HDTenEightyP/NetNews huggingface dataset:
From: mday@jukebox.lcs.mit.edu (Mark Day)
Subject: Re: Perceptions, Realities, Perceptions
Organization: MIT Laboratory for Computer Science
	<my4mh-h.kemnitz@netcom.com> <SHAW.92Aug13001642@whopper.lcs.mit.edu>
Date: Thu, 13 Aug 1992 16:53:36 GMT

   > shaw@whopper.lcs.mit.edu (Andy Shaw) writes:

   Another variation on this is to _become_ part of the majority.  However,
   historically, this path has only been taken by immigrants who happen to
   have the same skin color as the majority -- i.e. Irish, Italians, Eastern
   Europeans, and to an extent, Jews.  Blacks and Hispanics have not succeeded
   with this strategy, because it's difficult to become part of a group when
   you are easily discernable visually.

I don't think you have a very good grasp of how thorough the bias
against non-WASPs was in this country.  It's true that now the
divisions are "whites" vs. "blacks", "asians", "hispanics", etc.; but
earlier this century or last century, the idea of a WASP being somehow
indistinguishable from an Irish or Italian person would have been
laughable.

So "racial" attitudes can and do change over time.  My (admittedly
anecdotal) impression is that the way Irish, Italians, and company
became "white" is similar to an ongoing process that is gradually
scooping Asians into the "non-African" race.  The one thing that seems
to stay constant in American perspectives on race is that African
Americans are at the bottom (American Indians are below the bottom,
not even considered most of the time).

I think your subsequent analysis of the experience of Jews is rather
dubious, and verges on being just a collection of stereotypes.  It
seems to me that American Jewish organizations are not as coherent as
you describe, and are in fact rather worried that one consequence of
acceptance by white America will be the complete assimilation of Jews
by intermarriage and the loss of a distinctively Jewish culture.

--Mark Day

mday@lcs.mit.edu
From: lchsu@cayley.uwaterloo.ca (Leon Hsu)
Newsgroups: soc.culture.asian.american
Subject: Re: Caucasian Clarification
Date: 17 Aug 92 19:07:08 GMT
Distribution: na
Organization: University of Waterloo

In article <6237@ucru2.ucr.edu> lulu@guinan.ucr.edu (david lu) writes:
>
>I will not say anything about the above statement because I
>don't want to be in a war.  I just have one question.  What
>does the "-cu" and "-ge" suffixes mean?
>
>I hope that I won't be sorry for asking that ...


Unfortunately you probably will be. I suspect Dwight Joe will
soon post his regular article about his "brilliant" notation 
for classifying Chinese Baboons. Oh sorry ... that was redundant.
I think I should save a standard flame of Dwight's stupid 
notation posting. 

-leon.
From: hira@cme.nist.gov (Ron Hira)
Newsgroups: soc.culture.asian.american
Subject: Caucasian Clarification
Date: 12 Aug 92 13:44:19 GMT
Reply-To: hira@cme.nist.gov
Organization: National Institute of Standards and Technology

I've posted this before, but feel compelled to do so once again.

I understand that the majority of AA's reading from and posting to SCAA are
Orientals, but I must OBJECT to you all equating Caucasians with whites.

My folks are from India, and that is in Asia last time I checked. We're
considered Caucasians, but certainly not considered white; probably one
reason why our race is classified as Asian and Pacific Islander. I don't
appreciate being lumped in with whites, particularly in this group. I 
implore you to refer to whites as whites and not Caucasians.

