The model minority isn't a myth: why people don't want to admit that all prejudice isn't created equal

                         There has been buzz about the recent Miss America winner and I'll admit I was outraged at the enormous amount of ignorance spewed onto the interwebs, especially since Miss America is from my home state and my soon to be Alma Mater. However, people have been making outlandish arguments about racial dynamics in this country by claiming the ignorance response given to her proved that Asian Americans were stigmatized just as much as other minority groups. Many have argued that this is definitive prove that the idea of a "model minority" is a myth that doesn't exist. These statements can be true depending on what someone means by them, but in their literal sense they are are complete falsehoods that ignore white privilege and how white privilege was afforded to Asian and Indian American workers far more than their Black and Latino counterparts. This goes back to policies dating to the late 1800s moving forward all the way to the mid 1900s. Regardless of the perpetuation of whiteness, racial doctrine written at the time explicitly drew distinctions between Blacks and Latinos and Asians, making a hierarchical difference between the two. This can be seen clearly in 1950s as Asians were portrayed to have successfully assimilated into the U.S., while blacks and Latinos were considered to be failed Americans.

Quantifying stigmatization 
           Clearly one cannot quantify stigmatization. It can never be objectively proven that certain minorities are treated "worse" than others and any attempt to do so would be biased and unproductive. Instead we need to make the critical shift of understanding how identities are being targeted, rather than immediately jumping to the results of said prejudice and having an all out statistical throw down. For example, the effects of Islamophobia cannot be translated into some quantifiable number. Attempts to do this in social sciences tend to find a close proxy, but the proxy is never expansive enough for the horrible experiences that stem  from Islamophobia in this nation. To then make the next step a comparison to the systemic racism faced by Blacks is completely outlandish. We need to accept that these are two different forms of prejudice that require different forms of support.

The Model Minority
      I am not arguing that Asian Americans don't face prejudice. What I am cautioning against is this quick instinct to lump all experiences of oppression into one giant collective. Asian Americans don't face the significant economic and educational barriers that African American and Latinos face. They may face educational barriers (i.e. the way policies favor white students over Asian students), but these barriers aren't the same ones faced by African Americans. Furthermore, the sentiment of "never being a true American" differs from the sentiment faced in the black community which unabashedly makes claim to legitimate American citizenry (as they should), but finds themselves forever being a lower standard of American. These two psychological prisons aren't the same. They are both horrible in different ways. The creation of a Model Minority distinction isn't a falsehood, but it certainly isn't a blessing either. Both the Model minority and the downtrodden minority are in positions of subjugation. When an Asian American rejects the label of Model Minority, they are freeing themselves of that subjugation and rightfully so. However, the history behind that label cannot be tossed aside. It needs to be analyzed and scrutinized. It must be acknowledged especially when it had led to institutions giving specific benefits to certain groups and not others.

Together, but distinct 
    Minorities can be allies for each other, but must respect the distinct nature of what each other is going through. Sure we can bond over the similarities of oppression, however as stated by a friend of mine, we need to be mindful of the space we take up and how that could possibly prevent others from having their stories heard. I am not advocating for the disenfranchisement of Asian American experiences. I am respecting the unique nature of the Asian American experience. I think when we can recognize that we are different, then we can take the actual first steps to being allies for each other. 

