Representative Joe Knollenberg (R-MI) posted an entry on his blog for July 30, 2008, titled, "Protecting Our Families From Asian Invaders". It was about a bill recently passed in the House regarding oversight of product safety, especially of those coming from China. The title was later changed to "Protecting Our Families From Harmful Products".
Side note: My initial reaction was to make a post right away, but I held off because Stephanie Chang (APIAVote-Michigan) was preparing a press release. It was just sent out.
I'm glad Knollenberg had the sense to change the title, but it never should've been posted with its original title. It's simply incorrect. Sure, the bill protects our families - there's nothing wrong with increased oversight, regardless of where products come from. But the title changes the issue from product safety to us-versus-them and promotes xenophobic attitudes in America, especially directed against Asians. Last I checked, allowing harmful products to enter the US - as shameful as it is - doesn't constitute an invasion. Yellow peril, anyone?
Even if your radar didn't go off, if you didn't gut a gut sense of unease as I did, it's not a stretch to see how this should concern Asian Americans, specifically. Beneath the explicit xenophobia lurks the idea that Chinese people and the Chinese government are one and the same - an idea that Knollenberg applies to all people of Asian descent, and one that, sadly, reaches Asian Americans as well (see perpetual foreigner, Vincent Chin).
We - all Americans - deserve better from our elected officials. In a country with a history of exclusion brought about by xenophobia, it's important that we don't make the same mistakes.
You can contact Rep. Knollenberg's offices at http://www.knollenberg.house.gov/Contact/
Google cache of Rep. Knollenberg's original blog post
- arthur
Monday, August 4, 2008
Saturday, July 26, 2008
“What does being Asian American mean to you?”
I’ve attended as many UAAO and APA101 meetings as possible this past year and it was only recently when I started to reflect upon those experiences. The constant drilling of Asian American issues ranging from identity to coalition building; including several demonstrations of the UAAO fan-favorite “privilege walk” or “Four Corners”. For the most part during the discussion, I sat quietly during those meetings. Rarely questioning what I heard, I always listened and gave the occasional nod (Not because I was dozing off). That was good and all, but did I really understand what was going on? I was satisfied with whatever was presented at each meeting as long as I got to see the usual faces around the Yuri Kochiyama Lounge. It was not until much later did I start to understand, even if just a little about the Asian American issues.
Before writing this blog entry, one reflection that still sticks out prominently is when running for UAAO board. The former co-chair, Ms. CC Song, threw me a curve ball question and asked “What does being Asian American mean to you?” I was like “Woah” but if I recall I must have said something cheesy along the lines of “ummmm tough question…..I would say it’s about having the best of both worlds; having the Asian culture and traditions and yet the opportunities of being of an American”. Slightly disappointed by this answer, I still wonder what the answer to this question should be. Obviously it’s however you may define “Asian American” but how do I define it? Where do I start? Who do I ask?
A few months back, I decided to visit my uncle in North Carolina with my grandma and aunt, they started to reminisce about the times before they came to America. This naturally sparked my interest because it was my immigration story, my heritage. Whenever I was asked about my immigration story, it was what I called a “basic story” about how my grandparents came from China, moved to Trinidad, then a few years later, they came to New York around the 1970’s. The end. I was very ignorant because I didn’t know about all the struggles and sacrifices in between the journey, but now I do.
I realize how privileged I am! We are all privileged to go to an institution of higher education (and a very good, yet expensive one at that!) but it’s engulfed in a bubble. Only when off the campus and participating in programs like Alternative Spring Break did it allow me to apply some of the stuff from UAAO, APA101, and IGR. That was only the surface though. Coming back to New York for the summer allowed me to question a lot of other things. When I ride the bus, most people are people of color. When on a train, people are trying to scour for whatever change they can get with their talents or by trying to sell you an overpriced piece of candy. You can’t help but sympathize for the people who degrade themselves just so that they can make ends meet and feed their family.
I still don’t have a perfect answer to CC’s question of “What does Asian American mean to you?” The answer probably spans across hundreds of years of Asian American history and it’d probably take pages upon pages to come up with a decent answer. But the answer that I gave back then about having the best of both worlds was only because I am privileged to reap the rewards given to me by my ancestors, my grandparents, and all the others who came before me.
~Ray
Before writing this blog entry, one reflection that still sticks out prominently is when running for UAAO board. The former co-chair, Ms. CC Song, threw me a curve ball question and asked “What does being Asian American mean to you?” I was like “Woah” but if I recall I must have said something cheesy along the lines of “ummmm tough question…..I would say it’s about having the best of both worlds; having the Asian culture and traditions and yet the opportunities of being of an American”. Slightly disappointed by this answer, I still wonder what the answer to this question should be. Obviously it’s however you may define “Asian American” but how do I define it? Where do I start? Who do I ask?
A few months back, I decided to visit my uncle in North Carolina with my grandma and aunt, they started to reminisce about the times before they came to America. This naturally sparked my interest because it was my immigration story, my heritage. Whenever I was asked about my immigration story, it was what I called a “basic story” about how my grandparents came from China, moved to Trinidad, then a few years later, they came to New York around the 1970’s. The end. I was very ignorant because I didn’t know about all the struggles and sacrifices in between the journey, but now I do.