Thanks again,
Ron
Television: The Drug Of A Nation
Newsgroups: soc.culture.asian.american
From: russil@IDACOM.HP.COM
Newsgroups: soc.culture.asian.american
Subject: Re: Accountability, or rather, JJ's lack of it.
Date: 17 Aug 92 15:30:54 GMT
Reply-To: russil%idacom.hp.com@hplb.hpl.hp.com

jlw@gestalt.austin.tx.us writes:
>russil@idacom.hp.com writes:
>>I think you're missing Andy's point, though.  Anybody reading Andy's articles
>>knows who wrote them.  If they wanted to, they could look up his phone number
>>and home address.  Or they might remember his USENET articles while reading
>>one of his papers, or while interviewing him for a job.  The same isn't true
>>of jj@alice, because jj isn't his *real* name.
>
>You ever think that someone might NOT WANT any random user to be able
>to have that sort of information about him?  I mean it's all well and
>good for Andy to do it, but should the rest of us follow suit as if
>we were lemmings or something?

No, of course not.  jj mentioned that he's been harassed in the past.
He's got a family, too.  It makes perfect sense not to sign his real
name, particularly on such a controversial newsgroup as this one.

And I don't think Andy was justified in demanding that jj sign his name.
Being in a flame war on Usenet is hardly the same as burning a cross on
somebody's lawn.

But what I was responding to was Michael's statement that jj *was* really
signing his name.  He's not, of course.  There's a big difference between
using a handle, even if it's one that many of your friends know about, and
using your *real* name.  Handles are known within computer-user circles.
Real names are known everywhere.

>I'm all for Andy being completely free to plaster his dossier all over
>Usenet if he wants to, but I think there should be an element of choice
>involved.

Of course.

--
Russil Wvong
russil@idacom.hp.com

People will always choose the familiar over the comfortable  -- Virginia Satir
Xref: sparky soc.culture.asian.american:8223 alt.culture.us.asian-indian:524
From: mvij@novell.com (Manish Vij)
Newsgroups: soc.culture.asian.american,alt.culture.us.asian-indian
Subject: Re: friendships....
Date: 20 Aug 92 17:21:39 GMT
Organization: Novell Inc., San Jose, California

In article <1992Aug20.134143.15552@midway.uchicago.edu> moh2@midway.uchicago.edu writes:
>In article <1992Aug16.162728.23403@athena.mit.edu> tyadav@athena.mit.edu (Tapesh Yadav) writes:
>
TY>>  In realm of thought then, friendship is in exploring mind, values.... It
TY>>  is in deliberating about what is right, what is just, what is happiness,
TY>>  what is virtue; how, why, where, when, whats of life, of purpose, of
TY>>  meanings. It is in asking questions relentlessly, feeding on curiosity,
TY>>  seeking with our finiteness the glory of the infinite, the unknown.....

Are you a cafe crawler or a Joe Schmoe?  A philosopher or a laborer?
Seems like a demanding, intellectual model of friendship.  Friendship to me
implies more of an emotional aspect.  Your model sounds like intellectual
companionship more than friendship.

A=Amirthi:

A>Friendship is also not needing to ask questions...relaxing into the
A>comfort of the known. 
A>
A>It's having people to depend on, and being depended on in turn.
A>
A>It's doing favors without hesitation or thought for recompense.
A>
A>It's perceiving the beauty in someone's soul that they can't see
A>themselves, and helping it become more clear to themselves and others.

  -- Amirthi, (c) 1992

A true friend is harder to find than the roughest coal which sometimes
holds a bird in the hand ... no, wait . . . *sigh* I fear my powers of
quotation are no match.  ;-)  

ObACUA-I:  My parents and I have a continual argument over the meaning of
friendship and its relationship with family.  They believe family is
far more important than friends, and I agree with them in the sense that
familial relationships tend to be much more stable.  Yet they go so far
as to discourage spending time with friends because they see it as an
intrusion upon spending time with family, as if it were a zero-sum game.
I wonder if this is part of Indian culture or just my parents' personal
views.
                                          /-\o /-()  -- -  --   -
   Manish Vij    ::    '89 EX500          \_/ \\/ )  -- -    --
   mvij@ocf.berkeley.edu                       |/_\  -- -  --   - 
   mvij@novell.com                              \_/.  .  . . ........
From: yjhbhc@dante.lbl.gov (Joe Huang)
Newsgroups: soc.culture.asian.american
Subject: Re: Asian-American Guys Superior?
Date: 14 Aug 92 00:34:46 GMT
Reply-To: yjhbhc@dante.lbl.gov (Joe Huang)
Organization: Lawrence Berkeley Laboratory, Berkeley
NNTP-Posting-Host: 128.3.254.106

