From: ks4816@albnyvms.bitnet ("Qu'est-ce que vous a cherchez...le bien par le mal...-Enigma")
Subject: Re: Asian-male stereotyping, how?
Reply-To: ks4816@albnyvms.bitnet
Organization: University of NY at Albany
Date: Sat, 19 Dec 92 04:29:52 GMT

In article <1992Dec17.225215.26937@leland.Stanford.EDU>, underdog@leland.Stanford.EDU (Dwight Joe) writes:
>In article <1992Dec17.215424.11210@sarah.albany.edu> ks4816@albnyvms.bitnet
>writes:
>>[Chinese-cu stupidity deleted]
>>My view on your "distinctions" is that they are full of crap! For anyone who
>>KNOWS anything about ANY specific culture/ethnicity, they would be able to
>>realize that it is very hard to distinguish between people utilizing such
>>distinctions. As a matter of fact if you asked around, there aren't that many
>>people who are able to say that their culture hasn't had any effect on them AT
>>ALL!! Culture AND genetics influence people and regardless of how you like to
>
>Like I said, Chinese-cu people think that Japanese-(ge-)Americans will do
>the Japanese-cu "thing" because they are Japanese-ge.  Curiously, this
>is a view shared by rednecks, Klansmen, and Nazis.
>
>>delude yourself, EVEN YOU are "blighted" (sticking with your definitions) by
>>your cultural and genetic background.    
>>With regards to "rednecks, Klansmen, and Nazis", I'd just like to say that
>>they
>>all have something in common with you. You all judge and condemn people based
>>on one thing. In your case, it's a person's name. If his/her name is "Lee" (no
>
>No, I have distinctly said about 5 times this year that we cannot
>judge a person's culture by her last name.  For example, numerous Chinese-cu
>bigots assumed that Chancellor Tien of the UC campus was Chinese-cu
>because he had Chinese-cu last name.
>
>I insisted, apparently in vain, that we could not assume anything about
>him since we've never met him.  We can't possibly know that he is
>Chinese-cu.  He could be American-cu.  I mean.  He could have learned,
>after arriving in this country, that it was Chinese-cu who massacred 
>20,000 Taiwanese-ge around 1949.  Then, he could then have concluded that he
>didn't want to have anything to do with Chinese-cu culture.
>
>>offence to any Lee's out there) then they MUST be evil scum of the earth and
>
>I give people the benefit of the doubt until they make comments like
>"Chinese-ge = Chinese-cu", "Japanese-(ge-)Americans do the Japanese-cu
>'thing' because they are Japanese-ge", etc.
>
>If someone makes comments like this, I tend to think that he is Chinese-cu,
>regardless of his ethnicity.  There are non-Chinese-ge Chinese-cu.
>
>My suspicion that Ms. Jenny Shum is Chinese-cu is not based on her
>last name.  Only a Chinese-cu bigot would make that kind of conclusion.
>My suspicion that Ms. Shum is Chinese-cu is based on her assertion that
>(1) Chinese-ge = Chinese-cu and (2) Chinese-ge are a race.
>
>I know of no one, except Chinese-cu people, who believe that #1 and #2
>are true.  Ms. Shum is an example of someone who believes in #1 and #2.
>Therefore, I suspect that she is Chinese-cu; this has nothing to do with
>her last name.
>
>>deserve to be shot down by the "One Who Knows What Havoc Chinese Can Cause". 
>
>I care very much about Chinese-ge children--in fact, all children.
>I challenge Ms. Shum to find me the place where I even remotely criticize
>Chinese-ge children.
>
>Unless she fabricates something, she won't be able to find anything of
>the sort.  I am fairly confident that some Chinese-ge children have been
>helped by the charities to which I have donated.
>
>>[Chinese-cu stupidity deleted]
>>Jinsei wa "acceptance" dewa arimasen.
>
>Chotto.  Shum-san wa chuugokujin(-cu) mitai desu nee.  Doobutsu no yoo ni
>kangaetari yattari suru kara.
>
>Chuugokujin(-cu) wa ningen no yoo ni kangaetari yattari shi sae sureba
>sekai wa motto ii naru deshoo.  Demo ima chuugokujin(-cu) wa hantai desu.
>Hontoo ni taihen warui hito da.
>
>Chuugokujin(-cu) no kodomo wa chuugokujin no ryooshin to hanarete Nikkeijin
>ya Doitsu-Amerikajin nado no kazoku to sunda hoo ga ii yo.  Kodomo wa 
>ii ryooshin ni sodaterareta hoo ga ii desu kara.  Hontoo desu yo.
>
>Have a nice day.

As a few people have mentioned the futility of any further attempts at
intelligent correspondence with Dwight Joe, I've decided to borrow something 
from George (Hope you don't mind, George.).

