Talk:Asian fetishism/Archive 3

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Archive This is an archive of past discussions. Do not edit the contents of this page. If you wish to start a new discussion or revive an old one, please do so on the current talk page.

This is the talk page for discussing improvements to the Asian fetishism/Archive 3 article.
Article policies

Contents

Now listed at Wikipedia:Article Improvement Drive

Howrealisreal has listed this article at Wikipedia:Article Improvement Drive. I encourage you all (who have accounts) to vote for this article there and provide comments as you see fit. If this article is chosen for article improvement status, it could improve greatly within the coming weeks. (The goal of the article improvement drive, in case you're not familiar with the process, is to improve non-stub articles to featured article status.) --Idont Havaname 04:40, 11 October 2005 (UTC)

Note: The article was delisted on November 15 for not having enough votes. --Idont Havaname 06:22, 2 December 2005 (UTC)

Please Sign Your Comments

Reading this Talk page is a chore because one or more people post blocks of text without any signature, making it hard to tell who wrote what to whom, and when they wrote it -- making this Talk page nigh-incomprehensible. Please sign your comments. It's easy: just type two hyphens in a row, then a space, then four tildes. Like so: -- BBlackmoor (talk) 18:27, 11 October 2005 (UTC)

The term "original research"

Several editors have brought up the question of, "What constitutes original research?", here and at this page's entry at Wikipedia:Article Improvement Drive. No original research is an official Wikipedia policy and is supported by this project's founder, Jimbo Wales. It's right there with neutral point of view and verifiability. Here are some points out of WP:NOR that could certainly apply to how this article currently stands. (I've added some emphasis.)

  1. "Wikipedia is not the place for original research. Citing sources and avoiding original research are inextricably linked: the only way to verify that you are not doing original research is to cite sources who discuss material that is directly related to the article, and to stick closely to what the sources say."
  2. "The phrase "original research" in this context refers to untested theories; data, statements, concepts and ideas that have not been published in a reputable publication; or any new interpretation, analysis, or synthesis of published data, statements, concepts or ideas that, in the words of Wikipedia's founder Jimbo Wales, would amount to a "novel narrative or historical interpretation"."
  3. "Wikipedia welcomes experts. We assume, however, that someone is an expert not only because of their personal and direct knowledge of a topic, but because of their knowledge of published sources on a topic. This policy prohibits expert editors from drawing on their personal and direct knowledge if such knowledge is unverifiable. If an expert editor has published the results of his or her research elsewhere, in a reputable publication, the editor can cite that source while writing in the third person and complying with our NPOV policy. Otherwise, we hope expert editors will draw on their knowledge of other published sources to enrich our articles."
  4. "Like most Wikipedia policies, No original research applies to articles, not to talk pages or project pages, although it is regarded as poor taste to discuss personal theories on talk pages."

Hope this helps. If you have any more questions, I encourage you to read through the whole WP:NOR policy, which also contains the text of some emails from Jimbo on the English Wikipedia mailing list (wikien-l), or additionally you may ask me at my talk page. --Idont Havaname 00:31, 12 October 2005 (UTC)

I added two sourced sections on yellow peril and the model minority myth in America. I think from here we should identify other NPOV information that relates to these topics already in the article and integrate it in. That way we can organize the article better (under flowing headings and subheadings, etc..) and improve the overall balance and objectivity of research. --Howrealisreal 19:46, 18 October 2005 (UTC)

The title of the "Social consequences" section

I don't think that "Social consequences" is a good title for the section describing crimes resulting from Asian fetish. There are many social consequences that arise other than crime, which are far less serious. (Saying that Asian fetishism always leads to crime, or only leads to crime, is a rather extreme position.) I'm going to change the heading to "The Asian fetish's role in crime" for now. Does that sound good, or does anyone have a better title for it? --Idont Havaname 22:37, 15 October 2005 (UTC)

I was thinking that heading needed to be renamed also. How about "Co-occurrence with crime"? The way it is worded now seems a little long-winded maybe. --Howrealisreal 19:36, 16 October 2005 (UTC)
That's what I was thinking too. Thanks for your suggestion; I'll change it to "Co-occurrence with crime". --Idont Havaname 22:31, 16 October 2005 (UTC)
"Co-occurence with crime" is an inaccurate statement. It's like stating that hanging black men during the 1960's by the KKK was a co-occurence with a crime and that racism just happened to be part of the crime instead of the major cause of the crime. Almost all of these people who are stated as committing crimes against asian women were targeting asian women specifically because they were asian and because of their misconceived notions of asian women. Further, many of them were actively attempting to date asian women or had attempted this in the past. Kennethtennyson 20:32, 19 October 2005 (UTC)

Co-occurrence means an event or situation that happens in connection with another, not "just happened to be a part of". Crime connected to the Asian fetish I thought is pretty clear and accurate for the heading. Even with "negative social consequences" it comes across that crimes are the only negative outcome. I can think of other types of negative social consequences of the Asian fetish, like underminding race relations and Asian-American economic mobility that aren't always crimes, and described in other parts of the article under other headings. This article heading is specifically about crimes and should clearly indicate so. --Howrealisreal

