From: rtang@sunee.uwaterloo.ca (The One Your Mother Warned You About!)
Subject: Re: Asian-male stereotyping, how?
Organization: University of Waterloo
Date: Thu, 17 Dec 1992 23:56:33 GMT

In article <1992Dec16.205604.23901@leland.Stanford.EDU> underdog@leland.Stanford.EDU (Dwight Joe) writes:
>>underdog@leland.Stanford.EDU (Dwight Joe) writes:
>>>Hey, Chinese-cu boy.  Laugh at yourself.
This -cu stuff is really just a smoke screen.
A simple "Hey, BOY! Laugh at yourself." would have been
sufficient to get your point across.  Irrelevent references to ones
culture and/or race, IS first ethnocentric and second case racist.

NOTE: hatred based on ethnocentrism, isnt any better then racism.
      Case in point, within each racial group there is evidence of
      the former.  It is also important to note that my usage of 
      ethnocentrism does not mean genetic, but  cultural/nationistic
      differencs. ie) "Ethnic cleaning in Yugoslavia ..."

>This is a bizarre accusation which leads me to suspect that Ms. Shum 
>identifies with Chinese-cu culture.
See, what I mean, anyone who disagree's with Dwight Joe, is automatically
labelled someone of HIS evil chinese culture.

>"Chinese-cu" means "culturally Chinese".  "Chinese-ge" means "ethnicially
>(i.e. genetically) Chinese". 
Where's that DJ FAQ??  Someone please do the honours.

>I was not accusing the dimwit of being ethnically
			^^^^^^^
You mean, "dim sum" didn't you?  Anyone who admits (oh god, no!) to
identifying with Chinese (whatevers), has to be a "dimsum". ;)

>Chinese-ge; I was accusing him of identifying with Chinese-cu culture.
>I have no idea as to whether he is Chinese-ge or not since I've never met
>him; however, he has admitted to identifying with Chinese-cu culture.
As well, as stating that I identify with a few other cultures.  

I've been to and/or lived in and/or worked in more countries with different 
cultures, and made more friends then you have people who disagrees with you
(and that seems to be the majority around the newsnet, not just this newsgroup).

In fact, if the newsnet is any indication, you dont seem to possess
the social grace or tact to relate to anyone, who doesnt parrot the same
drivel you do.

>For about the 100th time, Chinese-cu != Chinese-ge.
For the 100th time, that wasnt her objection that you accused me of being
any particular race. (As if being any particular race is bad) BUT, she
was objecting to your irrelevent accusation of cultural affiliations, which
springs from the same corrupt thought which makes someone a racist.  What
ever race or culture you think you belong to, I would not generalize YOUR
traits to those groups or those to YOU.   You don't seem to be able to do
that.
 
>It's interesting that Ms. Shum thinks that Chinese-cu = Chinese-ge.
>Even more interesting is the fact that rednecks, Klansmen, and Nazis have
>the same view.
You seem to bring up the same boogie-men, to back up your bogus claims.
You should stop relying on that cut and paste facility so often in your
news posts.

>(On top of that, Ms. Shum thinks that the Chinese-ge are a "race".  Wow.
>That's news to me.  I know of only 3 (or 4, depending on how you count)
>races:  Mongoloid, Caucasoid, and Negroid; these are the terms which
>I learned in school from my sociology instructor.
But, thats just one school of thought. The fact there is doubt
whether there is 3 or 4 groups, doesnt lend credibility to that
theory.  The fact that these racial groups can interbreed without
any problems, as another argument against that classification.

Another is that there is no real justification for race lines as commonly 
known, but that its a continuoum. (possibly along several dimensions), which 
is the view I subscribe to.  There is of course some clustering of
characteristics, but this is due to isolation of particular groups
from others and a reinforcement of certain traits due to environmental
and hereditary factors.  BUT if you draw a line from east asia to Europe
along populated areas, YOU'd be amazed how one group almost blends into
the next, until the two ends apparently seem very different.

>But the Chinese-ge are a "race" as distinct from the Japanese-ge "race"?
>My.  My.  Perhaps Chinese-cu hegemony is more pervasive than I suspected.)
I wont even bother to state examples of hegemony of other cultural
groups. YOU and well as everyone else knows it exist.  You've apparently
had interaction with Japanese people (not Japanese Americans), so I wont
go any further.

RT
Newsgroups: soc.culture.asian.american,ca.politics,soc.motss