From: underdog@leland.Stanford.EDU (Dwight Joe)
Subject: Stereotyping (Re: Hong Kong Students (Was: Re: Asian cliques. Why?)
Keywords: Asian-Americans
Organization: Miners for a Heart of Gold
Date: Fri, 8 Jan 93 19:00:20 GMT

In article <berthiau.726090463@iros1> bunny@gnu.ai.mit.edu (Eva Chan) writes:
>Regarding the BMW's, ok, they may be used but since when can anyone afford to 
>pay at most $200 per month on a Beemer?  Even a used BMW will still cost at
>least $20K, and the ones I've seen were quite new and fully equipped. Some
>even had cellular phones.  Go figure that one out.

Unfortunately, my newserver has already deleted the original post where
a Chinese-cu boy explains what the typical American and the typical Chinese-cu
do with their money.  His aim was to explain why the American couldn't
buy the BMW.

I waited this long to see if anyone would offer a rebuttal condemning his
stereotyping.  No one offered it.

Yet, another person (apparently from Finland) makes some comments about how
he perceives Chinese-American women to wear a lot of makeup.  Numerous
Chinese-cu boys come out from nowhere to evoke the bowels of hell in
condemning this person.

This is sheer Chinese-cu hypocrisy.  Consider

Item i1
   Attribute a1
   Attribute a2
   ...
   Attribute an

When i1 pertains to "Chinese-cu" or "Chinese-ge", if any of the ai's are
disparaging Chinese-cu, they will come out of the woodwork, like bats
out of hell, to condemn the originator of those comments.

On the other hand if the ai's are (in their opinion) positive but disparaging
to other cultural or ethnic groups, then the Chinese-cu say nothing.
In fact, they don't even care about the scholarship by which the attributes
were obtained.  That's an irrelevant issue to them.

For example, if a1 is positive, no Chinese-cu boy will demand to know the
source, the relability of that source, etc.  They just assume it to be
true.  If a1 is negative, then they demand to know the source and that
the contributor produce evidence, references, etc.

Yeah.  This is the stupidest hypocritical crap that I've ever seen in
USENET.

[turning to stereotyping]

In the past year, there have been 50+ posts, condemning stereotyping.
But note that these condemnations only occur when the Chinese-cu are 
criticized.  They claim that _no_ generalizations can be made.

Odd.  The reality is that generalizations _can_ be made.  That's what
marketing and sales research departments do all the time.  When Avon
sells its products in China, they make generalizations about the culture
in order to produce the kind of commercials that have the greatest appeal.

Clearly, it isn't stereotyping that's eating the Chinese-cu.  In fact,
the Chinese-cu praise the stereotyping whenever _it_ praises the Chinese-cu;
they don't give tiddly do when that stereotyping is hurting the image of
another group.

By the way, this is not a trait of Westerners-cu.  Look at the other
newsgroups.  Westerners-cu tend to be much less hypocritical:  a Westerner
who criticizes stereotyping that disparages Western society is much likely
(than a Chinese-cu boy) to also criticize stereotyping that praises Western
society.

[getting back to the BMW posting]

Note that _no_ --I repeat, _no_-- Chinese-cu boy came out to condemn that
posting.  That pretty much says it all.  Hypocrites.

------------------------------------------------------------------+------------
Jinsei no imi wa nan desu ka.                Sister, can you      |   \|  |`
Shitte itara oshiete kuremasen ka.           spare a coin?        |    | -+-
                                                                  |   /| / \
Copyright 1992, 1993    Disclaimer:  1 + 1 = 3                    |
------------------------------------------------------------------+------------
Newsgroups: soc.culture.asian.american