(no subject)

[jhameia]

So tonight I revisited a post written by the awesome cycads on "foreign bodies as sexual playgrounds". Namely, the fetishization of foreign women by (mostly white) men.

I've said before, one of the reasons why I don't often discuss my own fetishes is that I don't feel I can own them, because I, as an Asian woman, AM a fetish. Most people don't surf for "white girl porn". They're usually just looking for porn. But "Asian" - ah, that's a specialty genre. It creeps me out when I hear guys drool over how cute Asian girls are (and usually, girls), how Eastern brides (whether or not Asian, sometimes European) are so much more submissive than [America]s.

Tonight, I read a(n admittedly old) comment which perfectly exemplifies all the fucking skeeviness about guys searching for foreign brides:

Right now, I have been hoping to find a nice foreign wife, and I am most interested particular groups. I would be greatly satisfied to find an equally special wife of my own ethnicity, but I want her different ethnicity cultural background to in a way help represent a certain pureness that is not easily obtained.

What is this pureness, cycads asks. Surely you mean 'uniqueness'. Oh no, according to this guy,

The [laugh]….”pureness” I was speaking of is actually all part of my intent to find a girl whose character is is very special. A virtuous woman.

This virtuous woman, who must be specifically from a different ethnicity and heritage because somehow, that enables her to retain her purity? What the hell does her heritage have to do with it, besides his wanting to spread his genetics further afield (ew yuck!)?

Her difference and race is an additional attempt to amplify the idea. Kinda like pulling an angel from the heavens into a land far from their own.

HOLD ON.

....

HOLD ON.

....

OH MY JESUS ALLAH BUDDHA.

Kinda like pulling an angel from the heavens into a land far from their own.

OH, HI, GUY?

We are not your pets and toys.

We do not exist to be shaped and molded by you.

In fact, that is VERY reminiscent of what abusers do to their victims: isolate them from where they belong to, force them to conform to their ideals.

WTF is this? It's so reminiscent of guys who take virgins so they can train said virgins to their own specific tastes. Sure, it makes sense on some level. If you, you know, make the assumption that your partner is not a person who deserves to live and be shaped by her own experiences. If you like your partner to not be her own person when you claim her.

The whole "partner as possession" factor is made of creepiness. I used to think it was hot, but the more confident I become in myself, the more independent I am (and liking it), the scarier this thought is. And it is everywhere.

The worst thing? This is supposed to be ROMANTIC. The whole "average dude wins angel" trope is supposed to be AWESOME and COOL because it shows that WOMEN ARE TOTALLY NOT SUPERFICIAL (no wait, isn't it the OTHER way around???) and that Good Guys Win the Girl!

Sick sad Nice Guy™ Waiting To Happen backpedals:

It’s clear you may not have immediately understood that I didn’t mean by force and I didn’t literally mean “pulling”. I simply mean just earning the company of someone by “drawing” their attention or interests to oneself.

My response? It is clear you do not come even close to comprehending just how goddamn problematic that framing is. It doesn't matter that you didn't mean that literally. Either way, if that is what you mean, you are filled with Communication Fail.

The company of women is not something to be "earned". By saying that, you frame women as something to be "earned", thus as trophies, as objects to be won. Ergo, as objects.

It is clear you do not even realize you have echoed the sentiments of abusers who isolate their victims, taking the latter from places of comfort for the former's amusement (or sense of control). Or maybe you do realize it and you're just backpedaling.

It is clear you do not even see how you have Other'd cultures different from your own, and women in general.

It is also damned clear you are a Nice Guy-ism™ waiting to happen.

Hell, you know what, I don't even care what you meant.

Attitudes like that are poisonous to both men and women, setting up impossible standards, boxing people into specific codes of behaviour which we could all do without. I am NOT an exotic foreign bride waiting to enter into your life and give you the happiness you oh-so-long-for - neither is ANY OTHER WOMAN, whether Asian or not.

Women aren't trophies, dammit. We're not the fucking Stanley Cup, we're not something you EARN like a fucking salary to keep you alive, we're not something you turn tricks for so you can get our attention. We're people. Stop talking about us like we're not.

*stabbities*

Comments

[tenchan.livejournal.com]

Congratulations on your first troll!!! <3!

YEAY! (http://alesrarus.funkydung.com/images/troll.jpg)

*Gives you your cute chocolate foil-wrapped statuette* *love!*

[fantasyecho.livejournal.com]

YEAY!

