Excited
Ernie first brought our attention to the Mister Wong bookmarking site that used to employ as a logo a caricature of an Asian man with jaundiced skin and slanty eyes, reminiscent of the malicious political caricatures Americans drew once upon a time in history to support the Chinese Exclusion Act. The Mister Wong logo struck a sensitive nerve in many in our community and, in response, we voiced our concerns. Then, a tidal wave of unproductive and clearly abusive comments to Ernie’s post chastised 8A for “making a big deal out of nothing.”
At first blush, it did seem like Asians picked a rather insignificant fight in the much graver war against racism and discrimination. Recall the Abercrombie & Fitch T-shirts depicting slanty-eyed Asians in cone hats and pulling rickshaws, accompanied by captions like “Wong Brothers Laundry Service: Two Wongs Can Make it White.” College-level Asians in particular took up the battle and stomped up a storm about what A&F intended to be an innocent “multicultural” line of tees. Many communities here in the States felt that these Asian activists were overreacting and that, in short, Asian Americans are just hypersensitive about their image.
This accusation reminds me of a legal doctrine I learned in first year law school in a torts lecture: the Eggshell Skull rule. A person should be held accountable for the unforeseen even unusual injuries of another when that person intentionally or negligently causes harm to that other. Thus, if I clubbed someone in the head who had as a preexisting condition a skull as thin as an eggshell and his skull unexpectedly breaks, I would be liable for all damages resulting from my wrongful act, even if his eggshell skull wasn’t foreseeable to me, even if I barely knocked him on the head with my club and in fact had I done it to someone with a normally thick skull, nothing would have happened. You take your victims as you find them, the saying goes.
Here, Asians did NOT overreact. What appears to be our hypersensitivity really evinces our lingering pain from an enduring history of oppression, the subjection of our forefathers to coolie status, and memories of playground teasing when white kids pulled their eyelids taut and ran after the Asian kids yelling “ching chong ching.” We watch our immigrant parents struggle against unreasonable prejudice and discrimination. We hear repeatedly about hate crimes against our community. Almost every day, some otherwise minor occurrence ineluctably reminds us that Diasporic Asians are still second-class citizens. Mount all that together into what we’re forced to recognize as our cultural identity and maybe this will make it easier for others to understand why Mister Wong triggered, whether it intended to or not, a harrowing blast from the past.
I see the Mister Wong and even the A&F incident as analogous to the 2002 case at UVA where, during a lecture demonstrating a particular point, a law professor lightly tapped one of the students on her shoulder. He did this every year in this particular lecture to demonstrate his point, but this time, this particular student was hypersensitive to such touching. The tap flooded her with memories of being terrorized, raped and molested when she was 11 years old and living in her native land of Panama. In a similar constellation, for many Diasporic Asians, a seemingly harmless cartoony image of a yellow-faced man with slanty eyes floods us with memories of being ridiculed for how we look, who we are, and where we come from.
While I thank Mister Wong’s web team for taking substantial steps to alleviate and mediate, the overtly insulting responses to Ernie’s post were not constructive in any way whatsoever and only showed just how necessary it was for 8Asians to air our disturbance in an open marketplace of ideas.
How does this post make you feel?
- Fascinated
- Amused
- Bored
- Sad
- Angry
NOTE: 8Asians.com is a community, and we thank you for being a part of it. While we welcome and appreciate differences in opinion, if you're rude or you're promoting spam, we have a right to edit or delete your comment. Read our comment policy for more information.
If you see a comment that violates the 8Asians.com comment policy, you may flag the comment by mousing over the comment and clicking "FLAG."
Wow so many comments but on the whole constructive. I won't add anything that has already been said:) i believe everybody's intentions were genuine and honest and the end result came up very differently from what they had intended it to.
Wow so many comments but on the whole constructive. I won't add anything that has already been said:) i believe everybody's intentions were genuine and honest and the end result came up very differently from what they had intended it to.
I noticed that the last comment on this topic is dated Aug 7th so I hope I'm not too late to post a comment. Any challenge to Asian reactions to perceived racism is a good thing as it should lead to deeper reflection on the East Asian experience in the west. Growing up in ANY western country, East Asian children WILL experience at least one of the following, racial harrassment, name calling, bullying, beatings, playground intimidation, social isolation, being spat on, exclusion and hatred. All of this because of a flap of skin called an epicanthic fold that covers the outer corner of their eyes. For the most part this type of experience will continue for these kids all the way through high school. Often the teachers and adults who are entrusted with the safety and security of these kids will turn a blind eye to the near constant harrassment, furthering the sense of disconnectedness of the victims.
The harrassment does not stop when these kids complete their school day. At home watching the television they are treated to sight of "Celebrities" like Rosie O'Donnell offering their ignorant and stupid "impersonations" of " how an Asian person speaks". Then the news comes on informing these kids of how "we" MUST stop the Chinese before they "overwhelm us" and that the rapacious appetites of 1.3 billion Chinese are destroying the environment, conveniently forgetting to remind us that it is the 150 years of European and U.S industrial environmental irresponsibility that have actually caused these problems.
In short East Asian children are attacked physically and emotionally at school. They are bombarded with negative and often hateful images of Asians throughout the media that come right into their homes. Asians experience a constant stream hostility in the most mundane ways.In effect Asians are conditioned to think of themselves in very demeaning ways and the western society they are a part of is all too happy to help them with this process.
So, to get back to the issue. Are images such as the one under discussion racist? In a healthy society the answer is no. But, we don't live in a healthy society - at least it isn't healthy if you're an East Asian. I cringe at these images because I know that someone somewhere is going to be empowered to harrass, bully or attack one of our kids. And not just our kids, adults aren't excepted.
For the German gentleman to suggest that these images are no different than images of blond caucasians in the media is plainly naive. No-one is going look at an image of a blond advertiser and be motivated or given ammunition to attack or harrasss blonds or any other caucasian. It just won't happen.
Are these images responsible for the racism experienced in our communities? Well...yes and no. They may not cause people to be xenophobic but they make it acceptable to demean the target group. And that's the main issue. Asians are a target group. Targets of xenophobic fear that strong Asian economies will destroy western economic and military superiority. Targets of xenophobic fear that our work ethic is so potent as to destroy all competition. Targets of envy that Asians are able to succeed economically as a minority in a minority distrustful culture. Targets of every unfunny and uninspired comedian who just has to pick on the East Asians to get the audience on their side. TARGETS.
This image and others like it are simply the tip of the ice-berg. What they reflect is a fear and distrust so ingrained that the perpertrators of such images are genuinely surprised when there is a negative reaction to it. What they reflect is a disdain and disregard so ingrained in the culture that to express it in this way is considered normal.
Do Asians overreact to this type thing? Again...yes and no. No because the reaction may be a visceral revulsion that this hostility has followed them into adulthood. Yes because this isn't the real battle. The real battle is the fight against our de-humanisation. Much of what is written, shown, discussed and opined about East Asians in the west depicts us as monolithic automatons with no individual characteristics and therefore unlikeable and having nothing in common with "individualistic" humanity of westerners. Because of this Asians are typically shown in movies as being extremely expendable with little value shown for Asian life. As a modern storytelling medium, movies are an important gauge of the mood of a culture, and this culture just does not like Asians and is not afraid to let it be known.
