Super Lin-tendo!

[itvnetop]

Originally Posted by mlmpetert

I don’t think Plaschke nails anything.

Hes using a stereotype, that Asians wont push back because they’re not a vocal minority, for his argument as to why stereotypes against Asian Americans seem to be more acceptable. Asian Americans, and the Chinese/Taiwanese in particular, are the “model minority” in the US, and can be considered one of the most “successful” racial groups within the US by many measures. Their average incomes are greater than the US population at large, they are the most educated and they are the least incarcerated. So perhaps being at the top of the US food chain, so to speak, makes it okay in some people’s mind to playfully stereotype them. Of all the disgraceful and distasteful stereotypes cast at Lin I don’t remember hearing or seeing any that were actually hateful or mean spirited, many may have been ignorant and dumb but I don’t think any were cast with malice. However, Asian Americans are also a pretty small population so Plaschke may have a point in that they are unable to vocally defend themselves, but I would be hesitant to imply its because they lack ability or motive as a people.

If you're open to it, I could refer you to some books regarding Asian American social issues. Ability has never been the problem. "Motive as a people" is definitely an issue. Lack of political/social activism is totally apparent in the pan-AA community. The attributes you mention (salary, education, etc) is a direct byproduct of a general immigrant mentality brought over from Asia (particularly China, Taiwan and South Korea). I'm glad you mentioned the MMI- while this may seem like a "good" stereotype... it's actually not. Whether you agreed with Affirmative Action or not, the MMI negated a specific minority afforded others- I'm not defending Affirmative Action, just putting into context what MMI actually elicits.

While it's true certain groups excel in education, others (notably SE Asians) have a far different experience (economically). Silly as it sounds, the MMI backlash featured a movement within the UC-system during Affirmative Action's heyday that promoted SE Asians being "excluded" from "Asian American" (just to gain certain advantages unafforded AAs). While the AA (specifically non-SE Asians) may land in a higher tax bracket, the entire group faces a harder glass ceiling than any social group.

Political apathy permeates the community because of the MMI mentality: Immigrants enter the States, work hard, never "buck" the system, teach their kids the same way. This mentality stems from the Eastern philosophy that group importance always takes precedence over individualism (a Western emphasis). In China, the proverbial "nail that sticks out gets hammered." In America, the same nail often gets rewarded. Is it any wonder why AA social activism pretty much starts and ends within university?

Of course, immigrant parents have huge influence on their children's futures. Many parents believe careers in entertainment, media or politics aren't lucrative/feasible for sustaining successful careers. I believe these fields are the front lines for social change- as generations pass, the representation will naturally increase.

I completely disagree with the suspension of Max Bretos. Just watch and listen to it, nothing should be misinterpreted by what he said and how he said it. Its ridiculous that certain phrases cant be used in conjunction with certain people. If we are all walking around thinking about stereotypes we need to avoid when speaking all were doing is stereotyping people internally. Its one thing to type something and catch a mistake before you publish it, it’s another to say something with no ill intentions in a none defamatory way and get in trouble for it. Its ridiculous. Also apparently Max Bretos’s wife is Asian American. I guess she should consider divorcing him if using the same judgment employed by ESPN.

I've spoken with several African American buddies on this point: If a writer published the following line (with no intention of offending anyone), would they be angry: "The Alabama defense played niggardly against LSU." Every single one of them said they would. Technically, "niggardly" is an appropriate description of how the Crimson Tide D played in the 'ship. But it's difficult for me to fathom how a writer or editor (of all people) can't foresee the possible double entendre. Point being, who's to say what constitutes a level of ridiculousness?