Calling all Asians: How racist is this idea?

[jouzinka]

I am a makeup artist and I have a problem.  ;D

A clothing designer student friend of mine got recently assigned to design and sew a kimono (of all things). For her graduation she needs to have it photographed for archives and this is where my problem is. We have a very Caucasian model, who has recently dyed her super-short hair peroxide blonde.

Yet, I would like to mask her as if she were a performer of the traditional Kabuki theatre.

Am I crossing the line?

[Valthazar]

I'm South Asian, and I don't think it is racist at all, but I am sure there will be someone or another who will think it is.  We are a multicultural society, and it is a shame if there are some people out there who will actually try to pick a fight over something like this.

[gaggedLouise]

Seeing that Kabuki is a recognized stage tradition that's influenced many western artists (David Bowie, for instance) I don't see why this would be racist at all. It's not in the least comparable to "blackfacing" a white actor to make fun of black Americans.

[jouzinka]

You would think, right? Still, seeing how much heat Katy Perry caught for her geisha performance at the AMAs, I realize this is a touchy subject.

[Lux12]

I am a makeup artist and I have a problem.  ;D

A clothing designer student friend of mine got recently assigned to design and sew a kimono (of all things). For her graduation she needs to have it photographed for archives and this is where my problem is. We have a very Caucasian model, who has recently dyed her super-short hair peroxide blonde.

Yet, I would like to mask her as if she were a performer of the traditional Kabuki theatre.

Am I crossing the line?

While kabuki is a very Japanese art form, a form of theater.But that's just it. It's an art form not inherently restricted to anyone based on ethnic elements. Thus I don't think that adopting it's trappings isn't racist. Anyone can do it really. It's not as if your making them put on black face or the also very offensive but much less used yellow face. While one should be careful to avoid any inadvertent stereotypical use, I don't think that using kabuki style is inherently offensive.

[gaggedLouise]

I thought it was the Kabuki bit that was supposed to generate trouble, not the kimono. Guess I read it that way because kabuki involves the face, the head - to us the face is so intimately a part of one's identity and individuality, in a way it's where person and society/cultural scene meet. That's partly a western idea, the notion that face equals unique individuality is less obvious in cultures where people often appear veiled or masked, as in the Middle East (especially women).

But I digress...No, seriously I don't think even a kimono and kabuki mask/make-up would lead to accusations of racism or colonial-era dumbing down. Not really. This is not going to be seen by a hundred millions like Katy Perry. I might be wrong, I was surprised by all the fuss about Miley Cyrus and her twerking gang!  ::)

[jouzinka]

I read a really good blog article about the whole Katy Perry performance and why it was racist. It was actually the act of (arrogance) taking a culture not her own, trampling on it, sexualizing it (basically raping it) for money and then acting like it was no big deal that rubbed people against their fur. By that logic I am way over the line with this idea.

Trying to come up with a way how to do it respectfully. :D

[Caeli]

Personally, my issue with most portrayals of different Asian cultures (and they are different, between individual cultures and regions as well as different historical periods; I see a lot of mixing up / confusion / deliberate ignorance when different clothing between different cultures are mixed willy nilly) or "dressing up for Halloween" is that they often stereotype a culture and/or perpetuate harmful cultural stereotypes.  Many of the entertainers who are "inspired" in this way treat non-Western cultures as a costume that they can take off and on; they don't have to live with the cultural baggage of being a minority American or immigrant to America (or living/understanding in the socioeconomical/political context of a culture elsewhere).  They don't live with the stigma, the backhanded racial "compliments", and often don't understand that just because they don't mean to be offensive, does not mean that they are doing something harmful.

I've had a lot of interesting conversations about this (usually in relation to Halloween, but once in a while it delves into what is okay and not okay when it comes to fashion, etc. as well) with people from many different backgrounds, so I've heard a number of perspectives on this.  From my own experiences, though, I've become considerably jaded by what I see in entertainment, pop culture/fashion, etc.

In response to your question:  Personally, I don't think it's over the line if your intent is to take inspiration from the style of traditional Kabuki theatre.  There's also something to be said for the background / context that you'll be doing this in.  If I were to see it, I don't think I would judge it as a case of cultural appropriation or racism, and would instead look at it through the lens of fashion design / makeup design.

[Valthazar]

Personally, my issue with most portrayals of different Asian cultures (and they are different, between individual cultures and regions as well as different historical periods; I see a lot of mixing up / confusion / deliberate ignorance when different clothing between different cultures are mixed willy nilly) or "dressing up for Halloween" is that they often stereotype a culture and/or perpetuate harmful cultural stereotypes. 

Personally, I think there is only so much cultural consideration that can be asked of Caucasians before it verges on becoming ridiculous.  It is a sad commentary of our society, that the OP of this discussion thread, who clearly respects all cultures, has to "ask" permission if something will be construed as racist or not.

If you look at Asian Countries, they are nowhere near as accepting of diverse ethnic groups as the United States or Europe.  Even relatively multicultural Asian countries, such as Singapore, blatantly favor their indigenous ethnic group on an institutional level.

I just think that continuing to rehash how we, as minorities, are somehow helpless victims of 'harmful cultural stereotypes' is actually creating an atmosphere of hostility among many Caucasians - which ends up damaging race relations.  For every Caucasian that cracks a race joke, there are just as many Asian-Americans cracking white jokes.  So why can't we accept a harmless joke here and there, if we are all the same? 

Asians and Indians are socioeconomically better off than Caucasians as a whole in the United States, which is why I don't understand how we are victims in this day and age.

[Vekseid]

Looking up the incident with Katy Perry, I find more actual Asians offended at misreporting than they are at her (people calling a Chinese dress she wore a 'Geisha outfit' for example). I even found a few who echoed my thoughts regarding the idea of the Japanese, of all people, being offended at the idea of appropriation. Cultures blend when they meet.

Blending Chinese and Japanese styles can irk some people (e.g. the liberties Perry took with her 'Kimono'), and that is by far the most common complaint - people assuming that eastern Asia is a single cultural bloc.

Personally, I think there is only so much cultural consideration that can be asked of Caucasians before it verges on becoming ridiculous.  It is a sad commentary of our society, that the OP of this discussion thread, who clearly respects all cultures, has to "ask" permission if something will be construed as racist or not.

If you look at Asian Countries, they are nowhere near as accepting of diverse ethnic groups as the United States or Europe.  Even relatively multicultural Asian countries, such as Singapore, blatantly favor their indigenous ethnic group on an institutional level.

I just think that continuing to rehash how we, as minorities, are somehow helpless victims of 'harmful cultural stereotypes' is actually creating an atmosphere of hostility among many Caucasians - which ends up damaging race relations.  For every Caucasian that cracks a race joke, there are just as many Asian-Americans cracking white jokes.  So why can't we accept a harmless joke here and there, if we are all the same? 

Asians and Indians are socioeconomically better off than Caucasians as a whole in the United States, which is why I don't understand how we are victims in this day and age.

It is good to worry about cultural appropriation when it risks becoming the single story we know said culture by. This isn't a situation most of Eastern Asia is under. That takes what amounts to willful ignorance in this age.

[Valthazar]

It is good to worry about cultural appropriation when it risks becoming the single story we know said culture by. This isn't a situation most of Eastern Asia is under. That takes what amounts to willful ignorance in this age.

While I can certainly agree with this, and it is nice to see members of E are eager to learn the true nature of different cultures, I do not feel that this is a quality representative of the majority of Americans.  I fear that making claims of racism over petty matters such as wearing a costume will actually detrimentally affect the way most uneducated Caucasians perceive minorities.