I noticed that the last comment on this topic is dated Aug 7th so I hope I'm not too late to post a comment. Any challenge to Asian reactions to perceived racism is a good thing as it should lead to deeper reflection on the East Asian experience in the west. Growing up in ANY western country, East Asian children WILL experience at least one of the following, racial harrassment, name calling, bullying, beatings, playground intimidation, social isolation, being spat on, exclusion and hatred. All of this because of a flap of skin called an epicanthic fold that covers the outer corner of their eyes. For the most part this type of experience will continue for these kids all the way through high school. Often the teachers and adults who are entrusted with the safety and security of these kids will turn a blind eye to the near constant harrassment, furthering the sense of disconnectedness of the victims.
The harrassment does not stop when these kids complete their school day. At home watching the television they are treated to sight of "Celebrities" like Rosie O'Donnell offering their ignorant and stupid "impersonations" of " how an Asian person speaks". Then the news comes on informing these kids of how "we" MUST stop the Chinese before they "overwhelm us" and that the rapacious appetites of 1.3 billion Chinese are destroying the environment, conveniently forgetting to remind us that it is the 150 years of European and U.S industrial environmental irresponsibility that have actually caused these problems.
In short East Asian children are attacked physically and emotionally at school. They are bombarded with negative and often hateful images of Asians throughout the media that come right into their homes. Asians experience a constant stream hostility in the most mundane ways.In effect Asians are conditioned to think of themselves in very demeaning ways and the western society they are a part of is all too happy to help them with this process.
So, to get back to the issue. Are images such as the one under discussion racist? In a healthy society the answer is no. But, we don't live in a healthy society - at least it isn't healthy if you're an East Asian. I cringe at these images because I know that someone somewhere is going to be empowered to harrass, bully or attack one of our kids. And not just our kids, adults aren't excepted.
For the German gentleman to suggest that these images are no different than images of blond caucasians in the media is plainly naive. No-one is going look at an image of a blond advertiser and be motivated or given ammunition to attack or harrasss blonds or any other caucasian. It just won't happen.
Are these images responsible for the racism experienced in our communities? Well...yes and no. They may not cause people to be xenophobic but they make it acceptable to demean the target group. And that's the main issue. Asians are a target group. Targets of xenophobic fear that strong Asian economies will destroy western economic and military superiority. Targets of xenophobic fear that our work ethic is so potent as to destroy all competition. Targets of envy that Asians are able to succeed economically as a minority in a minority distrustful culture. Targets of every unfunny and uninspired comedian who just has to pick on the East Asians to get the audience on their side. TARGETS.
This image and others like it are simply the tip of the ice-berg. What they reflect is a fear and distrust so ingrained that the perpertrators of such images are genuinely surprised when there is a negative reaction to it. What they reflect is a disdain and disregard so ingrained in the culture that to express it in this way is considered normal.
Do Asians overreact to this type thing? Again...yes and no. No because the reaction may be a visceral revulsion that this hostility has followed them into adulthood. Yes because this isn't the real battle. The real battle is the fight against our de-humanisation. Much of what is written, shown, discussed and opined about East Asians in the west depicts us as monolithic automatons with no individual characteristics and therefore unlikeable and having nothing in common with "individualistic" humanity of westerners. Because of this Asians are typically shown in movies as being extremely expendable with little value shown for Asian life. As a modern storytelling medium, movies are an important gauge of the mood of a culture, and this culture just does not like Asians and is not afraid to let it be known.
It is my understanding that it may also be applied to recover damages for severe emotional distress, manifest as the "eggshell psyche" rule. Recovery isn't granted often, but in really horrific situations, a court may. There are a few very recent cases in which damages were granted under some semblance of the "eggshell psyche" rule.
It is my understanding that it may also be applied to recover damages for severe emotional distress, manifest as the "eggshell psyche" rule. Recovery isn't granted often, but in really horrific situations, a court may. There are a few very recent cases in which damages were granted under some semblance of the "eggshell psyche" rule.
Doesn't the eggshell skull rule only apply in cases of battery? Emotional distress, not so much...
Okay, I'm nitpicking.
Ugh. So. Long. Ago.
Doesn't the eggshell skull rule only apply in cases of battery? Emotional distress, not so much...
Okay, I'm nitpicking.
Ugh. So. Long. Ago.
Hi Klaus,
The Mister Wong logo didn't offend or enrage me. When I first saw it, I cringed to myself and thought, "oy. NOT cool." Let's say none of this exploded as it did and the logo was still in use when Mister Wong hit the U.S. I personally would not have utilized the site. However, like I said, I was not enraged in any way, so I was not up to the point analogous to your hypotheticals where I would have "called 911." My post simply stated that I *understand* why Ernie and some others in my community would be deeply offended by it.
Forget what a "politically correct" drawing of an Asian man or a Black man or a Latino man might be. Let's just talk about where our political climate is at today and race relations in America. I don't disagree with Europeans when they say America is one f*cked up place right now. It is. And race relations here aren't at a point yet where a non-Asian person can draw a caricature like Mister Wong who is supposed to be an Asian person and exect Asian people not to get offended. Like you said, it's simply our political climate. It's not okay here. That's all there is to it.
Like what Courageous Kiwi said in a comment to Ernie earlier -- Maybe from a purely objective point of view, there isn't anything per se wrong with the cartoon and certainly we now understand there was no malice. But here in America, neither Kiwi nor I would be okay with that logo today. We probably won't be okay with that logo tomorrow either, or the next day. But maybe someday, the serious part of life won't be so bad that we cannot appreciate the funny parts. For now, it's still too serious for it to be funny, just like how if you tried making a sexual abuse joke to a rape victim, she probably won't find it too funny.
Hi Klaus,
The Mister Wong logo didn't offend or enrage me. When I first saw it, I cringed to myself and thought, "oy. NOT cool." Let's say none of this exploded as it did and the logo was still in use when Mister Wong hit the U.S. I personally would not have utilized the site. However, like I said, I was not enraged in any way, so I was not up to the point analogous to your hypotheticals where I would have "called 911." My post simply stated that I *understand* why Ernie and some others in my community would be deeply offended by it.
Forget what a "politically correct" drawing of an Asian man or a Black man or a Latino man might be. Let's just talk about where our political climate is at today and race relations in America. I don't disagree with Europeans when they say America is one f*cked up place right now. It is. And race relations here aren't at a point yet where a non-Asian person can draw a caricature like Mister Wong who is supposed to be an Asian person and exect Asian people not to get offended. Like you said, it's simply our political climate. It's not okay here. That's all there is to it.
Like what Courageous Kiwi said in a comment to Ernie earlier -- Maybe from a purely objective point of view, there isn't anything per se wrong with the cartoon and certainly we now understand there was no malice. But here in America, neither Kiwi nor I would be okay with that logo today. We probably won't be okay with that logo tomorrow either, or the next day. But maybe someday, the serious part of life won't be so bad that we cannot appreciate the funny parts. For now, it's still too serious for it to be funny, just like how if you tried making a sexual abuse joke to a rape victim, she probably won't find it too funny.
akrypti, a few comments:
You spoke of "unproductive and clearly abusive" comments. But that is precisely what the criticism at 8Asians can be labeled: Rather than constructive, it was purely and entirely destructive. It provided not alternative suggestions whatsoever.