Is there any possibility that "How real is real" is the same person as "I don't have a name?" Anyways, it is quite unlikely that anyone would name any title - "co-occurence with crime". It just sounds like an euphemism that someone would create - like the phrase "unexpected consequences" to describe the thousands of deaths after a race riot. Why are you trying to change this article to deny that the asian fetish phenomenon exists or to downplay it? Have you watched tv recently? Kennethtennyson 21:29, 21 October 2005 (UTC)
Actually, I am not Idont Havaname. He and I actually think very differently about this article: he would much rather see it deleted while I want it improved. Why would I, supposedly wanting to "deny the Asian fetish phenomenon exists or downplay it", nominate it at the Article Improvement Drive? Why would I also be the only one so far that has added content from scholarly sources (about the yellow peril and model minority) to substantiate the topic? You can liken me to the KKK or whatever other hate group you want, but until the other editors on this page actually want to discuss and be constructive about this article, instead of bashing eachother's personalities and having an edit war, there will be no hope for this topic to evolve credibility beyond coming across as a subjective, un-referenced rant. --Howrealisreal 23:14, 21 October 2005 (UTC)
I never called for this article's deletion, though back in the unsourced POV rant stages of the article's history I thought about listing it at Articles for Deletion because other editors would see it and list their recommendations. A topic like this would have the inherent controversy for an AfD to attract substantial discussion instead of robotic keep/delete voting, and to probably attract many, many edits to this page from editors all over the N/POV map during the AfD period. Deciding that I myself did not want this article deleted (and knowing from much AfD experience that it's rather silly to start an AfD with an "Abstain for now" vote), I eventually listed it at Wikipedia:Third opinion instead rather than bothering AfD; after some people saw it there, they joined in and were able to start improving the article. I told Howrealisreal to post it on Article Improvement Drive after he suggested it to me. Since successful AID nominations often end up well on their way toward featured article status, I think that's evidence enough to say I don't want it deleted. Howrealisreal and I are not the same person, though this certainly isn't the first time I've been accused of being a sockpuppet! . But rest assured, this is the only account I use here, and I never edit here unless logged in. I'd be looking for sources for this article too, but my classes this semester are such that I don't really have time to research additional sources as well as I would like to (lately I have not been editing many articles apart from my watchlist either, whereas normally I would be). If there's still anything that needs to be researched during my winter break, then I'd be happy to see what I can do as far as finding sources for it is concerned. Sorry for the long post, but hopefully this clears everything up for you all. :-) --Idont Havaname 01:07, 22 October 2005 (UTC)

Asian fetish

"Individuals with Asian fetish are supposedly sexually interested in Asians because of stereotypical qualities the individuals believe to be true amongst the Asian people, such as innocence, submissiveness, promiscuity, or sexual prowess (although some qualities are contradictory, presumably the individuals do not believe in all stereotypes at the same time.)"

It seems to me, that this sentence is problematic for a number of reasons. Who is doing the supposition? Sourcing this theorizing to a specific writer would be best; otherwise I would say reword it to "may be sexually..." and I would drop the parenthetical clause altogether, as an awkward attempt to make a judgement for the reader about an asian fetishist's views on the old virgin-whore dichotomy (which is hardly unique to this situation, btw).

Finally, there appears to be a glaring omission in this list of purported causes for sexual interest (and indeed this entire article), namely, the notion that some people might just be attracted to Asian people because they look hot. — MC MasterChef :: Leave a tip — 01:12, 23 October 2005 (UTC)


That's sort of an idiotic statement: " some people might just be attracted to Asian people because they look hot".

There are a million reasons why people may be attracted to each other. But we're not talking about those reasons. We're talking about ONE reason in particular. And that is attraction based on cultural and racial stereotypes. This entry is labeled "Asian Fetish", not "Physical Attraction".

Yes there are a million reasons, although you wouldn't guess it from this article. If you're not talking about them, I think you should either change the title of this article or put up a request for expansion. Who says fetishes can't be based on physical characteristics? — MC MasterChef :: Leave a tip — 04:51, 26 October 2005 (UTC)
P.S. - Could you please sign your comments?

One User Here:

Part of Asian Fetish is an assumption of behavior and attributes based on racial and cultural stereotypes. Physical attributes certainly play into that as well. ie, "Asian women are so small and passive".


So, what about the article is it that you feel is unmitigated or not justified by any sort of evidence? What about the article is "insulting"? Are you denying that Asian fetishes do occur and that there are people who are solely attracted to Asians (often Asian females) solely because of race? I have met many people that have said, "Oh yeah, I love Asian women because they are sexy and kinky!" How is that not a racially generalized comment? That is like saying, "Oh yeah, I like African women because they have bones in their noses!" Are all Asian women kinky? Do most African women live in tribes with bones in their noses?


Also, this article is not accusing all White men in general of Asian fetishes, it is simply affirming the reality that fetishism of Asians does exist. It is most often perpetrated by White men which is the reason why they are the most often mentioned. There are cases of fetishization of Asian culture by non-White men, but the cases tend to be much less focused on in the media. The frequency of Asian women paired with White men, the lack of postitive or normal portrayls of Asian male/Asian female relationships in the media, along with the negative and stereotypical portrayls of Asian men in the media signficantly shows an fetish towards Asians. If there is no mass Asian fetish, why is such a lack of AM/AF couples on TV? Where is there such a wealth of WM/AF couples in comparison? Why is there so many examples of cultural fetish and stereotyes (Abercrombie & Fitch being one of them) in American society?

No one is saying that all White men have Asian fetishes, the article is simply saying that it does exist and is a problem. Racism and cultural exotification does not go away by denying its existence.

