The (Asian-American) Feminist Mystique
17 Responses | Leave a Comment »
It’s starting to sound cliched, but where are all the good Asian-American feminists?
Take, for example, Natalise. In her recent video for the single “China Doll”, she claims to have “subverted every Asian stereotype I could get my hands on in a comical non-threatening way” (taken from her YouTube post), which seems disingenuous. How is the repetition of stereotypical “non-threatening” images of Asian women a catalyst for change? Doesn’t something that is more threatening produce a more immediate and visceral reaction? Moreover, she is not the first AA “feminist” to have resorted to such garish tactics to garner attention for her agenda. Remember Big Bad Chinese Mama (Kristina Wong) and Asianprincess (Gennifer Hirano)? They also made use of stereotypical images of Asian women in their performances, but with a little more panache.
One might argue that in a media-saturated atmosphere, where nothing is believable or intrinsically of worth, one of the more effective ways to get one’s point across is through satire and parody. This may work if the audience is equipped with the intelligence to understand the nuances of the performance, and can distinguish between each layer of meaning within the piece. But upon further examination of Natalise’s music video, including the lyrics, there is nothing of substance there. The images themselves are not new, even to sex-positive feminists like Susie Bright and Betty Dodson, and serve no other purpose than to illustrate how sexually appealing Natalise is as an Asian woman. Sex-positive feminism from the second wave is even more risque and challenging than this trite excuse of a political video. Natalise’s vanity piece would not be out of place amongst other videos from MySpace cam whores.
This is where I need to ask: why is it that the subjects of sex and sexual relations have to be front and centre for Asian-American feminists? Third-wave feminists have busted through sexual stereotypes and even postmodernism to form a feminism that can hardly be described in a short paragraph for its sheer complexity, black feminists are proudly embracing the colours of their skins and their ethnic differences and carving a place in white-dominated society for themselves, and South Asian and South-east Asian feminists are challenging their historical pasts and governments for independence, both individual and collective. Sex, in fact, is not always the top concern for these admirable women.
Do you Asian-American women have nothing of importance to fight for? Is that why you’re taking on outdated second-wave feminist notions and proclaiming them as your struggles, even when other feminists of colour have moved on? And most important of all, why are Asian-American men your enemies when they should be your compatriots? If your anger against Asian-American men stems from historical oppression, why not direct your vitriol to men from the colonial past, who invaded your countries of origin and oppressed your people far worse than Asian-American men ever could? In fact, try to understand your own cultural history before making foolish statements that involve the words “foot-binding”, “Chinese word for woman = slave” or “I don’t date/fuck/marry Asians”.
If you identify as an Asian-American feminist, take a good close look at what you’re fighting for, and see if everything adds up. Try not to let the narcissism of being a desirable Asian woman get to your head as we all know is wont to happen when you become popular in the blogosphere or anywhere else. And perhaps one day, one of you may come up with something that all Asian-Americans, women and men, or even Betty Friedan, would be proud of.
Leave a Comment »
Share
Entries (RSS)
jaehwan
8:28 pm | May 24, 2008Thank you, thank you, thank you, JadeDragon! Yes, why is it that Asian American feminism seems to be so out of place when compared with feminisms of other colors? It’s refreshing to see another piece on Asian American feminism that uses real logic, rather than “you don’t own my sexuality” narcissism.
awong
3:34 am | May 25, 2008good post
aznbro
11:40 am | May 25, 2008Nice post, Jadedragon. Is this the first post about feminism by a female on this site? (I’m assuming that you are female because of an avatar you used in the past; but if I’m mistaken, I apologize).
Several articles have been submitted on this site on the topic of feminism but most seem to delve on what AA feminism shouldn’t be rather than what it is. Can someone give me a quick “primer”? I have to admit that I still don’t understand what exactly what is expected on the part of AA men when AA feminists state that we do very little to combat sexism. Now, I understand this exists a lot within the family unit (including mine, where the boys were always treated better than the daughters). But what about outside the family unit? Is it possible to state some concrete examples where AA men can help out? Please don’t flame me if I sound ignorant but I would really like to be enlightened.
nightshade
2:50 pm | May 25, 2008Way to tell it like it is.
We missed you.
jaehwan
2:54 pm | May 25, 2008Nightshade is female.
aznbro
5:17 pm | May 25, 2008Oh yes, you are right Jaewhan. My apologies, Nightshade — You did post on feminism, I was aware that you were female (and you also crack ne up with some of your posts) but I guess I haven’t quite gotten my head screwed on properly here yet.
JadeDragon
8:52 pm | May 25, 2008This is a very quick summary, and should not be taken as a definitive guide.
First-wave feminism was basically women’s suffrage in the early 1800s, the fight for women to vote and have a say in their countries’ respective political systems. Second-wave feminism, which started in the 1960s and pretty much dissipated in the late 1980s with the backlash, was more about asserting individual rights over women’s bodies, such as the rights to birth control and abortion, and extending their roles beyond those of hearth and home. Third-wave feminism, however, is a title given to the various branches of feminist theories that grew from the ideas explored from the first two waves and later.