Second, you write:
"Here, Asians did NOT overreact. What appears to be our hypersensitivity really evinces our lingering pain from an enduring history of oppression, the subjection of our forefathers to coolie status, and memories of playground teasing when white kids pulled their eyelids taut and ran after the Asian kids yelling u00e2u0080u009cching chong ching.u00e2u0080u009d"
This is a strawman argument. A history of oppression doesn't justify letting out the feelings against third parties. The only "justification" not to call this an overreaction is to declare all whites equally responsible. Then, however, the racism would be flat square on your part. This is precisely the problem with your A&F comparison. A&F is a US companie, and if it doesn't take into account oppression in the US, then it can very well be criticised. But Mr Wong isn't.
You write:
"While I thank Mister Wongu00e2u0080u0099s web team for taking substantial steps to alleviate and mediate, the overtly insulting responses to Ernieu00e2u0080u0099s post were not constructive in any way whatsoever and only showed just how necessary it was for 8Asians to air our disturbance in an open marketplace of ideas."
Sorry, but to expect constructive replies, it would be wise to voice constructive criticism. Ernie didn't do that, and for precisely that fact, he received the reactions he called for.
"No one is asking anyone to become an expert in Asian American history. However, even if you donu00e2u0080u0099t understand someone elseu00e2u0080u0099s pain, when that person is clearly in pain because of something you did even if you didnu00e2u0080u0099t mean to do anything, shouldnu00e2u0080u0099t you nevertheless take a step back and reflect?"
But that's something entirely different than what happened here.
I'll take your own example:
"Recall the case I raised in the post about the woman at UVA who sued a professor for battery and pain and suffering because he tapped her on the shoulder during class. Itu00e2u0080u0099s not socially unacceptable per se to tap someone on her shoulder. But this particular woman suffered from sexual abuse and rape. The tapping on her shoulder reminded her of her nightmarish past and she suffered severe emotional distress because of it. She overreacted, right? All he did was tap her on the shoulder. The professor meant no harm. I donu00e2u0080u0099t get it. Why did she go postal?"
You state yourself "It''s not socially unacceptable per se to tap someone on her shoulder". That being the case, if someone is tapped on her shoulder and goes postal, the act STILL is socially acceptable. And no one will have any understanding whatsoever to suggest that tapping someone on the shoulder is something else than socially unacceptable. You apparently fail to realize that the campaign about Mr. Wong is precisely declaring sad tapping socially unacceptable. It has been said on and on and on here "How could they", "They should have known" and the effect of the campaign, namely the complete and utter abolition of the logo, not just for the US, but worldwide, has been hailed. It has even been declared a sound business decision although business-wise, it likely was a piss-poor decision, alienating more customers than it will produce new ones.
@Jesse -sorry if I get a bit more direct now, but you receive as you dish out:
"Therefore, you canu00e2u0080u0099t make the u00e2u0080u009creverse racismu00e2u0080u009d argument, the power and offense is JUST NOT THE SAME. "
Sorry, but that's complete and utter BS. Prejudice remains prejudice, whether it produces a visible effect or not. A lie is a lie is a lie. The pain felt because of it might differ, but that doesn't make a truth out of a lie. And it takes for some pretty weird logic to suggest otherwise. What's worse, you demonstrate a complete failure of grasping the consequences of racism -because they are bad not just for the victims, but for the perpetrators as well -just on different levels- and in both doing so AND ignoring the issue of truth vs. falsehood, you deprive yourself of most arguments against racism altogether. You even ignore that plenty of Asians have serious issues with racism on part of Japan -just ask some of the foreign maids there. To suggest that racism is only racism when perpetrated by white people is ridiculous crap.
You bitch and moan and insult Asians living in Germany and completely ignore the fact that Mr. Wong has also been around in Chinese. Only that tiny minority who actually voices a complaint has the right to be taken as a ledger. And because you say so, that has to be true. You declare a lot of stuff complete and utter bullshit, but the most bullshit I have seen from you. Your lecturing on European history is lagging by about 100 years. The fact that you call it a "damn good hegemony" that is perceived as malicious occupation by all too many on the receiving side only suggests that you're not quite honest about "seeing things from the other perspective", respectively seeing it only as valid for anyone else. This, however, is precisely the attitude that leads to the oppression cited by akrypti, to colonialism and all its nasty consequences.
Racism isn't abolished by one side trying to see things from the other perspective, but by EVERYONE reaching out towards each other. Anyone who promotes anything else, sorry to say, is only promoting one thing: racism.
akrypti, a few comments:
You spoke of "unproductive and clearly abusive" comments. But that is precisely what the criticism at 8Asians can be labeled: Rather than constructive, it was purely and entirely destructive. It provided not alternative suggestions whatsoever.
Second, you write:
"Here, Asians did NOT overreact. What appears to be our hypersensitivity really evinces our lingering pain from an enduring history of oppression, the subjection of our forefathers to coolie status, and memories of playground teasing when white kids pulled their eyelids taut and ran after the Asian kids yelling u00e2u0080u009cching chong ching.u00e2u0080u009d"
This is a strawman argument. A history of oppression doesn't justify letting out the feelings against third parties. The only "justification" not to call this an overreaction is to declare all whites equally responsible. Then, however, the racism would be flat square on your part. This is precisely the problem with your A&F comparison. A&F is a US companie, and if it doesn't take into account oppression in the US, then it can very well be criticised. But Mr Wong isn't.
You write:
"While I thank Mister Wongu00e2u0080u0099s web team for taking substantial steps to alleviate and mediate, the overtly insulting responses to Ernieu00e2u0080u0099s post were not constructive in any way whatsoever and only showed just how necessary it was for 8Asians to air our disturbance in an open marketplace of ideas."
Sorry, but to expect constructive replies, it would be wise to voice constructive criticism. Ernie didn't do that, and for precisely that fact, he received the reactions he called for.
"No one is asking anyone to become an expert in Asian American history. However, even if you donu00e2u0080u0099t understand someone elseu00e2u0080u0099s pain, when that person is clearly in pain because of something you did even if you didnu00e2u0080u0099t mean to do anything, shouldnu00e2u0080u0099t you nevertheless take a step back and reflect?"
But that's something entirely different than what happened here.
I'll take your own example:
"Recall the case I raised in the post about the woman at UVA who sued a professor for battery and pain and suffering because he tapped her on the shoulder during class. Itu00e2u0080u0099s not socially unacceptable per se to tap someone on her shoulder. But this particular woman suffered from sexual abuse and rape. The tapping on her shoulder reminded her of her nightmarish past and she suffered severe emotional distress because of it. She overreacted, right? All he did was tap her on the shoulder. The professor meant no harm. I donu00e2u0080u0099t get it. Why did she go postal?"
You state yourself "It''s not socially unacceptable per se to tap someone on her shoulder". That being the case, if someone is tapped on her shoulder and goes postal, the act STILL is socially acceptable. And no one will have any understanding whatsoever to suggest that tapping someone on the shoulder is something else than socially unacceptable. You apparently fail to realize that the campaign about Mr. Wong is precisely declaring sad tapping socially unacceptable. It has been said on and on and on here "How could they", "They should have known" and the effect of the campaign, namely the complete and utter abolition of the logo, not just for the US, but worldwide, has been hailed. It has even been declared a sound business decision although business-wise, it likely was a piss-poor decision, alienating more customers than it will produce new ones.