And it's CHOCOLATE! <3

Imperfect...

[(Anonymous)]

[Laugh]...You better be careful, that chochlate isn't any good.

Re: Imperfect...

[tenchan.livejournal.com]

Pah! Never insult a former foreigner trophy wife's cooking....

Even if she IS an American trophy wife. ~^_^~ <3

Re: Imperfect...

[(Anonymous)]

[Laugh]....Well, I'm sure she cooks very well, but the laws of no good and imperfection won't let the quality be great. Hey, you said you are a former foreigner's wife. Is it ok for me to ask why you separated?

Re: Imperfect...

[tenchan.livejournal.com]

I AM the foreign wife! ~LOL~

Long story, and potentially risky to converse on here. But, let's just say something about Jha's little dialogue struck home. ~smile~ I'm around, you're welcome to add me. ~nods~

Speaking of being a fetish, you ~know~ that even I can be viewed as one by my own rights? D cup? Go to Japan, China, etc, similar switchover from what was explained to me by an exchange student that lived with my family.(especially a *kinky* one) Mind you, here I get the feeling the 'charm' of being an American 'bride' in Canada is akin to having a bulldog, mastiff or something... ~^_^~

My views on potentially *being* a fetish are...so what? I'll be what I want to be, if you *happen* to like it, well, win for you, right? If you want to talk about this or that, I'll be point blank about what's a no and what's a maybe or a yes...you can't be 'moulded' into something you don't want to be if you don't allow it to happen. What I can't stand are the girls who will do anything even if they really aren't interested...why? For their partner. That's allowing yourself to be an object. I think, possibly, the mentality expressed in THIS portion is probably fault on both parties, not him or her entirely.

Fetishism of 'foreign' types is out there. Heck, being a girl I confess to openly objectifying the 'foreignness' of my partners, pin that to being an American and being a culture of borrowed cultures, or maybe mere fascination. (Kinda like I really like GREEN. Now, imagine if we had hot green chicks land from outer space..Instant Tenchan Win.) I can probably rattle off the nationalities of each of my partners, or the descents thereof, how they fit the sterotype, and how I now view that nationality 'in bed' due to it. Am I guilty? Maybe. Am I going to change that aspect? No...I am ~enthralled~ by foreign 'stuff'. It's my people-person 'oo shiney' weakness, and I confess it.

Anyway...I adore you, Jha, and I do read your posts avidly, agree or disagree, they give me something to chew on. <3!

Re: Imperfect...

[fantasyecho.livejournal.com]

LOL! You know what's weird is that I had a similar conversation about this, in which I pretty much said what you said - "just be whatever you want to be, and if it happens to play into stereotypes, well, fuck it. Just be aware of it."

Now, I of course understand the whole "oooh shiney differences!" thing? I really don't mind it (how can I, when I sometimes do the same thing?) - as long as people own that it's a fetish, that's it's postentially objectifying, that it's a result of cultural norms and narratives. Like, OWN IT! But so many people won't, and get defensive and grouchy about the whole thing, and unwittingly perpetuate stereotypes as a result. I react the same way to the whole hype about nabbing an American wife/husband is also the same in Asia. Except, of course, most people I know from home wouldn't be able to articulate themselves so finely to be able to have these conversations in the first place =/ I try though.

And the "I can't stand girls who do their best to please their partners" reaction? We DO live in cultures which teach girls to be people-pleasers and exhort boys to get all macho and super-protectively. I am loathe to place fault on the shoulders of both him and her in that aspect, especially if both of them are simply inexperienced and lacking the self-confidence to say 'no'.

To finish, we can only eschew these gender-heteronormative stereotypes if we chew on them !! XD (Oh dear, I must be getting to bed now. ILU2! Give the twins kisses from me.)

Re: Imperfect...

[(Anonymous)]

You see, look how Fantasyecho kindly approached Tenchan. With careful consideration and easy kindful response to certain things mentioned. There is an immediate tone difference. [laugh]...I explained the things related to what Tenchan said in the foriegn bodies post about the whole asian fetish thing, but instead of a normal response, I got scolded with hot water. Man, that burns. [laugh]...

Re: Imperfect...