One of the criticisms of second-wave feminism is that it really only explored the concerns of middle-class, college-educated straight white women, such as reproductive rights, sexual differences between women and men, and gender roles, thus neglecting the problems that were faced by women of other colours, gender identities and creeds. So after the second wave’s zenith, other feminists who would not have fit the mould of the second-wave feminist began to study and refine theories from the second wave to enhance their own knowledge and to help them realise their own feminist ideas.
This was mostly fruitful, as feminists of colour like bell hooks and Rebecca Walker created their own works dealing with issues that second-wave feminists didn’t really explore, such as the effects of race, queer sexualities and ethnic/cultural influences on the roles of women. But as with many political movements, some areas need improvement and better understanding.
Here’s where I shall start proselytising. =P It is my opinion that Asian-American feminists are failing to do what other more successful third-wavers have achieved in terms of knowledge and “furthering the cause” because they insist on playing the victim. Constant refrains of how their patriarchal cultures have betrayed them and how sexist Asian-American men are have basically ruined any leverage for change they may have had. “Victim feminism” also arose from the second wave, so it’s not as if Asian-American feminists were the first to identify men as oppressors (the “men oppress us” schtick is a fairly outdated notion for many third-wavers, as it is understood that there are more political institutions and social practices in place that do the oppressing).
Another problem is that Asian-American feminists tend to conflate sexism with history and traditional ideas. Just because my great-great-great-grandma and even my grandma had their feet bound doesn`t mean that their fathers and husbands were assholes who wanted their brides to have tiny feet. It was part of a practice that possibly began in the 10th century AD, and so my ancestors merely followed what they though was right“, as did their ancestors and not because they were sexist barbarians.
Therefore, when Asian-American feminists draw upon such anecdotes for their arguments against Asian-American men, it`s pretty stupid because many of them grew up in relatively privileged lives, went to good schools, where they learned about feminism“, and started repudiating Asian-American men in favour of other raceséethnicities because they weren`t good enough“. So why the hatredÉ Because daddy didn`t give you a pony for your eighth birthdayÉ Sometimes, what is needed on the part of Asian-American feminists is empathy, rather then knee-jerk reactions honed by white second-wave ideas of how relationships between men and women should be. It`s odd, but sometimes, I think it`s ironic that Asian-American feminists who trumpet about how they are being true“ to their roots and embracing multi-culturalism at the same time are blindly following ideas that were put down by white feminists in the first place, which even other feminists of colour have scoffed at or challenged.
As for your question on how Asian-American men can help, I can`t give you that much advice. All I can do is echo some of Dialectic`s previous thoughts: be a person who is empathetic, understanding and smart enough to sift out the bullshit, appreciate the Good, the True and the Beautiful in life, and don`t take things too seriously sometimes.
JadeDragon
9:32 pm | May 25, 2008Oh, and thanks for your compliments, guys. I’ve been away for quite a while because my personal life just went through some dramatic changes, so hopefully, I’ll be able to stick around for now.
jaehwan
3:04 am | May 26, 2008This is a hard one. All my life, until today, really, I was thinking that it was patriarchal for Asian men to get involved with any kind of Asian American feminism. I thought Asian men joining an Asian women’s movement would be like white people joining Malcolm X; it would brown the black coffee and make it lukewarm.
However, I now think that Asian men have to be proactive. Why? Because I now think that Asian men’s destinies are tied up with Asian women’s. (Lest I get slammed by any of the AA feminists which Jade describes above: No, I’m not talking about destiny which comes from marriage to…gasp…Asian men, and no, I’m not trying to control your sexuality. Date whomever you want. Seriously.) I think Asian men and women rise and fall together. Therefore, it is a part of Asian American male self-interest to take part in Asian American women’s affairs, and vice-versa, Asian American women need to take part in Asian American men’s affairs.
Which basically means–if my thinking is sound–that you need to get involved with organizing. Proactive organizing.
So Aznbro, if you’re interested, stick around. Let’s think this one through together.
JadeDragon
12:32 pm | May 26, 2008A quick note: It’s not “patriarchal” if Asian-American men involve themselves in Asian-American feminist endeavours. In fact, I, for one, would appreciate such participation.
However, it should be understood that the men can’t be leaders of such groups because they can’t completely represent female interests. It’s similar to D’s argument that a person in an inter-racial relationship isn’t suitable as a leader for a race-based organisation because if they want to be pro-active about racial issues, well, they’re not practising what they’re preaching.
Therefore, while men are welcome and should participate in feminist groups to gain better understanding, leadership or any other highly visible role would be counter-productive for the group.
jaehwan
1:57 am | May 27, 2008Jade,
Before I forget, it’s AWESOME to have you back!