@Jesse -sorry if I get a bit more direct now, but you receive as you dish out:
"Therefore, you canu00e2u0080u0099t make the u00e2u0080u009creverse racismu00e2u0080u009d argument, the power and offense is JUST NOT THE SAME. "
Sorry, but that's complete and utter BS. Prejudice remains prejudice, whether it produces a visible effect or not. A lie is a lie is a lie. The pain felt because of it might differ, but that doesn't make a truth out of a lie. And it takes for some pretty weird logic to suggest otherwise. What's worse, you demonstrate a complete failure of grasping the consequences of racism -because they are bad not just for the victims, but for the perpetrators as well -just on different levels- and in both doing so AND ignoring the issue of truth vs. falsehood, you deprive yourself of most arguments against racism altogether. You even ignore that plenty of Asians have serious issues with racism on part of Japan -just ask some of the foreign maids there. To suggest that racism is only racism when perpetrated by white people is ridiculous crap.
You bitch and moan and insult Asians living in Germany and completely ignore the fact that Mr. Wong has also been around in Chinese. Only that tiny minority who actually voices a complaint has the right to be taken as a ledger. And because you say so, that has to be true. You declare a lot of stuff complete and utter bullshit, but the most bullshit I have seen from you. Your lecturing on European history is lagging by about 100 years. The fact that you call it a "damn good hegemony" that is perceived as malicious occupation by all too many on the receiving side only suggests that you're not quite honest about "seeing things from the other perspective", respectively seeing it only as valid for anyone else. This, however, is precisely the attitude that leads to the oppression cited by akrypti, to colonialism and all its nasty consequences.
Racism isn't abolished by one side trying to see things from the other perspective, but by EVERYONE reaching out towards each other. Anyone who promotes anything else, sorry to say, is only promoting one thing: racism.
@Jesse!:
It is even worse: North Germans have resentments against South Germans, West against East, suburbs against suburbs and so on. And in many villages you stay a foreigner for some generation even if your family comes from the next village just a few miles away. And truly this is similar everywhere in the world - in the US as well.
But don't confuse passport and nationality or group. A Chinese in US may have a US passport, but still call himself a Chinese. And a Russian in Germany may have a German passport and still may be a Russian. Both is independent.
And to see that you plan to go to Germany, but your knowledge about Germany is obviously very limited, is quite weird. Your citation (u00e2u0080u009dwe ARE Germansu00e2u0080u009d) would hardly be heard in Germany before Soccer World Championship last year. Since WW2 Germans lack national consciousness and pride. You very rarely saw a German flag aside from official buildings and sentences like "We are Germans" or "I am proud to be a German" would immediately cast you to be weird or a nazi. This is caused by OUR history. You should now that and accept, that we are offended by being called racist (especially for a logo which here (!) is not racistic at all).
First I thought about ignoring your comment at all, because of the sterotypes you heavily use. But maybe you do not know better. Sentences like:
"...we Americans are trying to put our own history and lessons learned about racial strife on other countriesu00e2u0080u00a6 well you better damn well believe it. Call it hegemony if you will, but itu00e2u0080u0099s a damned good kind of hegemony if you ask me."
are reasons for so-called Anti-Americanism in Europe. With this mind you will get interesting discussions here.
I recommend you to read the following article, describing relation US-EU. It is a little bit off-topic here, but nice to read.
http://www.spiegel.de/international/world/0,1518,4...
@Jesse!:
It is even worse: North Germans have resentments against South Germans, West against East, suburbs against suburbs and so on. And in many villages you stay a foreigner for some generation even if your family comes from the next village just a few miles away. And truly this is similar everywhere in the world - in the US as well.
But don't confuse passport and nationality or group. A Chinese in US may have a US passport, but still call himself a Chinese. And a Russian in Germany may have a German passport and still may be a Russian. Both is independent.
And to see that you plan to go to Germany, but your knowledge about Germany is obviously very limited, is quite weird. Your citation (u00e2u0080u009dwe ARE Germansu00e2u0080u009d) would hardly be heard in Germany before Soccer World Championship last year. Since WW2 Germans lack national consciousness and pride. You very rarely saw a German flag aside from official buildings and sentences like "We are Germans" or "I am proud to be a German" would immediately cast you to be weird or a nazi. This is caused by OUR history. You should now that and accept, that we are offended by being called racist (especially for a logo which here (!) is not racistic at all).
First I thought about ignoring your comment at all, because of the sterotypes you heavily use. But maybe you do not know better. Sentences like:
"...we Americans are trying to put our own history and lessons learned about racial strife on other countriesu00e2u0080u00a6 well you better damn well believe it. Call it hegemony if you will, but itu00e2u0080u0099s a damned good kind of hegemony if you ask me."
are reasons for so-called Anti-Americanism in Europe. With this mind you will get interesting discussions here.
I recommend you to read the following article, describing relation US-EU. It is a little bit off-topic here, but nice to read.
http://www.spiegel.de/international/world/0,1518,4...
@akrypti:
> Silly Asian Americans are overreacting again.
Of course they are not overreacting, not the girl at UVA and not you seeing an open window. Because of your history this is obvious. But on the other hand, someone with a different background cannot understand this.
Let me continue and intensify your examples: When you see an open windows at night you get scared because the memory you have. If you call every time 911 because of the resulting danger, this makes sense for you, but for sure you will get a problem with the police soon.
The woman who sued a professor after tapping may be right, because tapping is not acceptable for her. But maybe she is remembered as well, seeing a picture of an uniformed soldier. Can she sue the professor using a picture in his lecture? Or if she is reminded by the threat "I'll be back!", can she sue TV station for showing the movie Terminator?
And finally: I understand, that you do not like the logo of Mr. Wong. How would a politically correct drawing of an Asian face look like? Is this possible at all?
@akrypti:
> Silly Asian Americans are overreacting again.
Of course they are not overreacting, not the girl at UVA and not you seeing an open window. Because of your history this is obvious. But on the other hand, someone with a different background cannot understand this.
Let me continue and intensify your examples: When you see an open windows at night you get scared because the memory you have. If you call every time 911 because of the resulting danger, this makes sense for you, but for sure you will get a problem with the police soon.
The woman who sued a professor after tapping may be right, because tapping is not acceptable for her. But maybe she is remembered as well, seeing a picture of an uniformed soldier. Can she sue the professor using a picture in his lecture? Or if she is reminded by the threat "I'll be back!", can she sue TV station for showing the movie Terminator?
And finally: I understand, that you do not like the logo of Mr. Wong. How would a politically correct drawing of an Asian face look like? Is this possible at all?
I second the props to Jesse! So sometimes akrypti and I do agree ;)
I second the props to Jesse! So sometimes akrypti and I do agree ;)
By the way, props out to Jesse! for the powerful, well-stated rebuttals.
By the way, props out to Jesse! for the powerful, well-stated rebuttals.
Let's try this again, since obviously I am not getting my point across.
Why Some Diasporic Asians May Find the Former Mister Wong Logo Offensive:
Think Pavlovian theory. In the beginning, whenever the bell rang, doggy got food. Later on, bell rang even though no one planned on giving doggy food, but doggy salivates for food anyway. Hum--isn't that weird? Why would you salivate at the sound of a bell? Ding dong has no direct causal link to food. Silly doggy is overreacting again.