[Neysha]

I couldn't care less. I'm Lebanese and True Lies was an awesome film.

Then again, as a proud Murrican with a fiance in the service, I loved Valley of the Wolves Iraq as well.

It'd take some massive ignorance or stupidity for me to be offended by something that wasn't meant to be offensive.

[Sho]

First off, no, I don't think it's racist. I'd just do my research and try to get the look as close to a real kabuki mask as you can. Then again, fashion is all about making risky stylistic choices…

Also, I'm going to have to agree with Valthazar, at least to a certain extent. I've lived in Japan and worked with two separate groups that helped teach about Japanese culture, and when we had a party and I wore a yukata (summer kimono made of cotton), I essentially got accused of being racist because I was white and it wasn't my culture. Despite my speaking the language. Despite my having lived there for years. I hit a point where I practically had both middle fingers up, and figured that there wasn't even any point in being interested in other cultures or letting it influence what I did since no matter how I looked at things, or talked about things, I was apparently going to offend someone.

Eventually I realized that you just can't make everyone happy; all you can do is try to appease the reasonable majority.

Also. I do have to ask, in regards to the Victoria's Secret geisha outfit - how is that 'racist'? How does that put down an entire race? I mean, the French Maid costume doesn't put down French people…or maids. Sometimes I think that people complain just for the sake of complaining, honestly. :/ I think some things really do need to be addressed, but this over-sensitivity is actually harmful, imho, since people just stop discussing different cultures, period, out of fear of their being labeled racist.

Then again, that's just me. No scientific information to support it, just my own personal experiences.

[Valthazar]

Eventually I realized that you just can't make everyone happy; all you can do is try to appease the reasonable majority.

I think we are going through a very transitory period of race relations in this country, and globally.

Historically, it was understood that the mainstream culture in the United States was distinctly Anglo-Saxon and European in origin, which is why Caucasians were seen as the 'dominant' racial group in the United States.  In the 1950s, Caucasians were nearly 90% of the United States' population.  This is also the reason why in the Western world, for the last half-century, there has been a push to celebrate the cultural richness of other ethnic groups, and downplay the cultural identity of Caucasians and European heritage.  Sadly, one of the negative implications of this has been that we are continuing to place the burden of racism largely upon Caucasians, even as they steadily become a minority around the year 2043.

It will be interesting to see how things progress in the future.  My unfortunate prediction is that Caucasians will continue to be marginalized by these questionable assertions of racism, since any organization promoting the interests of European-Americans as a minority will likely be immediately lambasted as racist.

[Oniya]

This is also the reason why in the Western world, for the last half-century, there has been a push to celebrate the cultural richness of other ethnic groups, and downplay the cultural identity of Caucasians and European heritage. 

Would you say that such celebrations as St. Patrick's Day and Oktoberfest (both culturally Anglo-European) are seen as 'racist'?  There's a lot of cultural diversity bundled up under the umbrella of 'Caucasian and European'.

[Valthazar]

Would you say that such celebrations as St. Patrick's Day and Oktoberfest (both culturally Anglo-European) are seen as 'racist'?  There's a lot of cultural diversity bundled up under the umbrella of 'Caucasian and European'.

I think it would be seen as racist by society at large, if Anglo-Europeans, or even Caucasians on a wider level, began to outspokenly 'own' those celebrations as 'theirs.'

The difference is, I can wear a Leprechaun hat and say, "We're all Irish on St. Pats!" and most Irish-Americans wouldn't think anything of this, they'd probably be glad I was celebrating their heritage - even though I am clearly culturally appropriating Irish heritage through this gesture.  I will be the first to admit that I don't know much about Irish history or culture.

Why is it any different if a Caucasian wears a kimono?  Why is one racist, but the other isn't?

[Oniya]

Gotcha - I hadn't grasped the distinction.  :-)

[Ephiral]

Also. I do have to ask, in regards to the Victoria's Secret geisha outfit - how is that 'racist'? How does that put down an entire race?

Why is it any different if a Caucasian wears a kimono?  Why is one racist, but the other isn't?

There are two major differences here, one subtle and one not. First and not so subtle: When St. Patrick's Day became a thing, it was pretty exclusive to Ireland and the Irish diaspora. It's celebrated widely now because the Irish are no longer 'other'; they're white, which was very distinctly not true relatively recently. This is a status that Asians in general and the Japanese in particular are getting close to, but not quite at.

Second, the subtler one: There's no long and ongoing history of exoticizing and sexualizing Irish culture, whereas Asian cultures are basically the poster child for this sort of treatment. This makes a huge difference. Important point to Sho in particular: 'Positive' racism? Still racist. The 'noble savage' was an incredibly racist narrative advanced by incredibly racist people, and the 'exotic Orient' - direct parent to the Victoria's Secret piece - is part and parcel of this line of thinking.

jouzinka: As I see it, there are two key questions. How easy would it be to get an Asian model for this shoot, and how hard did you look? Judging from the fact that you're asking here instead of to Asian friends in real life, I'm guessing the answer to at least one of these is 'not very'. This can be key to how it's interpreted - if there are candidates within relatively easy reach, then yes, this will come off as racism and cultural appropriation.

[Valthazar]

There are two major differences here, one subtle and one not. First and not so subtle: When St. Patrick's Day became a thing, it was pretty exclusive to Ireland and the Irish diaspora. It's celebrated widely now because the Irish are no longer 'other'; they're white, which was very distinctly not true relatively recently. This is a status that Asians in general and the Japanese in particular are getting close to, but not quite at.

I'm hard-pressed to think of any European-American holiday or cultural practice, where if I participated in it, would be told I am culturally appropriating that holiday or heritage.  In fact, almost every holiday or cultural celebration of European heritage in the United States seems to be very welcoming of other cultures and ethnic groups.  Can you tell me any situation where I, as a South Asian-American, would be told I am culturally appropriating a European tradition?  For obvious reasons, I am excluding the clear-cut racist groups (KKK, Neo-Nazis, etc.)

Second, the subtler one: There's no long and ongoing history of exoticizing and sexualizing Irish culture, whereas Asian cultures are basically the poster child for this sort of treatment. This makes a huge difference.

So at what point can this guilt of the past end, and we can view each other as fellow human beings who are equal?  I figured that as minorities slowly become the majority, this would end, but it seems you are suggesting that this should continue.  I certainly don't view myself as exotic or sexualized inherently due to my culture.  I go about my day working, paying taxes, and living my life just like everyone else, and most people nowadays treat me like a human being like they are - not due to my ethnicity.

[Oniya]

jouzinka: As I see it, there are two key questions. How easy would it be to get an Asian model for this shoot, and how hard did you look? Judging from the fact that you're asking here instead of to Asian friends in real life, I'm guessing the answer to at least one of these is 'not very'. This can be key to how it's interpreted - if there are candidates within relatively easy reach, then yes, this will come off as racism and cultural appropriation.

If I remember right, Jouzi is in central Europe.  That might make finding an ethnically appropriate model difficult, depending on the city.

[jouzinka]

jouzinka: As I see it, there are two key questions. How easy would it be to get an Asian model for this shoot, and how hard did you look? Judging from the fact that you're asking here instead of to Asian friends in real life, I'm guessing the answer to at least one of these is 'not very'. This can be key to how it's interpreted - if there are candidates within relatively easy reach, then yes, this will come off as racism and cultural appropriation.