In article <1992Aug13.230735.15052@CSD-NewsHost.Stanford.EDU> ajh@Xenon.Stanford.EDU (Alan Hu) writes:

>The AAMs are whining that AAFs don't want to go out with them, but are
>	easy pickings for white people.
>Now, AAFs are whining that AAMs don't want to go out with them, but are
>	easy pickings for white people.
>Perhaps Asian Americans are just easy in general for white people.
>What does that say?
>(And when someone black posts a question about about AfAm/AsAm relationships,
>everyone starts arguing about the white folks again.)
>

Maybe we should just face it and say that many Asian-Americans are not attracted
to members of their own race. Since this would sound too much like self-loathing,
a convenient rationalization is to blame the other party, such as AAFs stereotyping
AAMs paradoxically as either male chauvinists or wimps, or AAMs complaining that 
AAFs fawn on white boys. In reality, there are umpteenth ways that one can project
their biases with being overt about it,  such as acting more critical with
someone you're not attracted to or showing greater interest in the doings of
someone to whom you are.  Mating practices being what they are in this
country, such rationalizations are perhaps easier for the women to indulge in, 
since men are forced(?) to make conscious decisions on whom to approach. 

There are certainly many possible causes for intraracial (:-)) sexual antipathy,
such as white-dominated media images (everybody's favorite whipping boy), less 
emphasis on romance and dating in root Asian cultures, the desire to assimiliate,
etc.  This antipathy sometimes even pops up in the most unexpected situations.
I remember many years ago reading in a now-defunct Chinese American newspaper in 
San Francisco about a newly-formed support group for gay Asians. My first reaction 
was that such an organization would be a convenient way for gay Asians (minority 
within a minority) to meet each other. However, as I read on, it turned out the
main purpose of the group was for the members to discuss problems they were having
with their white boyfriends!

Joe Huang
Newsgroups: soc.culture.asian.american
From: lam@popeye.comm.mot.com (Dan Lam)
Subject: Re: Racism against WHITE in China??? (was Re: Caucasians don't understand
Organization: Land Mobile Products Sector, Motorola INC.
Date: Tue, 18 Aug 1992 15:32:41 GMT

In article <92229.214547ZQH@psuvm.psu.edu> <ZQH@psuvm.psu.edu> writes:
>In <1992Aug16.025209.24056@cs.UAlberta.CA>
>
>(FYI, foreigners from rich western countries --- 1st-class citizens
>      foreigners from other countries --- 2nd-class citizens
>      Chinese with foreign citizenships --- 3rd-class citizens
>      Chinese from HongKong & Taiwan --- 4th-class citizens
>      ethnic minorities in China --- 5th-class citizens
>      Han Chinese --- 6th-class citizens (lowest)
> according to the practices & written/unwritten policies of Chinese
> Communist Government).
>
	
	Let's see ... I am 1/2 Chinese 1/2 Vietnamese with US
citizenship .....  I must be considered 7th-class citizen in China.
Lower than the lowest?  Hmm, probably should forget about trip to
China.
From: hira@cme.nist.gov (Ron Hira)
Newsgroups: soc.culture.asian.american
Subject: Re: Caucasian Clarification
Date: 14 Aug 92 12:11:22 GMT
Reply-To: hira@cme.nist.gov
Organization: National Institute of Standards and Technology