In the beginning, whenever we saw a caricature of a slanty-eyed Asian man, it was used in a derogatory, offensive way to illustrate the point that Asians were a completely inassimilable race in America and therefore deserved no legal rights. It happened over and over and over ad infinitum. At some point, we've just come to associate that particular caricature with a long history of discrimination and racism. Hum--isn't that weird? Because a little cartoon figure has no direct causal link to discrimination and racism. Silly Asian Americans are overreacting again.
Recall the case I raised in the post about the woman at UVA who sued a professor for battery and pain and suffering because he tapped her on the shoulder during class. It's not socially unacceptable per se to tap someone on her shoulder. But this particular woman suffered from sexual abuse and rape. The tapping on her shoulder reminded her of her nightmarish past and she suffered severe emotional distress because of it. She overreacted, right? All he did was tap her on the shoulder. The professor meant no harm. I don't get it. Why did she go postal?
A while back, in the dead middle of the night, a complete stranger broke into my apartment, climbing in through the second floor window and sat on my bed while I slept. I had to call 911 and all hell broke loose, he was beaten to the ground, blood spattered everywhere, and the police dragged him away in handcuffs at 4 am. Now, whenever I see an open window late at night, I still get a little shivery and I need to pause for a moment and logically, rationally remind myself I'm okay. Weird, huh? What's so scary about an open window late at night?
No one is asking anyone to become an expert in Asian American history. However, even if you don't understand someone else's pain, when that person is clearly in pain because of something you did even if you didn't mean to do anything, shouldn't you nevertheless take a step back and reflect?
On that note, 8Asians never claimed to speak on behalf of all Asians everywhere. We know quite well how diverse the Asian population is. Heck, the 8 of us rarely even agree with one another. We come from all walks of life, different nationalities, different upbringings, different interests, different political leanings, and the most we hope for is that 8Asians may serve as a forum for converging all those diverse viewpoints.
Let's try this again, since obviously I am not getting my point across.
Why Some Diasporic Asians May Find the Former Mister Wong Logo Offensive:
Think Pavlovian theory. In the beginning, whenever the bell rang, doggy got food. Later on, bell rang even though no one planned on giving doggy food, but doggy salivates for food anyway. Hum--isn't that weird? Why would you salivate at the sound of a bell? Ding dong has no direct causal link to food. Silly doggy is overreacting again.
In the beginning, whenever we saw a caricature of a slanty-eyed Asian man, it was used in a derogatory, offensive way to illustrate the point that Asians were a completely inassimilable race in America and therefore deserved no legal rights. It happened over and over and over ad infinitum. At some point, we've just come to associate that particular caricature with a long history of discrimination and racism. Hum--isn't that weird? Because a little cartoon figure has no direct causal link to discrimination and racism. Silly Asian Americans are overreacting again.
Recall the case I raised in the post about the woman at UVA who sued a professor for battery and pain and suffering because he tapped her on the shoulder during class. It's not socially unacceptable per se to tap someone on her shoulder. But this particular woman suffered from sexual abuse and rape. The tapping on her shoulder reminded her of her nightmarish past and she suffered severe emotional distress because of it. She overreacted, right? All he did was tap her on the shoulder. The professor meant no harm. I don't get it. Why did she go postal?
A while back, in the dead middle of the night, a complete stranger broke into my apartment, climbing in through the second floor window and sat on my bed while I slept. I had to call 911 and all hell broke loose, he was beaten to the ground, blood spattered everywhere, and the police dragged him away in handcuffs at 4 am. Now, whenever I see an open window late at night, I still get a little shivery and I need to pause for a moment and logically, rationally remind myself I'm okay. Weird, huh? What's so scary about an open window late at night?
No one is asking anyone to become an expert in Asian American history. However, even if you don't understand someone else's pain, when that person is clearly in pain because of something you did even if you didn't mean to do anything, shouldn't you nevertheless take a step back and reflect?
On that note, 8Asians never claimed to speak on behalf of all Asians everywhere. We know quite well how diverse the Asian population is. Heck, the 8 of us rarely even agree with one another. We come from all walks of life, different nationalities, different upbringings, different interests, different political leanings, and the most we hope for is that 8Asians may serve as a forum for converging all those diverse viewpoints.
I can't believe I'm reading "there's an image of whites there and *I* am not offended" and "I have lots of Asian friends"!!! What is this, amateur hour???
Wow, you folks don't get it do you? Being White in this world has a whole bunch of power and privilege. Don't believe me? You don't have to, you're wrong. If you're white, you have enormous amounts of sway in this world. It's unfair and unjust but it's the way it is right now. Therefore, you can't make the "reverse racism" argument, the power and offense is JUST NOT THE SAME. The fact that you may not be offended by a white image just proves the point. You don't understand why an Asian may be offended by an image. And you know what? You never will. You are not Asian, there is no real way for you to know how they might feel. The only thing for a white person to do, if they want to help cure racism, is be understanding and trusting and do the damned research and try, just try to see the world through another perspective besides your own personal point of view.
I can't believe I'm reading "there's an image of whites there and *I* am not offended" and "I have lots of Asian friends"!!! What is this, amateur hour???
Wow, you folks don't get it do you? Being White in this world has a whole bunch of power and privilege. Don't believe me? You don't have to, you're wrong. If you're white, you have enormous amounts of sway in this world. It's unfair and unjust but it's the way it is right now. Therefore, you can't make the "reverse racism" argument, the power and offense is JUST NOT THE SAME. The fact that you may not be offended by a white image just proves the point. You don't understand why an Asian may be offended by an image. And you know what? You never will. You are not Asian, there is no real way for you to know how they might feel. The only thing for a white person to do, if they want to help cure racism, is be understanding and trusting and do the damned research and try, just try to see the world through another perspective besides your own personal point of view.
Klaus argument that Asians in Europe are not offended by the Mr. Wong image and by extension any stereotypical Asian image is complete and utter bullshit.
The cultural, political and national history of European countries is such that only someone who is "native" can be truly be naturalized and therefore Asians, blacks, Turkish, whatever who may be born in, say, Germany; maybe even a family several generations deep who speak German natively will never really be considered a German citizen currently. It's call the jus sanguinis (right by blood) policy and is practiced by MOST countries in the world.
Granted one could make the argument that in the US, Asians and other non-whites are also rather disenfranchised and certainly they are, but they at least have a legal argument with the US' jus soli policy (right by soil; you're born here, you're a citizen, end of story) and hence the differences in the minority civil rights movements in this country versus anywhere else where they can only argue something as nebulous and hard to define as "culture," ("we ARE Germans") which is too hard for policy makers to quantify.
Those laws and policies in a country like Germany do a lot to shut up the minority population and permanently consider them "foreign", so that something like Mr. Wong wouldn't be pointed out as offensive, because the offended party really has no power or argument to make. Only, if perhaps, China the "home" of all Chinese took some sort of international offense to the image (but they wouldn't and that's another argument altogether). So instead you have Asians in Germany, who might consider themselves German, so much so that they may try to distance themselves from their Asian heritage because the only images they have to relate to are at best foreign and at worst offensive.
Now, going back to the American culture versus European culture argument that we Americans are trying to put our own history and lessons learned about racial strife on other countries... well you better damn well believe it. Call it hegemony if you will, but it's a damned good kind of hegemony if you ask me.
