Jeff Yang on Hapa and mixed race identity
CVK
Another great Asian Pop column from Jeff Yang for SFGate.com. He discusses Kip Fulbeck’s Part Asian, 100% Hapa
“Consciously or not, I feel like it sexualizes the images,” she says. “Most of what you hear or read about mixed-race people is about our appearance. But we’re not all supermodels, we’re not all hot DJs. I’m afraid that people won’t think critically when they see something like this. They’ll just look at the pictures and ooh and aah at the way that mixed people look.” (To Fulbeck’s credit, the book features a very wide spectrum of individuals — hot and not, old and young, plain and distinctive — some of whom don’t look particularly hapa at all.)
And then there’s the whole idea of a book focused on hapa images, which Chau feels consciously segregates multiracial Asians from other Asians and from other mixed-race individuals. “I think we need to be inclusive. We need to find things we have in common with other communities of color, not just put ourselves on a pedestal. And despite good intentions, it seems like this could end up being part of the problem, not part of the solution.”
Jeff explains our various projects (New Demographic, Mixed Media Watch, Addicted to Race), and it’s great to see that he really understands the bigger picture of what we’re trying to accomplish:
The collective mission of their combined platforms is to dispel misconceptions about the mixed-race experience and to provide an open and candid forum for the discussion of race-related issues. Even, or perhaps especially, when the questions being asked are uncomfortable…
“Here’s an example of one of the things we try to get people to confront: Just because you’re mixed or in an interracial relationship, doesn’t mean you’re somehow vaccinated against being racist,” says Van Kerckhove…
The point they consistently make is that while race is a genetic fiction — it’s chromosomal bling, God’s way of playing “Pimp My Ride” — it’s very much a social reality and one that can’t be ignored or wished away. Yet much of the discussion related to race and racial mixing is either abstract and academic, or softball and utopian. The personal side, the real-world side, the “just people” side — that often gets lost in the static…
“What we’ve ultimately found is that mixed-race and interracial relationships end up being very powerful filters through which to look at race in general,” says Van Kerckhove.
And ultimately, while we have our reservations about Fulbeck’s book, what we really want is for more people to jump into discussing these issues. So if the book can accomplish that, then it’s definitely a good thing:
Chau says that their goal is ultimately to “get more voices into the discussion” — which, she allows, is also one valuable aspect of Fulbeck’s book. “At least it will reach a greater number of people and get them thinking and talking,” she says. “Sure, I have my concerns, but I’m not upset that the book is here. I think it’ll be interesting to see what comes of it.”
Bob wrote:
Is it really so bad to be stereotyped as good-lookin’ and exotic?
Posted 30 Mar 2006 at 6:19 pm ¶
Marsha wrote:
If you have to ask that question, I think it is perfectly obvious that you haven’t read this blog…at all. There are tons of posts on here why that stereotype is just what it is- a stereotype.
And, since when is stereotyping ANYONE a good thing?
I can’t stand it when people just assume that the know something about me based my ethnic background.
Posted 31 Mar 2006 at 10:17 am ¶
Ben wrote:
I think Bob’s question is legitimate, but in the context of the post it seems like flamebait
As the post mentions, the book features a wide variety of individuals, and I would say, if anything, it detracts from the stereotype that all hapas are hot.
Posted 01 Apr 2006 at 1:29 pm ¶
little mixed girl wrote:
a while back kip plugged this project at a talk at my university.
while i admit that it’s interesting, what really pisses me off is how mixed ppl like to separate themselves from other mixed ppl.
we have facebook groups for “half-asians”, “half-blacks”, etc. words like “hapa” or “mulatto” (racist) that ppl use to promote their special mix.
what’s wrong with being just mixed?
what’s the need for calling out all mixed ppl that are a certain mix?
mixed ppl as a group are all broken up into cliques of same-mixedness, why separate further?
*end rant*
Posted 02 Apr 2006 at 12:32 am ¶
Ben wrote:
If it’s OK to make racial distinctions between people at all, I think it’s fine to maintain those distinctions between multiracial people as well.
I would say that, for instance, the hapa identity and experience in America are quite different from the mulatto identity and experience, both presently and historically.