???

What is there to talk about Asian fetish? I really don't know what to add to this article. Is it possible that this article could become a featured article? Whoever started this article must be some weird dude crazy about Asian females. Sorry but that's how I feel about this article. Asian fetish wouldn't be in a typical encyclopedia. Wikipedia must be a special encyclopedia if it has articles such as this one. I agree that the facts are true...but honestly who is really reading this?? Who would be studying Asian fetish as a project? I did googled Asian fetish and the only thing I found was tons of porn sites. So how do you expect us to find information about this topic? (Kyla 17:54, 5 November 2005 (UTC))

Well...I have done a certain amount of research...informally and without realizing it at the time...But hardly enough to earn a degree in Asian Studies, you understand;>--R.D.H. (Ghost In The Machine) 21:52, 6 November 2005 (UTC)


Object to Objectification

I find the article's very title to be wrong on so many different levels. Replace the word Asian with "Black" or "Blond" and you will see what I mean. Sexual fetishes pertain to either objects (Dildos,Cucumbers, Balloons, furry suits etc) practices (Oral, anal, bondage etc) or specific body parts (feet, breasts, ass, belly buttons etc). They DO NOT pertain to an entire race (which happens to also be the largest race on the planet currently, for those keeping score) ! So not only is it racist to refer to an "Asian fetish" but it is, essentially, objectification of women. I will not stoop to say this article's author "needs to get laid". But I would advise him (or possibly her) that if they ever hope to, a good way to start would be to stop viewing and treating people like objects. Treat them with courtesy, respect and kindness, same as you would anyone else (assuming you are a gentleman, of course). Trust me, this works, no matter where you are or whom you're dealing with. You might even find someone who will "love you long time" in every sense...which, ultimately, is all any of us can truly hope for.--R.D.H. (Ghost In The Machine) 21:52, 6 November 2005 (UTC) _________________________________________________________________

One View Here:

You are missing the point entirely. Asian Fetishism is ABOUT objectifying Asians (and Asian women in particular). How can you object to something that is describing what objectification is about? You might as well say "I object to the term "racism" because it is racist".

The victims of Asian fetish are objectified by the perpetrators. It is about taking stereotypical racial qualities and applying them to an entire race or gender.

And when you say sexual fetishes "do not pertain to an entire race" you are absolutely wrong. As the article accurately states, there have been many incidents where Asian women have been victimized because of their race.

When some dude goes around a college campus and pours his semen into the drinks of Asian women exclusively out of some sort of perverted sexual urges, what the heck do you call that?

I find it hillarious that you chastise the author for "objectifying women" when it is opposition to Asian female objectification which is the point of the entire article.

_________________________________________________


"When some dude goes around a college campus and pours his semen into the drinks of Asian women exclusively out of some sort of perverted sexual urges, what the heck do you call that?"

I call that a fucking pervert who needs to have his ass, throughly kicked and spend some time in a jail cell with another sexual sterotype-A big black prison rapist named Bubba.

I only discovered this article anyway, because it was on Wikipedia:Article Improvement Drive. There is a thin line between reporting something and revelling in it. This article seems to be doing more of the latter to ME. That is MY view, not yours. But I'm glad you find them so hilarious. BTW, your views here would carry more weight if you LOG ON with a REAL ACCOUNT and SIGN your comments. Otherwise, you are just another anonymous jerk, one step above a common vandal, who doesnt want to take responsibility for your words. --R.D.H. (Ghost In The Machine) 06:44, 8 November 2005 (UTC)


______________________________________________________________________________


One View Here: It's not just about "who you happen to find hot", but what kinds of behaviors you attribute to people based on their race. If someone thinks Asian women are attractive because he thinks Asian women are passive and submissive then that goes beyond mere physical attraction. And as the news stories in the article show, Asian Fetishism can have some serious real-world consequences.

Cadr, in your post above, you say that "I don't see that an attraction to people of a particular race necessarily involes racism or objectification".

It may...or may not. I agree. But thanks for acknowleging that racism and objectification do often play a factor in this.

Article one sided - propose changes

There are a few camps here. I understand the different sides. However, this article shows the views of one side and explores that side without even accepting the other side, which is excluded all together. These two sides are "like asians for their apperance" and "like asians for their percieved qualities that must come with the appearance" (i.e. the racist/prejudiced stance). To deny that it is possible for non asians to find asians to be beautiful simply due to some of their more typical cosmetical traits is unscientific and absurd. It is neither just about the aesthetics nor the prejudiced side, it is about both. There are different types of motivations for asian fetishists. Both sides must be allowed into the article and explored. Read on to see my concerns and suggestions for change:

""Asian fetish" is a slang term in the United States, the United Kingdom, Canada and Ireland, used to describe the attraction of non-Asian, primarily (but not necessarily) white men, to Asians,"

The introduction has several issues that should be addressed through an elaboration, rewrites and deletion:

1. The use of 'asian' is too vague and unsatisfactory. An "Asian" could refer to a person resident in Asia (including caucasians or blacks, thus), of Asian ethnicity (by that, I refer strictly to their genetical/cosmetical aesthetical features), or someone who embodies the Asian culture, etc. I suggest this be altered to show that Asian fetish 'symptoms' is sexual and romantic attraction toward people who are Asian in appearance (aesthetics). - ( Propose clarification. )