I realize how privileged I am! We are all privileged to go to an institution of higher education (and a very good, yet expensive one at that!) but it’s engulfed in a bubble. Only when off the campus and participating in programs like Alternative Spring Break did it allow me to apply some of the stuff from UAAO, APA101, and IGR. That was only the surface though. Coming back to New York for the summer allowed me to question a lot of other things. When I ride the bus, most people are people of color. When on a train, people are trying to scour for whatever change they can get with their talents or by trying to sell you an overpriced piece of candy. You can’t help but sympathize for the people who degrade themselves just so that they can make ends meet and feed their family.
I still don’t have a perfect answer to CC’s question of “What does Asian American mean to you?” The answer probably spans across hundreds of years of Asian American history and it’d probably take pages upon pages to come up with a decent answer. But the answer that I gave back then about having the best of both worlds was only because I am privileged to reap the rewards given to me by my ancestors, my grandparents, and all the others who came before me.
~Ray
Sunday, July 6, 2008
How can you be a "model minority" if you don't speak English?
“You look like you’re from China!”
The little girl looks at me with her bright brown eyes, naturally inquisitive, almost pleased to have made such an observation. I can tell that she is waiting for a response, some affirmation that her speculation is correct. I had mentally prepared myself for my first day as a volunteer at a Head Start program in Detroit. Hitting, crying, screaming—these were my worst-case scenarios. I did not expect the most salient aspect of my identity to be questioned with such confidence and gusto by a girl barely over the age of five.
Cultural insensitivity is not uncommon in the U.S, or the world for that matter (see Laura’s post). And how can I find fault in genuine innocence? What bothered, and continues to bother me, about the little girl’s comment is how indicative it is of a larger societal issue. I was probably the first, or one of a small number of Asian people this little girl has ever encountered. She will probably never know the beauty of diversity because policy makers and America’s educational system will keep her in a classroom with those who share her skin color and class background. Not surprisingly, segregation in the classroom affects the quality of education a racial minority receives in comparison to his or her white counterparts.
In a country where racial discourse is too often framed from a black and white or black and Latino dichotomy, where do Asian Americans find voice in discussions on educational inequality? More specifically, in a country where Asian Americans have supposedly set and exceeded standards for educational success, should we even care?
Last month, the New York Times released an article entitled “Report Takes Aim at ‘Model Minority’ Stereotype of Asian American Students.” According to the report, the model minority perception “diverts attention from systemic failings of K-to-12 schools, shifting responsibility for education success to individual students.” While psychological distress and esteem issues are unsurprising outcomes of the dangers of the model minority myth, as the report suggests, the failings of the educational system are unfortunately overlooked.
Left in the Margins: Asian American Students and the No Child Left Behind Act, a report by the Asian American Legal Defense and Education Fund (AALDEF), states that the myth of the model minority often negates the fact that many Asian Americans, particularly those who do not speak English as their first language, have difficulties succeeding in school. Contrary to stereotypes that describe Asian Americans as model students of academic achievement, many Asian American students are struggling, failing, and dropping out of schools that ignore their needs.
Programs meant to close the achievement gap between minority and white students and improve the achievement of all students, such as No Child Left Behind (NCLB) lack the provisions necessary to ensure that such laudable goals are actually met.
NCLB requires that students are regularly assessed in reading and math, often in the form of standardized testing, and that their performance on these assessments be used as a measure of the school’s educational quality. If student scores do not meet these achievement targets, the school may face a number of sanctions, including the dismissal of staff and a complete overhaul of the school’s management. The law fails to acknowledge that schools must first be equipped with the proper resources in order to achieve academic success.
I began this post with the anecdote of the little girl in Detroit because, as hackneyed as this sounds, she made me examine my own shortcomings and privileges. I didn’t know how to respond to her question because I knew why she asked it, and that knowledge made me uncomfortable. I was probably one of the first, or the first Asian person she had ever encountered because Asian Americans who actualize the “American dream” and consequently fulfill the model minority stereotype don’t send their children to public school in Detroit.
But what about the Asian Americans who, due to the failings of the education system, find it difficult to fulfill the stereotype? According to the AALDEF report, most school districts do not provide sufficient services for English Language Learners (ELL), especially those who speak a language other than Spanish. In California, home to one of the largest concentrations of A/PIAs in the country, there were over 34,000 Vietnamese speaking ELLs. Yet despite Vietnamese being the second most common native language of California ELLs, there are no two-way bilingual programs in the entire state of California for any Southeast Asian languages.
I may be presumptuous in saying this, but in Garden Grove, home to the largest concentration of Vietnamese outside of Vietnam, the median household income is approximately $50,000, compared to neighboring cities whose residents claim average household incomes in the $100,000 range. The demographics in these cities are also significantly different. As of the most recent census, 30.9% of Garden Grove’s population claimed to be of Asian descent compared to the neighboring city of Orange (my hometown), with only 9.3%. In short, money matters.
