Most people in the U.S. believe that Asian American success in the academic field is indicative of idealized immigrant assimilation, but this image is not completely accurate and may be more harmful than beneficial

                It is commonplace to assume that Asian Americans’ academic and monetary success in the United States can be attributed to “natural” intellect and a culture that inherently places emphasis on education.  However, this attitude silences Asian American and Pacific Islanders’ (AAPI) voices in discussions of racial injustice in addition to numerous, serious repercussions.

What the model minority myth is

                In short, it is the idea that AAPIs are a prime example of an immigrant group that has reached a higher level of achievement than the rest of the population average. This success is typically measured in high achievement in academics and in the workplace, as well as other factors such as low crime rates.

                AAPIs have had a history of being seen as the “Yellow Peril”, a fear that manifested itself as initiatives to restrict immigration from Asia and the Japanese internment camps of World War II. That is, until it became convenient for them to be portrayed otherwise.

                During the Civil Rights Movement of the 1960s, blacks mobilized across the nation calling for action against segregations laws, voter disenfranchisement, and mass racial violence at the time. In response, the white American press began publishing rags-to-riches stories of AAPIs who achieved success in the U.S. despite facing similar racial segregation and marginalization as blacks. White America essentially broadcast the message that if AAPIs are doing so well, black America’s concerns were unfounded and the system was fine as is.

By the 1980s, every major U.S. publication had run a feel-good story about the high achievements of AAPIs

AAPIs were nonthreatening enough to utilize as symbols of idealized minority assimilation to American society because their population was much smaller and their history of political activism was quieter and less visible. Thus, AAPIs have been a tool to justify institutional racism ever since, and the model minority myth is taken as fact to this day.

Flaws of the Model Minority Myth

                The model minority myth seems to be fairly easy for the general public to understand. After all, it’s hard to argue against a “positive” stereotype and the statistics that tell us that AAPIs have “obtained the highest educational attainment level and median household income of any racial and ethnic demographic in the country”. This idea alone is misrepresented, as are many other aspects that constitute the myth at large.

It homogenizes an incredibly diverse group

                Asia is the world’s largest continent, not simply made up of the Chinese, Japanese, and Korean. AAPIs therefore have many differences in class, ethnic, geographic, cultural, and religious backgrounds. Claiming otherwise one-dimensionalizes AAPIs on traits based on stereotypes rather than as complex humans with complex experiences.

It needlessly pits AAPIs against other minorities

                The model minority myth contributes to the historical tension between “the model minority” of AAPIs and those who the myth seeks to put down: blacks and Latinos. This is precisely what the manufacturers of the myth intended in a classic “divide and conquer” tactic. If minorities are too busy feuding with each other over harmful stereotypes and illusory privileges of “positive” stereotypes, they will spend less time resisting the actual oppressors. Black and Latino communities’ struggles with social inequity are attributed to “bad culture” without the press exploring whether institutional racism is at play. In contrast, when a well-educated, upper middle class East Asian community seems to be flourishing, the media is quick to attribute it to how much the current system is working. The latter story is easier to swallow at the expense of creating a very problematic racial hierarchy, leading into the next point.

It makes racism seem less harmful to certain minorities over others

                It’s very troublesome that success is being measured in wealth and academic success, and it’s even more problematic that supposed social and economic equality means there are no significant forms of discrimination left in American society.

                Instances of microaggressions are so prevalent in our society that they are considered normal, which silence AAPI voices in discussions of racial issues.

It puts undue, unfair pressure on AAPIs

                For starters, reduction of AAPI into superhuman machines thriving in the American education system and workplace is pure objectification at best. Its implications beyond that are far worse.

                Higher expectations of AAPIs means Asian-American college students in particular are more likely than white American students to have suicide thoughts and to attempt suicide. Additionally, 15.9% of U.S.-born Asian-American women have a higher lifetime rate of suicidal thoughts than the general 13.5% of the U.S. population, according to the American Psychological Association. This is not helped by the studies that show AAPIs in general are less likely to seek psychological and counseling services .

Hard facts about the “model minority”

Infographic compiled by the Asian Americans Advancing Justice - Asian Law Caucus

AAPIs face more economic inequality than the model minority myth would suggest

                First and foremost, it should be noted that while AAPIs seem to boast impressive statistics with having a higher median income than white Americans, AAPIs also have a higher rate of poverty. According to the U.S. Census Bureau, while 12.4% of the general U.S. population is living below poverty, 37.8% of Hmong (the highest in the country for any one ethnicity), 29.3% of Cambodian, 18.5% of Laotian, and 16.6% of Vietnamese people show stark poverty rates that are not discussed enough. For reference, 27.6% of blacks and 25.3% of Latinos compared to 9.9% of whites live under the poverty line. 

The fixation on the successful numbers of AAPIs is a result of an inaccurate depiction of their economic diversity. The reason for the earning disparities in the first place is due to higher educational attainment by Chinese and Indian Americans in particular. When white men and AAPI men with similar educational backgrounds and qualifications are compared, however, it is shown that white men will still earn up to 8% more. Something in the current system, therefore, still discriminates against AAPIs.

The relationship between AAPIs and higher education is bleaker than the model minority myth suggests

                The idea that AAPIs are overrepresented in universities is also, simply, a myth. University officials have used this myth as justification to cap their “quotas” of AAPI students during the admissions process. This means that AAPIs have to actually work harder to score higher than their white counterparts and compete amongst themselves for a limited number of spots. Prestigious institutions such as Brown University, Harvard University, and UC Berkeley have been investigated for their discrimination against AAPIs in admissions.