In article <1992Aug13.201311.19821@sco.com>, garyh@sco.COM (< Gary H >) writes:
|>From: garyh@sco.COM (< Gary H >)
|>Subject: Re: Caucasian Clarification
|>Date: 13 Aug 92 20:13:11 GMT
|>
|>
|>In article <4797@dove.nist.gov> hira@cme.nist.gov writes:
|>!I've posted this before, but feel compelled to do so once again.
|>!
|>!I understand that the majority of AA's reading from and posting to SCAA are
|>!Orientals, but I must OBJECT to you all equating Caucasians with whites.
|>!
|>!My folks are from India, and that is in Asia last time I checked. We're
|>!considered Caucasians, but certainly not considered white; probably one
|>!reason why our race is classified as Asian and Pacific Islander. I don't
|>!appreciate being lumped in with whites, particularly in this group. I 
|>!implore you to refer to whites as whites and not Caucasians.
|>!
|>!Thanks again,
|>!Ron
|>!Television: The Drug Of A Nation
|>
|>Ron,
|>
|>Most Indians from India I know consider themselves asian, unless you are
|>refering to Native American Indians.
|>

I consider Myself American of Asian descent. What I was objecting to is the
constant equating of all Caucasians as White. There are 3 major races that
I know of: Negroid, Caucasoid, and Mongoloid. I'd prefer that people use
geographic terms such as Asian American rather than racial terms.

Ron

|>Gary
|>-- 
|>|^^^^^^|            _Yo_Man_____________________________
|>|      |          /            garyh@sco.com             \
|>|  _  _|        /             uunet!sco!garyh              \
|>| (o)(o)      /             425  Encinal Street              \
|>@      _)   /          Santa Cruz, California  95061          |
|> | ,___|   /   W: [408] 457-0195 x7765 / Fax: [408] 429-1887 /
|> |   /     \_______________________________________________/
|>/____\            The Santa Cruz Operation (SCO), Inc.
                                    
Newsgroups: soc.culture.asian.american
From: masahiro@tgevax.life.uiuc.edu (Masahiro Kono)
Subject: Re: Why do minority groups whine?
Organization: University of Illinois at Urbana
Distribution: na
Date: Thu, 13 Aug 1992 16:04:31 GMT

thao@bnr.ca (Anthony Murtagh) writes:

>In article <1992Aug13.034552.2450@leland.Stanford.EDU> underdog@leland.Stanford.EDU (Dwight Joe) writes:
>>In article <1992Aug13.021954.4194@bnr.ca> thao@bnr.ca (Anthony Murtagh) writes:
>>>In article <1992Aug13.010803.20829@leland.Stanford.EDU>
>>>underdog@leland.Stanford.EDU (Dwight Joe) writes:

[text deleted]

wow.
.
.
.
.
.
.
I thought a little respite from all the whine flames might
be appropriate here. :-)
.
.
.
Now back to the regularly scheduled program. . . . .   :)
Newsgroups: soc.culture.asian.american
From: jpak@oakhill.sps.mot.com (Jim Pak)
Subject: Re: Why do all people whine? (was Re: Why do minority groups whine?)
Reply-To: jpak@manute.sps.mot.com (Ugly American)
Organization: Motorola Inc.  Austin, Tx.
Distribution: na
Date: Wed, 12 Aug 1992 20:32:21 GMT

In article <BsvKBt.Gxp@undergrad.math.waterloo.edu> lchsu@cayley.uwaterloo.ca (Leon Hsu) writes:
>In article <1992Aug11.214540.13684@oakhill.sps.mot.com> jpak@manute.sps.mot.com writes:
>>Sorry, but whining sure sounds like an American thing to me.  Don't forget
>>what the last letter in scaa stands for.
>
>Man, am I ever tempted to say that, yes whining is an American thing and
>only Americans whine. Goddamn Americans! Complain about everything!  :)

Yup.  Did you watch the NBC coverage of the Olympics?  Enough about that
boxer who got screwed or the US men's volleyball team!  Steve Timmons gets
on TV and says, "I guess the only way the Japanese can beat us is to have
a committee hand it to them," or something like that.  Steve, I agree you
got jobbed, but on the other hand you guys didn't have to let the Japanese
get up on you two games to one and 14-13 in the fourth.  Maybe if you didn't,
y'all would still have your hair by now.