NCLB expired in 2007 and is up for reauthorization. According to AALDEF, as Congress considers the reauthorization of NCLB and other education reforms, legislators, policy makers and policy advocates must take into account the needs of Asian American students, a group that is often neglected, due in part to the model minority myth.
It’s easy to discuss the myth and to ironically sit in out ivory towers and attempt to debunk it. Segregation, economic disparities, language barriers and the resulting challenges they cause—to me, these things matter more than how good the Asian kid next door is at calculus and whether his ability to understand the derivative of a graph affects his psychological well being. We know the model minority myth is false. It’s time to focus on fixing the causes of those falsehoods.
NY Times Article
College Board & NYU Report on the Model Minority Stereotype
AALDEF Report
California Census Data
-Veronica
The little girl looks at me with her bright brown eyes, naturally inquisitive, almost pleased to have made such an observation. I can tell that she is waiting for a response, some affirmation that her speculation is correct. I had mentally prepared myself for my first day as a volunteer at a Head Start program in Detroit. Hitting, crying, screaming—these were my worst-case scenarios. I did not expect the most salient aspect of my identity to be questioned with such confidence and gusto by a girl barely over the age of five.
Cultural insensitivity is not uncommon in the U.S, or the world for that matter (see Laura’s post). And how can I find fault in genuine innocence? What bothered, and continues to bother me, about the little girl’s comment is how indicative it is of a larger societal issue. I was probably the first, or one of a small number of Asian people this little girl has ever encountered. She will probably never know the beauty of diversity because policy makers and America’s educational system will keep her in a classroom with those who share her skin color and class background. Not surprisingly, segregation in the classroom affects the quality of education a racial minority receives in comparison to his or her white counterparts.
In a country where racial discourse is too often framed from a black and white or black and Latino dichotomy, where do Asian Americans find voice in discussions on educational inequality? More specifically, in a country where Asian Americans have supposedly set and exceeded standards for educational success, should we even care?
Last month, the New York Times released an article entitled “Report Takes Aim at ‘Model Minority’ Stereotype of Asian American Students.” According to the report, the model minority perception “diverts attention from systemic failings of K-to-12 schools, shifting responsibility for education success to individual students.” While psychological distress and esteem issues are unsurprising outcomes of the dangers of the model minority myth, as the report suggests, the failings of the educational system are unfortunately overlooked.
Left in the Margins: Asian American Students and the No Child Left Behind Act, a report by the Asian American Legal Defense and Education Fund (AALDEF), states that the myth of the model minority often negates the fact that many Asian Americans, particularly those who do not speak English as their first language, have difficulties succeeding in school. Contrary to stereotypes that describe Asian Americans as model students of academic achievement, many Asian American students are struggling, failing, and dropping out of schools that ignore their needs.
Programs meant to close the achievement gap between minority and white students and improve the achievement of all students, such as No Child Left Behind (NCLB) lack the provisions necessary to ensure that such laudable goals are actually met.
NCLB requires that students are regularly assessed in reading and math, often in the form of standardized testing, and that their performance on these assessments be used as a measure of the school’s educational quality. If student scores do not meet these achievement targets, the school may face a number of sanctions, including the dismissal of staff and a complete overhaul of the school’s management. The law fails to acknowledge that schools must first be equipped with the proper resources in order to achieve academic success.
I began this post with the anecdote of the little girl in Detroit because, as hackneyed as this sounds, she made me examine my own shortcomings and privileges. I didn’t know how to respond to her question because I knew why she asked it, and that knowledge made me uncomfortable. I was probably one of the first, or the first Asian person she had ever encountered because Asian Americans who actualize the “American dream” and consequently fulfill the model minority stereotype don’t send their children to public school in Detroit.
But what about the Asian Americans who, due to the failings of the education system, find it difficult to fulfill the stereotype? According to the AALDEF report, most school districts do not provide sufficient services for English Language Learners (ELL), especially those who speak a language other than Spanish. In California, home to one of the largest concentrations of A/PIAs in the country, there were over 34,000 Vietnamese speaking ELLs. Yet despite Vietnamese being the second most common native language of California ELLs, there are no two-way bilingual programs in the entire state of California for any Southeast Asian languages.
I may be presumptuous in saying this, but in Garden Grove, home to the largest concentration of Vietnamese outside of Vietnam, the median household income is approximately $50,000, compared to neighboring cities whose residents claim average household incomes in the $100,000 range. The demographics in these cities are also significantly different. As of the most recent census, 30.9% of Garden Grove’s population claimed to be of Asian descent compared to the neighboring city of Orange (my hometown), with only 9.3%. In short, money matters.
NCLB expired in 2007 and is up for reauthorization. According to AALDEF, as Congress considers the reauthorization of NCLB and other education reforms, legislators, policy makers and policy advocates must take into account the needs of Asian American students, a group that is often neglected, due in part to the model minority myth.
It’s easy to discuss the myth and to ironically sit in out ivory towers and attempt to debunk it. Segregation, economic disparities, language barriers and the resulting challenges they cause—to me, these things matter more than how good the Asian kid next door is at calculus and whether his ability to understand the derivative of a graph affects his psychological well being. We know the model minority myth is false. It’s time to focus on fixing the causes of those falsehoods.