I had zero say in the appearance of the model. The designer picked this one, so that's what I have to work with. The chances of getting a Japanese model do the shoot would be below zero - personally, I don't know of a single Japanese model in Czech Republic. Getting geneally an Asian model would probably be easier, but not so easy either. Plus, honestly, I find this whole "it has Asian features so who cares if it's Vietnamese, Chinese or Japanese" concept offensive myself. I will rather do this with a Caucasian model than a Vietnamese one.

P.S. As unbelievable as it may sound, I do not have any Asian friends in my life. I have acquaintances, but not the kind I would discuss a subject like this with.

[jouzinka]

Sorry for double post. :)

Tomorrow is THE day. Will let you all know what we decided to go with in the end. I appreciate all the input - I've been reading and taking notes. <3

[Ephiral]

I'm hard-pressed to think of any European-American holiday or cultural practice, where if I participated in it, would be told I am culturally appropriating that holiday or heritage.  In fact, almost every holiday or cultural celebration of European heritage in the United States seems to be very welcoming of other cultures and ethnic groups.  Can you tell me any situation where I, as a South Asian-American, would be told I am culturally appropriating a European tradition?  For obvious reasons, I am excluding the clear-cut racist groups (KKK, Neo-Nazis, etc.)

I'm not in a position to give a long-winded essay on cultural imperialism right now, but the short version is that European culture welcoming outsiders stems from an uncomfortably recent history of forcing the other to adopt European culture under threat of violence as a means of subjugating and breaking potentially-resistant locals. (And by "uncomfortably recent", I mean I can point to explicit examples within my lifetime.)

So at what point can this guilt of the past end, and we can view each other as fellow human beings who are equal?  I figured that as minorities slowly become the majority, this would end, but it seems you are suggesting that this should continue.  I certainly don't view myself as exotic or sexualized inherently due to my culture.  I go about my day working, paying taxes, and living my life just like everyone else, and most people nowadays treat me like a human being like they are - not due to my ethnicity.

You're speaking like this is a thing of the past; it isn't. Ask some female friends of your ethnic group if they've ever had a white guy who hit on them/wanted to date them because of their race. I will be surprised if the overwhelming majority don't have multiple stories to regale you with. For darker examples, well... remember that there are people living today who remember being thrown in internment camps because their parents came from across the Pacific. And... I can't believe I'm saying this, but of course you don't see yourself as exotic. That's why it's called "exoticising the other."

I had zero say in the appearance of the model. The designer picked this one, so that's what I have to work with. The chances of getting a Japanese model do the shoot would be below zero - personally, I don't know of a single Japanese model in Czech Republic. Getting geneally an Asian model would probably be easier, but not so easy either. Plus, honestly, I find this whole "it has Asian features so who cares if it's Vietnamese, Chinese or Japanese" concept offensive myself. I will rather do this with a Caucasian model than a Vietnamese one.

I think you're right on Japanese vs generically Asian, but... generally speaking, there's an acceptance of interchangeable Asians in media. (Pay attention to TV Asian characters' stated ethnicity and the ethnicity of the actors who play them sometime. You'd be amazed how rarely they match up.) Yes, this is a problem, and no, it's not good to contribute to it, but... you probably wouldn't be called out as racist for it.

As to the rest: I think I came across much harsher than intended; I'm sorry. There's an easy trap to fall into, of basically glancing around within arm's reach and saying "Nope, don't see any minority representatives here, guess there's none to be found"; I was simply trying to call it to attention. In your specific case, it sounds like it would be genuinely impossible to find someone of the appropriate ethnicity, which does avoid the trap.

[Vekseid]

I'm not in a position to give a long-winded essay on cultural imperialism right now, but the short version is that European culture welcoming outsiders stems from an uncomfortably recent history of forcing the other to adopt European culture under threat of violence as a means of subjugating and breaking potentially-resistant locals. (And by "uncomfortably recent", I mean I can point to explicit examples within my lifetime.)

I actually find this rather offensive, especially when the subject is Japan. Not every European power was colonial. Japan was. My own Japanese teacher had to ask me about a certain act that is recently in the news again due to yet another public denial.

When does it stop, anyway?

We get the word slave from the ethnic group Jouzinka may be a part of (and to whom I trace my paternal lineage, with a very unique last name to match) - her country has no history of colonialism, regardless. Slavic lands, minus the slavs, were the entire point of of lebensraum - it's not like this mistreatment is only in the ancient past.

It's one thing to acknowledge that I'm privileged in my country because I'm white. It's entirely another to try to equate whiteness or 'European' with 'oppressor'. The former can lead to a resolution. The latter is the sort of thing genocides are made of in the first place.

[Ephiral]

I actually find this rather offensive, especially when the subject is Japan. Not every European power was colonial. Japan was. My own Japanese teacher had to ask me about a certain act that is recently in the news again due to yet another public denial.

When does it stop, anyway?

We get the word slave from the ethnic group Jouzinka may be a part of (and to whom I trace my paternal lineage, with a very unique last name to match) - her country has no history of colonialism, regardless. Slavic lands, minus the slavs, were the entire point of of lebensraum - it's not like this mistreatment is only in the ancient past.

It's one thing to acknowledge that I'm privileged in my country because I'm white. It's entirely another to try to equate whiteness or 'European' with 'oppressor'. The former can lead to a resolution. The latter is the sort of thing genocides are made of in the first place.

I know exactly what you're talking about without checking recent news. And yes, 'atrocity' barely even begins to cover it, and Japan's handling of it since then is nothing short of disgraceful. But... does that make it right to accept and enshrine racist attitudes and behaviour toward them in return? Where does that stop? Progress, to me, is not just being better than the worst, but striving to better ourselves.

I'm not tying to equate 'white' with 'oppressor', and I'm sorry I came across that way. It's entirely possible to be a white European without being actively racist or oppressive - that's my heritage, in fact. I was addressing a very specific topic - the generalization of white European culture to include everyone. It is possible to freely and respectfully share of your culture and partake of others'. But... violent enforcement of Western culture as not just the norm but the only acceptable culture? It's not even history. I can point to examples as recent as 1996 of the top of my head. This context matters when it comes to the question of why minority cultures need to be handled carefully, even if nobody you know is actively oppressing minorities right now.

[Sho]

You're speaking like this is a thing of the past; it isn't. Ask some female friends of your ethnic group if they've ever had a white guy who hit on them/wanted to date them because of their race. I will be surprised if the overwhelming majority don't have multiple stories to regale you with.

You'd actually be surprised. There's this idea that white girls are someone 'typical' and thus not exoticized…buuuuut, they are. There are plenty of men who will only date white women (I've met quite a few of them at my country club, and while I disapprove of it, it certainly proves that it's true). Another example would be a black friend of mine becoming inordinately excited when he started dating a white girl. Not because she was any better than his previous girlfriends, but he perceived it as a sort of status symbol (his words, not mine). Finally, if you're a white girl who travels anywhere in Asia, be prepared to be exoticized and harassed in ways that you wouldn't believe.

Beyond that, though, you've definitely made some interesting points - I suppose where I become somewhat annoyed with the idea is the assumption that the white people of today aren't allowed to find any culture other than their own sexy. If they do so, they're pulling on their imperialist past (as per what Vekseid said), and are somehow racist…which I disagree with. I'm always surprised when people find it unacceptable to dress up as a geisha, but acceptable to dress up as a German barmaid or Viking warrior. I wouldn't particularly consider any of those costumes racist (the cross-bleeding of Chinese elements into Japanese elements of the costume being a different topic completely), but the geisha costume would raise eyebrows while the others would not.