2. Pointing out that an Asian fetishist must be non-asian is inaccurate because it is primarily a sexual preference/obsession. The ethnicity of the Asian fetishist becomes irellevant. I'm sure some who read this will object - but that is only if you believe that the 'natural' automatic attraction is toward people who have certain similar cosmetic traits as oneself. This is not true. It is no more different from caucasians having different eye and hair colours - everyone simply has different preferences. - ( Propose deletion or clarification. )

3. 'white men' is superflous. There are probably more asian men than caucasian men with an asian fetish. Only the old racist ideals of that one should like people who share certain cosmetical traits with oneself makes this pass by unnoticed. - ( Propose deletion or clarification. )


"The phenomenon has also been called "yellow fever,""

1. Perhaps it has, inaccurately. Yellow fever is an overall love/obsession with all things asian, while Asian fetish refers to the sexual/romantical aspect only (Wether or not that is motivated by concious or subconcious racist beliefs does not change this differentiation). - ( Propose clarification of their differences. )


"There is a great deal of controversy surrounding the issue: some would regard the term "Asian fetishist" to be a racist stereotype of white men; others regard the underlying phenomenon itself as evidencing racism on the part of white men who are attracted to Asian women, and possibly on the part of the Asian women themselves (racism against their own cultures)."

1. The controversies described are vague and do not explain why. The other side of the view, that more varied couples is viewed as a very good thing by many, is left out. - ( Propose total rewrite. )

2. "racism against their own cultures" - the author of this does not appear to be able to seperate different concepts like ethnicity (meaning genetical) and culture/nationality. Culture is something like 'environment', traditions, etc, not a group of genetically similar people. Therefore it is impossible to be racist towards such a construct. Also, the author assumes that having an asian appearance means one must also have an asian culture and such, this is both inaccurate and racist. - ( Suggest deletion. ).

Lastly, I think that the introduction should be expanded to give a quick insight into what asian fetishism is, and the two main differences that cause so much controversy - the AF's who appreciate the aesthetics in asians, and the prejudical AF's who are attracted because they believe the aesthetics come with differences in character traits too (stereotyped or asian culturally derived such - this is racist).

I have done a bold rewrite assimilating all these suggested changes. Read it below and comment:

"Asian fetish" is a slang term in the United States, the United Kingdom, Canada and Ireland, used to describe those who; for whatever reason; display the sexual/romantical preference for people of Asian genetical makeup, particularly East Asians such as Chinese, Japanese, Koreans, and Taiwanese.

Those with Asian fetish do not find all who are Asian aesthetically to be attractive. One Asian fetishist typically disagrees with another on beauty ideals and displays an individual taste, but find that 'the look' they desire is most frequently held by people of asian genetical makeup. Other ethnicities such as certain caucasians (including jewish and latino), or any combination of the ethnicities, share some typical asian aesthetical traits such as dark hair and dark eyes, typically making them more appealing to the person with an Asian fetish.

Asian fetishism may also be non-aesthetical in nature. Those Asian fetishists who cannot seperate aesthetical genetical traits from cultural traits (see racism) assume that people who are aesthetically Asian also hold certain characteristics and qualities that come from stereotypes and Asian culture. Such people do not necessarily have an aesthetical preference for Asians; the attraction is fueled by assumptions on the nature/character instead. The two types may coexist.

The phenomenon has similarities to "yellow fever," but differs by lacking the intense cultural interest. A heterosexual man who has an Asian fetish may be referred to as a "rice king" or "rice lover" (a homosexual man, a "rice queen"). There is controversy surrounding the issue: The most common is that sexual preferences for those of another genetical aesthetical makeup than one's own is unnatural and therefore an ulterior motive, such as racism, must be present. Others see all forms of Asian fetishism to breed tolerance and acceptance toward diversity.

I will address the rest of the article at a later time. It does provide some interesting and probably true considerations. Parts of it presents only the 'controversial' one side of the view - as fact. This is strongly biased and must be changed. -- Mikkow 04:45, 16 November 2005 (UTC)

How about some distinction between what constitutes an asian fetish and what is just an interracial relationship. The two are not the same. To introduce the term without noting that its most apparent usage is misapplied as a pejorative, is leaving out another important viewpoint. --198.105.45.121 16:18, 16 November 2005 (UTC)

We do need some fixing here. This article seems to focus from the racist point of view. And there's something about the tone of the article that bothers me. Milpitas guy 23:46, 22 November 2005 (UTC)

Reading over most of these comments the "changes" are almost entirely syntactical. It is obvious that these things are real "Asian Fetishism" (whatever you want to call it). In seems to me that these "clarifications" are an attempt to water down the impact of this phenomenon. User:SillyAlgebraist


The article is too obsessed with isolating the white racial component of Asian Fetishism. The criminal statistics fail to mention Asian (male) on white (female) crime which has happened [e.g. Boulder Colorado student attacked by group of 4 AA men some years ago]. Such balanced discussions never seem to occur during the rush to echo the "White Asiaphile" stereotype, and this actually goes to support the entry concerning the tolerance and encouragement of Asian male - White Female fetishes that seems apparent among many Asian males. Also, the stereotyped African American Asiaphile is nowhere to be found here.


HA... your kidding right? The reason why it focuses on whites is becuase its predominantly a white problem. Asian Male crimes against White females? I bet 1. Their not motivated by some sick perversion like white males and asian females 2. They are statistically insignificent and are probablby isolated incidents. Further, there are no studies at all on asian male's "whtie fetishism" this must be some fabrication of yours.