NY Times Article
College Board & NYU Report on the Model Minority Stereotype
AALDEF Report
California Census Data
-Veronica
Monday, June 30, 2008
"What's up with the Asians"
It was Thursday morning, June 26. I was driving to meet a couple people for breakfast in Madison Heights. Naturally, I was scanning the stations. 89X (88.7FM here in the metro-Detroit area) was my choice. They were doing their morning talk show. I didn't mind the lack of music - I'd listened to them for two years' worth of morning drives to high school, and I figured anything was better than silence.
As the hosts - "Dave and Chuck the Freak" - ended one segment, they started with "...and now for 'What's up with the Asians'." Cue "Asian style" background music. I could feel the all-too-familiar dread rising in my throat, and if I hadn't been driving, I would've slapped my hand to my forehead. Repeatedly.
The first section started off mildly enough, giving me a measure of hope that it wouldn't be as bad as I thought. The DJs discussed workplace regulations in Japan restricting employee waist size to cut down on obesity. Okay. Let's see what they have to say about - oh, look at that. Not even one minute in and one of the hosts has already made the unoriginal, sweeping generalization that all Asian people are short. Another one cuts in and starts doing an impression of a Japanese executive, complete with fake - dare I say it, racist - accent.
Next, they talk about Harry Lee, an recently-deceased Asian American sheriff from New Orleans. Who was a cowboy, in their words. They don't miss a beat in doing impressions of the late sheriff with the same fake accent, guffawing over the apparently self-contradicting image of a foreign Asian - as opposed to an Asian American, as Harry Lee was - donning the garbs of a cowboy. No respect for the dead. And beneath the juvenile humor lies a more harmful idea - Asians can't take on "traditional" American roles. An Asian American cowboy? That's ridiculous! What kind of accent would he have?
As one character says in Dragon: The Bruce Lee Story, "You're an American citizen, but you're not really an American."
At this point, I resigned myself to my growing disgust and flipped to another station. Was this what the station had come to? Of all the things going on in the world - in our country - they decided to devote a chunk of air time to mocking Asians and Asian Americans? And they did it using the same tired, old stereotypes - Asians are short. Asians can't speak English without an accent. That's what I call cheap laughs - no effort, no thought, and no heart - and it saddens me to see anyone stoop to such levels, but it's especially disappointing to see them do it.
I've listened to this station for years. Hell, I've enjoyed it, even if it's never been the brainiest comedy. 89X was a regular part of my day - something familiar but always fresh. That's why it was my first choice on that morning drive. And that's why I couldn't just roll my eyes and laugh at the ignorance on display. I felt actual disgust, as if a friend had turned around and made squinty eyes at me - you know, as kids did in the fourth grade. 89X, I thought you were better than that.
You can find the podcast of The Morning X on this page, under 8 a.m. Thursday, June 26. A direct link is here.
arthur
As the hosts - "Dave and Chuck the Freak" - ended one segment, they started with "...and now for 'What's up with the Asians'." Cue "Asian style" background music. I could feel the all-too-familiar dread rising in my throat, and if I hadn't been driving, I would've slapped my hand to my forehead. Repeatedly.
The first section started off mildly enough, giving me a measure of hope that it wouldn't be as bad as I thought. The DJs discussed workplace regulations in Japan restricting employee waist size to cut down on obesity. Okay. Let's see what they have to say about - oh, look at that. Not even one minute in and one of the hosts has already made the unoriginal, sweeping generalization that all Asian people are short. Another one cuts in and starts doing an impression of a Japanese executive, complete with fake - dare I say it, racist - accent.
Next, they talk about Harry Lee, an recently-deceased Asian American sheriff from New Orleans. Who was a cowboy, in their words. They don't miss a beat in doing impressions of the late sheriff with the same fake accent, guffawing over the apparently self-contradicting image of a foreign Asian - as opposed to an Asian American, as Harry Lee was - donning the garbs of a cowboy. No respect for the dead. And beneath the juvenile humor lies a more harmful idea - Asians can't take on "traditional" American roles. An Asian American cowboy? That's ridiculous! What kind of accent would he have?
As one character says in Dragon: The Bruce Lee Story, "You're an American citizen, but you're not really an American."
At this point, I resigned myself to my growing disgust and flipped to another station. Was this what the station had come to? Of all the things going on in the world - in our country - they decided to devote a chunk of air time to mocking Asians and Asian Americans? And they did it using the same tired, old stereotypes - Asians are short. Asians can't speak English without an accent. That's what I call cheap laughs - no effort, no thought, and no heart - and it saddens me to see anyone stoop to such levels, but it's especially disappointing to see them do it.
I've listened to this station for years. Hell, I've enjoyed it, even if it's never been the brainiest comedy. 89X was a regular part of my day - something familiar but always fresh. That's why it was my first choice on that morning drive. And that's why I couldn't just roll my eyes and laugh at the ignorance on display. I felt actual disgust, as if a friend had turned around and made squinty eyes at me - you know, as kids did in the fourth grade. 89X, I thought you were better than that.