All of this being said…I understand that many people are sensitive to these topics, so I just keep my mouth shut and try to err on the side of caution, generally. I do think it's a bit unfortunate, though; white people literally cannot draw inspiration of any sort (sexy or otherwise) from Asian or African cultures without being 100% accurate (even if they're stretching the design for their own purposes rather than from ignorance), or even at all, without being considered racist.

[Ephiral]

I'm not saying it never happens to white girls - but that tends not to be where a lot of it (I'd say probably the majority) gets directed, and that matters. I'd also hazard a guess that a lot of the men you're referring to are themselves white - and yes, that's racist, but the racism is still focused outward in those cases, if that makes sense. As to white girls in Asia... well, yeah. That's straight-up role-reversal. Exoticising the other happens all over the place; that doesn't make it okay when we do it, and it doesn't mean we shouldn't be mindful of the context when we're interacting with traditionally-oppressed people.

I would say that, yes, finding another culture sexy is probably racism. Why? Because it's indicative of some pretty extreme ignorance. It's possible to find certain elements of a culture sexy, sure - but if you assign that label to the culture as a whole, you're treating it as more monolithic than it deserves and glossing over a lot.

Costumes in particular can be problematic for reasons that are hard to explain, but... well, the short version is that they're very often used to showcase incredibly shallow stereotypical crap and pretend to be of a culture, without ever having to deal with any of the downsides. (Ask some Native people who take their cultural heritage seriously about Halloween sometime.) The geisha costume in particular is likely to raise eyebrows because it's not just doing that, it's pandering to a specific stereotype which has been hugely problematic and the basis for a lot of racism in the past.

It's not impossible to appreciate other cultures respectfully. But... it's important to err on the side of caution. If you have to ask if something is racist, I'd say that's probably a good indicator on its own that the action in question is at the least problematic - and I would absolutely try to seek out the opinion of someone from the culture in question, someone who can't just take off the costume when it gets uncomfortable. (Important note, though: Be cautions and respectful in your approach, and be prepared to take "I don't want to talk about this." as an answer - being expected to speak for your entire culture is a problem, too.)

[Valthazar]

I would say that, yes, finding another culture sexy is probably racism. Why? Because it's indicative of some pretty extreme ignorance. It's possible to find certain elements of a culture sexy, sure - but if you assign that label to the culture as a whole, you're treating it as more monolithic than it deserves and glossing over a lot.

I'll write more when I get home, but how is it racist to find another culture sexy?  I've only ever dated Caucasian women, and I find it hot when they get all excited about dressing up in saris and all for events lol.

[Ephiral]

I'll write more when I get home, but how is it racist to find another culture sexy?  I've only ever dated Caucasian women, and I find it hot when they get all excited about dressing up in saris and all for events lol.

To find all of a culture sexy is to have an incredibly shallow view of that culture - you pretty much have to gloss over some ugly or unpleasant or just plain boring bits to get there. Which means you're not showing that culture proper respect, and brings us close to the 'costume' issue I described in that post - you appreciate it as something you can take when it's convenient or attractive to you without ever having to deal with the downsides.

[Kythia]

I'll write more when I get home, but how is it racist to find another culture sexy?  I've only ever dated Caucasian women, and I find it hot when they get all excited about dressing up in saris and all for events lol.

Ephiral's point is that saris are a subset of South Asian culture, not its entirety.  Finding saris sexy is fine, extending that to read "I think saris are sexy therefore I find South Asian culture sexy" is what she's objecting to.

Ninja'd

[Vekseid]

I know exactly what you're talking about without checking recent news. And yes, 'atrocity' barely even begins to cover it, and Japan's handling of it since then is nothing short of disgraceful. But... does that make it right to accept and enshrine racist attitudes and behaviour toward them in return? Where does that stop? Progress, to me, is not just being better than the worst, but striving to better ourselves.

I'm not tying to equate 'white' with 'oppressor', and I'm sorry I came across that way. It's entirely possible to be a white European without being actively racist or oppressive - that's my heritage, in fact. I was addressing a very specific topic - the generalization of white European culture to include everyone. It is possible to freely and respectfully share of your culture and partake of others'. But... violent enforcement of Western culture as not just the norm but the only acceptable culture? It's not even history. I can point to examples as recent as 1996 of the top of my head. This context matters when it comes to the question of why minority cultures need to be handled carefully, even if nobody you know is actively oppressing minorities right now.

The discussion is about risk of cultural appropriation. Of one of the world's largest ethnic groups.

I mean, we can discuss the appropriation and extinguishing of cultures in general - but it's a bit off-topic. Japan is one of the world's most powerful countries. Major neighboring powers (and these days, everyone is) tend to blend cultures. Japan's economic might and historic legacy are major factors in why there is interest in them. Not one person who is willing and aware enough to put on a Kimono is going to put on a "Gods Must be Crazy" display of cultural ignorance.

One might as well ask whether the people of India should be offended that the entire planet has appropriated their numeric system.

I'm not claiming that racism towards Japanese or other Asian communities doesn't exist, or isn't a problem. We're referring to the genuine appreciation of a single, major culture's art, here, not e.g. sexualization.

[Ephiral]

The discussion is about risk of cultural appropriation. Of one of the world's largest ethnic groups.

I must be misunderstanding this. It... seems like you're trying to say it's impossible to have your culture appropriated if you're the majority somewhere.

I mean, we can discuss the appropriation and extinguishing of cultures in general - but it's a bit off-topic. Japan is one of the world's most powerful countries. Major neighboring powers (and these days, everyone is) tend to blend cultures. Japan's economic might and historic legacy are major factors in why there is interest in them. Not one person who is willing and aware enough to put on a Kimono is going to put on a "Gods Must be Crazy" display of cultural ignorance.

One might as well ask whether the people of India should be offended that the entire planet has appropriated their numeric system.

I'd say the topic seems to have ventured a little further than this one specific case. Valthazar was asking why white European culture can be participated in by 'outsiders',m which is where the statements you took offense to came from. Sho specifically asked what was racist about a clear-cut example of exoticization and sexualization. The specific case jouzinka mentioned in the OP? I would say not racist, but I'd also say that's not carte blanche to do it that way in every case - context is of vital importance, which has been the core of most of what I've been trying to say.

[lilhobbit37]

Seems to me this saying says how I feel best: What's good for the goose is good for the gander.

If other cultures can dress up in silly European culture stereotypes and laugh about it, then why shouldn't it work the other way as well?

Someone brought up the Irish.

The Irish came to America and were treated worse than even the recently freed African Americans of the time. They slept 12 to a room in the worst housing in the worst places of the cities. Many jobs told them they were not even welcome to apply.

Yet no one has any problem laughing about Irish culture, stereotyping them all as one generic type of people.

And no one calls those people racist.

Yet if that Irish person who just watched everyone laugh about her heritage then dons a kimono for a picture, she is a racist?

Because she isn't asian so she has no right?

To me, the world has lost focus of what racism really is, and practices racism constantly on European cultures.

Keep in mind, while people get so worked up about mashing all Asians into one category, all Caucasians in america are lumped similarly.

I work with death certificates and we have separate origin boxes for each Asian race, each African race, each Spanish race.

But white is white. Not french, not Irish, not English, not dutch. Just Caucasian/white.

Why is it that we are expected to be able to tell the different cultures of every race except white?

