The Ideal and the Reality of Asian American Feminism (or Chicken Balls and Hainan ji fan)
2 Responses | Leave a Comment »
I just read a very nice description of the Asian American feminist ideal at the Reappropriate blog:
the ideas of Asian American feminism [are] best defined by Gary Okihiro’s “When and Where I Enter”, which argued against the patriarchy of minority communities and cautioned that Asian American equality could only be achieved by the joint elimination of both racism and sexism, both inter- and intra-racially.
I agree in principle with the spirit of this ideal, although I disagree that “racism” and “sexism” as we currently understand them can ever be “eliminated.” (They can be “minimized” through education and sound social policy, but they also must be “reconceptualized” in a “developmental” framework: that is, we have to understand racism and sexism, or ethnocentrism and patriarchy, and their origins and endings, as part of the “maturation” or development of human individuals and groups. More on that at another time.)
As I stated in my previous post, keeping in mind that feminism is a very comprehensive topic, and without going into an intricate and abstract discussion on just what feminism is and where it comes from, I think most of us can agree that if you believe in gender equality and viewing women as human beings of equal “worth,” dignity, potential, and all that good stuff as men, you’re some sort of “feminist.”
I and every other intelligent person on this site and forum agree that feminism, in this broad sense, is great, and that patriarchy exists and is bad. I would love to live in a society where we have “eliminated” sexism and racism (though it’s not possible), and to that extent, I agree with Reappropriate’s AA feminist ideal.
An ideal is one thing, and the way it manifests in people and the world is another. In my fellow contributor Xian’s discussion of the topic, he mentions how many people have “agreed that [AA feminism] is unnecessary and that the existing Asian American feminist movement is pathological and self-defeating.” He says that this is completely false, and that “What people are pointing to as the Asian American feminist movement is simply a few high profile figures who have internalized mainstream racism.”
I totally agree with him that a healthy form of AA feminism is necessary, just as a healthy form of any sort of feminism is necessary to create a more equal and more just and more adorable society. I also agree that the “few high profile figures” he mentions do not constitute the AA feminist movement. I’m not sure, however, that the “AA feminist movement” itself hasn’t internalized mainstream racism to some significant degree as well.
We may be talking about different things here, but as I understand it, the “AA feminist movement,” in terms of its constituents, consists of the abovementioned high profile figures (they’re Asian American and they clearly stand for some sort of feminist rights/equality principles), all the lower profile advocates, activists, and artists online and on the streets, and any AA female or male who believes that women and men ought to have equal opportunities, be treated equality, and have the same dignity and worth (let’s not get into just what “equal” means, though).
If I’m correct in my understanding, this movement consists of a pretty massive part of the AA community, and at least from what I’ve seen in my own research and experience, there is a sickness in our community. Its most obvious and controversial symptom is in the “interracial disparity.” Our community suffers from self-esteem and identity issues, caused primarily by white patriarchy and colonization (which has resulted, as it does everywhere, in a vicious cycle of internalized/externalized causation, so I’m not “laying all the blame” on white folks here, and at any rate it’s hard to blame someone’s ancestors for colonizing and being patriarchal when all post-tribal civilizations were assholes); these “identity pathologies” manifest differently in males and females, and they have infected us socially and politically.
We’ve been infected for so long, so deeply, and at such a rate, that some of us don’t even think it’s a sickness. We think it’s normal. We think it’s healthy. We defend the existence of the “disparity” with every fiber of our beings, as though our very identities, self-respect, and self-conception depended on its moral legitimacy.
And of course it does. Our community, we’re like lepers who’ve spent our whole lives in the colony and want to kill anyone who cares enough to tell us that there’s a better way to be.
And how do these lepers attack? They attack with “feminism.”
No intelligent, self-reflective, and decent person would argue with the basic goal of gender equality in humanity. There is a great deal of misunderstanding about most social movements these days, and in the case of feminism, there is no dearth of ignorant men, minority or otherwise. But the problem here isn’t just that feminism isn’t being understood by Asian American men, but from what I’ve seen, it’s also that it isn’t being understood by Asian Ameircan women.
Take the typical “discussion” about the interracial disparity. Whenever anyone, generally a male, mentions how fucked up it is that so many AA women go after white men (which, as a population, is undoubtedly caused by internalized racism, but I’m not saying anything about any individuals reading this, of course), the first attack he’ll receive is always the “feminist” one. Example:
You patriarchal, misogynist pig! You have no right to tell me what to do with my body! Stop trying to control me! We don’t belong to you! We aren’t your property, we’re human beings! We can date and marry and fuck whoever we want!
This is quickly followed with:
No wonder so many of us don’t want anything to do with you! We’ll never forget the foot-binding!
And this may be accompanied with undercurrents of
My dad is an emotionally-distant controlling asshole who can’t communicate, my brother is a huge geek, and my mom is an embarrassment.
Now, I’m obviously being a bit facetious here, but this isn’t far from the truth. This is “feminism” as it’s understood by a good deal of AA female “feminists.”
Their arguments are of course outrageous. They’re ludicrous. And worst of all, they’re inapplicable.
Many of our “social activists” and “civil rights advocates” love telling us, for example, to boycott a restaurant or a store to protest offensive ads or products.