Should refer to journalistic sources such as: http://www.yaledailynews.com/article.asp?AID=29233 which specifically discusses trends, multiple incidents, and behavior specific to white male / asian female encounters.


Major re-writing needed

This article has some very serious POV problems. I'll try and do some re-writing to mitigate that, but a lot more is needed. I'm gonna start by changing the presentation the subjective opionions which are presented as though they were objective fact or the position of Wikipedia.

A number of sources are currently cited in this article, but most of them appear to be sociologist types of the "political correctness" persuasion (I'm not sure what's the best word exactly, but think women's studies, queer theory, race theory, deconstructionism, etc.). And it's fair to include these people's positions, but we need to be sure that they're presented as opionions, not asserted as objective fact. Beyond that, we should try to include the opinions of others as well. The "original research" rule may make this somewhat difficult though, as I believe that the people who have thought the most about this issue (and hence written the most about it) tend to be people of the persuasion that I described above.

My personal opinion is that if two people are attracted to eachother (for whatever reasons) and treat eachother well then I'm not gonna criticize it. I think people can be attracted to people of a certain ethnicity for a whole number of reasons. One major factor is often a lust for the exotic - for something different from what they're used to. Thus it's common for both black and white Americans (both male and female) to be attracted men and women from other parts of the world (and often their descendants as well). From what I've heard, people (both male and female) in many Asian countries, such as Japan, are often attracted to white Americans and other white people or African Americans and other black people for the same reason. And this seems to hold true thoughout much of the rest of the world. I think some socio-biologists have even theorized that (at least part of) this might be an evolutionary inclination stemming from the fact that someone more genetically different from yourself would be less likely to have potentially harmful recessive genes matching yours. Another common reason is that people of a certain ethnicity may simply have the physical features that one finds attractive, or be more likely to have them. For example I tend to prefer shorter women (probably cuz I'm fairly short for a guy), so I end up finding a lot of Asian women attractive, though I'm also attracted to short women of other races.

There's also the issue of whether or not a "fetish" is neccessarily harmful. And from what I've heard, most psychologists these days don't think so. The prevailing view seems to be that if it doesn't get in the way of functioning in day to day life and having healthy relationships then it's not something to worry about. For example, if a guy has a foot fetish and he dates a girl who has one too and they like eachother's feet and fall in love and make eachother happy then that's cool. It'd only get to be a problem if he started being more obsessed with her feet than he was with her as an individual. And likewise with racially/ethnically based attractions, I think it's typically just a preference or a healthy turn-on, and more rarely in the latter category where it would be considered more of a pathological mental illness.

Blackcats 01:39, 27 November 2005 (UTC)