[Vekseid]

I must be misunderstanding this. It... seems like you're trying to say it's impossible to have your culture appropriated if you're the majority somewhere.

I am saying that 'appropriation' of the sort by someone whose interest in Japan holds more depth than a vocabulary that could be summed up as: 'bushido, katana, kawaii, baka, samurai, ninja' does not pose a danger to Japanese cultural identity, and can be respectfully and tastefully done by 'outsiders'.

With more marginalized cultures, there is a much greater risk of issue:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=D9Ihs241zeg

[Kythia]

I work with death certificates and we have separate origin boxes for each Asian race, each African race, each Spanish race.

But white is white. Not french, not Irish, not English, not dutch. Just Caucasian/white.

Why is it that we are expected to be able to tell the different cultures of every race except white?

I'm a little confused by your question.  French, English, Dutch etc. aren't races, they're nationalities.  Do the non-white boxes list nationalities - countries of origin - or do they list ethnicities?

[Vekseid]

It would be quite something if those boxes included Catalan but not Occitan/Frankish/Norman/Breton.

I think there is a lot to be said for the idea that Europe is some monolith.

[Valthazar]

I'm not saying it never happens to white girls - but that tends not to be where a lot of it (I'd say probably the majority) gets directed, and that matters. I'd also hazard a guess that a lot of the men you're referring to are themselves white - and yes, that's racist, but the racism is still focused outward in those cases, if that makes sense.

With all due respect, this isn't the case.  If you go to Asia, I guarantee you that Caucasian women are almost every man's fantasy - purely because she's white.  I hate to say this, but it's dangerous for a Caucasian woman to walk around by herself in India, for example, because of how dangerously prevalent this race-based ideology is.  I just get the impression that you are naive to the fact that racism is often perpetrated by other races on a much larger scale than by Caucasians.  If you want to have a discussion about cultural appropriation though, realize to how much of a greater degree it takes place in Asia in many cases.

Most people in Asia know Caucasians by what they see in Hollywood movies.  Many of them have zero understanding about European values, heritage, way-of-life, etc.  And yet, they feel perfectly fine using blonde-haired, blue-eyed actresses nowadays in Bollywood movies as a status symbol.  Why aren't you criticizing this and singularly finding fault with segments of Europeans?

Asians readily adopt western style of clothes, for example, because they've managed to sexualize white culture to such a large degree.  Why is it cultural appropriation though, when a Caucasian woman adopts Asian practices because she finds that culture inherently sexy?

[Kythia]

It would be quite something if those boxes included Catalan but not Occitan/Frankish/Norman/Breton.

I was skipping over that and assuming "Hispanic" rather than "Spanish"

I think there is a lot to be said for the idea that Europe is some monolith.

Yeah.  The geographic place I grew up has been, in vague order, Northumbrian, English, Scottish, English, Danish, Norwegian, English, British.  Pinning down an ethnicity for a native seems like more of an exercise in politics than fact.

[Ephiral]

Valthazar, you might want to read the rest of that paragraph, where I specifically address what you're talking about. Yes, Caucasians are the other in Asian countries and get exoticized there. And that is every bit as wrong. The solution isn't to ignore it, but to call it out everywhere.

[Valthazar]

Valthazar, you might want to read the rest of that paragraph, where I specifically address what you're talking about. Yes, Caucasians are the other in Asian countries and get exoticized there. And that is every bit as wrong. The solution isn't to ignore it, but to call it out everywhere.

Or to just accept that it's okay to have fun and explore other cultures, be attracted to other ways of life, and not worry about every little thing being construed as racism.

[Ephiral]

Thanks for the clarification, Veks. Makes sense now.

I tend to worry more about the potential for real harm to real people than about how much fun I'm having. And on that note, I think I'm done here.

[lilhobbit37]

I'm a little confused by your question.  French, English, Dutch etc. aren't races, they're nationalities.  Do the non-white boxes list nationalities - countries of origin - or do they list ethnicities?

How is French, Irish, English any less an ethnicity?

Each have their own set of characteristics, their own cultures.

And they list both technically.

Asian is broken up into vietnamese, chinese, japenese, or other asian (which is then broken up much farther but there are limited numbers of check boxes.

I'm not sure what part of this is any different than separating europeans similarly.

Edit: And the category for Spanish is Hispanic/Spanish, which has categories based on place of origin aka Cuban, Mexican, etc etc. The funny part is Spain is not a choice.

Even though Spain would technically be the original Spaniard aka Hispanic, would it not?

But it is in Europe aka white aka caucasian.

[Kythia]

How is French, Irish, English any less an ethnicity?

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ethnicity#Ethnicity_and_nationality

Many reasons, but two stand out.  First, over a thousand years of warfare between those three countries perhaps in particular have meant that boundaries have changed so often as to make separating them out pointless.  Look at central France or Eire on this map.  Defining "English" (say) as an ethnicity requires you to claim that people in Aquitaine (say) changed ethnicity several times during the course of a lifetime.

Second, when I'm at my parent's house we speak predominantly Urdu because my mother's second husband is of Pakistani descent, although he was born over here.  My boyfriend, until he met me, didn't know any who had left London.  Claiming "English" as an ethnicity begs the question of what we have in common other than living within a set of borders that have, as I mentioned above, changed numerous times.

[lilhobbit37]

By English I meant specifically England/United Kingdom NOT english-speaking just to clarify.

But my original point still stands that stereotyping european cultures is acceptable to all, yet stereotyping any other cultures from other continents is frowned upon.

It should be all or nothing.

And none of that should even touch upon something as simple as a model dressing in classic Japanese garb when she isn't Japanese. What she is doing isn't meant offensively or stereotypically. She is doing nothing to demean the culture. She is simply a non-Japanese in Japanese garb.

[Valthazar]

But my original point still stands that stereotyping european cultures is acceptable to all, yet stereotyping any other cultures from other continents is frowned upon.

Europe is quickly becoming multicultural and national boundaries are quickly eroding due to the strengthening of the EU.  You'll see more ethnic mixing in Europe, and less ethnic distinction in each country in the upcoming decades.

Whether or not this is a good thing is debatable.  Personally, I do not think it is.

[Blythe]

I am a makeup artist and I have a problem.  ;D

A clothing designer student friend of mine got recently assigned to design and sew a kimono (of all things). For her graduation she needs to have it photographed for archives and this is where my problem is. We have a very Caucasian model, who has recently dyed her super-short hair peroxide blonde.

Yet, I would like to mask her as if she were a performer of the traditional Kabuki theatre.

Am I crossing the line?

It was mentioned in the thread there isn't a model of the appropriate ethnicity to use? Well, that is not your fault. Do the best you can. Research your subject (in this case, Kabuki), and endeavor to portray it in a tasteful manner. Try to be as accurate as you can. Acknowledge that the portrayal will probably not be spot on, but you are working with what and who you have.

Ultimately, you are helping someone work on an academic project. Your intent is not to culturally appropriate, nor is it to exoticize the "other." Your intent appears to be academic and in good faith, and ultimately, not racist. You do not appear to be crossing a line, at least to me.

[Kythia]

By English I meant specifically England/United Kingdom NOT english-speaking just to clarify.

England and the UK are emphatically not the same thing. 

