From 2c8978ef89376de719a1f5292489e9a3b990d14b Mon Sep 17 00:00:00 2001 From: Eric Chen Date: Mon, 30 Dec 2024 12:29:36 -0500 Subject: [PATCH] Fix wording --- content/shorts/2024-12-29.md | 2 +- 1 file changed, 1 insertion(+), 1 deletion(-) diff --git a/content/shorts/2024-12-29.md b/content/shorts/2024-12-29.md index f9dc7d6..8a48aa5 100644 --- a/content/shorts/2024-12-29.md +++ b/content/shorts/2024-12-29.md @@ -10,7 +10,7 @@ images: This past semester, I took an Asian American Studies course in order to fulfill some Gen-Ed credits at my university. I had the sort of bland expectations you would expect for a class like this. However, I am pleased to say...I was right about the class the whole time. The entire course was framed around the fight against racism and discrimination and the difficulty for Asian Americans to integrate into the United States. Every class was imbued with a victim narrative that only inspired a certain kind of conversation where we could only analyze the challenges and injustices without room to celebrate the contributions, achievements, or cultural impact of Asian Americans. The class portrayed a reductionist view where Asian American history was simply a battle against oppressive forces, and I found myself longing to hear some celebratory stories of cultural identity outside of that particular lens. However, that never came to be. I learned nothing about how the Chinese introduced ethnic food to Americans. I learned nothing about how Indian Americans contributed to the technological boom of the 2000s. I learned nothing about how Japanese and Korean entertainment ravaged global cultural boundaries and fostered a new generation of cross-cultural appreciation. Is this aspect of Asian American history not just as pivotal to understanding as the struggles against racism and discrimination? Can we talk about Asian American success without having to evoke their struggles against oppression as the backdrop? The ironic lack of diversity in the portrayal of Asian American history left me (and other students I talked to in my class) wanting. -One main point that my professor emphasized is that the Asian American psyche is not a monolith--i.e. Asian Americans don't all think the same. Anybody with a competent faculty of thinking would agree with this statement, but I found many of the discussions and material antithetical to this idea. First, the professor enforced a strict interpretation of certain ideas (e.g. affirmative action, model minority) without room for deviation. Every conversation had an assumed prior that you agreed with the portrayal--for example, seeing the idea of model minority as a myth, as if that interpretation is a fact. Second, the professor would inject overtly political opinions into the discussion with a strong attitude that discouraged any kind of disagreement, essentially incentivizing conformity over critical thought.[^1] Third, the course offered an excessive amount of material with authors who couldn't tolerate people who didn't share their worldview. I watched a couple of seminars of supposed Asian American Studies pundits who evoked sentiments along the lines of: "Muslims who vote Republican are a shame to their people and are only voting against their own interests"[^2] and "I can't understand why Asian Americans are protesting affirmative action, and I couldn't even imagine talking to one of them."[^3] I found it incredibly ironic and disappointing that these experts could evoke this kind of ostracizing sentiment when their whole field revolves around the intricacies of the Asian American experience. It seemed like the entire anti-monolithic sentiment was just a façade, where none of these people can actually tolerate much disagreement at all. And the whole discussion begs the question, what does being Asian American even mean? +One main point that my professor emphasized is that the Asian American psyche is not a monolith--i.e. Asian Americans don't all think the same. Anybody with a competent faculty of thinking would agree with this statement, but I found many of the discussions and material antithetical to this idea. First, the professor enforced a strict interpretation of certain ideas (e.g. affirmative action, model minority) without room for deviation. Every conversation had an assumed prior that you agreed with the portrayal--for example, seeing the idea of model minority as a myth, as if that interpretation is a fact. Second, the professor would inject overtly political opinions into the discussion with a strong attitude that discouraged any kind of disagreement, essentially incentivizing conformity over critical thought.[^1] Third, the course offered an excessive amount of material with authors who couldn't tolerate people who didn't share their worldview. I watched a couple of seminars of supposed Asian American Studies pundits who made statements along the lines of: "Muslims who vote Republican are a shame to their people and are only voting against their own interests"[^2] and "I can't understand why Asian Americans are protesting affirmative action, and I couldn't even imagine talking to one of them."[^3] I found it incredibly ironic and disappointing that these experts could evoke this kind of ostracizing sentiment when their whole field revolves around the intricacies of the Asian American experience. It seemed like the entire anti-monolithic sentiment was just a façade, where none of these people can actually tolerate much disagreement at all. And the whole discussion begs the question, what does being Asian American even mean? # Model Minority "Myth"