Your pointless diatrab about "its ok to date others" is not the central theme of this article. The Blatent fact is that there exists an obvious bias within the United States to sexualize Asian females and at the same time desexualize Asian males. Even far-right trash magazines like National Review have had articles about the "puzzling disparity" of Asian Male/Female "out-relationships" in the past.
The statistics shows that Asian/White intermarriage is the highest of all the minority groups by some large degree. This is obviously provoked by something. More "polite" theories suggest it is 'assimilation,' yet that dosn't explain the fact that most of these, nay, almost all of these inter-marriages are with Asian Females and White males...
Further the sorts of Fetish manifesting themselves against Asian females from all these reports are OBVIOUSLLY very harmful. So maybe you think urinating on people and stealing women's hairs is perfeclty acceptable activity, but the majority of normal indivuals in ANY society would probably disagree.
"From what I've heard, people (both male and female) in many Asian countries, such as Japan, are often attracted to white Americans and other white people or African Americans and other black people for the same reason."
Yes its always good to bring up Japan, the most "white" washed of all the Asian nations. Yet, recent developments seem to show that people still want to see others that look like them in movies etc. Take for instance Korea's emerging movie/tv show industry. Many articles in even the western media (such as BBC) have pointed out that they are starting to replace Hollywood's foothold in Asia. Soundbytes from KBS interviews of regular people have stated "we want to see people like us as the heroes, as the romantics" and other similiar comments. Obviouslly race matters in the social sense.
Its very telling that Korean movies and now the new Chinese media is becoming much more popular (especially Korean romance dramas that show ASIAN MEN with ASIAN WOMEN) in Asia, then the Hollywood rubish like Last Samurai. After all, if its so normal for differnt sexes in races to love each other so easily where are all the Asian men hearthrobs in America?
SillyAlgebraist 07:59, 27 November 2005 (UTC)
Do you have specific articles to cite? Also, stop making personal attacks. --Idont Havaname 18:11, 27 November 2005 (UTC)
S.A. - I find it ironic that you accuse me of making a diatribe when my critique was dispassionate and well reasoned whereas your response appears to be very much an emotional rant. As for my analysis not being "the central theme of this article," I would beg to differ. I think dissenting opinions are quite relevent.
In looking for reasons why there are more marriages of Asian females & white males than vice versa, I think there one important factor you may have overlooked. The fact that in WWII and the Korean War, large numbers of American troops (overwhelmingly male) were deployed in Asia, and large numbers have been stationed in Korea and Japan ever since - in addition to the Vietnam War and the US bases that were in the Phillipenes until the 1990s. So there have simply been large numbers of American males in contact with a lot of women in various asian countries for a long time. Had there been a lot of Asian soldiers deployed in the US for a long time, then I'm sure a lot of white women would have ended up marrying them and moving back to their countries with them. Of course you can say that all this is imperialism and such, and I'd even be inclined to agree, but I'd say you should blame American foriegn policy and not some postmodernist notion of an "Asian fetish" that supposedly springs from it.
And then, since WWII, Asian countries have been sending a lot their "best and brightest" over to America to study. But sadly enough, American women (likely women in general) aren't attracted to smart guys so much as they are to jocks and soldiers, and the minority of our women that did have a thing for geeks already had an ample supply to choose from. I know 'cuz I am one of those native born geeks :-P And it'd make things a whole lot easier for me if women were falling all over themselves to be with guys who were silly and good at algebra, but unfortunately that's just not the way it is.
Finally, to address your whole thing about the movies - I don't really see the relevance here. Sure - a lot of Asian countries now have the money and expertise to churn out slick-as-hollywood films with their own actors in their own language that don't have to be dubbed or subtitled. Good for them, but how is this relevant to the supposed fetish that so many western men have??? Maybe you were trying to refute my point Asians also lusting for the exotic, but I don't think you've done so. I know plenty of white American women who prefer Hollywood flicks over Spanish language (or other foreign) films but still have quite a thing for Latin men (or other foreigners), so I don't quite see the relevance there.
What is becoming more apparent to me though is that in addition to the whole feminist/postmodernist/political-correctness thing, much of the critique of the supposed "Asian fetish" seems to be motivated by the insecurities of Asian men who want to keep "their" women for themselves. And aside for the stand of most politically-correct people on this issue, it seems to me to be very much analogous to American white men getting upset that so many white women are going with black men (much more than the number of black women going with white men). But instead of tirading against inter-ethnic/racial relationships and the supposedly nefarious motives behind them, I think it would be a lot more productive for people to just focus on finding compatible partners who like them for who they are. Blackcats 02:51, 28 November 2005 (UTC)
"Personal attacks?" Since I didn't attack the individual its funny that you accused me of such. I precisely did what Wikipedia said I should do, I attacked the statements the person was making notice "Your pointless diatrab" the subject is obviouslly focused on his statements, not the individual. Had i attacked the person on his own being and not his "merits" I would have said "Since your obviouslly a sick asiaphile apologist" But I didn't now did I?
Also, why not ask the person who I was commenting on whether he has any articles to cite? As far as I can tell, all these complaints about this article seem to have yielded very little citations. If you want citations for the opposing viewpoint. I can easily go into jstor or a university database and pull numerous articles. Of course they'd all be this suppodly "one-sided" viewpoint from the "Queer theorist," from sociology etc which were pointed out by the previous individual.
If you want to see a BBC article I was refering to about the "Korean Wave" http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/entertainment/4041861.stm
But really anyone who knows anything abotu Asia at this point knows that it is true that the Korean film industry is becoming increasingly popular. Why don't you go out and do some snopping around in korean/chinese/tawianese/japanese media on this, you'll find it to be very true. I will do more on this article after 1 1/2 from now as I am currently busy with work. It seems to me, very obvious, as these indiginous medias become more popular, the Western (white based) media becomes less. Its very much a zero-sum game. Its obvioulsly the market speaking, Asians are sick of seeing white people constantly when they go out for entertainment, and rightfully so, since Americans obviouslyl don't like to see Asians all to often in serious roles in America (lest they be prostitues or kung fu heroes).
Also what seems to be increasingly obvious is that most of these changes that are being made on the article are almost entirely syntax. That is you find "acceptable" syntax which waters down the actaul message, which is that this phenomonon is real.
And I'm still awaiting some kind of answer to the questions I possed.... SillyAlgebraist 22:12, 27 November 2005 (UTC)
S.A. - I think I addressed most of the points you made above.
As for the "syntax" changes that I've made - like I said in my original post here, those changes are being made so that subjective opinions and analysis are presented for what they are - not asserted as fact or argued for by Wikipedia. This is neccessary for compliance with Wikipedia's NPOV policy. Even criticisms of things like nazism, which most everyone sees as evil and repulsive, cannot be asserted by Wikipedia. So Wikipedia certainly cannot take a stand on much more controversial issues like this one - where there's a great deal of disagreement within mainstream society.
To be clear though, this most basic NPOVing proccess which I've started is by no means sufficient. Much more dissenting opinions need to be found and presented to give the article balence. Blackcats 03:02, 28 November 2005 (UTC)

"In looking for reasons why there are more marriages of Asian females & white males than vice versa, I think there one important factor you may have overlooked. The fact that in WWII and the Korean War, large numbers of American troops (overwhelmingly male) were deployed in Asia, and large numbers have been stationed in Korea and Japan ever since - in addition to the Vietnam War and the US bases that were in the Phillipenes until the 1990s."

That absolutely has NOTHING to do with why the situation is true in America NOW. This phenomenon is prevelent even amnogst native born Asian-Americans (which makes up the vast majority of the diaspora population in question). Also this again totally ignores that their is a media bias against Asian males (it must totatly be in the imaginations of all these pathetic Asian males). Again, where is the Asian male hollywood hearthrob if its so easy for differnt races to be attracted to each other irrespective of sex?