[tenchan.livejournal.com]

Generally speaking, I'm of the mindset that if you're sleeping with someone, there should be something there more than a 'hey, nice tits wanna fuck?' mentality. I don't ~do~ one night stands, in my honest opinion, even if you're in it for just sex, not having time to experiment, explore and simply enjoy the individual usually comes up lacking. Then again I'm not into the mere physical, there's always something more to it, and I can't enjoy it unless that other aspect is present. If that 'fetishism' is the all consuming part of your relationship, regardless of the type, time to reconsider.(Again, IMHO)

I'll tell ya, us American brides, we can be more than people can handle. We're outspoken, blunt and expect to be treated well.(And we're culturally deficient. Enculture us!) Like I said something like a mastiff with a chihuahua attitude. ~giggle~ I don't consider myself the 'high maintenence' type, though, really. *shifty eyes*

When I talk about individuals inability to say no, or articulate preferences, I'm not thinking about the inexperienced. You can't say 'hey! let's try bondage!' and not realize it doesn't mean duct taping you to a ceiling. (Just imagine the acrobatics!) I'm thinking of folks who have been told or know they can say no. For those inexperienced, I chalk it up to either low self esteem and a desire to be accepted, which is GENERALLY rooted in social interactions and parenting. (OMG, crap...I'm sounding like a mom! Head for the hills!) The only thing we can do, as parents, is resolve to shed the 'you're not dating til' you're 50!' attitude, accept our kids will be delightedly figuring out themselves and their bodies while we're not looking, and send a clear message early on before Cosmo, Disney and the rest can cock-block us. We aren't solely responsible for shaping who our children become, but, we are very responsible for the self image they take into the world from the start.

Anyway...I openly confess a weakness for Asians (I include those of Hindu descent in this consideration), Irish, British and Germanic types. I specifically have a weakness for red hair and freckles. (I place the blame squarely on my first girlfriend...*puuur*) I've dated across the colour spectrum, and, with few exceptions have taken away nothing but positive from my exes. (Including my most previous.)

Anyway...this is going to go on for a while, I can tell, quick, dear, give us a distraction!

Re: Imperfect...

[(Anonymous)]

Ok, thanks. I agree definitely Tenchan. I think I understood what you meant. But yeah, that's right, be whoever and whatever you want to be, if the person your with happens to like those certain things about you more than those of other people, then jackpot for them. And yes, as you said, you can't be moulded into something you don't want to be if you don't allow it. That's right.

Oh, something my teacher mentioned today.....

[(Anonymous)]

We were in class today and we were discussing how a letter was written by a woman to the men of society because women were not treated equally and stuff. The class was getting all excited as a few guys, myself included, and a few girls were trading thoughts on the idea of women to men and men to women. The girls were taking some of what the guys were saying the wrong way. Like when one guy said something about women being women are more sensitive and what not and men should not just be sensitive, a man should be "the man". The girls very much disagreed and with good reason. They took it the wrong way though and I pointed it out to them by explaining that he didn't mean that men should be "the man", he means men should be "a man" meaning he should act like a man and woman should...act like a woman being usually more conscious and less aggressive or whatever. My teacher said this though, "I am a woman, and I know that women can often be much more sensitive and feminine to men in a sense that she makes herself act as a more sensitive and willfully objective to a man, but as a woman, it feels good to be treated like woman. Not saying that he is more than me though." She said she's married to a good husband and he is a very aggressive man, and she loves him. She didn't mean he treats her wrong. I actually tried my best to restate what she said, but I hope you get the idea. And think about this, would you usually expect a woman to come to a guy in attempt to get him, or would you usually expect a man to do it to a woman? I'd usually expect the man to come to the woman. This is a thing that makes him appear more firm I guess or strengthened as a man to the woman. Women like to be seen as a beautiful, physical and/or unphysical. If a woman came to a guy in a such a manner, you'd probably see her as a more of a jump around girl, meaning she probably has been trying too hard to get different guys. She may even seem less mindful of how she chooses her men.

Oh man! Awesome! I never get to use this icon!

[sparklemagpie.livejournal.com]

They took it the wrong way though and I pointed it out to them by explaining that he didn't mean that men should be "the man", he means men should be "a man" meaning he should act like a man and woman should...act like a woman being usually more conscious and less aggressive or whatever.

You're talking about a lesson in stereotypes. That ideal - that a man should be aggressive and dominant and a woman more submissive and sensitive - is limiting and damaging to both genders.