But my point two wasn't strictly about languages spoken, it was about the problems defining "English" as an ethnicity given that all that combines is belonging to the same nation.  The word for that is "nationality".  I think part of the problem is that you seem to be using race, culture, ethnicity and nationality interchangeably or, at least, I haven't picked up on the differences you mean by them

[Valthazar]

But my point two wasn't strictly about languages spoken, it was about the problems defining "English" as an ethnicity given that all that combines is belonging to the same nation.  The word for that is "nationality".  I think part of the problem is that you seem to be using race, culture, ethnicity and nationality interchangeably or, at least, I haven't picked up on the differences you mean by them

He's referring to the existing populations of those countries for several generations, prior to the recent waves of immigration over the past half-century.  In other words, "white-British" or "white-French" - even though those white populations themselves derive their origins from multiple regions of Europe, if you look far back enough.

[lilhobbit37]

England and the UK are emphatically not the same thing. 

But my point two wasn't strictly about languages spoken, it was about the problems defining "English" as an ethnicity given that all that combines is belonging to the same nation.  The word for that is "nationality".  I think part of the problem is that you seem to be using race, culture, ethnicity and nationality interchangeably or, at least, I haven't picked up on the differences you mean by them

I'm aware that they are not the same thing, but england is a part of the united kingdom and I wasn't sure if it was more appropriate to call it England (which for the point of this discussion explained my point) or the U.K. (which it technically is now).

My point is Irish vs. French for example are as different as Chinese vs. Japanese.

Both have distinct ethnic backgrounds which ARE different, both races have distinct features which are different, yet as a whole are lumped together because both have the same skin tone, similar to people lumping all asians together.

[Vekseid]

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ethnicity#Ethnicity_and_nationality

Many reasons, but two stand out.  First, over a thousand years of warfare between those three countries perhaps in particular have meant that boundaries have changed so often as to make separating them out pointless.  Look at central France or Eire on this map.  Defining "English" (say) as an ethnicity requires you to claim that people in Aquitaine (say) changed ethnicity several times during the course of a lifetime.

Second, when I'm at my parent's house we speak predominantly Urdu because my mother's second husband is of Pakistani descent, although he was born over here.  My boyfriend, until he met me, didn't know any who had left London.  Claiming "English" as an ethnicity begs the question of what we have in common other than living within a set of borders that have, as I mentioned above, changed numerous times.

"English" Is the ethnicity that refers to Anglo-Saxon descendants of the British Isles who adopted portions of Norman language and customs after William the Bastard became William the Conqueror. The borders of what makes up 'the English people' have changed relatively slowly, absorbing Cumbrish, Cornish, and portions of Welsh lands as those cultures have been completely annihilated, mostly absorbed, or largely marginalized, respectively.

It's much less visible now than it was three centuries ago, but it's not invalid. The Celts and Anglo-Saxons are distinct cultural groups.

[Neysha]

Or to just accept that it's okay to have fun and explore other cultures, be attracted to other ways of life, and not worry about every little thing being construed as racism.

I definitely see some elements of this discussion using the term racism so extensively and broadly as to practically cheapen the term until it's almost worthless.
---

"To be fair, if it was between a black guy and a white guy for the job, I'd probably choose the White guy. Just cuz... averages and all."

"You're being racist."

----

"I love her eyes, she looks so sultry. I think I'm going in, wish me luck!"

"You're being racist."

----

"It's St, Patricks Day, everyones Irish today!"

"You're being racist."

[Kythia]

My point is Irish vs. French for example are as different as Chinese vs. Japanese.

Both have distinct ethnic backgrounds which ARE different, both races have distinct features which are different, yet as a whole are lumped together because both have the same skin tone, similar to people lumping all asians together.

They're simply not.  To take an obvious example, both Eire and Brittany in France are Celtic nations.  So, sure, we can adjust your statement to" Irish and parts of France vs. other parts of France are as..." but that essentially boils down to "Parts of France vs. Other parts of France are as different as...." and makes claiming "French" as an ethnicity untenable.  And that's without getting in to Normandy, Piedmont, etc.

I'll cheerfully accept that the same problem applies to "Chinese", for example, which is crying out for subdivisions and clarity.  Han and Mongol are clearly two different groups.  But that doesn't seem to be the point you're making, in fact it seems to be the exact opposite.

He's referring to the existing populations of those countries for several generations, prior to the recent waves of immigration over the past half-century.  In other words, "white-British" or "white-French" - even though those white populations themselves derive their origins from multiple regions of Europe, if you look far back enough.

That wasn't the impression I got.  From "I work with death certificates and we have separate origin boxes for each Asian race, each African race, each Spanish race.

But white is white. Not french, not Irish, not English, not dutch. Just Caucasian/white.

Why is it that we are expected to be able to tell the different cultures of every race except white?"

it seems he is very much referring to country of origin as opposed to anything else ("Dutch" rather than "Dutch or Flanders"  which would be the obvious split if he was talking about the culture, "Irish" as opposed to "Celtic" etc.)

[lilhobbit37]

I wasn't referring to country of origin. I was refering to ethnicity.

I apologize if I don't know the exact ethnic name for the different european ethnicities but that is exactly my point. White is white and no one is expected to know all those, while ethnicities of asian, hispanic, or african origin are pushed on us. We are expected to know all the differences between each ethnicity but all white are equal in the eyes of the world.

Which just is NOT true. There are very different ethnicities within the caucasian population of the world.

And that was my point.

[Kythia]

There are equally big distinctions within "Chinese" that you're not expected to know.  I think the Caucasian ones are just more obvious to you through familiarity. 

[Valthazar]

lilhobbit, my gut feeling is that until European-Americans begin to actively celebrate their unique national heritages in the open, you'll continue to see "Caucasians" lumped together. 

Most Korean-Americans, Japanese-Americans, Indian-Americans, etc. in the United States have a very unique understanding of their heritage, and seek to actively promote it in society.  Until Polish-Americans, French-Americans, Russian-Americans begin to actively do the same on a broad, societal level, it is unlikely to see a shift.  Currently, it seems that most Europeans have no issues having their cultures grouped together under one category.  Whether or not that is true in their hearts, is another story.

[Kythia]

Most Korean-Americans, Japanese-Americans, Indian-Americans, etc...

Funnily enough, I think Val has put his finger on the point here with "Indian-Americans".  There are roughly one and a quarter billion people in India, there are roughly one billion white people in the world.  Your tick boxes are about the same, you're just over-emphasising differences.  It makes perfect sense to have a tick box for "Indian" that hides the massive diversity of that country, it makes sense to have a tick box for Caucasian. 

[Valthazar]

Funnily enough, I think Val has put his finger on the point here with "Indian-Americans".  There are roughly one and a quarter billion people in India, there are roughly one billion white people in the world.  Your tick boxes are about the same, you're just over-emphasising differences.  It makes perfect sense to have a tick box for "Indian" that hides the massive diversity of that country, it makes sense to have a tick box for Caucasian.

Ideally, one shouldn't determine their independent variables in conducting research, based purely on how prevalent the representation in each group will be.  The US government is notorious for doing this, however.  Even the National Crime Victimization Survey that the FBI uses is biased in that sense.

Under the category of "perpetrators of crime" are the race categories: White, Black, Other, and Unknown.  Many Hispanics get thrown into the White category when reporting crime.  The categories for victims are much more specific with their categorizations, but I'll need to look into what exactly they are.

[Kythia]

Ideally, one shouldn't determine their independent variables in conducting research, based purely on how prevalent the representation in each group will be.  The US government is notorious for doing this, however.  Even the National Crime Victimization Survey that the FBI uses is biased in that sense.

Under the category of "perpetrators of crime" are the race categories: White, Black, Other, and Unknown.  Many Hispanics get thrown into the White category when reporting crime.  The categories for victims are much more specific with their categorizations, but I'll need to look into what exactly they are.

