Parks and Parents and the Public Self

Me and some friends from church decided to have a picnic this weekend. At the same time, a group of parents decided to have a picnic with their children, as well. They had 5 little girls in pink and purple princess dresses. Some in tights, some in shiny shoes, all as cute as possible.

They were playing a game that went like this: lift your skirt over your head and scream about what your underwear looks like. For one girl, this meant pulling her tights down so her friends could get a better look.

One of the adults came over and quickly threatened to take her home and the game quieted down.

When do we stop throwing our skirts around and start crossing our legs when we sit? And who made it like that anyway? Is it only shameful because we've been told it is?

Offhand Remarks

In a recent post, I wrote briefly about offhand remarks. Tonight, the topic deserved revisiting.

I am home, finally, and ready to sleep. Outside, I hear women laughing, then a voice shout "You fucking Asians, shut up!"

Silence ensued. And I knew I would not sleep.

My own assumptions. First, that the voice was male. I could be wrong, but I doubt it. Second, that the voice was white. Unprovable, and harder to defend than gender. I could be wrong. And third. that I heard what he said accurately.

Am I being over sensitive? A man is trying to sleep. In frustration, he yells out the window at women who happen to be Asian. Heat of the moment, he didn't mean anything by it, its not like he's racist.

Or maybe, that is exactly what he means. In the heat of the moment, he said exactly what he meant, even if he would have had the good sense not to any other time. In a split second, the not-nice-thing he chose to say was 'Asian'. Not assholes, or any other common pejorative. Not bitches, fat, ugly, loudmouth, or any other word that could make someone feel bad about themselves regardless of truth or beauty.

Asian was the first thing he thought of that he thought would shut them up. He must have a reason. What is it that makes him think we are somehow inadequate, or threatening, or un-American, that our name can be substituted for an insult?

And what if we substituted another group into the blank, instead of Asian?

"You fucking blacks, shut up!"

"You fucking queers, shut up!"

"You fucking Jews, shut up!"

Am I still overreacting?

How is it that incidents like this, and much much worse, still happen? Why did a student beat another student on campus this year for hanging a Palestinian flag? Why does our philosophy department only teach one class that doesn't focus on white men? Why did the financial aid office insist my black female classmate was an athlete? Why is the average income of the new freshman class $100,000 per year?

Are not all these situations problematic? Are not all these situations related?

Diversity and Multiculturalism

This week Cal is celebrating the 20th anniversary of the American Cultures (AC) requirement. The AC requirement, originally envisioned as mandatory exposure to the Ethnic Studies perspective (that is, a perspective that tries to talk about people of color, and the world, from the view point of people of color). Its a bit revolutionary if you think about it-- the only class that every Cal undergrad is required to take is one on the importance of race.

Or, it could be revolutionary. This is where I perceive the difference in diversity and multiculturalism. Diversity in the curriculum says "Every group is important to American history because each group contributed". Multiculturalism says "Every group is important to American history because each group contributed. So why have so many groups historically been ignored in the curriculum and in representation on campus? And what are the ramifications?" See the difference?

The requirement was not so much envisioned to change what students learn, but to change how faculty teach. There are faculty across the departments here who believe in an anti-racist, decolonial education that pays attention to environmental justice and other admirable efforts to heal the world. How do we get that to be the norm?

I Do Not Imagine Me

The phrase comes from an interview with a lesbian woman in occupied Palestine. It strikes me as a powerful phrase. I do not imagine me.

Who of us live so far beyond the margins that people must imagine our existence? Or, more often, who of us live so far beyond the margins that people refuse to imagine our existence? In the preface of the poetry anthology Inclined to Speak, Hayan Charara quotes Iranian President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad saying "In Iran we don't have homosexuals like in your country". Actively dis-imagining a people. I do not imagine me.

In a Bible study I led, I had a friend tell me "I don't think I could have a gay Bible study leader. I just don't think that would be right." Such an offhand remark for him, but I remember it two years later. He didn't imagine that he might already have a queer Bible study leader. I do not imagine me.

Who of us lives so far in the margins that no one imagines our existence? But still, we exist. I do not imagine me.

