www.gothamist.com/archives/2004/04/15/protesting_details.php
More information about the protest 18 can be found here, but expect to see some neatly printed signs at from noon till 1PM in front of the Fairchild Publications building at 7 West 34th Street. And we recommend you watch 21 Crouching Tiger, Hidden Dragon and 22 Kill Bill if you haven't. They know kara-TAY, kung pao chicken, and some other violence-without-weapons techniques. Remember, Asian women can be fierce - the lotus blossom thing is a trick. If anyone goes, take pictures and let us know if protestors are eating 23 Pocky and 24 Vitasoy, okay? Matte Chi on 26 what else you can do to protest the article. And Gothamist 27 on the Details piece and Urban Outfitters' t-shirts. Apparently they've run Gay or Latino (or some variation on that) - I'd find that offensive, too, but given that I have Asian friends who forwarded me the Details Gay or Asian, I only heard about it then. There are some funny parts, sure - I can laugh at my race and I do - but taken as a whole, it's a very ugly picture of Asian men. Perhaps the editors needed to run it past a couple Asian staffers, other Asians at Fairchild, and their friends. It's not just about Details' humor - they're trying to be a tastemaker, so they need to be more aware of the issues. I understand this is a private site, but I have almost as little tolerance for censorship as I do for racism. Basically, its one of those little goffy one pagers cracking fun at some stereotype. Basically, its one of those little goffy one pagers cracking fun at some stereotype. Unless of course Details still plans to publish that "Internment Camps for Asians: Not a Bad Idea" article. If we can tolerate an article which some people find offensive I would think we could also tolerate the people are offended by it. And if people are so offended, they want to do something about it (like organize a protest), then I support that over complacency any day. It's a mistake to think that everyone is going to agree on what's offensive or not. The Asian American community is still a growing one and its voice is not going to be unified all the time. In the meantime, we're going to be feeling our way here and there, sometimes we might over react, but these reactions to what we perceive as racism don't come from nowhere - it comes from growing up here, from our experience in America. The racism against Asian Americans can be pretty subtle sometimes and I think in the end the community needs to make a stand and let people know what is acceptable. That's what this protest in my mind is all about: Showing up and letting people know that the Asian American community has a voice - a young loud voice - and no matter how disjointed our views may be we'll send a message that we are willing to act on our convictions. More information about the protest can be found herei blogged my complaints about this here. Read more in 46 protest tomorrow about Details' Gay or Asian article 47 ziegfeld Apr 16, 2004 7:51 AM I respect and support Gothamist's (and its community's) right to post regarding whatever topics it likes. I respect and support the right of individuals to protest. That said, I'm wondering how Gothamist decides what is acceptable and unacceptable stereotyping. A reading of its 4/7/04 post regarding "Queer Eye for the Straight Girl", for example, suggests that Gothamist believes that gay men have a great sense of women's fashion and makeup; Doesn't this reinforce the prevalent stereotype of gay men as sensitive, sexually skilled fashionistas? Or are the descriptions justified because the post was written as part of Gothamist's humorous commentary on pop culture (known, perhaps, as the Details defense)? Futhermore, that post even promotes the use of the term "fag", a word which at least the Encarta dictionary defines as a taboo or offensive term for a homosexual. A word which might be acceptable among members of a community but is still used by those outside it as a taunt or in hate. I'm curious, too, why Gothamist has chosen to highlight Asians' protest against the Details piece and not that of GLAAD or other gay rights groups. As always, I regularly read and enjoy Gothamist for its timely coverage of the city and its often witty take on the trends of the day. I challenge it, though, to make its agenda and moralistic stance clear if they are part of that coverage. Are Asians some kind of special group that noone can ever crack a joke at the expense of? If you don't like the spread, fair enough, don't read it. Enough with the sensitivity, if everybody got any more sensitive we'd all break out in a collective rash. This is so silly, I might even take a walk down to 34th street today to see who I should never ever take seriously. I hope the editors at Details make like the producers of Terrence & Phillip on South Park and tell the placard wavers, "Hey, go fuck yourselves. Our magazine is selling even better with the controversy. The stereotype of the "superfag" that is all over the media right now is a huge step up from the murdering sexual predator/mindless sex addict image of gay men that came before it. Most hegemonic stereotypes are distructive, but I think that this has touched a nerve in the asian community because there are so few images of asians in the media. That said, I think it is a valid point to question why gothamist has de-emphasized the gay community's reaction. If anything, the common thred here is that the perception of being gay is something to avoid, which is obviously homophobic. Gay men are used as the final punchline in these comparisons. I thought Details ran a funny comparison a few years back when it was gay style today/straight style in 5 years. I appreciate gothamist's editorial voice - it is compelling and the reason why gothamist is successful. I've always read gothamist as gay friendly, and the use of fag in the positive, reclaimed, pomo bent, btw. I dunno, but I'm not going to pay the $17 admission fee to find out. I'm Asian and while I don't think the spread is funny, I wouldn't protest it. But, I also wouldn't simply say that the protesters should lighten or shut up. You can't say Details has a freedom of speech, but these Asian groups don't. Did a chinese girl spurn you on the bus when you told her konichiwa? This is the Protest about that Details article being racist against Asians. I've heard secondhand that particular Asian cultures' depictions of blacks can be very negative. I'm an Asian-American woman who is NOT offended by the movie or the article, but isn't Kill Bill chock full o'racist stereotypes of beautiful dragon lady, lotus-blossom killers and white-bearded kung foo masters who teach their grasshopper students to murder with the greatest of sly Asian ease? What makes these two portrayals of Asians different, Gothamist? Is it because Gothamist didn't find the Details article entertaining, and your lack of chuckles damned it to the "Unfunny Ethnic Humor = Racist" file? Are the Kill Bill movies not racist because they're "cool"? Why doesn't Gothamist organize protests or show alarm whenever a Lucy Liu movie comes out? Simply said, I'd like to challenge Gothamist to define what it considers to be racist. Because from what I've gathered from this Details magazine issue (and the "Everyone loves an asian girl" issue from a few weeks back), your site seems to condemn things as racist or offensive if it's not witty or cool. But BLATANT Asian stereotypes in the media seem to get a pass if it's all the buzz in your local coffee house. For the future, I suggest that before you start calling things/people/articles/movies out as RACIST, you should define WHY. Doing so will allow you to EDUCATE the population (or at least level the playing field so everyone knows what you're making a stink about), rather than just putting something out there to show how culturally aware you are. I would have preferred it if he hadn't painted with such a large brush. I would hope that everyone be a little more specific to what offends instead of lumping in the myriad of culutes of an entire continent. Is 'American Culture' racist because Details runs a shamelessly racist spread? That's the whole point - that people ...
|
http://csua.com/feed/