(I would also say that implying the existence of a singular hapa identity or experience ascribes false homogeneity to a fairly diverse population… but then I would also say that implying the existence of a singular Asian identity or experience ascribes false homogeneity to a fairly diverse population.)
So, if we’re willing to maintain separate racial identites in the first place (while tacitly/obviously sharing American-ness, for instance), I think it’s consistent that we’d maintain separate mixed-racial identities while tacitly/obviously sharing mixed-ness.
Posted 03 Apr 2006 at 9:28 am ¶
Lyonside wrote:
LMG: I hear you in that something that affects one “type” of mixed folk should be of interest to other ‘types” of mixed folk. Hence the presence of groups like SWIRL and heck, this blog.
However, CULTURALLY there can be huge amounts of difference, and I have to respect that. Someone who is of Vietnamese and Japanese heritage, vs. Someone of African-American and Chinese heritage, vs. Someone of African-American/Hispanic heritage, vs. Someone of African-American/ White heritage, vs. someone of Hispanic/Hawaiian… etc. [Insert Combo Here] is going to have different experiences in the US based on location, cultural involvement of the individual and the parents, environment, language, diversity of environment, etc.
To lump us all together negates the value of those various cultures and ethnicities. To lump us all togehter is to make broad and therefore meaningless generalizations.
Posted 04 Apr 2006 at 10:24 am ¶
t-mac wrote:
Lyonside’s comments to little mixed girl makes me wonder then if it makes sense to have a multiracial box on the census since persosn of diverse backgrounds have varient cultural experiences. I haven’t read much on the arguments in favor of a multiracial box. Once finals are over (I’m still in school and semester is quickly closing in) I will do more research.
By the way, I love the site. I been reading the posts off and on for the past month or so.
Posted 04 Apr 2006 at 5:13 pm ¶
little mixed girl wrote:
the problem is that the 2 main types of mixes (black/white & white/asian) seem to think of their own mix as being representative of what mixed is.
and when they do consider “other types” of mixes, it’s always with “well they have a different experience from me so we can’t possibly have anything in common except for being mixed.”
why is it so offensive to ppl to just be “mixed” rather than creating a label that you and a handful of other people know?
what about those of us that are mixed with 3 or more groups?
what about those of us that don’t have an uprbringing that has some cultural aspect to it?
i don’t think “lumping” us together negates the experience of being mixed, instead we are forming bonds with other mixed people.
part of the reason that the mixed community is so fractured is that we only look at our own mix and we exclude other mixes.
when i go abroad, i say that i am “american”, this doesn’t negate my mixedness, if they want to know further info i can tell them.
i personally don’t think the use of key words to describe types of mixedness is helpful to anyone.
what’s next; words that let you know if your father or mother is the mexican one? we can still be unique as individuals, but it pains me to see mixed ppl on my campus that don’t go to the mix club because “it’s not a black/white or white/asian or indian/white specific club.”
Posted 04 Apr 2006 at 6:51 pm ¶
Lyonside wrote:
LMG: I think you’re missing my point for your own soapbox.
Those inclusive groups EXIST. And we have a lot to learn about each other. The common experiences of most mixed people revolve around the dominant society’s response to THEM. Therefore, since we tend to fall outside the societal/cultural norm, we are treated similarly (”what are you” questions, assumed to favor one culture over another, especially if one is minority versus minority, assumed to be confused, etc.).
However, I will not insult a, say, Japanese/Hispanic person by assuming that their experiences are the same as mine, as a black/white biracial, SIMPLY BECAUSE WE’RE BOTH MIXED. Just as I don’t assume my future kids will have the same experiences as myself as multigen mixes (they will be PuertoRican latino/a, black, and white, and unlike myself, have 2 identified minority parents).
Seems like you want it both ways:
Posted 04 Apr 2006 at 10:36 pm ¶
Lyonside wrote:
(sorry, I clicked outside the text box and couldn’t get back):
Seems like you want it both ways: you claim that terms shouldn’t be used, and then claim that black/white and white/asian mixes are against the others. Maybe that’s true on your campus. In my experience, not so much.