Memorial Events for Richard Aoki

Saturday May 2, 2009, 1.00-4.00

Wheeler Auditorium, UC Berkeley Campus

Program to Celebrate the Life and Times of Richard Aoki

Featuring Bobby Seale, of the Black Panther Party and friend of Richard

Other speakers: AAPA, twLF, friends and colleagues

Video: "Tribute to Richard Aoki" by TWF films

Co-sponsored by the Asian American Studies/Ethnic Studies Dept,. UCB

Public Invited

-----------------------------------------------------------------------

Sunday May 3, 2009 11.00 am-1.00 pm

Lil' Bobby Hutton (Defremery) Park

1651 Adeline St. (near 18th St.) Oakland

Outdoor Community Remembrance and Celebration

Community readings of short writings and poems dedicated to the life of Richard Aoki

Co-sponsored by EastSide Arts Alliance, Serve the People, Black August Organizing Committee

Public Invited

----------------------------------------------------------------------

Sunday May 3, 2.00 pm

Chapel of the Chimes

4499 Piedmont Ave., Oakland

Memorial Service

Sponsored by friends and family

And Then There Were Four

Yesterday Vermont became the fourth state in the US to legalize same-sex marriage, only a few days after Iowa announced that it would recognize same-sex marriages. That makes 8% of the US, if we give states equal percentages. (Questionable statistics make me feel safe. What about you?)

How to frame the debate on same-sex marriage: is it a moral issue? Is it a religious issue? Or civil rights? And how come all sides say they're defending their right to marriage?

I go to church two to three times a week, so I have ample opportunities to survey the Bay-area-East-Asian-young-and-college-educated Christian community. And people use the Bible to defend both "marriage equality" and "same sex marriage"-- God doesn't tell us to foist our Christian morality on non-Christians; if we believe its wrong, we should not allow people to continue in sin; don't confuse your culture with what the Bible actually says, the church was wrong when it defended anti-miscegenation laws, too; and so on and so on. A relatively small, relatively homogenous community, using the same text comes up with different answers. Whatever the opinion on same-sex marriage, we seem to be able to use the Bible to defend our position. I argue that this is an issue of framing, not the confusing-ness of the Bible.

I frame it as a civil rights issue. The LGBTQ community is a distinct community, and we deserve the right to self determination, just like any other community. Who knows us better than we do, aside from God, if you believe in him, too?

God is on Our Side

This weekend at church, a friend leaned over to ask me what I thought of a song. The song in question is Bethany Dillon's You Are On Our Side. The chorus goes:

You sit at the table with the wounded and the poor

You laugh and share stories with the thief and the whore

When you could just be silent and leave us here to die

Still, You sent Your Son for us

You are on our side

The question is, what does it mean to say that God is on our side? Who is 'us'? And what does that give 'us' the license to do? The song itself calls us to remember that even in our weakness and in our mistakes, God loves us. But for my friend (and I agree with him), the phrase "God is on our side" conjures up images of US imperialism. So often it seems that US military aggression hinges on God's blessing (think of the conquest of the Americas, Manifest Destiny, the War in Iraq-- "God has put the wilderness in front of us to conquer!" or "God has given us a great victory!").

What does it mean to sing "God is on our side"? Or Chris Tomlin's variation "If God is on our side, who can be against us?"? Can it simply mean that God loves us? Or is it invariably tied to US military aggression?

It Was a Good Day in Iowa

Iowa announced today that marriage cannot be limited to a man and a woman. That is to say... SAME SEX MARRIAGE IS LEGAL IN IOWA! That's three out of fifty (Connecticut and Massachusetts being the other two).

I do truly believe that we will see similar movements across the rest of the country in this generation. And I do hope it happens sooner rather than later.

Update: Nothing's changing

Two years ago, Nickelodeon signed M. Night Shyamalan to make a movie out of Avatar: the Last Airbender. Shyamalan proceeded to cast all white actors for the main roles of the movie. Finally, a month ago, he replaced Jesse McCartney with Dev Patel, from Slum Dog Millionaire, to play Zuko.

I bring this up for two reasons. First, the Avatar cartoon is set in an Asian-inspired fantasy world, so it seems incongruous to fill it with nothing but white folks. And second, cutting Asian Americans out of Asian American inspired films is a pattern. Speed Racer was originally a Japanese anime, but when it came to the big screen last year, none of the main characters were Asian. 21, similarly wrote Asian Americans out of the script, although it was inspired by the largely Asian American MIT black-jack team.

And so on and so on. Even in movies like The Fast and the Furious: Tokyo Drift, which is set in Tokyo, import white leads. Asian Americans continue to appear as secondary characters and stereotypes.

Usually I don't make a big deal about it because plenty of other people do. But I like Avatar. And I don't want anyone making a terrible movie out of it.