You can find the podcast of The Morning X on this page, under 8 a.m. Thursday, June 26. A direct link is here.
arthur
Saturday, May 31, 2008
Hey! China, mi reina, psssst chinita!
So this past fall semester, especially towards the end, I was reminded how much winter sucks. I mean, it's pretty for a minute and then you get cold and your socks get soaking wet and then freeze etc., etc. Hence I ran away to Ecuador for study abroad. I figured, "Ecuador" being on the "equator" it would be warmer and sunny all the time and that I would be able to avoid getting SAD (ya know, seasonal affective disorder where you get all depressed cuz there's no sun). Also, I didn't know much of anything about Ecuador except that it is part of the Andean Community and like other members of that community has a strong indigenous presence. Ecuador, unlike say Chile or Argentina, boasts of its pluriethnic, multicultural society that to me was much more appealing than Spain and the other programs available in South America. After becoming much more active in the A/PIA community during the fall semester, I thought that studying abroad in a country that seemed so different but with such a supposed pluriethnic society would be a great opportunity.
And believe me, Ecuador is a beautiful country. Its Andes are perhaps a bit smaller and less jagged, the weather conditions less extreme and landscapes less stark than its neighbors to the south (Peru, and Bolivia) but they are no less dramatic. Not to sound like a tourist guide book, but it's true when they say that Ecuador has a little bit of everything, with so much of the natural beauty of the world in such a small country. Yet along with the beautiful views of terraced mountainsides comes with the realities of the economic conditions that come with a country developing at many different levels.
The construction of race in Ecuador historically and today has been mostly that of white (Spanish and other European immigrants) mestizo (of mixed white and indigenous heritage) and the indígenas or indigenous groups. The strong indigenous presence in Ecuador is a credit to their 500 year long struggle in the face of rampant racism both personal and institutional. The economic implications of this discrimination are obvious, but they affect non-indigenous racial minority groups even more. For example, Afro-ecuatorianos are very obviously discriminated against both in terms of the negative stereotypes that exist, but also how those stereotypes have shaped the kinds of economic opportunities available. (As in, there really aren't many, mostly domestic service. And unlike in the United States there isn't any kind of middle or upper class Afro-ecuadorian population to be in a position to denounce the stereotypes that exist.) Not only this, but their population is so small in comparison to other countries that had a far greater slave-economy that even to see an Afro-ecuadorian walking around is a rarity.
Needless to say, sighting a Japanese-American college-aged girl was even less common, and sparked reactions inversely proportional to how often this event occurred. And by that I mean, I got cat-called every freakin time I stepped out the door.
To be fair, I knew that there isn't a significant Asian population in Ecuador. And especially in comparison to Peru, Brazil and other countries in Latin America, the influence that that miniscule population has had both historically and today is limited at best. So perhaps I should have been better prepared and had a strategy with how I would deal with it. But I didn't, and every time I heard a comment, or my host sister’s attempt at an explanation, “oh no, you see, it’s okay because they call all Asians ‘china’ [Chinese person] here” doesn't really cut it and it was hard for me to accept with no further argument. Ignorance is never an excuse, and can never justify offensively racial or racist remarks. (Especially when the person affected says something about it.)
My host mother would play a game whenever she had guests over in the afternoon when I came home from the university. She would call me over to the kitchen table and sit me down and present me to her friend and say, “Qué crees que ella es? Nunca podrás decirme.” [“What do you think she is? You’ll never be able to guess!”] and inevitably the guest will guess Chinese and Mayu (my host mother) would kind of smile in a self-satisfied way as if my racial ambiguity was some clever trick she devised. Whenever my host mom would make comments like that, or, “Tú pareces una ‘geisha’ casi exactamente!” [“you look exactly like a geisha…] I couldn’t help but say something and express my discomfort. At the point where we stop voicing our opinions, where we stop questioning the rationale behind certain things is the point where such things become incorporated into our societies.
My program was primarily white, but had a few other exceptions besides me. Yet of these, I was the only East Asian American and in demographic situations like these, when some guy behind you is shouting, "Hey!! Chinita!" you know exactly who he's referring to. It was hard to address this issue, not just with my own personal misgivings with how to approach the incredibly different cultural traditions in Ecuador (namely, the widespread belief in racial stereotypes and the invisibility of non-indigenous racial minorities)but also because of pressures I felt from my friends. Several times over the course of the semester, some of the other students in my program would say something if I corrected a guy who just called me 'little Chinese girl.' They'd be like, "wow you get so annoyed!"
As if I didn't have a right to be annoyed?
I don’t really think there is a fine line with a grey area between right and wrong in situations like this. Am I being oversensitive? If someone hears a comment that is directed towards them or not and is offended then the comment is offensive. How a comment is judged is subjective to the listener and they ultimately have the opinion that matters most. Intention is important given certain contexts, if the comment refers to something the listener has control over intention plays a bigger role. But in the case of race, if the person at whom it is directed deems a comment racist, intention matters little.
