On that awful 'Asian Girlz' song

[Content note: Racism, misogyny, rape.]

Okay, so, I guess we have to talk about this song, "Asian Girlz", and its video, which have been making the rounds on the Internet. I'm almost too tired to even write about this shit. I don't just mean tired at this moment, I mean in general. But here we go. Thankfully, Angry Asian Man provides all the summary you need, plus a transcript of the lyrics.

I have not brought myself to watch the video, but the lyrics are so nonsensically racist and sexist that I was almost convinced the whole thing was a parody of Asian fetishism. Not that that would make it instantly unproblematic, mind, but that's how ridiculous this song is. What also struck me is that there are actually quite a few references that show awareness of Asian (American) culture. I mean, yeah, the usual stereotypes are there--fried rice, ninjas, dragons--but boba tea? Shark fin soup? These are not things I expect the average white racist to be familiar with. I immediately thought, I bet this band is from LA, which a little Googling confirms. I'm guessing the place names in the song would be another giveaway, if you're familiar with that area.

We actually have something of a cultural milestone here. This is Asian American fetishism, perpetrated by dudes who presumably see and interact with real Asian Americans all the time. Asians: reliably exotic, even when they're totally familiar! 'Forever foreigner' syndrome--you're looking at it.

Of course, these lyrical geniuses accompanied their video with the usual sad disclaimer of self-unaware privilege hogs everywhere:

It's a joke, we're making fun of ourselves, we LOVE Asian women, we have an Indonesian band member, &c., &c. I've got bingo!

I don't have time to go into all the ways this song fails at both not-racism and self-parody, but I think they should be pretty obvious. I do want to address, though, the band's description of their song as an "endearing & submissive...tribute" to Asian women. I don't know about you, but I don't find anything endearing or submissive about this lyric:

It's the Year of the Dragon
Ninja pussy I'm stabbin'

I know, I know, it's a JOKE, because it's not like sexual violence is a REAL THING that happens to women ALL THE TIME. Lighten up! Nothing to see here--just some guys reducing a woman to a body part, which they talk about stabbing.

Or these:

Come on sit on my lap (right here baby)
Or we'll send you back
And you age so well
I can barely tell
17 or 23?
Baby doesn't matter to me

Boy, the only thing funnier than sexual coercion by threat of deportation is statutory rape!

Band dudes: If you really wanted to write a tribute to Asian women (rather than a tribute to your personal wank fantasies), you might consider that some of the Asian women who hear your song will have experienced sexual violence and most of them will have experienced racist treatment, and to them your song will sound like nothing more than a litany of the same hurtful garbage, regardless of your intentions.

I'm sure these dudes would say they "love" Asian women, which just points out another problem: the conflation of "love" and "respect". You can "love" an object, but you can't respect one. (Quite literally, fetishism is love of an object.) When you, a stranger, insist that you "love" me, that is not flattering, and it is not harmless, because it's an objectifying, dehumanizing love. It's a selfish love, so keep it the fuck to yourself.

As a parting thought, I bet these d-bags are kept really busy hollering 'konichiwa' or 'ni hao' at every Asian American woman they see. It's a wonder they even have time to craft masterworks like this one.

PS. 3...2...1...wahhhhhhh, CENSORSHIP!!

Breaking news: white dude backs other white dude for powerful position

Honestly, New York Times, this fan letter to Lawrence Summers is frankly embarrassing, even if it's "only" in the opinion section: The Right Leader for the Fed

No one is perfect, but I score Larry’s batting average and qualifications at the top of the heap. There’s that extraordinary intelligence: the most brilliant, most analytical and most surgical brain of anyone I’ve ever encountered.

Whoo, sports metaphors! Also, no one is perfect, but WHATEVER, let's get back to talking about how awesome Larry is! He's just so intelligent.

Now I know I'm an angry no-fun feminist and all, but I find it striking that Steven Rattner can't even be bothered to mention the other top contender for the post, Janet Yellen, in his panegyric to Summers. He doesn't have a word to say about what makes Summers a better candidate for the job than Yellen--he doesn't have anything to say about Yellen at all. But the language he uses to describe Summers's "extraordinary intelligence" is telling: "brilliant", "analytical", "surgical". Don't stop there, Mr. Rattner, let's do a little word association! I'll start: Precise. Cold. Hard. Scientific. Male. Do I win?

By implication, it's that "brilliant, analytical, surgical" intelligence that Yellen lacks. In a piece about how great Lawrence Summers is, who famously thinks that women have less intrinsic aptitude than men for science and engineering, that implication is a problematic one, to say the least.

Also, I am SO SURPRISED that Rattner found "working for [Summers]...to be stimulating, enjoyable and harmonious", and that he assumes this experience to be universal:

As near as I could tell, my thoroughly satisfying experience was similar to that of his other staffers. On reflection, I concluded that passing years, a searing experience as president of Harvard and some help from trusted aides had sanded down some rough edges.