These things are not really the natures of men and women, but their 'traditional' roles, formulated by societal rules over centuries, out of a history that has subjugated women and probably just as damagingly held men responsible for all things and thus given them an imbalanced portion of power.

To me it is just as shameful and upsetting to see how men and boys are expected to be behave as it is to see how women are still being treated as second-class.

I can count on one hand how many times in my life I have seen my father cry. He is a kind and sensitive man, deeply emotional, and I grew up in my childhood feeling that despite how much he loved me he was detached from my life, that he maybe even didn't love me as much as my mother did, because his emotionally open affection was so much rarer. As an adult I understand that he bottles up what he feels because he was raised with that 'stiff upper lip', 'be a man', 'don't cry like a sissy' attitude. He was raised this way by a father who was even more reserved, because of how he was raised. This cycle of reservation, these male ideals of holding back 'weak' emotions and putting forth confidence and aggression, have damaged my relationship with my father. They will, unless society changes drastically in my lifetime, damage my relationships with my sons should I have them (no matter how much I try to instill in my children that expression of emotion and a lack of desire for dominance or aggression is okay).

Some women, myself included, are content to behave in a way that fits some of the historical ideals of femininity (submissiveness, strong emotional connections, motherly behaviour) - but ANY woman who commits herself to these behaviours should do so because that is what feels RIGHT to her and fits her personality, not because someone tells her that is what's PROPER.

Were I to feel more comfortable taking the lead, or being more reserved in my emotions, or if I wasn't inclined toward mothering, that should be just acceptable and sadly in society as it is today, it isn't.

Similarly, if a man is just naturally a dominant and confident person that is one thing, but it is another to take a boy who tends toward submissiveness and emotional openness and tell him that acting that way makes him 'not a man' or to foist derogatory terms like 'faggot' on him because he dares not to fit the narrow-minded status quo.


And think about this, would you usually expect a woman to come to a guy in attempt to get him, or would you usually expect a man to do it to a woman? I'd usually expect the man to come to the woman. ... If a woman came to a guy in a such a manner, you'd probably see her as a more of a jump around girl, meaning she probably has been trying too hard to get different guys.

The idea that women who are the initiators or aggressors in relationships (romantic, sexual or otherwise) are seen as 'jump around girls' is antiquated and disgusting. It is a slanderous means of keeping a woman 'in her place' - to call her a whore and imply that she is a bad person (specifically that she is a bad woman) for doing something that is perfectly acceptable for any man to do. It's a double-standard and the fact that you even bring it up as if it's a valid point is upsetting and shows the root of your ignorance.

These things that you think of as acceptable and part of the natural inclinations of men and women are NOT natural inclinations. They are societal constructs that hurt and limit all of us, and you are supporting these constructs wholeheartedly when this is the kind of behavior you expect of other people in your life.

Re: Oh man! Awesome! I never get to use this icon!

[(Anonymous)]

Uhm...Yeah. You know it's not the female that courts (I think I'm using it right) the male animal. The male courts the female, he comes to her and tries to present himself in a manner that she accepts to be proof of his ability to produce a good outcome ( I say it like this because some animals just mate and leave I think, while others stay, but the process is the same). Women are very equal to men, but of course it's fairly difficult to see that in society even with passed laws and stuff throughout the past. Look, I'll put it like this, women and men are equal being of nature, but in marriage according to my own understanding there is the man of the house. He is the dominant figure of the house, but as a loving person/husband to his wife, he will treat his wife as his greater joy. She is the purpose of his strive to uphold the their home.

Re: Oh man! Awesome! I never get to use this icon!

[sparklemagpie.livejournal.com]

And what I JUST finished explaining to you is that your understanding of their being a 'man of the house' is wrong. That is not necessarily the way things should be. It is a stereotypical role that has grown out of a culture that has continually used that formula of a family life to subjugate women.

I am not trying to call men who are 'the man of the house' bad. If they treat their female partners respectfully, and those women are comfortable in a more 'submissive' familial role then that is their choice.

But that is NOT the way it has to be, and not the way it always is, and by setting that up as a standard expectation society is failing all of those who do not conform to that ideal.