So, unfortunately I was unable to talk to everyone in Ecuador and I'm sure that the few people I did talk to will probably still call every Asian traveler in Ecuador a Chinese person. Be that as it may, I have no regrets with how I tried to handle those situations in Ecuador. As I mentioned before and that I cannot stress enough, ignorance is never an excuse for racial discrimination and racist remarks. Ignorance isn't an indicator of a primitive culture, nor is it inextricably tied to cultural practices that can never be eliminated. It is instead a marker of how much work and organizing is left to be done.
These, among many other experiences I had in Ecuador, have reminded me why it's so important to be involved in community organizing and outreach. Why it's so important to remember the history of various racial struggles in the United States and all over and try to bring that knowledge to others. The lessons I learned have renewed in me my want to see racism ended, and upon reflection of my semester, it was refreshing to have experienced it all. I know that for the upcoming year, in whatever capacity I can, I'll be striving towards making real changes on campus and hopefully in the community and on a greater scale. And I hope anyone who reads this (or really just everyone in general) will do the same. I know it seems so improbable that the actions of one can really make a difference, and I know it seems trite to say but all we need is to just keep going one person at a time and at some point we'll reach that critical mass necessary to make lasting change.
~Laura
And believe me, Ecuador is a beautiful country. Its Andes are perhaps a bit smaller and less jagged, the weather conditions less extreme and landscapes less stark than its neighbors to the south (Peru, and Bolivia) but they are no less dramatic. Not to sound like a tourist guide book, but it's true when they say that Ecuador has a little bit of everything, with so much of the natural beauty of the world in such a small country. Yet along with the beautiful views of terraced mountainsides comes with the realities of the economic conditions that come with a country developing at many different levels.
The construction of race in Ecuador historically and today has been mostly that of white (Spanish and other European immigrants) mestizo (of mixed white and indigenous heritage) and the indígenas or indigenous groups. The strong indigenous presence in Ecuador is a credit to their 500 year long struggle in the face of rampant racism both personal and institutional. The economic implications of this discrimination are obvious, but they affect non-indigenous racial minority groups even more. For example, Afro-ecuatorianos are very obviously discriminated against both in terms of the negative stereotypes that exist, but also how those stereotypes have shaped the kinds of economic opportunities available. (As in, there really aren't many, mostly domestic service. And unlike in the United States there isn't any kind of middle or upper class Afro-ecuadorian population to be in a position to denounce the stereotypes that exist.) Not only this, but their population is so small in comparison to other countries that had a far greater slave-economy that even to see an Afro-ecuadorian walking around is a rarity.
Needless to say, sighting a Japanese-American college-aged girl was even less common, and sparked reactions inversely proportional to how often this event occurred. And by that I mean, I got cat-called every freakin time I stepped out the door.
To be fair, I knew that there isn't a significant Asian population in Ecuador. And especially in comparison to Peru, Brazil and other countries in Latin America, the influence that that miniscule population has had both historically and today is limited at best. So perhaps I should have been better prepared and had a strategy with how I would deal with it. But I didn't, and every time I heard a comment, or my host sister’s attempt at an explanation, “oh no, you see, it’s okay because they call all Asians ‘china’ [Chinese person] here” doesn't really cut it and it was hard for me to accept with no further argument. Ignorance is never an excuse, and can never justify offensively racial or racist remarks. (Especially when the person affected says something about it.)
My host mother would play a game whenever she had guests over in the afternoon when I came home from the university. She would call me over to the kitchen table and sit me down and present me to her friend and say, “Qué crees que ella es? Nunca podrás decirme.” [“What do you think she is? You’ll never be able to guess!”] and inevitably the guest will guess Chinese and Mayu (my host mother) would kind of smile in a self-satisfied way as if my racial ambiguity was some clever trick she devised. Whenever my host mom would make comments like that, or, “Tú pareces una ‘geisha’ casi exactamente!” [“you look exactly like a geisha…] I couldn’t help but say something and express my discomfort. At the point where we stop voicing our opinions, where we stop questioning the rationale behind certain things is the point where such things become incorporated into our societies.
My program was primarily white, but had a few other exceptions besides me. Yet of these, I was the only East Asian American and in demographic situations like these, when some guy behind you is shouting, "Hey!! Chinita!" you know exactly who he's referring to. It was hard to address this issue, not just with my own personal misgivings with how to approach the incredibly different cultural traditions in Ecuador (namely, the widespread belief in racial stereotypes and the invisibility of non-indigenous racial minorities)but also because of pressures I felt from my friends. Several times over the course of the semester, some of the other students in my program would say something if I corrected a guy who just called me 'little Chinese girl.' They'd be like, "wow you get so annoyed!"
As if I didn't have a right to be annoyed?
I don’t really think there is a fine line with a grey area between right and wrong in situations like this. Am I being oversensitive? If someone hears a comment that is directed towards them or not and is offended then the comment is offensive. How a comment is judged is subjective to the listener and they ultimately have the opinion that matters most. Intention is important given certain contexts, if the comment refers to something the listener has control over intention plays a bigger role. But in the case of race, if the person at whom it is directed deems a comment racist, intention matters little.