Bitch ain't bad: recognizing male privilege

       It's easy as a man to read a few texts (typically labeled as "feminist texts", I like to think of them as "keeping it real texts") and then profess your personal disgust for your own gender. Ironically enough, instead of professing this disgust to men (you know the people who should probably be educated about these topics), you immediately seek out a woman, typically so you can subconsciously fish for reassurance that men aren't that bad and even if they are, you are now enlightened and therefore exempt of all negative association. Well you aren't.
      Male privilege is a thing and whenever men make statements like "I get it, but..." or "I don't think it's that bad", I know to just ignore them because typically something ignorant is about to be said. And that's not to absolve myself of this ignorance. I say stupid shit like this all the time and while I typically catch myself and backtrack, there are sometimes where I (and even some of my friends who are women) miss how my patriarchal framework blurs out my male privilege.
     For example, let's take Lupe Fiasco's popular song "Bitch Bad", which received mix reception among people. Some people thought Lupe was simply telling it how it is and was actually doing a service for African American women by making necessary commentary on how African American women were negatively perceived and expected to act in the current culture. Many feminist disagreed vehemently (with good reason too), but were promptly ignored. This is because on it's face, "Bitch Bad" is a song that rails against the negative stereotypes typically ascribed to women and instead advocates for a positive outlook. However, if one were to listen to the song a few more times it's clear that the song was written by a man for women.
    I won't give an in-depth analysis of why this particular song is problematic, but I'll leave this here http://www.policymic.com/articles/16236/lupe-fiasco-bitch-bad-sexist-single-makes-hip-hop-women-look-bad for anyone who's interested. Hopefully you've read the article and agreed (if you just took my word for it, then that's pretty foolish of you) and realize how problematic Bitch Bad really is. Now to be fair, Bitch Bad is more than just making commentary on women, but more specifically African American women. I think this key difference changes some of the rules of engagement rhetorically, but doesn't do much to blunt the clear misogyny or as one critic described it "mansplaining" that Lupe engaged in.  And yet when I first heard this song I thought it was incredibly progressive. One might wonder how could I? Raymond clearly women are made powerless in this song, why couldn't you see that? That's because when oppression isn't overt, it's essentially invisible to those who aren't looking for it.
   So I guess this a charge to the men who aren't being morons. We need to do better and be better about having a critical eye. A part of wrestling with our male privilege is taking an impact calculus on how it affects the world around us. Furthermore, we cannot look to women for explanation. An ally doesn't offer support, then immediately ask the person being assisted to do it for them (well sometimes this does happen, the mantra typically goes "help me help you", but that's besides the point). Still, even with all of this, I know that it will be a struggle. There will be slip ups and times where we let ourselves down. To say that's ok and we could try again next time is unacceptable. We need to be better. Plain and simple.

A note on the title: The title of this post can be read in various ways. First I could be saying it in a literal sense, insofar that the individual in question isn't bad. Or I could be siding with women who aim to reclaim the word bitch. The final explanation is a simple repudiation of Lupe's song title. I won't admit to which one I intended as I think that all three of those interpretations can provide for good discussion alone.

A simple break down of the misogyny of the song:
I realize that many of you won't read the article so to explain misogynistic nature of the I'll just give two key examples.

First, the chorus blunders through feminist issues in order of magnitude from slight ignorance to complete disregard for agency. The first line, "Bitch Bad", again comes into conflict with any attempts to reclaim the term. Women good being spoken by Lupe reaffirms the patriarchal tendency to ascribe value to women as if they were an object. Continuing with this trend of objectification, Lupe imbues the normative lady, by stating "lady better", but what constitutes a lady is never explored, leaving only the prototypical explanation for lady as the only possible interpretation. Finally, he says "they misunderstood, primarily talking about the women in the song. Why can't men be included in this. Why isn't it we misunderstood, signifying society's disillusioned state?  Then he completely butchers it with "I'm killing these bitches", continuing the unfortunate tradition of violence being directed at women who have been determined to be sub-par.

Second, the premise of the song is a young girl and young boy meeting later as young adults. Both go through this disillusionment process as children. But for some reason the girl is the one that is "caught in an illusion", but the boy miraculously was able to pick up what a positive woman is supposed to be. This is an unaware microcosm for the ignorance of this song. Just as Lupe thinks he knows what a woman should be like, this young man also thinks he knows what a woman should be like, with any input being given my woman either being completely discounted or ignored. 

I'm not Detroit and neither are you.