Well, many Hispanics are White, so that makes sense.  But I'm sorry, you've lost me a little?  Not clear on what your point is?

My point was that you will happily identify as "Indian American", a heritage that includes roughly the same number of people as the disputed "White" category and don't seem to feel that involves grouping your culture together with other inappropriately (whether or not that's true in your heart is another story :P).  Lil hobbit seems to be overlooking how huge and diverse some of the non-white categories in fact are.  I return to "Chinese" and the 1.35 billion from many different backgrounds he thinks is fine grained vs. the roughly 7 million Irish he seems to think are an equivalent tick box.

[lilhobbit37]

Except the whole reason the racism issue comes up is that these people are minorities. If what you are saying is true, then white is the minority and all the minority races need to stop whining about being minority.

And my point wasn't that we don't have a tick box. It's that we don't have a place at all to break it down further. Again, asian, hispanic, etc, have a seperate box where they can put Other: and then specify which asian or whatever ethnicity they are.

White does not have that. It's simply white. Don't matter what ethnicity, you are simply white.

[Valthazar]

Well, many Hispanics are White, so that makes sense.  But I'm sorry, you've lost me a little?  Not clear on what your point is?

My point is, we can very easily study how black crime has evolved from the 1950s to today, for example.  However, it is very challenging to study how white crime has evolved over that time span, considering that a sizable portion of American crime today is perpetrated by Latin American gang activity.  In addition, it makes it very difficult to empirically demonstrate the adverse effects of illegal immigration, when the categorizations are so broad.

According to your reasoning then, why is it that Hispanics are a separate category as victims, for many types of crimes?  Clearly, our society does not perceptually view them as white - whether true or not.

My point was that you will happily identify as "Indian American", a heritage that includes roughly the same number of people as the disputed "White" category and don't seem to feel that involves grouping your culture together with other inappropriately (whether or not that's true in your heart is another story :P).  Lil hobbit seems to be overlooking how huge and diverse some of the non-white categories in fact are.  I return to "Chinese" and the 1.35 billion from many different backgrounds he thinks is fine grained vs. the roughly 7 million Irish he seems to think are an equivalent tick box.

I'm content with the Indian-American categorization (actually, I consider myself simply American, but that's another story), only because we're still comparatively the minority in the US.  In India, you better believe that they will be taking into account the smaller segments of Indian ethnic origin.  Given that Caucasians are the majority in the US, one would imagine that along similar lines, the categories would reflect the ethnic diversity, but lilhobbit is indicating that this is not the case.

[Kythia]

Given that Caucasians are the majority in the US, one would imagine that along similar lines, the categories would reflect the ethnic diversity, but lilhobbit is indicating that this is not the case.

Ideally, one shouldn't determine their independent variables in conducting research, based purely on how prevalent the representation in each group will be.

Correct me if I'm wrong, but are you not now arguing against yourself?

[Valthazar]

Correct me if I'm wrong, but are you not now arguing against yourself?

No, I'm not - there's merit to both points you quoted.  On one hand, it is important to define independent variables by uniqueness, but on the other hand, I am noting that the trend around the world has been for the dominant racial/cultural group of a country to naturally be more keen to differentiate the sub-ethnicities of its country (as in India, for example).  Otherwise, there's a tendency for people like lilhobbit, who represent the 'indigenous' group (at least prior to the last 50 years), to feel alienated by their own government.

[Ephiral]

My point is, we can very easily study how black crime has evolved from the 1950s to today, for example.  However, it is very challenging to study how white crime has evolved over that time span, considering that a sizable portion of American crime today is perpetrated by Latin American gang activity.  In addition, it makes it very difficult to empirically demonstrate the adverse effects of illegal immigration, when the categorizations are so broad.

Um. You're aware that you're saying "The data for Latin-American crime is unavailable because it's conflated with whites" and "We know that a lot of crime is Latin-Ameican in origin" in the same paragraph, right? Given that, I'd say [citation needed] on your assertions about the prevalence of Hispanic criminals.

[Kythia]

No, I'm not - there's merit to both points you quoted.  On one hand, it is important to define independent variables by uniqueness, but on the other hand, I am noting that the trend around the world has been for the dominant racial/cultural group of a country to naturally be more keen to differentiate the sub-ethnicities of its country (as in India, for example).  Otherwise, there's a tendency for people like lilhobbit, who represent the 'indigenous' group (at least prior to the last 50 years), to feel alienated by their own government.

Hmmm.  So where do you come down. Should the us government use less than ideal methods and be crticised by you on that front,  or make "indigenous" people feel alienated by using ideal methods and be criticised by you for that. While there may be merit,  you can't have this both ways.

[Valthazar]

Um. You're aware that you're saying "The data for Latin-American crime is unavailable because it's conflated with whites" and "We know that a lot of crime is Latin-Ameican in origin" in the same paragraph, right? Given that, I'd say [citation needed] on your assertions about the prevalence of Hispanic criminals.

I was purely referring to the NCVS reporting categorization being biased - as a governmental statistical reporting method.  Other reporting agencies have empirically published Hispanic crime rates.  According to a 2009 report by the Pew Hispanic Center, in 2007 Latinos "accounted for 40% of all sentenced federal offenders-more than triple their share (13%) of the total U.S. adult population". This was an increase from 24% in 1991. 72% of the Latino offenders were not U.S. citizens.

http://www.pewhispanic.org/2009/02/18/a-rising-share-hispanics-and-federal-crime/

[Ephiral]

I was purely referring to the NCVS reporting categorization being biased - as a governmental statistical reporting method.  Other reporting agencies have empirically published Hispanic crime rates.  According to a 2009 report by the Pew Hispanic Center, in 2007 Latinos "accounted for 40% of all sentenced federal offenders-more than triple their share (13%) of the total U.S. adult population". This was an increase from 24% in 1991. 72% of the Latino offenders were not U.S. citizens.

http://www.pewhispanic.org/2009/02/18/a-rising-share-hispanics-and-federal-crime/

Thank you; I do appreciate the cite. That said... well, this speaks to the prevalence of sentencing, not the prevalence of criminals or crime. There are other explanations for this data, and I'd say your assertion is not justified based on this alone.

[Valthazar]

Hmmm.  So where do you come down. Should the us government use less than ideal methods and be crticised by you on that front,  or make "indigenous" people feel alienated by using ideal methods and be criticised by you for that. While there may be merit,  you can't have this both ways.

If it were up to me, I'd just get rid of all these ethnicity forms on job and college applications.  In this day and age, when we claim to evaluate people by the content of their character, and not their exterior, we still try to maintain quotas for some reason.  I kid you not, there is now talk at my institution of needing to set a minimum quota for male students, because the females have better grades (a situation taking place at many universities).  Let's just evaluate people for what they offer.

Thank you; I do appreciate the cite. That said... well, this speaks to the prevalence of sentencing, not the prevalence of criminals or crime. There are other explanations for this data, and I'd say your assertion is not justified based on this alone.

I am interested to hear your explanation of the data.

[Kythia]

If it were up to me, I'd just get rid of all these ethnicity forms on job and college applications.  In this day and age, when we claim to evaluate people by the content of their character, and not their exterior, we still try to maintain quotas for some reason.  I kid you not, there is now talk at my institution of needing to set a minimum quota for male students, because the females have better grades (a situation taking place at many universities).  Let's just evaluate people for what they offer.