When they do this, when they make this moral recommendation, are they trying to control my body, or enslave me, or undermine capitalism, or be anti-capitalist? Of course not. Anyone who would make that accusation would be a world-class moron. In fact, what they’re trying to do is quite the opposite: they’re trying to get me to do something which will promote my own social and political freedom by reducing objectifying stereotypes and symbols. They’re using capitalism to exert moral pressure.
But when it comes to advocating for a social or political boycott (such as recommending that we not have visible leaders in IRs, particularly with white men, and keep in mind this is moral recommendation, not a legal one, so no one’s forcing anyone to do anything), somehow, it becomes a male attempt to control females, put them back in the kitchen, re-classify them as chattel, get the foot-wraps out, and undermines feminism. It’s somehow anti-feminist. It’s somehow an attack on Asian females by Asian males.
In fact, what we’re trying to do is quite the opposite: we’re trying to get people to do something which will promote their own social and political freedom by reducing objectifying stereotypes and symbols. We’re trying to promote mutual understanding and trust between the genders by reducing unnecessary tension points, by refusing to let our leaders escape into the arms of white patriarchy (quite literally) whenever they please. We’re using feminist ideals of equality, of fighting white patriarchy, to exert moral pressure.
Do you see how ridiculous the typical response to our recommendation is?
Do you see how sick a population is where a significant number of our female (and gay) advocates and artists can all be found with white males? Do you see how sick we are when we expect, defend, and rejoice in it in our representatives and books and movies?
You can call something authentic as much as you want, but everyone knows what sweet ‘n’ sour tastes like.
There is the ideal, and there is the reality. In effect, this “tainted” form of “feminism” becomes exactly what Reappropriate says it’s not: rabidly anti-Asian-male.
So who is being polarizing? The ones defending, promoting, celebrating a sick psycho-sexual-social structure, or the ones pointing it out?
Our community is sick. We’re riddled with self-esteem and identity issues, and we celebrate them. We’re addicted to them. And the first thing an addict has to do to get better is admit that she has a problem.
We’ve already done it here. We know, and we accept, all the fucked-up things our women and men feel and do. We know what we are. We know who we are.
Do you?
Leave a Comment »
Share
Entries (RSS)
Dialectic
7:30 am | Apr 06, 2008On a personal note, it saddens me that the Reappropriate author has felt so despondent, angry, and dismayed at what she has seen in the last few debates. That was certainly not the intention of any intelligent and well-meaning writer. I note that her frustration mirrors our own, and we have been feeling it for a long, long time.
“I feel like I’ve been banging my head against a brick wall, and all I have to show for it is ostracization, derision, and occasionally ridicule from some Asian American men.”
Replace “AA men” with “AA women” and “white males” and now you have some idea of what we have felt. At the same time, I find a statement like this hard to believe:
“I feel like the adage “working twice as hard to get half as far” is poignantly relevant to how hard I’ve struggled for the same acceptance in the APIA online community that some of my male colleagues enjoy almost innately.”
Everything I’ve seen online, in academia, and in activist and artistic circles points to women being in the dominant and visible positions when it comes to the APIA on- and offline community. In fact, when you look at the major sites, their web traffic, and their linked networks, you’re far from being the black sheep: we are. And we are because our site had a very “masculine” tone and feel, and because we do not tow the standard feminist/ academic/ activist line in our opinions.
jaehwan
1:49 pm | Apr 06, 2008Great article, D! I had a good Sunday morning laugh at your “You patriarchal, misogynist pig” rant! It may be somewhat facetious, but it’s not so far off the mark.
I’d like to point out one more thing in your comment above:
There is a financial angle to this whole debate as well. In her precursor to the link you posted above where she debates with, of all people, Xian, Jenn also writes:
Jenn reverses the genders in order to make a hypothetical point to Xian. There are some things that are just out of nowhere: I’ve NEVER, even among internet crazies, heard anyone call for Asian women to quit their jobs in order to make room for Asian men.
But the more important economic issue that dovetails with what you wrote above is that women are the dominant force in APA academic, activist, and artistic circles, and these “Asian American feminists” are supported by cold hard cash. I feel bad that Jenn is losing money on her site and I respect her for pursuing the sciences, but the fact is that Jenn could become a millionaire by writing a book like the millionaire orientalist Amy Tan. She could become a full time “diversity consultant,” like her friend Carmen Van Kerckhove, who has the privilege of decrying our Asian American male “sexism” here since she’s a paid “expert” on these things. Even in a small city like Portland, any Asian person who echoes the Kingstonian mantra can become a “diversity consultant,” though quite understandably because of the philosophy involved, most of these people are Asian women. These jobs are not readily available to the more “male-centric”–I actually prefer “equality-centric”–positions, and I can honestly say that I know ZERO Asian American equality-centric people who teach diversity full time. I literally don’t know any Asian men in these full time positions. Most of them are part-timers like us who can’t quit our day jobs. The message is clear: if you take concrete steps to fight the dominant racial hierarchy, you get cast out into the cold, much like many of the main Asian American sites have done to the 44’s.
That’s why I think nightshade and mg are correct in referring to the Kingstonian movement as “fake feminism” or “fauxminism.” It’s just white supremacy wrapped up in nicer wrapping paper.