Talk:Asiaphilia

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Contents

[edit] merge

Yeah, I just made an edit about "Geeks and Japan." hehe. I see your point about merging, but I thought it deserved a cursory mention here. I dunno; there are a lot of people who have been focusing a lot more on these issues here than me, so i defer to their judgement. Maybe clearer links to Asian Fetish, Japanophile, and Otaku would be warranted. I searched on Asiaphile, and thought of my little point. Anyway. Deadbarnacle

These page seems to overlap:

Asiaphilia, Asian fetish

Both seem to be poorly written, so perhaps we can merge on into the other, redirect or the like.

I vote for redirect Asiaphilia into Asian fetish

Also I just noticed that this page Asiaphile already redirects to Asian fetish, so it looks like someone was screwing around (changing 'phile' to 'philia') Willowx 14:05, 26 July 2005 (UTC)

  • Keep; It is two different things. Asiaphilia and e.g. Francophilia are attraction to culture. Fetish is sexual preference. Merging these articles does not make sense - the only thing they have in common is "Asia". | Celcius 06:08, 26 August 2005 (UTC)
    • Perhaps, but the article itself places undue emphasis on the sexual aspect of 'Asiaphilia'. I would agree, Keep the article, but transfer the information on sexual preference and issues surrounding it (which comprise most of the article) to Asian fetish. Then expand the article to become something more like a general version of Japanophile or otaku. SReynhout 02:33, September 3, 2005 (UTC)

[edit] POV

This stub is 1) not interesting 2) obscure 3) totally POV 4) badly written It should either be cleaned up, merged or deleted IMHO.

'Philia' by the way means 'love'. Philosophy means love of knowledge. The coiner of this phrase seems to view 'philia' as akin to pedophila. Very misinformed....

Of the many "NPOV" claims by the anonymous editor today, I've left this one NPOV tag as the article itself states the term is up for debate. If the anon editor would like to propose a rewrite that's fine. "Badly written" isn't grounds for an NPOV tag. Samw 00:21, 11 May 2005 (UTC)

[edit] Japanophile

couldn't this page be merged with Japanophile and/or Asian fetish ?

I think it returns to few hits on google to be worthwhile :-P Flammifer 02:03, 23 July 2005 (UTC)

Yes, maybe this is a good idea. The Japanophile page is also weak. One page discussing the whole issue might be better than 50 pages uses slightly different terms. Willowx 07:09, 27 July 2005 (UTC)
I disagree. They are different words with different meanings. I've heard "Japanophile" used in a non-derogatory sense, but I've never heard of "Asiaphilia" being used by anyone other that angry Asian-American males who are annoyed at the Asiaphiles for stealling their women because of racist fetishes. (PLEASE NOTE: THE LATTER IS NOT MY POINT OF VIEW, AND I AM NOT TRYING TO ENFORCE ANYONE'S OPINIONS.)elvenscout742 19:02, 27 July 2005 (UTC)
Couldn't we present both views in one article? Willowx 09:40, 1 August 2005 (UTC)

Let me give this a try. There are three Wikipedia entries to examine: Asiaphilia, Japanophile, and Asian fetish, plus Asiaphile (redirect page); and decide which to delete, leave alone, or merge. Can we agree that there are two fundamental differences here? On one side there is the socio-cultural issue of a non-Asian person with an interest in aspects of Asian culture such as music, food, people, movies. To my way of thinking this pertains to both the Asiaphilia and Japanophile articles. Now there is also sexuality side of it, Asian fetish. One does not necessitate the other. Regardless of one’s own personal beliefs, the fact does exist that there are individuals who these terms do apply to. Looking at the history of the pages it seems obvious that these subjects incite some strong feelings by some users here. My conclusions are below, and I welcome any more eloquent member to amplify with their own thoughts.

Your ideas? --Tony Hecht 19:41, 27 July 2005 (UTC)

In case I didn't make it clear, I vote to keep all of them just the way they are. "Asiaphilia" is a little controversial as it is a supposed condition that is essentially just an Asian fetish. Asiaphile is a more common word, in my experience, and is used as a pejorative by angry Asian American males to denote white males who try to steal their women. Also, Japanophile is a much more widespread word that should not be merged into "Asiaphilia". elvenscout742 10:50, 26 August 2005 (UTC)
    • Comment; Japanophile (attraction to Japanese culture) is technically a sub-category of Asiaphile (attraction to Asian culture) and they could as such easily be merged. Asian Fetish is technically a sub-category of Fetish and relates to sexual attraction to asian people - not attraction to Asian or Japanese culture. Culture <> Sex | Celcius 06:12, 26 August 2005 (UTC)


The problem I see is that there are two aspects: 1) a positive view, a la Francophile, ie. a fan of a culture and 2) a negative view, of some kind of exploitation/fetish. On top of these ambiguity, we have mulitple slang that convey the same idea: Wapanese, Japanophile, Sinophile, Koreanophile, Asiaphile, Asian fetish etc. I think it is silly to have a separate page for every single slang variation, and plus the quality is very low. I'd rather we condense this topic into one or two articles that presents all sides objectively, with sources, and maybe lists various slang variations. In essence, one article presenting both negative and positive views. Does this make sense? The question I have is, if we merge, is Asian fetish a better central term (or is it too exclusively sexual) or is Asiaphilia a better term (although a bit POV slangy). Is there any better word????????? "Asian dating controversy", "Asian White controvery" or something more encyclopedic?? Willowx 09:32, 1 August 2005 (UTC)

[edit] phile != philia

One relatively major problem with the article is that its stated topic is "Asiaphilia," which clearly refers to an abstract concept, but that all its definitions in the article refer to people - "Asiaphiles," I'd assume. - Ruakh 16:16, 8 August 2005 (UTC)

[edit] Discussion on Blacktokyo.com

I'm curious why there's only one external source listed here; would a website created for people of African descent living in Japan be the best source for a reference to this? Would there be a fair discussion, considering they would most likely be the targets of "Asiaphilia" accusations? It would just be as biased if the link was to a discussion on an purely asian-themed website, IMO. I'm removing the link.

[edit] Source plz

I'd like to see a source for that last bit about homosexuality and beards. Rob 16:25, 15 February 2006 (UTC)

Retrieved from "http://en.wikipedia.org../../../a/s/i/Talk%7EAsiaphilia_bfcd.html"