We all live on the same planet and racism and hate should not be tolerated just because it's happening across the border or in a different culture. That was the argument the US and other countries (ahem, in Europe) made about the Taliban when Afghani refugees kept begging the West to intervene. "Nope, it's not our place to judge their treatment of women or ethnic minorities... besides, we want an oil and methane pipeline running through that country."
Finally, I find it absolutely hilarious that Klaus argues that they were offended (!) that Ernie was implying they were racist and un-PC and that Europeans don't want to be seen that way. Um. Wow. Really? Just because someone called you out you're offended? Please. I think not choosing racist icons to represent your brand is probably a good start to avoid that unnecessary hardship.
I'd like to commend Ernie for doing the original post and to akrypti for the follow-up... and a big "FUCK YEAH" to the fact that they founders of misterwong.com changed the logo! I mean that is some powerful shit! And if any Germans have a beef with me they can meet me for a beer and a discussion when I'm there in September!
Bis dann!
Klaus argument that Asians in Europe are not offended by the Mr. Wong image and by extension any stereotypical Asian image is complete and utter bullshit.
The cultural, political and national history of European countries is such that only someone who is "native" can be truly be naturalized and therefore Asians, blacks, Turkish, whatever who may be born in, say, Germany; maybe even a family several generations deep who speak German natively will never really be considered a German citizen currently. It's call the jus sanguinis (right by blood) policy and is practiced by MOST countries in the world.
Granted one could make the argument that in the US, Asians and other non-whites are also rather disenfranchised and certainly they are, but they at least have a legal argument with the US' jus soli policy (right by soil; you're born here, you're a citizen, end of story) and hence the differences in the minority civil rights movements in this country versus anywhere else where they can only argue something as nebulous and hard to define as "culture," ("we ARE Germans") which is too hard for policy makers to quantify.
Those laws and policies in a country like Germany do a lot to shut up the minority population and permanently consider them "foreign", so that something like Mr. Wong wouldn't be pointed out as offensive, because the offended party really has no power or argument to make. Only, if perhaps, China the "home" of all Chinese took some sort of international offense to the image (but they wouldn't and that's another argument altogether). So instead you have Asians in Germany, who might consider themselves German, so much so that they may try to distance themselves from their Asian heritage because the only images they have to relate to are at best foreign and at worst offensive.
Now, going back to the American culture versus European culture argument that we Americans are trying to put our own history and lessons learned about racial strife on other countries... well you better damn well believe it. Call it hegemony if you will, but it's a damned good kind of hegemony if you ask me.
We all live on the same planet and racism and hate should not be tolerated just because it's happening across the border or in a different culture. That was the argument the US and other countries (ahem, in Europe) made about the Taliban when Afghani refugees kept begging the West to intervene. "Nope, it's not our place to judge their treatment of women or ethnic minorities... besides, we want an oil and methane pipeline running through that country."
Finally, I find it absolutely hilarious that Klaus argues that they were offended (!) that Ernie was implying they were racist and un-PC and that Europeans don't want to be seen that way. Um. Wow. Really? Just because someone called you out you're offended? Please. I think not choosing racist icons to represent your brand is probably a good start to avoid that unnecessary hardship.
I'd like to commend Ernie for doing the original post and to akrypti for the follow-up... and a big "FUCK YEAH" to the fact that they founders of misterwong.com changed the logo! I mean that is some powerful shit! And if any Germans have a beef with me they can meet me for a beer and a discussion when I'm there in September!
Bis dann!
"We shouldnu00e2u0080u0099t be afraid of offending others. We should simply consider it good manners to respect others."
I still do not see how this drawing of an older Asian man could offend or just express any intent to disrespect anyone.
Though deriving from Northern Europe, I do not look exactly as the stereotypes of North European whites might suggest (my hair is light brown and my eyes are green, while the clichu00c3u00a9 depicts North Europeans as having fair hair and blue eyes). Yet, I would never ever feel offended if some company chose to use a picture of a man as their logo who is perfectly fitting into that clichu00c3u00a9.
I have been living in the States for a while, I fell in love with an Asian-American woman I am still friendly with, and some of my best friends here in Europe are Asians. No-one of these people found the Mister Wong logo to be offensive, in fact they liked it because they considered it a very positive stereotype about Asians (Asians are often believed to be more cooperative, hard-working and polite than Europeans). The Mister Wong logo was designed to suggest desirable qualities like these. In fact, no European company would ever think about using a drawing of someone taken from their not-so-popular minorities for that, such as the Gypsies, the Black Muslims, the Turks, the Arabs or the Pakistani. That is because if you selected a Gypsy as your corporate logo, you would deliver the message that your company's business is all about stealing, begging, stinking and being lazy. (Note I am not stating that any of these prejudices be true, I am just stating that they do exist.)
So, it seems to me that you are making an unjustified claim by pretending to speak for all, most or even just a significant minority of Asians when criticizing the Mister Wong logo for being racist. If there is any stereotype being promoted by this logo at all, it is the idea that Asians are delivering excellent service quality and are doing their jobs very thoroughly. At the end of the day, it is not the entire population of Asian Americans feeling offended about it, it is just a small group of individuals who believe they are in the position to speak for millions of other Asian Americans just because they all share the same race.
Would it be justified to state that Symantec has been offending Whites for years just because they used a stereotypical white business man to advertise their products? And if any white person claimed to speak out for "every white person out there" when accusing Symantec of being racist, would anyone take this seriously, including Symantec?
Guess what? I believe that the very least Asian Americans need are a few people from their race who are running ridiculous attacks on web companies because there is something these few people consider politically incorrect. And I would feel more comfortable if you finally admitted that you are speaking for yourself rather than every Asian person on earth. Don't you think the latter constitutes inherently racist behaviour?
"We shouldnu00e2u0080u0099t be afraid of offending others. We should simply consider it good manners to respect others."
I still do not see how this drawing of an older Asian man could offend or just express any intent to disrespect anyone.
Though deriving from Northern Europe, I do not look exactly as the stereotypes of North European whites might suggest (my hair is light brown and my eyes are green, while the clichu00c3u00a9 depicts North Europeans as having fair hair and blue eyes). Yet, I would never ever feel offended if some company chose to use a picture of a man as their logo who is perfectly fitting into that clichu00c3u00a9.
I have been living in the States for a while, I fell in love with an Asian-American woman I am still friendly with, and some of my best friends here in Europe are Asians. No-one of these people found the Mister Wong logo to be offensive, in fact they liked it because they considered it a very positive stereotype about Asians (Asians are often believed to be more cooperative, hard-working and polite than Europeans). The Mister Wong logo was designed to suggest desirable qualities like these. In fact, no European company would ever think about using a drawing of someone taken from their not-so-popular minorities for that, such as the Gypsies, the Black Muslims, the Turks, the Arabs or the Pakistani. That is because if you selected a Gypsy as your corporate logo, you would deliver the message that your company's business is all about stealing, begging, stinking and being lazy. (Note I am not stating that any of these prejudices be true, I am just stating that they do exist.)