And please don't try to compare the rights and wishes of human beings with the drive of animals to mate with one another and use that as some kind of 'proof' that male dominance is the natural way of things. The mating habits of creatures as simple and survival oriented as birds or cats and dogs isn't comparable to the societal and personal meaning inherit in the same act for humans. We're more complicated than that and you can't apply the same 'rules' to the two groups. Bringing that up is insulting.



Listen, I understand the point you're trying to make. We ALL understand your point. Stop trying to explain how we've all misheard and misunderstood you. We haven't. We know what you are saying and we are telling you that you are still WRONG no matter how many times you word it a different way or try to tell us what you 'really' meant.

Re: Oh man! Awesome! I never get to use this icon!

[(Anonymous)]

[sigh]....Hey, I want you to explain to me how the relationship of a husband and wife and how they both play their roles in working together.

Re: Oh man! Awesome! I never get to use this icon!

[sparklemagpie.livejournal.com]

That is different for every husband and wife because each couple is comprised of two individuals who don't approach problems the same as everyone else.

But the simple answer is that a husband and wife work together by respecting one another, compromising when they disagree and sharing the responsibilities of life and a relationship in a way that they're both comfortable with.

Re: Oh man! Awesome! I never get to use this icon!

[fantasyecho.livejournal.com]

That's a fallacy. Males of many species will court a female, mate, and then leave.

Many males of other species will court a female, co-habit, but not necessarily sire the children.

All of this is for the basic purpose of procreation.

I don't know if you've noticed this, but humans don't always get together solely based on procreation.

You really need to lay off the analogies.

Re: Oh man! Awesome! I never get to use this icon!

[(Anonymous)]

[sigh]...Yes, I know that. My point was just the idea that the male approaches first, and the females do choose whichever male is more likely to give good offspring, but we can say that "offspring" is all the things you and someone else shares when you get together. Not just babies.

Re: Oh man! Awesome! I never get to use this icon!

[fantasyecho.livejournal.com]

How is this applicable to human interaction? Human relationships are a hella lot more complex than "male approaches, female chooses". Hell, not even ALL animals fit this paradigm. Keep the evo-psych out of this, that's a slippery slope you DON'T want to fall down off. You're already failing in the Metaphor and Analogy categories.

Re: Oh, something my teacher mentioned today.....

[fantasyecho.livejournal.com]

The girls were taking some of what the guys were saying the wrong way.

Of COURSE. If they disagree and have their own truth, CLEARLY they were taking it the wrong way. I feel an eye-roll coming on.

Re: Oh, something my teacher mentioned today.....

[ardwynna-m.livejournal.com]

Isn't is the way? It's always that the girls are 'taking it wrong', never that the boys were the ones saying it wrong, or even saying it right so that the girls understood and didn't like what it was anyway. Perfect agreement, that's the only acceptable female response to mansplaining. *eye-rolls with you*

Re: Oh, something my teacher mentioned today.....

[(Anonymous)]

Well, the whole thing about the girls taking it wrong wasn't my focus for telling you about it, but I was just saying that there were disagreements. The guys just didn't know how to avoid sounding like they are being inconsiderate or still making themselves sound too dominant. They never argued with the things I said. I usually just let both sides say their part, then I explained the reasons for the misunderstandings and why both parties were actually in complete agreement, but didn't know how to express such without sounding one-sided.

Re: Oh, something my teacher mentioned today.....

[ardwynna-m.livejournal.com]

If the 'girls taking it wrong' wasn't the focus, then stop phrasing it as if it is. Your use of language is terrible if you have to keep explaining what you really mean. Frankly I don't see the 'misunderstandings' here. What the guys expressed was outdated, socially backwards and subjugating crap all women have heard before and the girls had every right to be pissed.

Re: Oh, something my teacher mentioned today.....

[(Anonymous)]

Well, I gave an example. We all were on the same page, but there were some things that just sounded bad. Like one guy said the man is like a large tree being really strong and stuff, and a woman is like the delicate beautiful flower. I laughed immediately after he said that, because it really sounded bad. I said aloud to everyone as they listened that when he used that idea, I didn't think it sounded too good. He made woman sound too easy to step on. As they discussed related stuff though I begin to think about a drawing I made about love. Check this link out, I do my thinking about relationships based on what love is. http://abetwabe.deviantart.com/art/Tree-Sap2-131370604

Re: Oh, something my teacher mentioned today.....

[fantasyecho.livejournal.com]

*scritches another mark on Male Privilege card*