Letters to the Editor
-
All that surprising?
"But professor Niwa is right: When race enters the equation -- when the perpetrator of a crime of this type is black, like "Beltway Snipers" John Allen Muhammad and his ward Lee Boyd Malvo, or Asian, like Cho -- it rises to the surface and stays there, prompting inevitable discussions about whether "black rage" or "immigrant alienation" were somehow to blame; whether in some fundamental fashion, color of skin, shape of eye, or nation of origin lie at the seething, secret heart of such tragedies."
Is this really all that suprising? I recall on my own campus how different ethnicities gladly set up racially-based groups to promote the idea of a unique-yet-shared experience common only to that ethnic group, as opposed to the mainstream (read: white) experience. I don't see such groups as a problem, nor their analysis as flawed. But when ethnic groups themselves spend so much time perpetuating the idea of difference, should it really be surprising when the mainstream media acknowledges this, and asks whether these differences were involved in the behavior of a member of the group?
-
tracker:
I'm confused.
What exactly is it that you think I'm saying?
That white males are generally NOT priveleged?
If so, you've drastically misunderstood me.
Most white males in, say, their 30's or above have actually seen white male privelege dismantled in their lifetimes.
I'm talking mostly about men 25 or younger, especially who were in grade school in the 90's. These men were often raised believing that once upon a time white men had all the power, and that now we want that to stop. I've actually hard them say "Why am I being blamed for stuff other white men did?"
Teaching them about the history of white male privelege isn't going to make them feel any more grateful that they enjoy those priveleges today...especially if they don't.
My original post was meant to counter the assumption that white people never think about the effect whiteness has our behavior.
Angry young white boys are not exactly a new phenomenon, but those who grew up in a "post-PC" society are often irritated that they're supposed to feel grateful for having been born white males.
I see, hear, and read this sentiment every day.
And my point is that if a boy feels marginalized and we tell him he SHOULDN'T simply because he's a white male...that sentiment won't magically disappear.
The kid might be poor, or abused at home, or neglected...or he may have no "good" reason at all for feeling different.
If an adolescent boy is already feeling vulnerable and he's then mocked for not having the "right" to feel that way...it stands to reason that his rage won't dissipate on its own.
I'm not even necessarily arguing that we SHOULD draw color lines when it comes to taking responsibility for the mental health of our young people...just that traditionally identified "ethnic" sub-groups are not alone in doing so.
Just as black people might worry about the future of young black men, and Koreans might worry about the impact of Korean culture on Koreans, I occasionally think about the messages we send to young white men in America.
"Stop whining and be grateful you little pussy" may not address all of their needs equally.
And I'm in favor of altering our approach if it reduces the amount of sublimated rage in marginalized loners.
-
Race Matters (different from racism)
Jeff Yang's article points out a reality of U.S. society and history - race matters, absolutely. The stereotyping of Asians is real and it plays a part of who Cho was, just like how any racial or gender perception in society effects any particular race or person. People may not want to hear that or feel comfortable with it, but it's the truth. Thank you.
That said, I read a quote by Elaine Kim, Ethnic Studies professor at Berkeley in the SF Chronicle. To paraphrase her about the murders, "you didn't do it, don't take responsibility for it." She's spot on about this. While sympathy and empathy are natural toward everyone involved, NO ONE should feel guilty about being Asian, Asian American, Korean or Korean American because of what ONE disturbed INDIVIDUAL did.
The rhetoric of stereotyping of groups (ethnic in this case) vs. the individual is probably the most divisive and clearest here and is what I believe Niwa pointed out. With Columbine, no one talked about the killers race because they were white and they acted as INDIVIDUALS. Somehow with Cho, all Asians, Koreans, immigrants or foreigners are grouped together or associated.
Clearly Cho acted as an individual. Any kind of automatic or implied connection to Asians or Koreans is misguided at best, racist at worse. I believe that's the point here...don't group people together for one individual's action.
-
.
I think the problem here is that all these articles are conflating Race with Culture. The Culture he came from, and especially his family, may have influenced how he ended up (especially in regards to not getting treatment for his mental illness) -- but the Race he is HAD NOTHING TO DO WITH IT.
-
"Smart But Quiet"? Try: "Mean Asshole"
Smart? I read his "plays" - they were juvenile. His video? He didn't seem particularly bright.
Quiet? Yes, lots of people described him as quiet. But Nikki Giovanni has a better handle on him - she describes him as mean. He intimidated female students. He stalked them, he photographed them with his cellphone when he knew it was annoying to them. He was trying to demean them. His plays scared male as well as female students. They were just plain mean.
And he was a foreigner. Yeah, he's been in the US for a while, but he is a foreigner. So he's a mean, foreign asshole. That doesn't make him much different from mean, native-born assholes. We've got plenty of those. I guess he just figured he'd join the crowd.
-
I agree with einnocents.
The only people I've heard mention Korean culture as culpable or backlash against Asians at all is from Asians themselves. For the love of God, people, please stop talking about this or you will give the radical white racists and anti-immigration people fuel for their fire!
The mainstream media has clearly not indicted Asians and neither has the amazing student body, faculty, and administration at VT. Nor have the victims' friends and families made any comments about it.
It's so sad to me that the automatic expectation from the Asian American community was that white people were going to immediately bash them for Cho's crime. We really have not made any progress if this is still the expectation. As a white person, I feel ashamed and angry that Asian Americans like Yang would stereotype me as a would-be basher.
White people live and work with Asians, African Americans, and Hispanics/Latinos every day. Heck, some of us are even married to Asians and have Hapa kids! I'm sickened that the level of discourse in this country has once again devolved to amped up charges of racism when there is so little to substantiate that.
Why can't we all just agree that Cho was a profoundly disturbed and mentally ill young man whose actions were the result of his illness and his own personal lived experiences? And that those experiences included immigrating to the US at age 8, growing up middle-class in what to him must have been a very foreign country for at least a few years, having to adapt and learn a new language, being bullied at school for his social awkwardness and speech issues, the frustrations he likely felt when his overbearing romantic affections were not returned, and a general sense that no one understood or could understand his pain. None of those reasons have anything at all to do with being Asian. They could apply to ANY person who immigrated to this country at a young age; or who was bullied a lot as a kid; or who had obsessions with women that resulted in harassment and stalking. There is a way to talk about this without addressing ethnicity. But the thing is--his cultural background will (and should) be addressed because it IS a part of his personal context, just as it would have been addressed in the "culturally-sensitive" therapy that Yang would have sent him to.
Not to take a cheap shot at Yang, but his writing stinks of the kind of Gen X identity politics-mongering that was his bread-and-butter at A Magazine. He should get with the program and realize that the generations after him, including that of Cho and his victims, are far more enlightened and nonchalant about difference (be it ethnic, religious, or sexual orientation) than he and his fellow neurotic Gen Xers ever were.