So, it seems to me that you are making an unjustified claim by pretending to speak for all, most or even just a significant minority of Asians when criticizing the Mister Wong logo for being racist. If there is any stereotype being promoted by this logo at all, it is the idea that Asians are delivering excellent service quality and are doing their jobs very thoroughly. At the end of the day, it is not the entire population of Asian Americans feeling offended about it, it is just a small group of individuals who believe they are in the position to speak for millions of other Asian Americans just because they all share the same race.
Would it be justified to state that Symantec has been offending Whites for years just because they used a stereotypical white business man to advertise their products? And if any white person claimed to speak out for "every white person out there" when accusing Symantec of being racist, would anyone take this seriously, including Symantec?
Guess what? I believe that the very least Asian Americans need are a few people from their race who are running ridiculous attacks on web companies because there is something these few people consider politically incorrect. And I would feel more comfortable if you finally admitted that you are speaking for yourself rather than every Asian person on earth. Don't you think the latter constitutes inherently racist behaviour?
Hi Klaus,
I do believe wholeheartedly that the Mister Wong webteam acted in good faith and I appreciate how quickly they responded. What I don't appreciate is the hundreds--yes, hundreds--of harassing comments we here at 8Asians received simply because Ernie chose to voice his opinion on his own website. We didn't tell anybody to do anything. We simply posted an entry that said, hey, look, we're offended. Then for that opinion, we get a slew of comments telling us to go f--k ourselves and leaving below-the-belt insults?! I know the same thing happened to Mister Wong -- many Asian Americans left very inappropriate comments in their blog in response to the logo, so everybody is a little at fault here. It's all rather juvenile. We can disagree, but let's do it with some integrity, please.
As to your hypotheticals -- if I visited Saudi Arabia and it would be offensive in their culture for me to walk around without a headscarf, then you better believe yes, I would put on a headscarf while in Saudi Arabia. It's called respect. On the other hand, I don't need to wear a headscarf in America, so if someone from Saudi Arabia visited the U.S. and expressed her offense to me walking around in America without a headscarf, which is our custom, then this time, she is the one out of line. Mister Wong intends on extending into the U.S. and thus it is only prudent business judgment to not utilize a logo that offends us.
If 8Asians catered to an audience consisting of Iranians who followed the Sharia, then yes it would be stupid of us to include on our website something that our target audience would find patently offensive. If I went out to dinner with a person who considered the cow a holy animal and I ordered a burger fully knowing that person considered the cow a holy animal, then wouldn't you say I'm an inconsiderate ass? If I did the same but ordered the burger unintentionally because I did not know that person considered the cow a holy animal, then as soon as I found out, I would apologize profusely. If my apology was heartfelt, the other person would accept it and next time I would order something else instead of beef and all would be well. I'm not suddenly "afraid" of ordering beef in front of her; I'm simply going to abstain from ordering beef out of respect for her. You're confusing respect for one another's culture and customs with being afraid to offend.
We shouldn't be afraid of offending others. We should simply consider it good manners to respect others. If inadvertently we do something that offends, then make amends. And then be friends.
You want "intention" to be the first thing we consider in determining offense. Intent cannot be the main standard because the main reason America's constitutional law fails to protect minorities from discrimination is because it uses as its main standard "intent" instead of "effect." Plus, my Mama always taught me the road to hell is paved with good intentions. Thus, the point that "if all are angered so easy [sic] the world will get very impersonal and boring" is not the best defense here.
Hi Klaus,
I do believe wholeheartedly that the Mister Wong webteam acted in good faith and I appreciate how quickly they responded. What I don't appreciate is the hundreds--yes, hundreds--of harassing comments we here at 8Asians received simply because Ernie chose to voice his opinion on his own website. We didn't tell anybody to do anything. We simply posted an entry that said, hey, look, we're offended. Then for that opinion, we get a slew of comments telling us to go f--k ourselves and leaving below-the-belt insults?! I know the same thing happened to Mister Wong -- many Asian Americans left very inappropriate comments in their blog in response to the logo, so everybody is a little at fault here. It's all rather juvenile. We can disagree, but let's do it with some integrity, please.
As to your hypotheticals -- if I visited Saudi Arabia and it would be offensive in their culture for me to walk around without a headscarf, then you better believe yes, I would put on a headscarf while in Saudi Arabia. It's called respect. On the other hand, I don't need to wear a headscarf in America, so if someone from Saudi Arabia visited the U.S. and expressed her offense to me walking around in America without a headscarf, which is our custom, then this time, she is the one out of line. Mister Wong intends on extending into the U.S. and thus it is only prudent business judgment to not utilize a logo that offends us.
If 8Asians catered to an audience consisting of Iranians who followed the Sharia, then yes it would be stupid of us to include on our website something that our target audience would find patently offensive. If I went out to dinner with a person who considered the cow a holy animal and I ordered a burger fully knowing that person considered the cow a holy animal, then wouldn't you say I'm an inconsiderate ass? If I did the same but ordered the burger unintentionally because I did not know that person considered the cow a holy animal, then as soon as I found out, I would apologize profusely. If my apology was heartfelt, the other person would accept it and next time I would order something else instead of beef and all would be well. I'm not suddenly "afraid" of ordering beef in front of her; I'm simply going to abstain from ordering beef out of respect for her. You're confusing respect for one another's culture and customs with being afraid to offend.
We shouldn't be afraid of offending others. We should simply consider it good manners to respect others. If inadvertently we do something that offends, then make amends. And then be friends.
You want "intention" to be the first thing we consider in determining offense. Intent cannot be the main standard because the main reason America's constitutional law fails to protect minorities from discrimination is because it uses as its main standard "intent" instead of "effect." Plus, my Mama always taught me the road to hell is paved with good intentions. Thus, the point that "if all are angered so easy [sic] the world will get very impersonal and boring" is not the best defense here.
I agree with Klaus description, and he is right to bring up exactly those examples.
Akrypti, as you said: there are strong strong problems with this in America. Which I am in no way denying. But it is not the solution to be offended by something which is happening outside your little eggshell - and this is the point i am missing, as I wrote ernie before as well.
The acknowledgement that not YOUR definition alone is what counts in the world, but that this is more than a one side thing. I am still missing that. And I take offense in that, I react angry on the fact that you demand from me - doing accusations like this as well - that I should bow to your experience, to your history of racism and what you experienced in the US as you say every day.
That _is_a problem - but you cannot judge by that on the general population of the world.
.
The solution is not "ignore others, I like to do as I do" but we together have to work on it. It is not going to work that just one side obeys to what the other side thinks is appropriate.
Nicole
ps:i wanted to use the link only in the website field, but it is not long enough to take it. I would be fine with you just deleting this sentence and put the link in there: http://crueltobekind.org/archive/2007-07-27/the_co...
I agree with Klaus description, and he is right to bring up exactly those examples.
Akrypti, as you said: there are strong strong problems with this in America. Which I am in no way denying. But it is not the solution to be offended by something which is happening outside your little eggshell - and this is the point i am missing, as I wrote ernie before as well.
The acknowledgement that not YOUR definition alone is what counts in the world, but that this is more than a one side thing. I am still missing that. And I take offense in that, I react angry on the fact that you demand from me - doing accusations like this as well - that I should bow to your experience, to your history of racism and what you experienced in the US as you say every day.
That _is_a problem - but you cannot judge by that on the general population of the world.
.
The solution is not "ignore others, I like to do as I do" but we together have to work on it. It is not going to work that just one side obeys to what the other side thinks is appropriate.