-
     Welcome to the Dwight Joe FAQ.  This article is a standard rebuttal to
certain beliefs Dwight Joe routinely expounds in soc.culture.asian.american.
Specifically, Dwight Joe believes Chinese culture intrinsically incorporates
racism, sexism, infanticide, child abuse, and I suppose, other unsavory
characteristics.  For a full example of his beliefs, the reader is referred
to his many postings, one of which drew this response and is therefore
specified in the References: line of the header.

     The motivation behind this canned response is my belief an undue amount
of bandwidth is wasted concerning Dwight Joe's beliefs.  Dwight Joe has shown
a tendency to respond to any topic under discussion by espousing his
anti-Chinese feelings.  This, in turn, spoils many good threads of debate as
many readers of scaa, long tired of reading such nonsense, automatically add
the thread to their kill files.  Such readers are instead urged to add
/underdog/h:j to their kill files.  This may deny Dwight Joe a goal I suspect
he pursues, that of censoring discussion on Chinese culture and government.

     Hence, if you're reading this message, and are considering a followup
merely to rebut Dwight Joe's response, I strongly urge you to reconsider.
We most surely understand the frustration and resentment you're probably
feeling, because we've shared it first-hand over the last few years.
Certainly, if you have something valuable to add, please feel free to do so.
However, I think it quite likely what most of the scaa readership has already
heard it, as we're all too familiar with Dwight Joe and the responses he
draws.  *Please*, under most circumstances, you should not respond to Dwight
Joe at all, only to the original topic under discussion.

     Getting to the rebuttal, it is my contention Dwight Joe's beliefs are
without scientific foundation, and in fact, unmitigated racism or incitement
thereof.  Certainly, some individuals of Chinese society practice some of the
above, just as some members of any society deviate from "normal morality."
However, in the absence of scientific evidence showing Chinese society displays
these features with a greater frequency than other cultural groups, I contend
any civilized person must follow a simple moral principle: innocent until
proven guilty.  Dwight Joe has been repeatedly called upon to substantiate his
claims with references to an independent study.  He has consistently ignored
such calls, and in fact, often cites a single anecdote as proof that an entire
culture incorporates a particular practice.  Without any real evidence, one
should not make such wild accusations.  To do so smacks of racism and bigotry.

     Even if his claims were to be substantiated, which they have not, such
faults would not justify Dwight Joe's calls for the dissolution of Chinese
culture.  All societies have their faults, but such faults do not warrant their
destruction.  American society has been accused of sexism, racism, and
violence.  Yet no one (I know) calls for the abolition of American culture.
Yet Dwight Joe calls for the substitution of Chinese culture with Western
culture.  One does not treat a wart by shooting the man; one treats the wart.

     Another telling habit of Dwight Joe is to classify those who disagree with
him as Chinese.  He himself gets uppity when others claim Dwight Joe is Chinese
himself because (a) he has a Chinese surname, and (b) at least one scaa regular
has met his brother and hence is in a position to know.  Yet, one the basis of
a poster's opinions, Dwight Joe turns about and makes similar claims to ethnic
origin.  Such two-faced behavior demonstrates the hypocrisy and illogic of his
arguments.

     Finally, Dwight Joe uses a particular notation.  For the edification of
the new reader, I explain it here.  The notation involves abbreviating certain
words:

	Chinese-cu: Chinese culture, ie. raised as a Chinese;
	Chinese-ge: Chinese genetically, ie. bearing certain physical features;
	Chinese-ci: Chinese citizenship, ie. of a particular country.

I believe these distinctions, as used by Dwight Joe, are merely camouflage,
for his own mind as well as others.  Dwight Joe uses these terms to deflect
accusations of racism from himself by redefining racism to specifically
exclude his beliefs.  Such denials, however, are worthless, as Dwight Joe's
repeatedly posted opinions make it clear he holds significant predjudice
against Chinese society.
-- 
----
George J Wu,  Superior Maker of Technical Snafus,  georgew@metasw.com
Meta-Software,  1300 White Oaks Road,  Campbell, CA 95008,  (408) 369-5400
Never be the first to believe.  Never be the last to deceive.  ---  Chess
  
  ************************************************************************
  *  		   		 |     	  "I am so       		 *
  *  Jenny Shum			 |	      afraid of 	       	 *
  *  University At Albany	 |                living	         *
  *  ks4816@albanyvms.bitnet	 |	             in oblivion"        *
  *  ks4816@rachel.albany.edu	 |		        -Anything Box    *
  *				 |				         *
  ************************************************************************
Xref: sparky soc.culture.asian.american:10983 soc.culture.african.american:13065 alt.politics.clinton:18839