Hapa does NOT mean just white/asian, to my understanding. The term originated in Hawaii and means any part Asian mix (if more white/Asian first gen mixed people use it, maybe it’s because there are a lot of them in the mixed population). The same for white/black people (we’re pretty common - when I first joined SWIRL and attended a NYC function, it was the first time ever that I was a majority instead of a rarity) -= although noone I know uses “mulatto” or any other term other than mixed or biracial.
It’s an identifier not meant to isolate, but to end the questions and also express some pride or at least accuracy in identification.
Again, if cultural experiences are different, then why should we all identify the same way? Sounds like one-droppism to me.
Posted 04 Apr 2006 at 10:42 pm ¶
Damie_Troy wrote:
This is the automatic problem you will encounter because society wrongly prioritizes specific race over fellow Americanism and humanity. This is why you can’t control such a diverse group as all multiracial people.
Posted 04 Apr 2006 at 11:16 pm ¶
Lyonside wrote:
Correction: first post should read: “Especially when one is a minority and the other is the majority” - i.e. in the US, if someone is white and something else, the dominant culture wants to lump a mixed person in as a something else (and sometimes the something-else culture wants to as well).
Posted 05 Apr 2006 at 8:48 am ¶
little mixed girl wrote:
lyonside, i think we’ve done this on mixedfolks forums?
what i’m saying is this: “what’s the problem with calling yourself mixed (or biracial/multiracial/transracially adopted”?
most ppl that use those speical mix terms are in the minority.
if someone says “i’m hapa” (outside of hawaii/cali/seattle) ppl will be like wtf are u talking about?
i don’t think that what i wrote is all that confusing.
i’m not expecting you to think that all mixed people have exactly the same experience, rather i’m expecting that as multiracial people that we should be identifying as multiracials before trying to separate ourselves into groupings of who’s this mix or who’s that mix.
as for mulatto, maybe where u are from it’s a nuetral term, but where i’m from it’s a pretty racially insensitive word, and i wouldn’t doubt that other parts of the country (minus the south) feel the same way.
anyways. forget it, i have a paper to write.
my annoyance concerning these specialized mixed words is not from me trying to take away from someone’s experience as a mixed person, but from the fact that it’s like just damn annoying? i dunno, i have pride when i say that i’m mixed, i don’t need a special word for my mix to show my pride.
besides, since we’re all so different as you say, what’s the point of even caring about anything? the feeling i get from you is that because we have differences, we can’t understand each other; i believe that we can, but when you are using special words like that you put up walls to communication.
Posted 05 Apr 2006 at 5:09 pm ¶
Lyonside wrote:
LMG:
Re: mixedfolksforums, Nope, we haven’t. I’m always this tag pretty much everywhere I post.
Um, yes, they WILL know what hapa means. 1) I live on the East Coast, and I’ve heard it. 2) it’s a relatively neutral term for mixed Asians, unlike some others for mixed ancestry. 3) it doesn’t DIVIDE, it just helps identify.
Um, never said mulatto was a neutral term (I have NEVER promoted it, have no idea why you targeted me for that little rant). I said that no biracial white/black person I know uses it. BECAUSE It’s not a neutral term. You must have me confused w/ someone else, maybe at Mixedfolks?
I’m not saying we’re “SO DIFFERENT”. GOD. READ WHAT I POSTED. And don’t read emotions into anything I’m posting unless it’s obvious (see emphasized capitals above) - it’s the net, after all.
If I may steal a bit from GLBT phrasing, it’s not “special words,” it’s equal words. And by that, I mean, if an Irish American dude can call themselves Irish-American with impunity (i.e. in today’s America it’s v.v. unlikely to get you hired and fired, or denied housing), then why can’t a mixed Asian person identify as Hapa, especially if it fits their POV and helps answer annoying questions? I’m not saying that anyone should ALWAYS identify a certain way - just that if the descriptor works for them, then who the hell am I to say otherwise?
Posted 05 Apr 2006 at 9:16 pm ¶
Mara wrote:
wow these posts get pretty emotional.
just want to throw in there, that i think hapa folks might be trying to differentiate & get their experience on the board, because for a long time being mixed, just meant being black & white. i think for all nonblackwhite mixed folks, we are trying to get people to understand a broader mixed race experience - and everyone’s perspectives, blackwhite, hapa, etc. will contribute to this.
peace
Posted 06 Apr 2006 at 4:55 pm ¶