Nicole
ps:i wanted to use the link only in the website field, but it is not long enough to take it. I would be fine with you just deleting this sentence and put the link in there: http://crueltobekind.org/archive/2007-07-27/the_co...
why not sit down with the mr.wong team, designing a new and political correct mr. wong logo. this way both parties would win. you win, because mr. wong migrates to the political correct person you could accept and mr .wong wins, as they have not to change their corporate identity.
have you ever considered that the team behind mr.wong "identifies" itself with the name and the cartoon behind the logo? do you think they would do this if they did not feel comfortable with this identity? the team and the service would like to be seen as a busy collector of bookmarks. busy as chinese people. nothing else. no racism.
why not sit down with the mr.wong team, designing a new and political correct mr. wong logo. this way both parties would win. you win, because mr. wong migrates to the political correct person you could accept and mr .wong wins, as they have not to change their corporate identity.
have you ever considered that the team behind mr.wong "identifies" itself with the name and the cartoon behind the logo? do you think they would do this if they did not feel comfortable with this identity? the team and the service would like to be seen as a busy collector of bookmarks. busy as chinese people. nothing else. no racism.
Hello akrypti,
thank you for the factual explaination. I understand you argumentation very well, but I am sorry I disagree. With your cultural background as an Asian in North America your arguments may be very reasonable. But Ernie was offended by a website in Germany and he wrote an very angry note in his blog. By this we ran into a dilemma, because Europeans DO have a different cultural background. For most Europeans - even Asians here - the picture of Mr. Wong is not offending or racistic, because it is a drawing without observable affront of any Asian. But what IS offending many Europeans is the accusation of racism. (Ernie did not use this word, but he conveys this idea). He is boosting this anger by sentences like: 'Maybe people arenu00e2u0080u0099t as sensitive to political correctness as they are here in North America.' This is a hard defamation and so it is not surprising to get many very angry responses.
And it is not suprising, that Mr. Wong changes their Logo, because political correctness is important in Europe, but it does not coincide with political correctness in North America.
Connecting to your examples let me ask some hypotetical questions: If a group in Saudi Arabia gets offended, because you wear no headscarf, would you follow them? If someone from Iran gets offended, because the Sharia prohibits pictures of living beings, would you remove your picture from the website? I one from India is offended because you eat a burger made from beef, but cows are holy animals, would you stop eating?
As the world gets smaller by the new media like internet, these dilemmas cannot be solved. You will always offend some other group or get offended by someone. So I think Ernie DID overreact. You should first think about the fact whether the intention is to offend you or not. So, please calm down. If all are angered so easy the world will get very impersonal and boring.
Hello akrypti,
thank you for the factual explaination. I understand you argumentation very well, but I am sorry I disagree. With your cultural background as an Asian in North America your arguments may be very reasonable. But Ernie was offended by a website in Germany and he wrote an very angry note in his blog. By this we ran into a dilemma, because Europeans DO have a different cultural background. For most Europeans - even Asians here - the picture of Mr. Wong is not offending or racistic, because it is a drawing without observable affront of any Asian. But what IS offending many Europeans is the accusation of racism. (Ernie did not use this word, but he conveys this idea). He is boosting this anger by sentences like: 'Maybe people arenu00e2u0080u0099t as sensitive to political correctness as they are here in North America.' This is a hard defamation and so it is not surprising to get many very angry responses.
And it is not suprising, that Mr. Wong changes their Logo, because political correctness is important in Europe, but it does not coincide with political correctness in North America.
Connecting to your examples let me ask some hypotetical questions: If a group in Saudi Arabia gets offended, because you wear no headscarf, would you follow them? If someone from Iran gets offended, because the Sharia prohibits pictures of living beings, would you remove your picture from the website? I one from India is offended because you eat a burger made from beef, but cows are holy animals, would you stop eating?
As the world gets smaller by the new media like internet, these dilemmas cannot be solved. You will always offend some other group or get offended by someone. So I think Ernie DID overreact. You should first think about the fact whether the intention is to offend you or not. So, please calm down. If all are angered so easy the world will get very impersonal and boring.
Having not gone to law school, it was very interesting to read about the "Eggshell skull rule." I am finishing reading The Chinese in America: A Narrative History and it is amazing how discriminatory the U.S. has been historically to Chinese. I think a lot of people, including Chinese Americans, don't realize this.
Having not gone to law school, it was very interesting to read about the "Eggshell skull rule." I am finishing reading The Chinese in America: A Narrative History and it is amazing how discriminatory the U.S. has been historically to Chinese. I think a lot of people, including Chinese Americans, don't realize this.
Wow, people read this site?!
Wow, people read this site?!
Trackbacks
Custom Search
Recent Posts
- Jennifer Yuh Nelson Wins Annie Award for Kung Fu Panda 2
- Report Reveals APA Gay & Lesbian Organizations Only Receive 0.7% Of Available LGBT Funding
- What I Learned From Posting A Dragon Lady Personal Ad
- Hard Boiled Egg Mold for Bento Decoration
- Is Classical Music Alive For Long?
- VIRAL LIKE SARS: North Korean Accordion Players Perform a-ha’s Take On Me
- California Shark Fin Soup Suppliers Sue State Over Ban
Recent Comments
- : "It has been said that playing an instrument as a child is the greatest predictor of concert attendance as an adult. " Not for me,... – Is Classical Music Alive For Long?
- : @TinaTsai I had a class that was like that; where the students would come together and discuss certain topics and end in some consensus. The... – How Standardized Tests Stunt the Intellectual Growth of Asian American Students
- : This is equal parts enraging and chilling. I did a long reaction here. – Pete Hoekstra's Offensive Anti-Asian Super Bowl Ad
- : @dragonrider0ne Thanks for the vote of confidence ^_^ When you say "been through the grind", I have to say, it was quite a grind. Everything... – How Standardized Tests Stunt the Intellectual Growth of Asian American Students
- : @TinaTsai If the student is already an accomplished writer capable of articulating his / her thoughts and constructing complex characters, then correcting grammar mistakes is... – How Standardized Tests Stunt the Intellectual Growth of Asian American Students
APA Events
Feb 10: (Los Angeles, CA) CAUSE: Women in Power Annual Luncheon
Feb 15: (Seattle, WA) Pork Filled Players Enter The Year of the Dragon Spam*O*Rama
Feb 16: Adam WarRock and Kirby Krackle: West Cost Tour Dates!!!
Feb 16: (New York, NY) Amar Chitra Katha: Monica Ferrell, Chitra Ganesh, Keshni Kashyap, and Himanshu “Heems” Suri of Das Racist
Feb 17: (Los Angeles, CA) All My Sons
Feb 18: (Stanford, CA) Stanford’s 16th Listen to the Silence Conference- Feb 18: (San Francisco, CA) NAAAP-SF Lunar New Year Gala 2012
Feb 25: (Los Angeles, CA) Past Present I Future Imperatives: Queer Space Time
Staff and Contributors
- Editors
- Ernie Hsiung - Founder, Editor-in-Chief
- Moye Ishimoto - Co-Editor, Editorial
- Joz Wang - Co-Editor, PR & APA Outreach
[...] then as I was writing this, we see another comment stating their nonunderstanding of the offense. So I had to write another: I can’t believe I’m [...]