I was leaning more towards xian’s side on that IR debate (I think it was jaehwan and xian vs. D and mao), but I agree with you 110% on the feminism thing. It’s funny because whenever I pressure…um…certain “Asian American feminists” on the roots of their movement, they always reference Gary Okihiro, who is a guy! I’ll quote said feminist:
Ummm…does anyone see some irony in having an “Asian American feminist” movement founded by…a guy? Moreover, isn’t is suspect that she uses his definition of “Asian American feminism” to talk about how bad Asian men are, as opposed to what Asian women can do? So basically it’s a feminism that doesn’t focus on women? (That’s according to what Okihiro says. How it is actually practiced mirrors what you mention above.)
So I agree with you 110%. We should participate, but we shouldn’t take highly visible roles as feminists.
aznbro
12:31 am | May 28, 2008Thanks for the AA feminism primer, JadeDragon. On the surface, it seems to me that (Kingstonian feminism issues aside) there isn’t that much difference between AA feminism and mainstream feminism (such as work-place glass-ceiling issues and affortable daycare) — or am I mistaken? I understand that within the family unit, the boys are often favoured over the girls but it seems to me that AF doing just as well as AM in the media, politically and the work-place.(For gen 1.5er and higher anyways)
JadeDragon
2:36 pm | May 28, 2008Well, in theory, Asian-American feminism takes on concepts from “mainstream” feminism and tailors them so they can be applied to issues concerning women from various Asian cultures. The problem is that in many cases, Asian-American feminism tends to focus on issues that are less relevant to modern society, such as the “favouring boys over girls” angle. I actually have yet to hear an Asian-American feminist asking for better daycare because many of them seem too focused on how Asian-American men ain’t treatin’ them right.
Now, while I can empathise with something like the favouring-boys-over-girls bit (I come from a traditional Chinese family myself and my brother is the only son), I find that Asian-American feminists tend to make that sort of topic the main thrust of an argument and focus on the “I’m a victim!” part when other feminists of colour have already moved on or made peace with it.
However, you can’t quite compare a family’s treatment of boys and girls with the treatment of Asian-American woman and men in media, politics or the workplace. Those arise from very different circumstances and are dependent on many other outside factors as well.
Leaf
9:28 pm | Jun 01, 2008I wholeheartedly agree that men should not be leaders of women’s organizations.
People of color in IRs should not be restricted from leading race-based organizations. Applying this standard to gender-based organizations would require their leaders to stop dating/marrying men.
Dialectic
11:06 pm | Jun 01, 2008Uh, no, you’re not drawing a proper analogy. You’re equating the relationship between men and women with the relationship between races, and they’re completely different.
JadeDragon
11:11 pm | Jun 01, 2008Leaf, you’re assuming that all leaders of gender-based organisations would be heterosexual/heteronormative too, which is often not the case.
bdmntn
10:08 am | Aug 22, 2008this comment is for an old post, so maybe no one will even read it, but i had to take the time to answer this question - “why is it that the subjects of sex and sexual relations have to be front and centre for Asian-American feminists?”
the answer is a crucial issue for all feminists and is two-fold. asian-american women (and more importantly, white men) are bombarded with images of what asian sexuality is. the predominance of asian porn on the internet, the orientalist notions of exotic women of the east in literature and the essentialist delegation of an asian women’s face to the domain of sex in film are a constant media perpetuation of the age-old myth in america - asian women are submissive whores. and while certainly women of other races are viewed sexually, the association of asian women and sex in the broader culture is nearly universal and complete. “me love you long time” has a particular resonance here - there is no equivalent for black or hispanic women.
and generally in these media and cultural portrayals, asian women are denied individual beauty or a broader womenhood. they are presented solely as submissive “faces” represented only by sexuality, or some derivative thereof. with their individual beauty denied, their sexiness is apparent only because they are asian i.e. “that’s a sexy asian”. this essentialist notion is the most damning as a form of cultural oppression.
the question now is how feminists of other races have been able to move on, but asian-american feminists are still confronting the issue of sex. it seems to me, obvious. the general culture still presents asian-american females based on their sexuality. in films such as “the last samurai”, the asian women is still solely the prize of the white man, who won her hand in marriage a.k.a. sexuality by killing her husband. it doesn’t matter that he’s a “foreigner” and those cultural rules don’t apply to him. it is this “traditional american fantasy”, which since the 1930’s has been presented to american audiences in film and novels that has laid the groundwork for the further dehumanizing sexualization of the rampant asian porn market, which is generally served with some byline like “these submissive orientals will please you long time”. i won’t even mention mail-order brides. i dread the day when my kids google the word asian.
so, overall, i’d have to say that it’s that asian-american feminists have not properly addressed the systemic problems with asian-american sexuality in a sufficiently public way. and while the general culture is slowly being exposed to asian-american women in less sexual contexts (reporters, representations depicted by other asians), the asian sexuality subtext in alive and kicking, and generally over rides those benign representations. it’s no surprise that memoirs of a geisha was written by an old white man, or that mike meyers has twins “fuk u” and “fuk mi” as his sexual desire, because with a history rich in subjecting asian women to solely sexual positions, americans easily understand the stereotype.
just my two (and a half) cents.