     I don't have course hands, so I won't be laying brick. Yea, I'm a fucking coward and a weakling at that. Instead I have an imaginary pedestal, hoping that some ignorant soul stumbles upon my site and reads about the minority's plight through the eyes of a sheltered college student. I am not good enough to be their speakerphone, yet I find myself cringing with every "well intentioned" white girl who wants to announce to the world how amazing Detroit is going to be once gentrification has taken it's full course. Of course they won't be the ones laying the brick for that either. And when I step back I realize how foolish this entire engagement is. Two people, far removed from the very community and people we claim to be advocating for, are indirectly clashing over who has true agency. Neither of us has agency. So I guess if we're going to call me a fraud, then we'll call both of us frauds and I'm ok with that.
    Instead I want to hear from my friend Samantha, who has been laying brick since she stepped on this campus. Why not have her write an opinion piece where she talks about the people of Detroit? I don't even know why I ask stupid questions. There is no answer to that question that makes anyone happy. So we'll keep it unanswered and as long as there's a bone thrown every now and then, our newspaper can continue to uphold the Michigan facade of diversity. And just to be clear it has everything to do with race.
   We can toss the blame on minorities. Perhaps they have no journalistic drive or interest. A theory I hold is that the journalistic space has always been printed in white and black and minorities don't easily fit within normative culture. We are forced to take rigid spaces and creatively conform to them, while maintaining our out of bent message. Clearly what is produced is akin to watered down soda (or pop), so no one wants to read our writing. Once in awhile, if the stars align and several blue moons and double rainbows fill the sky, a minority is given a soapbox, while a non minority audience gathers around to be moved by a pathetic appeal. If logic and scathing criticism is given, then expect them to be labeled deranged and bitter (as I expect many of you will think of me after this).
   Still, the fact remains that Detroit, New York, Boston, Los Angeles, Dallas, Flint, etc are never talked about by their true inhabitants. This is especially true of New York, where you'd have a higher likelihood of finding someone like me rather than a typical New York Michigan student, among a random sample of New York City youth. Does that mean we need to get into a shouting match of the true New York experience? Probably not, but the fact remains that the experience a majority of people live through is kept silent, while I read article after article (and this isn't only in our Newspaper) written from the perspective of a one percenter's offspring (or at least someone trying to be). I'm sick of it.
    Ignore me please. Ignore her please. Listen to the people of the city. Let them decide whether they're city moves them. Make them the builders and the architects. And please ignore the prattle given by us.
    

A higher purpose

        I can't give you an adequate break down of the pros and cons of a strike on Syria. While I know a lot, I am not well versed in the military, political and economic factors that go into making a fully informed decision. So what I can only talk about is the moral implications of a strike (or refusing to strike) as I see them. The Geneva protocol is a protocol that finds its roots in the Hague conventions, which was one of the first modern day attempts at brokering peace and setting limitations for war. One of these limitations is a strict prohibition of projectile objects being used as weapons for the purpose of suffocation (i.e. chemical weapons). This was passed in 1899, 114 years ago. The Geneva conventions adopted it as protocol and the general assembly has passed several resolutions reaffirming the United Nations commitment to this particular piece of doctrine. In other words, most of the world is in pretty much agreement that chemical warfare is simply unacceptable and inhumane. Yet Assad has been allowed to amass large amounts of chemical weaponry and use said weapons on his own people. This is unacceptable.
        I don't know what the United States is going to do, but the world needs to respond to this travesty. If the United States is the only responder, then shame on the world for not responding. As humans, chemical weaponry should be taboo. If we idly look the other way as these weapons are used right in front of our faces, then why do we even have a Geneva protocol? Why do we have any sort of international code, if it can be nonchalantly broken with no expected penalty? This is possibly one of the most clear cut decisions out there. Either we are a country and a world of ideals or we aren't. If we find ourselves in the former group then we must strike. If we find ourselves in the latter, then a strike isn't in our future.
     We need to strike for our ideals. Have there been chemical attacks where the world has looked the other way, yes I'm sure there has been. But this is different. We can watch people dying on video from these weapons. We aren't just looking the other way with blissful ignorance. We are abandoning what has been considered a moral standard all around the world. So please, don't talk to me about petty politics of this "being another Iraq" or "none of our business" because it is our business. It's everyone's business. And the entire world should be doing something about it. Unfortunately America and France seem to be the only two countries at the vanguard of our humanity. 