So, unfortunately I was unable to talk to everyone in Ecuador and I'm sure that the few people I did talk to will probably still call every Asian traveler in Ecuador a Chinese person. Be that as it may, I have no regrets with how I tried to handle those situations in Ecuador. As I mentioned before and that I cannot stress enough, ignorance is never an excuse for racial discrimination and racist remarks. Ignorance isn't an indicator of a primitive culture, nor is it inextricably tied to cultural practices that can never be eliminated. It is instead a marker of how much work and organizing is left to be done.
These, among many other experiences I had in Ecuador, have reminded me why it's so important to be involved in community organizing and outreach. Why it's so important to remember the history of various racial struggles in the United States and all over and try to bring that knowledge to others. The lessons I learned have renewed in me my want to see racism ended, and upon reflection of my semester, it was refreshing to have experienced it all. I know that for the upcoming year, in whatever capacity I can, I'll be striving towards making real changes on campus and hopefully in the community and on a greater scale. And I hope anyone who reads this (or really just everyone in general) will do the same. I know it seems so improbable that the actions of one can really make a difference, and I know it seems trite to say but all we need is to just keep going one person at a time and at some point we'll reach that critical mass necessary to make lasting change.
~Laura
Sunday, May 25, 2008
Dreams and Identity
Let me preface this entry by paraphrasing Frank Wu: we're all social scientists - it's just that most of us are really bad at it. And that's the problem.
The DREAM Act (Development, Relief and Education for Alien Minors), for those of you unfamiliar with it, is a proposed federal bill that would give the children of undocumented immigrants the chance to gain legal status if they graduated from high school and sought to attend college or serve in the military. There are several technical details, such as what qualifies as attending college or the number of years of military service - this page lays out those details.
How does this affect APIAs? According to the Department of Homeland Security, an estimated 9% of unauthorized immigrants in 2006 were born in Asia - Vietnam, China, Korea, India, and the Philippines. In absolute numbers, this comes out to about 1.1 million people. A study by the Pew Hispanic Center found that most illegal immigrant families have children born in the US. I will note that this is a generalization, and a distributional figure - what percentage of families in different immigrant populations has US-born children - should qualify the PHC's findings.
It often seems that discussion about APIA issues revolves around broad societal and cultural trends - model minority, perpetual foreigner, representation in the media. That's why I decided to turn around and look at specific legislation affecting APIAs. Although the DREAM Act affects APIAs less than other groups by proportion, 1.1 million people are far too many to neglect.
In reading arguments against the DREAM Act's passing, I've found a streak of nativism. "Unfair", "cutting in line" and "our parents were legally here first" crop up in discussion like hundreds of angry weeds. Make no mistake, the bill's opponents most likely do feel that it is genuinely unfair. To quote Frank Wu again, it does no one any good to claim that others have no principles. But there's more to the opposition than just vitriol and a different definition of fairness. There's something deeper in the bitterness permeating this bill's existence, and that's the question of what it means to be not an American with citizenship, but rather an American.
It's easy to conflate the two. I would argue that someone born in the US, someone raised in the US, someone who has learned and socialized and achieved in the US is an American. I would argue that citizenship is artificial, except that it provides very real social benefits. Should someone who has spent their youth in the US have opportunity wrenched away simply because their parents came here illegally? Are they no longer Americans simply because their parents don't have legal citizen status? It's a matter of identity and claims to identity, among other things.
These questions are entangled in other issues, as well. Reform of immigration law has become an issue in the upcoming election. An inefficient and slow immigration process contributes to the rates of illegal immigration. But it would take far more time and text space than one blog entry to cover all the facets of immigration and the DREAM Act, because this is a complex issue with no small amount of passion and no small number of stakeholders on either side.
Currently, the DREAM Act is in legislative limbo. The official page in the Library of Congress can be found here.
arthur
The DREAM Act (Development, Relief and Education for Alien Minors), for those of you unfamiliar with it, is a proposed federal bill that would give the children of undocumented immigrants the chance to gain legal status if they graduated from high school and sought to attend college or serve in the military. There are several technical details, such as what qualifies as attending college or the number of years of military service - this page lays out those details.
How does this affect APIAs? According to the Department of Homeland Security, an estimated 9% of unauthorized immigrants in 2006 were born in Asia - Vietnam, China, Korea, India, and the Philippines. In absolute numbers, this comes out to about 1.1 million people. A study by the Pew Hispanic Center found that most illegal immigrant families have children born in the US. I will note that this is a generalization, and a distributional figure - what percentage of families in different immigrant populations has US-born children - should qualify the PHC's findings.
It often seems that discussion about APIA issues revolves around broad societal and cultural trends - model minority, perpetual foreigner, representation in the media. That's why I decided to turn around and look at specific legislation affecting APIAs. Although the DREAM Act affects APIAs less than other groups by proportion, 1.1 million people are far too many to neglect.