 According to a detailed publication compiled by College Board, “The AAPI student population is concentrated in a small percentage of institutions, giving the false impression of high enrollment in higher education overall.” AAPI college students tend to be distributed in only a limited number of institutions, such as in 2000 when two-thirds of AAPIs attended college in only eight states.

                Facts such as these tend to be glossed over in major policymaking decisions, such as the Supreme Court’s recent decision to uphold Michigan’s ban against affirmative action. The model minority myth alone serves as a pillar of color-blind racism and suggests that for society to move forward, minorities need only to pull themselves up through hard work rather than protest and policymaking. In the same way, proponents of the ban of “racial preferences” would rather take away the social programs and protections that seek to amend historical segregation and racial bias than openly discuss the inequities inherent in the current higher education system. The fact remains that minorities in general are still vastly underrepresented at universities, yet the ban outright ignores this.  Because the model minority myth persists, bans on affirmative action and related protections persist, meaning chilling consequences for the advancement and empowerment of already marginalized minorities.

               

Book Reviewed: Coolies

Author: Yin

Illustrator: Chris Soentpiet

Rating: 5.0/5.0 stars

Pros: It is a classic in every sense of the word.

Cons: Not found

“Coolies” by Yin details the story of Chinese railroad workers who endured the harsh working conditions and racial prejudice for a better life for their families. The titled derives from the derogatory name for a lower-class worker often used on Asian descent. (See Wikipedia’s definition here.)For such an emotionally charged term, it can be hard to write a children’s story that doesn’t antagonize or polarize readers. Yin, in the book “Coolies” manages to pull this off with grace and elegance by focusing on the story of two brothers who survive an ordeal that some adults did not.

The book is only about 20 or so pages long, which makes for a very easy and worthwhile read. The illustrations by Chris Soentpiet are masterpieces, filled with exquisite detail and emotion that is needed to handle such an emotionally heavy story. The plot is simple enough to understand by a five year old, but the way the author delivers the story makes it a page turner even for adults. Reading the book, I wanted to know what would happen to Shek and Wong!

What does it mean to be a person another race?

The answer to the question would lead John Howard Griffin on a journey through a side of America he had never known about. All he had to do was darken his skin.

John Howard Griffin, writer and former Army medic was baffled and confused by the lack of progress on the “race question” in America. Why didn’t everyone get along? Why did it seem like the world of White Americans and Black Americans so different even though they lived in the same country?

Mr. Griffin set out on an experiment to find out the answer. With the help of a doctor, lamps and creams, John Howard Griffin transformed himself from a White journalist and writer to a Black person. (He also shaved his hair.) He didn’t change anything else that one might consider aspects of a race like language, clothes, or mannerisms. At that point, he learned just how fluid the concept of race is.

Once he began the experiment, Griffin detailed his experiences (both internal and external) as he tried to navigate through his new world. Griffin was unprepared for the response that he got. As a Black man, Griffin was denied service at check-cashing stations, was forced to move to back of the bus, was verbally harassed, and even chased down by a group of young boys. He had to learn as quickly as he could, the unwritten code of race relations in the South where he was traveling including which restrooms were open for “Colored” people, which hotels he could stay in, and how much eye contact he could have with White people. In short, he got to see a side of America that he thought never existed. He saw a side that demeaned Black women and crippled Black men. The experience left him increasingly angry and hopeless at time.

Griffin was not content, though, to just darken his skin. Griffin did various little mini-experiments and traveled to different areas to see the types of responses he would get. He put himself boldly in situations that allowed him to see how White and Black people would react. For example, Griffin would darken his skin for a little bit and then remove the creams and shading to note the differences in response. He traveled to Mississippi to get a deeper experience into a place where he felt prejudice was incredibly strong.

The negative experiences Griffin faced, though, with the new understanding and help he received from the Black community in learning how to navigate this unwritten “race relations code”. He was able to hear from Black men and women about their unrestrained thoughts on race relations. He was able to get to go beyond the stereotypes to see the actual human beings behind them. As a result, he gained a whole new respect and understanding of the race relations as it was back in the 1960’s. Sadly, a lot of the same issues Griffin describes are still with us forty years later.

Upon completion of the book, Griffin became a sort of celebrity, both in a good way and bad. He became a best-seller, but he also became a hated figure in his community and local areas around the South. An effigy of him was burned in his town and he received letters of threats in the mail. On the other hand, he became an increasingly sought after lecturer and speaker, continuing to write on a variety of topics (social justice, religion, blindness, etc.) all the way up to his death in 1980.

Commentary

John Howard Griffin‘s “Black Like Me” is a classic for a lot of reasons. It features an interesting mix of journalistic writing mixed in with personal reflections and commentary. Griffin’s work also portrayed a really vivid and detailed snapshot of his world at the time in incredible detail. Griffin, in journalistic mode, is able to capture the smallest details from a glance to something larger, like a plate of food. He balances this with a grace and respect for the humanity. “Black Like Me” is not just a series of journal articles about an experiment. It is an exploration into American society and its views on race, poverty, social class, human nature, and faith.

To me, though, the greatness of John H. Griffin’s book is his openness to vulnerability. Griffin accepted the fact that he could die on his experiment, yet he had to go through with it. He risked being misunderstood (he was), being criticized and mocked (he was), because he felt that only through this experiment would he be able to get some answer to his question. As a person born in the category of White American, he could never fully comprehend the totality of the Black experience in America, but he didn’t have to. Suffering doesn’t require full participation in order for you to feel it and be forever changed. That experience temporarily crossed the barriers that are still evident in our society today. By opening himself up to such vulnerability, he grew wiser and stronger as a human being.

Let us hope that one day we can one day express the strength that he did.