Your internship in New York doesn't make you a New Yorker

                I love how some people believe they are so open minded that they can become legitimate members of every city, culture, and place they visit. It reeks of arrogance. In their mind, going to a few tourist attractions, living in a posh refurbished house they were given for an internship and eating NYC cart food makes them undergo a magical transformation that allows them to be a "New Yorker". Well I'm here to remind you that you are not a New Yorker, Bostonian, DCer or what ever city you happened to intern at. And it's not because you weren't born there. It's because I believe, and at least I know this is true for New York City, that the drudgery of the city, the unspectacular moments of being on the train, taking the bus, having your train canceled, missing your favorite halal cart guy before he goes to lunch and other sort of mundane things are what makes up the bulk of NYC. You can't properly appreciate the oddities that can only exist within the city until you've lived through the monotonous hum of what the city is made of.
             Also, when you live in a place temporarily, you only make short term investments in that place. Perhaps you decided to give a few dollars to a homeless man when walking down the street. Or you decided to buy a starburst from the teen selling it on the train to keep himself "out of trouble". These gestures, while kindhearted in nature, aren't long term investments. Compare this to those who have spent hours helping rebuild NYC for free after Sandy. How about the mentors who day in and day out mentor troubled kids in the city, accepting no compensation but smiles and brightened futures. These people are making long term investments because they realize that when they put more into the community they live in, their lives become richer. When you have felt that NYC has given you so much that you want to give it all back, then call yourself a New Yorker.
          New York is a safe haven for so many that it would be irresponsible of me to not mention those who have fled to the city for its open minded culture. Many irresponsible teenagers and college dropouts come to a city where they know judgement won't be passed, and even if it were, then you're fully within your right to tell that person to fuck off. Those people are New Yorkers by default. They have no where else to go and so they call New York City their home because that's all they have.
        And right along with them are all the workers and everyday people who aren't fortunate enough to go to an elite University. These are the people who serve hot dogs. Fix your roads. Unclog your pipes. Clean your hotel rooms. Basically anything you think seamlessly goes on in the city is in some part facilitated by them. For them New York City is just a place. They don't mindlessly take part in the revery we can clearly see in your poor photography of skylines and waterfronts. They don't have time for such merrymaking. Instead they have to make a living. But once in awhile they'll go over to Coney Island on a friday night. Exhausted and feasting on sandwiches they had prepared beforehand, you see them sit down with their family on the sand, while fireworks illuminate the sky above them. This is their vacation. This is their New York City.
        New York and any city is an actual place. Not some fanciful wonderland, where with business savvy and a blind eye, you can live the "good life". There are plenty of people who have lived in the city all their lives and will never be New Yorkers. That's because the final step to being New Yorker isn't the flat out rejection of all of the wonderful things you are currently experiencing, but instead the acceptance of everything else the city has to the offer, good and bad.
    

Where do we go from here?