Which would be fine if the playing field was level.  But without monitoring, we'll never know.  Is the fact that demograph X is over-represented in field Y a matter of them simply having more to offer or of them having external advantages which, if offered to all, would eliminate that overrepresentation.  We'll never know under your proposed system.

I'm radically in favour of quotas, incidentally, but that would be taking the conversation way too far off topic.

[Oniya]

I am interested to hear your explanation of the data.

Among other things, there's the tendency in some districts for non-Caucasians to be questioned more aggressively if they are brought in as suspects.  There's a stereotype of African-Americans as being 'thugs', and Hispanics as being 'gang members' or 'illegals'.  When Cayley Anthony was initially just a 'missing child', Casey claimed that she had left her with a lady named Zenaida Fernandez-Gonzalez - and the woman (who actually existed and didn't even know the Anthonys) wen through hell to recover her reputation.  Susan Smith said that 'a black man' carjacked her and drove off with her kids in the back seat.  She'd actually driven the car into a reservoir and drowned them herself.  The point is that people were ready to believe these depictions, and someone without the education about their rights or the finances to hire a good lawyer can get convicted for things they didn't do.

[Ephiral]

I am interested to hear your explanation of the data.

The most immediately obvious would be far higher rates of poverty among Hispanic populations. You specifically cite a very sizeable portion of the incarcerated as undocumented, which tends to correlate extremely strongly with poverty and abusive conditions. There's also the matter of racial bias in the justice system, which is a well-documented problem in certain areas of high Hispanic population. (Sheriff Arpaio, I'm looking in your direction.)

In short, equating "high incarceraton" to "high criminality" makes two blatantly false assumptions - that socioeconomic conditions are equal across the board, and that the justice system is perfect.

[Valthazar]

Among other things, there's the tendency in some districts for non-Caucasians to be questioned more aggressively if they are brought in as suspects.  There's a stereotype of African-Americans as being 'thugs', and Hispanics as being 'gang members' or 'illegals'.

I don't deny any of this, there is a lot of truth to what you are saying.  But if indeed some of those statistical trends I posted are in fact true, what sort of evidence would you need to acknowledge that there is a higher criminal rate among certain populations in the US?  I am not sure how we will ever be able to ensure that such perceptual biases are statistically removed, but we can't let that prevent us from studying trends over time.

[Valthazar]

The most immediately obvious would be far higher rates of poverty among Hispanic populations. You specifically cite a very sizeable portion of the incarcerated as undocumented, which tends to correlate extremely strongly with poverty and abusive conditions. There's also the matter of racial bias in the justice system, which is a well-documented problem in certain areas of high Hispanic population. (Sheriff Arpaio, I'm looking in your direction.)

In short, equating "high incarceraton" to "high criminality" makes two blatantly false assumptions - that socioeconomic conditions are equal across the board, and that the justice system is perfect.

Oh, I know poverty is a major player, that's what fuels gangs after all.  I wasn't trying to suggest that one ethnic group is more criminal than another by nature, that would be a ridiculous assertion.  But studying growing criminal presence among certain ethnic groups, such as poverty-stricken illegal immigrants, can guide public policy.

But this thread has gotten so far off topic, and I apologize for that.

[Oniya]

I don't deny any of this, there is a lot of truth to what you are saying.  But if indeed some of those statistical trends I posted are in fact true, what sort of evidence would you need to acknowledge that there is a higher criminal rate among certain populations in the US?  I am not sure how we will ever be able to ensure that such perceptual biases are statistically removed, but we can't let that prevent us from studying trends over time.

Among other things, running the statistics based on more varied criteria.  You'd also have to define 'population' to some extent.  People living in a backwater town in the middle of Amish country are going to have different crime rates and categories than people of equivalent race and income level living in the low-income areas around a major city.

[Ephiral]

Oh, I know poverty is a major player, that's what fuels gangs after all.  I wasn't trying to suggest that one ethnic group is more criminal than another by nature, that would be a ridiculous assertion.  But studying growing criminal presence among certain ethnic groups, such as poverty-stricken illegal immigrants, can guide public policy.

It would - but that's explicitly not what's being studied in the data you cited. Again, there's an important distinction between "incarceration" and "criminality". I seem to recall you explicitly admitting in another thread that poverty has other effects here - such as, say, barring access to the best legal defenses.

[Valthazar]

It would - but that's explicitly not what's being studied in the data you cited. Again, there's an important distinction between "incarceration" and "criminality". I seem to recall you explicitly admitting in another thread that poverty has other effects here - such as, say, barring access to the best legal defenses.

I know, I completely agree.  However, I asked earlier what more appropriate data could be used to avoid these biases, and truly zone in to truly understand criminality among poverty-stricken Hispanics and illegal immigrants.  Oniya mentioned the need for more varied criteria - which is certainly true.  Though as you can imagine, it is difficult to obtain such data, especially when the demographic is undocumented in the first place.  Illegal immigration is a big public policy issue right now, so if you have an alternate data source that could be used to learn more about criminality among these specific demographics, I would be interested to check it out.

[Oniya]

Regional data - something like ZIP codes, or otherwise geographically defined areas - could be a start. 

[gaggedLouise]

Weighing in some estimates of the density of cops per square mile would be neat too. Of course, the chances of getting caught, or even of a suspected crime getting reported, is going to be higher if there are more cops around in the area. Like, compare the risk of getting caught or even chased for poaching somewhere in Alaska and the chances that a burglary in downtown Chicago would get reported.

Edit: I am not thinking of the likelihood of the individual cops in a town being "dense" in that other sense.  ;)

[Ephiral]

Of course, there's a well-documented balancing factor there, too - visible police presence tends to reduce crime in an area (and possibly increase it in adjoining, less-patrolled areas). Lots of variables here, I'll admit, which is why I balk at conclusions being leapt to.

[Skynet]

I'm not Asian, but I think that cultural appropriation in this day and age (especially when it comes to US-Japan relations) is unavoidable.  If you're a creative writer/designer delving into a culture other than your own, you should try doing it with care and in a respectful way.  Appropriation is not bad in and of itself; the problem comes when media portrayals contribute to and reinforce negative societal perceptions.

In the case of the OP, I'd be more specific and ask for Japanese voices.  Asia is a large bloc of nations, many of which have little in common with each other.  Asking groups which would potentially be directly affected by any offensive stereotypes is a good idea whenever you're "writing the other."

In regards to Kabuki theater, well I don't really know.  But I think it's wrong to assume that non-ethnic Japanese people can't perform it without automatically being racist.  Maybe if the play ends up a parade of ill-informed Japanese stereotypes, yes, but the actors themselves, no.

[didoanna]

I remember an episode of Scrubs when JD was explaining the ways Doctors explain to families that the patient has died.....

....and he suggested a good favourite was traditional Kabuki theatre.....

....cue JD jumping into a room in the full outfit and performing assorted hand movements and gestures to indicate the patient is dead.....

.....probably because of the context and the extremely dark humour.....it came across as very funny.

[Ivory11]

the race of your model isn't racism, anyone who says it is racist because "white people can't wear asian clothes or be in asian theater" is an extremely racist statement.

When I was in school, I went to my school's "sister school" in japan, where I was the only male in their school play (all girls school, we were there for a month) and it was very traditional japanese theater, and I played the part of a Samurai, when I asked about if this would be considered racist, me being a white guy dressed as a Samurai, the sensei told me simply "anyone can wear the clothes, anyone can perform, so long as they respect the costume and respect the theater" so in a way, I was in the same sandals your model is in.

(BTW, I was a hit)