"Of course you can say that all this is imperialism and such, and I'd even be inclined to agree, but I'd say you should blame American foriegn policy and not some postmodernist notion of an "Asian fetish" that supposedly springs from it."

Actaully I don't chalk this to imperailism because I'm not a proponent of Marxist rubish. It is simply the result of the market. The market of a predominatnly white america is showing a prefrence to sexualize asian females and to desexualize the asian male. Which again corroborates my belief that race is an extremely important factor in social behavior.

"Maybe you were trying to refute my point Asians also lusting for the exotic, but I don't think you've done so. I know plenty of white American women who prefer Hollywood flicks over Spanish language (or other foreign) films but still have quite a thing for Latin men (or other foreigners), so I don't quite see the relevance there."

Yeah perhaps you missed the comment after that about the quoest from KBS where they did interviewed some people on the street and individuals mentioned how they want to see Asians in these roles. I was again citing a case where the market is indicating that race matters socially.

"What is becoming more apparent to me though is that in addition to the whole feminist/postmodernist/political-correctness thing, much of the critique of the supposed "Asian fetish" seems to be motivated by the insecurities of Asian men who want to keep "their" women for themselves."

What has always been apparent to me is that white males love to white wash anythign they can because of the supposed political correctness society we live in. They can't do so with blacks so they do so with Asians.

"And then, since WWII, Asian countries have been sending a lot their "best and brightest" over to America to study. But sadly enough, American women (likely women in general) aren't attracted to smart guys so much as they are to jocks and soldiers, and the minority of our women that did have a thing for geeks already had an ample supply to choose from. I know 'cuz I am one of those native born geeks :-P And it'd make things a whole lot easier for me if women were falling all over themselves to be with guys who were silly and good at algebra, but unfortunately that's just not the way it is."

Nice play on my screenname, you are so witty.. Girls not falling for guys who are "silly" and "good at algebra." Sarcasm aside, further, you suppose in your article that the "majority" of Asian men from Asia who come to the US are geeks. I find that a laughably biased statement, which not only demonstrates your obvious ignorance of the present situation in universities, but also reveals your subtle predisposition to believe that "Asians men are geeks." Since intellignece does not imply "geekiness." Even if we suppose that all the Asian men who came ot the US to study were super-intelligent, you could not state the later conclusion....

Also, the big point... it is still the case that nothing you have said explains the situation the majority of Asian-American males find themselves in today. Arn't Asian-American males natives? Shouldn't they have then equal ability at these females as you, who is also a native? Unless you would like to propose to me that most Asian-American males are dorks? And dorks to such a degree that they are inferior to you. Which I'd gladly like to refute to you personally in reality.


This is a society that, as even Steve Sailor of the National Review admitted, marginalizes Asian male both in the media and in everyday life. If even the far-right observes this then there probably is something to the phenomenon. Of course he tried to forward similiar ideas on why, but they havn't survived the test of time.

"And aside for the stand of most politically-correct people on this issue, it seems to me to be very much analogous to American white men getting upset that so many white women are going with black men"

Good point, good thing white men can always fall back to Asian women and Asian men are so well accepted American society.


"But instead of tirading against inter-ethnic/racial relationships and the supposedly nefarious motives behind them, I think it would be a lot more productive for people to just focus on finding compatible partners who like them for who they are."

Suppodly? Its a fact that racism exists. All people are inherenlty racist. That is the way it is and always will be. No amount of propoganda can hide it. Its obvious that white-americans are racist, as is all of mankind. This article is written about a kind of manifestation of white american racism. The difference between you and I is not between "political correctness," since I don't believe in this either. The difference is I see the world the way it is, you see it in some kind of fake candy coat where people just accept each other because of "who they are." This "abstract notion" of "who we are" being detached from race is a prefrenced idea, it is not reality. Maybe some minority group, like the Jews can essentially easily blend amongst the greater population since they've become europeons anyways, but true minority groups don't have the luxury.

On the comment it being outside the mainstream implying the fallacy of these assertions. The citations list from any academic database is going to be full of this type of reasoning. You can chalk this to academic bias, but whats the opposing theory? The only opposing theory I've seen while browing the journals is that its a result of 'assimililation.' Certainly a more digestable theory to those who would like to percieve themselves totally innocent. Yet, I guess this means that Asian men just arn't assimilating as well to American society. A total shame, so if thats true why is that? Maybe its because Asian men are dominering and oppresive? Again, that would also be a more digestable theory to white america.

In any event, it was also more mainstream in America to accept the inferiority of blacks in the first half of the 20th century (so I suppose that may imply that it was correct according to you right?). Yet, if majority is all we're talking about just wait 20 years when the 20 million excess Chinese males grow up and see american media showing Tom Cruise conquering Japan or maybe the sequel will have him be the last Shaolin Warrior and taking a Chinese wife after righteously killing her husdband, all while mastering the art of kung fu in 6 months. Or the latest William Hung being laughed at (curious no normal asian males seem to make it to the media -must be because they don't exist). Or maybe they'll have the pleasure to see the newest movie on Ghengis Khan (being played by a European of course). I think as Asian societies take a look at this issue, they'll start to see the obviouness of the phenomenon. SillyAlgebraist 03:41, 28 November 2005 (UTC)

"Most relationships"

This is a value judgement. Further, it is not supported by any emperical evidence. If you people actaully want to be netural then you can only utilzie the existential quantifier. We know that "there exists" normal relationships. You can even say many, but to say "most" is to make a statement that is totally baseless SillyAlgebraist 04:15, 28 November 2005 (UTC)