                   We are upset. We are outraged. We want blood and some of you might have been thinking that this time it isn't enough to just put up a facebook status. Some of you might have thought that perhaps now is the time for some retribution. This retribution comes in various forms. Many want to protest and are protesting. Many want to riot and destroy things (typically their own neighborhoods, which is a shame). And some just want to live out the Hammurabi code to its fullest extent. A life for a life, specifically a white life for a black life. And all of this want is justified. Those of you who look down on this, need to be quiet. You don't know. You don't know the disappointment a minority feels as they think about this "colorblind" justice system. You don't fully comprehend the fear blacks and other minorities now feel as they see yet another young man die because he "looked suspicious". You don't know the anger minorities have, since their country and justice system has failed them. Yet you expect us to adhere to a sense of honor, stewardship, and overall justice. Where were those virtues for Trayvon?
                But this post isn't about you. We've been far too focused on you and it's time for us to take back what is ours. But we need to do it on our own terms. That's why I plea for those of you who choose to react emotionally, do so with words. For those of you who wish to cry, sing out to the community. For those of you who wish to shoot and kill, fashion bullets out of ballots and euthanize this unjust system. If you want to start a war, then let us charge with a well coordinated brigade, not a haphazard militia. I am not promoting inaction. I am not asking us to put our pitchforks away. I merely want us to succeed in the most effective way possible, if not for our community, then for Trayvon.
            Does this mean no violence? Well, some of you might find a well coordinated way to perpetrate violence in response to all of this. And that would be terrorism. I am not at full liberty to pass judgement on you for doing so. While I am outraged about this situation, my pale skin makes it so that the brunt of this tragedy doesn't sting quite as much as it does for those of you who are people of color (this doesn't mean that I am not stereotyped based on other physical attributes). I don't know if you feel these acts of violence are necessary just to regain your sanity and security. But before you do, I want you to think about our morals. I want you to think about your children and your loved ones. I want you think about us in a  colorblind sense for a second, so that you might be able to empathize for a second for all those who you are intending to harm. Then if you really feel it is necessary, I will ask you to shoot me first, not because I love the people I'm protecting, but because I love our dignity as a community. And for those of you who feel dignity has gone to the wayside, I urge you to think of the innocent lives that might be caught in the crossfire. Such lives cannot be weighed less than Trayvon's. For when we begin picking and choosing the value of human life based on color, we are no better than those who oppress us. Also let's not forget our white brothers and sisters, who stand with us in unity, not only when it is convenient, but also when it is necessary. Will you risk harming them for a misguided sense of justice?
            This post is for minorities and our allies. If you do not fall within that group and feel threatened by this post, then good. We are threatened all the time and the fact that we have finally decided to take action should be unsettling for you. I am not going to say I don't condone violence. Such a message would distort the complicated feelings I have towards violence. I personally would never engage in it and I believe the previous paragraph outlined my plea for those who intend to do so. But when it comes to talk of violence and it's possible ramifications, immediately ostracizing people isn't the answer. We need the thought of this violence out in the open that way we are all honest with how much this has hurt us.
          Some of you might think that none of us actually consider violence a viable option, and I hope that is true. But unfortunately something this triggering and this horrible is bound to have negative ramifications. To assume violence will not happen would be careless. That is why I wrote this post. To not only stop any small conflagration of violence, but also to re-purpose it into a meaningful cry for social change.
        

The African Double Standard

            The international community and American political sphere has went crazy over the recent coup/revolution that occurred in Egypt. Everyone with a little political savvy or people who don't know when to keep their mouths shut (I consider myself in the latter group) have either picked sides or felt a need to keep close watch on the political future of Egypt. And I'd be a complete hypocrite if I didn't admit I was doing the same. I immediately sided with the democratic process (i.e. sure Morsi may have sucked, but you voted him in), while saving my own ass by claiming ignorance to how bad things are, therefore withholding judgement on the actions of the Egyptian people. Honestly as I said before, people like me and many others seriously needed to say absolutely nothing. Specifically http://www.nytimes.com/2013/07/05/opinion/brooks-defending-the-coup.html?hp this nytimes article by David Brooks is a perfect example of the exact opposite opinion to mine, but just as presumptuous and patronizing. I won't get into the specific details on why David Brooks is completely out of line, but I can acknowledge that we're both making asses of ourselves with each comment. So instead of discussing the merits of the situation, I want to bring up the fact that this very occurrence has been happening in Africa for the past 3 decades and yet most African countries only get a small fraction of international attention in comparison to Egypt. Sorry western countries of the world, your bias is showing a little.
       One might argue, " Raymond, African governments are getting toppled over all the time, if Egypt makes this a habit, we'll stop caring about it as well." Such an argument is of course incredibly ignorant, seeing that there have been many successful African governments with steady turnover and healthy political elections, but a good recent counter example to this would be that of Mali. Remember when Mali suffered a coup? No? Really because it was a pretty big deal, seeing that at the time Mali was considered the golden standard for African democracies (some people still think it is, but the coup definitely hurt its perception). And while the Mali coup certainly made it to the front page once, it immediately faded in the background of typical American hooplah (some of that hooplah was important mind you, but there's important hooplah happening now, yet Egypt still  remains the talk of the town).
     I don't know what I'm asking for by writing this. The point is I feel like a hypocritical asshole and misery enjoys company. And I'm kind of tired of people who parade as politics lovers, when in fact they just like being able to talk about the latest political events and don't really care about politics equally. Own up to your bias and realize that most of us don't honestly care about what happens in Egypt. The majority of us are just using it as a spectacle.