Or else in a recent issue of _Sports Illustrated_, some unnamed US swimming
official bitches about the Chinese women taking steroids.  I agree, there
may be something fishy going on (down Dwight, down boy), but until you can
prove it, it's probably best not to be *that* vocal about it.  Or Gwen
Torrance whining about Gail Devers and the Russian woman taking steroids.

Anyway, I supported the American protest in both the boxing and the volley-
ball cases, but you see, the media gives an outlet for the whining, and then
the Americans do their best to accomodate them.

>Seriously though, I think whining is a little more widespread than just
>America. Hmmm ... maybe this is time for me to chatise you for being
>typically american by being Americo-centric. [insert diatribe on evils
>of American society]  :)

Me?  America-centric?  Of course!!!  Who gives a damn about other countries
anyway??  America, #1!!!!!!!  Always was, always will be...  :-)

[Ugly American joke directed to Leon coming up; you are forewarned]

BTW, I think it's time we closed the border on the north end as well.  :-)

Jim
From: mday@jukebox.lcs.mit.edu (Mark Day)
Newsgroups: soc.culture.asian.american
Subject: Re: Why do minority groups whine?
Date: 14 Aug 92 06:31:06 GMT
	<1992Aug13.215051.23178@leland.Stanford.EDU>
	<BsyE5x.M7z@watserv1.uwaterloo.ca>
Distribution: na
Organization: MIT Laboratory for Computer Science


   rtang@sunee.uwaterloo.ca (The One Your Mother Warned You About!) writes:
   > underdog@leland.Stanford.EDU (Dwight Joe) writes:

   >Was it "Doan Nguyen"?
   Although "Nguyen" is a very common vietnamese surname.
   I believe her name was "Hahn Doan" <- or something close to that.

I don't remember the person, but I would bet on "Hanh Doan" as a more
likely spelling for a Vietnamese name.

--Mark Day

mday@lcs.mit.edu
Newsgroups: soc.culture.asian.american
From: gwangung@milton.u.washington.edu (Just another theatre geek.....)
Subject: Re: Why do minority groups whine?
Organization: University of Washington, Seattle
Distribution: na
Date: Wed, 12 Aug 1992 15:19:12 GMT

In article <1992Aug12.004456.26805@leland.Stanford.EDU> underdog@leland.Stanford.EDU (Dwight Joe) writes:
>In article <1992Aug12.002610.16584@CSD-NewsHost.Stanford.EDU>
>ajh@Xenon.Stanford.EDU (Alan Hu) writes:
>>Small children whine when their parents beat them and there's nothing they can
>>do about it.
>Only a Chinese-cu would remark about it so causally as you have,

	No, only a Chinese-cu would make THIS remark.

	After all, only a Chinese-cu would be THIS ignorant of other cultures.

-- 
Roger Tang gwangung@milton.u.washington.edu
Executive Producer Emeritus, Asian Theatre at the UW;
	The definition of having balls is a non-singer who goes karaoke singing 
with the cast of a musical revue.
From: jj@alice.att.com (jj, clueless old white boy)
Newsgroups: soc.culture.asian.american
Subject: Re: Cut out this "ORIENTAL" stuff, just call me "Chink" (Was Re: ORIENTALS???????)
Date: 13 Aug 92 21:36:18 GMT
Article-I.D.: alice.23446
Reply-To: jj@alice.UUCP (jj, clueless old white boy)
Organization: NJ State Home for Bewildered Terminals

In article <SHAW.92Aug12213647@whopper.lcs.mit.edu> shaw@whopper.lcs.mit.edu (Andy Shaw) writes:
>In article <25446@dog.ee.lbl.gov> John Scott <jscott@Aztecridge.LosGatos> writes:
>>  Whenever I call an oriental "oriental", I always get told to say Asian
>>  instead.  I just don't understand what the big deal is with you
>>  orientals!!!  I always ask for a legitimate reason but never get one.  I
>>  hope someone on this newsgroup could give me a reasonable explanation. 
>>  Otherwise, I see nothing wrong with calling Korean, Chinese, and Japanese
>>  people "oriental."