You might also be interested in looking at Avoid Weasel Words, which discusses what you have brought up in your comment. It's generally a good strategy for getting at the neutral point of view. Your concern is addressed in WP:WEASEL#Other problems. Generally, it's not good to use any weasel words, but how many of the relationships are normal isn't really something that can be quantified; the definition of "normal" is subjective in itself.--Idont Havaname 06:28, 28 November 2005 (UTC)
Ok... well I don't know if you're criticizing me but the phrase "there exists" is rigorious enough to be used in logic and mathematics as a foudnational object, so I think it would also be useful in natural languages as well. The phrase "there exists" is clearly neutral, and it is much more neutral then "most," which is what I replaced. SillyAlgebraist 06:36, 28 November 2005 (UTC)

Unfortunately, a lot of relationships in the US these days are disfunctional to varrying degrees. But no emirical evidence has shown that relationships between non-Asian men and Asian women are statisticly any more likely to be disfunctional than relationships with any other race and gender combination. So I've changed the article to more directly state this. Blackcats 02:22, 29 November 2005 (UTC)

Your edit is unacceptable. Reading it it almost sounds like the possibilty that your assertion is incorrect is absurd. Therefore it will be changed back to the "tehre exists" statement which is most defintilly netural. A non-trivial stylistic syntactical equivelent will be found if you have problems with how this sounds. Yet, I can't do much non-trivial work at this moment since I'm kept busy till a week and a half from now.SillyAlgebraist 03:26, 29 November 2005 (UTC)

S.A. - The wording "Although there exists many relationships between Asian females and non-Asian males that are healthy and functional" is very much POV, because it implies that healthy and functional relationships are the exception. And absolutely no evidence has been shown to support a claim that relationships between women of Asian descent and men of any other ethnic/racial group are any less likely to be healthy and functional than relationships of any other racial/ethnic composition. If you can find a reputable double-blind psychological study that shows that those sort of relationships are statistically less likely to be healthy than any other then by all means cite it. But the burden of proof is on you here. People in these relationships must be given the benefit of the doubt. And it's totally unacceptable for you or anyone is to slander and impugn people who happen to be in this type of inter-racial relationship. Blackcats 23:24, 29 November 2005 (UTC)

Actaully "Although there exist" dosn't imply anything of what you said. Perhaps you need to go ahead and look at rigorious interpretations of that term. Its obvious whatever you did study in your college days it was not anything that require rigorious and formal thinking. Therefore, the entirety of the nonesense you typed after this objection is meaingless. SillyAlgebraist 00:28, 30 November 2005 (UTC)


It certainly does have implications in contexts like this one. For example, if this discussion were addressing concerns that some have raised about relationships between black men and white women and the article were to say "Although there exists many relationships between black men and white women that are healthy and functional, such and such concerns have been raised." If the article were written that way, I think most people would see it as obvious racism. While the literal meaning is true, many such healthy and functional relationships do indeed exist, the clear implication is that those are the exception to the rule. For example, one might use that same sort structure to say: "Although there exists many people who have been in high speed auto accidents without suffering serious any injuries..." Blackcats 03:36, 30 November 2005 (UTC)


"Although the meaning is true" well if yous uppose the meaning is true, yet it will be "implied" by others, then we can only conclude that they are bringing in other predispotisions when reading the article. Which is of course, none of my concern.
Actaully no.... that is rather netural. The problem with you is that your predispose the idea that it will be healthy. Suppose relationships between black men and white women wern't healthy... then what? We don't know either way since data does not exist. Its only racist because your interpreting this within your hated "PCness" (And here I thought you were a man of stoute and unyielding principle, only to find your one of flimsy ones -the kind that is disingenious).
And again the way you phrase it puts it in less concrete wording and it very much sounds like the alternative to your assertion is absurd. Now I know you must have been one of those kids who tried to put the circle in the square socket, but here's a hint... Maybe you can create a phrase that dosn't have, embedded within it, your bias if your "displeased" by my semantically correct statement.
Oh yes, "I think what most people..." I can care less what you "think," its clear that if one can't even grasp simple thought, he should not be counted on to grasp higher ones. The syntax is correct and will remain until a total overhaul can be done to this article. SillyAlgebraist 05:47, 30 November 2005 (UTC)

SillyAlgebraist - First of all, if you're going to quote me with quotation marks and everything then you should at least quote my exact words. What I said was "While the literal meaning is true" [Emphasis added]. But despite the fact that the literal meaning is true, the implication is very much misleading. This isn't a matter of predisposition or anything of the sort - it's simply a matter of the English language. There are numerous other examples of sentences where the literal meaning is true but the implication is misleading. For example, if an article were to read "Chicago is a city of more than ten thousand people." Yes, that's true, but it's very misleading because it gives the impression that it's a city of less than 100,000 when in fact it's a city of several million. Another example - if a Wikipedia article read that "Mother Teresa was never successfully prosecuted for child molestation." Yeah - that's technically true, but it gives the impression that there was likely widespread suspicion that she she may have been a child molester and that there may well have bee an unsuccessful prosecution against her. There are lots of cases like those, and that's why it's important to consider not just the literal meaning of a sentence but what it implies. Blackcats 08:27, 30 November 2005 (UTC)