In reading arguments against the DREAM Act's passing, I've found a streak of nativism. "Unfair", "cutting in line" and "our parents were legally here first" crop up in discussion like hundreds of angry weeds. Make no mistake, the bill's opponents most likely do feel that it is genuinely unfair. To quote Frank Wu again, it does no one any good to claim that others have no principles. But there's more to the opposition than just vitriol and a different definition of fairness. There's something deeper in the bitterness permeating this bill's existence, and that's the question of what it means to be not an American with citizenship, but rather an American.
It's easy to conflate the two. I would argue that someone born in the US, someone raised in the US, someone who has learned and socialized and achieved in the US is an American. I would argue that citizenship is artificial, except that it provides very real social benefits. Should someone who has spent their youth in the US have opportunity wrenched away simply because their parents came here illegally? Are they no longer Americans simply because their parents don't have legal citizen status? It's a matter of identity and claims to identity, among other things.
These questions are entangled in other issues, as well. Reform of immigration law has become an issue in the upcoming election. An inefficient and slow immigration process contributes to the rates of illegal immigration. But it would take far more time and text space than one blog entry to cover all the facets of immigration and the DREAM Act, because this is a complex issue with no small amount of passion and no small number of stakeholders on either side.
Currently, the DREAM Act is in legislative limbo. The official page in the Library of Congress can be found here.
arthur
Wednesday, January 9, 2008
Higher Higher Education
During the general meeting today, we talked about several important issues the Democratic and Republican candidates address. One of them is about higher education. Now, as a non-citizen permanent resident, I don't have the right to vote, and this may be why I care about the issues much more than the candidates. One of the issues brought up today was about education, and very interestingly, a community member suggested the idea of not ranking higher education institutions.
His idea is that, with the ranking system in place, people attach prestige to institutions, giving the institutions the incentives to raise tuition. Many top institutions, public or private, charges astronomically high tuitions, making it affordable mostly to people from privileged backgrounds. Getting rid of the system, he said, would probably help bringing the cost down, and the prestige, and people can afford to go to wherever they want to go.
Not surprisingly, other people argued against his idea. What's the point of that? We go to Michigan because of its prestige, because it leads us to great jobs and huge, multi-national corporations. We are used to think that we are top of the top, better than everyone else. Harvard is the Michigan of the East. If we don't have this ranking system in place, how do we separate the better from the worse? "Then we might as well be a communist country," someone said. I smirked.
It's interesting that we want to bridge the gap between the rich and the poor, yet at the same time we want to keep each other separate to distinguish the best, better, worse, and worst. We fight for social justice, try to erase glass ceiling, but from the discussion today, it seems that we're only willing to do it to a certain degree-- until our very own status quo is challenged. I'm not going to argue whether communist is good or not. I'm sure some people think it's great, some think it's awful, and some think it's great in theory, awful in practice. And we know what happens when we attach -isms to things-- there are too many things associated with them and that defeats the whole point of tackling the issue straight. So what are we fighting for? So that the A/PIA community can be empowered and rise upward, while keeping other oppressed people on the bottom, so we can separate the better from the worse?
I'm not an expert of open admissions, and Wikipedia does a better job than I do. And if you know more about open admissions, feel free to comment on this entry. To be honest, I have my own hesitations about it, since "I worked so hard to get into the second best public institution in the country." But I'm definitely more open-minded about open admissions now than four years ago, when I first entered college. It took a lot for me to recognize my own privileges, to be honest with myself that I have resources others don't have, and this meritocracy talk is bunch of bull.
cc
His idea is that, with the ranking system in place, people attach prestige to institutions, giving the institutions the incentives to raise tuition. Many top institutions, public or private, charges astronomically high tuitions, making it affordable mostly to people from privileged backgrounds. Getting rid of the system, he said, would probably help bringing the cost down, and the prestige, and people can afford to go to wherever they want to go.
Not surprisingly, other people argued against his idea. What's the point of that? We go to Michigan because of its prestige, because it leads us to great jobs and huge, multi-national corporations. We are used to think that we are top of the top, better than everyone else. Harvard is the Michigan of the East. If we don't have this ranking system in place, how do we separate the better from the worse? "Then we might as well be a communist country," someone said. I smirked.
It's interesting that we want to bridge the gap between the rich and the poor, yet at the same time we want to keep each other separate to distinguish the best, better, worse, and worst. We fight for social justice, try to erase glass ceiling, but from the discussion today, it seems that we're only willing to do it to a certain degree-- until our very own status quo is challenged. I'm not going to argue whether communist is good or not. I'm sure some people think it's great, some think it's awful, and some think it's great in theory, awful in practice. And we know what happens when we attach -isms to things-- there are too many things associated with them and that defeats the whole point of tackling the issue straight. So what are we fighting for? So that the A/PIA community can be empowered and rise upward, while keeping other oppressed people on the bottom, so we can separate the better from the worse?
I'm not an expert of open admissions, and Wikipedia does a better job than I do. And if you know more about open admissions, feel free to comment on this entry. To be honest, I have my own hesitations about it, since "I worked so hard to get into the second best public institution in the country." But I'm definitely more open-minded about open admissions now than four years ago, when I first entered college. It took a lot for me to recognize my own privileges, to be honest with myself that I have resources others don't have, and this meritocracy talk is bunch of bull.
cc
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)