Interesting.  The original of this didn't get to this site.
Now, that''s almost a kindness, BUT... (that's why I'm using your
quoted article, Andy)

Scotty, WHY CAN'T YOU JUST CALL PEOPLE WHAT THEY WANT TO BE CALLED?
WHY DO YOU HAVE TO USE YOUR NAME for them. WHY WHY WHY?

Geeeze, beam me up, LaForge, there's no intellegent life down here!

>I kind of like the way Lui is calling himself "Twinkie Chinkie" now -- it
>neutralizes the negative connotations.  
Yes, it's a very good tactic, as long as enough people use it and
understand it.

I've used it for years.  It's a venerable technique, and it works.
I'm sure it has a name, I probably knew the name when I was as young
as Andy.
-- 
 Bush    *Copyright alice!jj 1992, all rights reserved, except transmission
   vs       *by USENET and like facilities granted.      Said permission is
 Clinton  --    *granted only for complete copies that include this notice.
 Just Say !NO!       *Use on pay-for-read services specifically disallowed.
Newsgroups: soc.culture.asian.american,soc.motss
From: johnf@uhheph.phys.hawaii.edu (John Flanagan)
Subject: Re: AM/CM - Gay Colonialism?
Organization: University of Hawaii, Dept. of Physics & Astronomy
Date: Wed, 19 Aug 1992 04:37:03 GMT

In article <64177@cup.portal.com> Arthur_T_Hu@cup.portal.com writes:
>
>(think about it - where are all the
>Asians who are Americanized enough to be gay? 

Ever been to Honolulu?

>They're not in SF, they
>probably went to engineering school like all good Asian-Am boys, and
>work in Silicon Valley!) 

There are probably 1,000 gay Asian-American students right here at UH.

>What is surprising is that it looked like
>most of them specifically were looking for white males. 

One reason might be that they are looking for partners who are outside
their communities, and who therefore pose less risk of outing to their
relatives.  

--John
-- 
John Flanagan                          ||"Pretty boys
johnf@uhheph.phys.hawaii.edu           || with the sunshine faces
U. of Hawaii, Dept. of Physics & Astro.|| <mumble mumble>..."
2505 Correa Rd., Honolulu, HI 96822    ||            -- My Bloody Valentine
From: ag3l+@andrew.cmu.edu (Arun K. Gupta)
Newsgroups: soc.culture.asian.american
Subject: Re: Caucasian Clarification
Date: 15 Aug 92 07:13:48 GMT
Article-I.D.: andrew.QeXFwgW00VB5EPWYhC
Organization: Physics, Carnegie Mellon, Pittsburgh, PA


In response to Kevin Gong's excerpt from a dictionary, here
is the American Academic Encyclopedia (1985)


             The human species has migrated and hybridized dramatically in
             the past 40,000 years. As a result, some of the human
             subspecies have been drastically relocated. Late in the
             Pleistocene the Caucasians probably moved into northern Africa
             along with animals from the Palaearctic zone. From that time,
             if not earlier, a zone of racial intermediates has extended
             from the Sahara to Somalia. A similar zone of racial mixture is
             found in India between the more northerly Caucasians and the
             more southerly Australasians.

*****
Anyway, y'all can argue about race all you want. Personally, I belong to
the human race.

-arun gupta
ag3L@andrew.cmu.edu