In other words, as near as Rattner could be bothered to notice, or care about, the experience of anyone not himself, Summers is a great guy to work with! Since he apparently couldn't be bothered to actually ask any of those other people. And it's definitely not possible that he would fail to notice poor treatment of women, or people of color, or anyone without his and Summers's shared privileges, because everyone knows white dudes are totally objective observers of the world around them. It's like that old riddle--if sexism happens and a white dude doesn't notice it, was it really sexist? (A: Haha, NO, don't be silly!) Dude can't even talk about sexism--"a searing experience" at Harvard? Really? What the fuck kind of experience do you think it was for all the women harmed by his remarks, Mr. Rattner?

It's especially illuminating to read the above in relation to this piece, published in the same edition of the same paper, about some big-shot philosophy professor who left his tenured position after a student reported him for sexual harrassment. The article starts with the totally un-shocking revelation that philosophy is not a very friendly field for women:

Thinkers from Aristotle to Kant questioned whether women were fully capable of reason. Today, many in the field say, gender bias and outright sexual harassment are endemic in philosophy, where women make up less than 20 percent of university faculty members, lower than in any other humanities field, and account for a tiny fraction of citations in top scholarly journals. [Emphasis mine.]

In case it wasn't clear, "thinkers" today are still questioning whether women are fully capable of reason. Like Larry Summers. That's a problem, and apologists like Rattner are only adding to it.

See also:
Paul Krugman: Sex, Money and Gravitas
Business Insider Australia: Elizabeth Warren Has Thrown Her Support Behind Janet Yellen For Fed Chair

The killing of Larry Eugene Jackson, Jr., by Austin police

Last Friday, an Austin Police Department detective shot and killed Larry Eugene Jackson, Jr., a black man. The detective, Charles Kleinert, was investigating a bank robbery that had happened earlier that day (to which Jackson was not connected). From the linked article:

Jackson misidentified himself when he was questioned by the bank manager that afternoon outside the bank on West 35th Street. Jackson had previously tried to enter the bank, police said, but the door was locked because of the ongoing robbery investigation. Jackson briefly left, police say, then returned and tried again to enter the bank before he was confronted by the manager, who in turn told Kleinert, who was inside the bank conducting a follow-up investigation of the morning robbery, about the exchange. Kleinert went outside to talk with Jackson and after a two- or three-minute conversation – captured by surveillance cameras – Jackson fled, police say.

 [...]

Police said that Kleinert, dressed in plain clothes and displaying his APD credentials on his shirt collar, took off on foot after Jackson – why, exactly, Kleinert felt the need to initiate the pursuit remains unclear. (With video of Jackson and info about his "fictitious" ID in hand it would seem Jackson could be found later.)

Kleinert apparently felt the need to not only follow Jackson on foot, but actually commandeered a nearby vehicle, ordering the driver to follow Jackson:

When the pair drove up to a bridge that spans Shoal Creek, Kleinert spotted Jackson, who the source said was merely walking along the sidewalk. Kleinert reportedly said, "There he is!" before jumping out of the car. Shaken, the motorist drove away and subsequently called police.

According to [APD Assistant Chief Brian] Manley, Kleinert followed Jackson under the bridge near the Shoal Creek Trail and there a scuffle ensued; Jackson was shot once, in the back of the neck.

There are, of course, the usual attempts to discredit the victim and put him on trial posthumously: he shouldn't have run, he was suspicious, the police are sure he was "up to no good". But the most incredible part of the story, to me, is this:

Manley said that Kleinert's reasons for taking immediate action would be explored during the department's criminal and administrative inquiries into the shooting. The department will "have a better idea [of] what his intentions were" and "what was his mindset" as the investigation proceeds, Manley said.

This is very curious wording. Kleinert's "intentions". His "mindset". I'm no expert on police protocol, but it seems to me like the department's investigation ought to focus, first and foremost, on Kleinert's actions. Those actions include abandoning an ongoing robbery investigation to aggressively pursue a nonviolent individual not actually connected with any crime, then shooting and killing him. It's difficult for me to imagine a set of circumstances in which those actions are compatible with responsible police work. I'm not saying it's impossible, but it would be truly exceptional. Manley's wording, though, implies that there's definitely a reason Kleinert did what he did, and once that's discovered, all will make sense.

This framing of intentions and mindset is very familiar from the George Zimmerman case. Zimmerman was acquitted by the jury because (ostensibly) there was no proof that he intended to kill Trayvon Martin. Never mind that all of his actions up to that point were totally irresponsible and unnecessary. We are meant to suspend any consideration of Zimmerman's actions up to the actual physical confrontation--or to buy into the racist idea that Zimmerman was justified in following Martin--and pin the entire burden of responsibility on a single piece of intangible, untraceable, unknowable evidence. See also this article in the Washington Post about the difficulty of bringing federal hate crime charges against Zimmerman:

“The Department of Justice couldn’t bring this case unless they believe they could prove to a jury beyond a reasonable doubt that George Zimmerman killed Trayvon Martin because of his race,” said Rachel Harmon, a law professor at the University of Virginia and a former prosecutor in the Justice Department’s civil rights division.

“It’s not enough to show that Zimmerman followed Trayvon Martin because of his race,” Harmon added. “They would have to show that he attacked Martin for that reason. . . . Proving that motive is why it’s hard to bring hate crime charges in general and why it is likely to be hard to bring them in this case.”

Effectively, you can't prove racism unless you have psychic insight into an actor's mind. That's awfully convenient for racists.

[Credit goes to Melissa at Shakesville for links to the above news articles.]