Racial Identity Formation

I was born in China and spent most of my formulative years there. I cannot say that I developed my Asian racial identity in China because my identity was very much innate and blanketed by my physical surroundings. Cross' Racial Identity Development Model seems to be grounded on the notion that systemic or environmental factors cause an individual to feel “different.” I do not recall many situations where I had to exert my racial identity; everyone I interacted with during these years were Chinese. There was not another skin color I could compare to. Growing up in a very homogeneous population of working class Chinese folks in rural China and then urban Hong Kong taught me very little about racial and cultural identity. While racial homogeneity may lead to racial isolation, I found my experiences to be very positive. Back then, I did not know about racism; I transcended the issue of race by considering people as individuals rather than markers of their racial categories. The Cross Model, and other identity models, cannot generalize all individuals within a specified group, e.g. immigrants versus native-born, adults versus adolescents, but it is helpful in that it considers the sociopolitical influences on individuals.

Coming to the United States, I was confronted with a melting pot of diversity. On the upside, I gained exposure to difference and hopefully, learned to immerse in it and embrace it. However, I also learned to set categorical cultural and racial frames around certain people. I learned to discriminate. The U.S., because of its sheer diversity, fosters an oppressive culture where those who are “different” from the norm (white, homosexual male) are discriminated against. In this environment, those who are "different" internalize the messages they have been fed about what is “right” and “normal” to develop a heightened sense of self and group identity. Cross's model shows the “resocialization experience” in which a Black individual progresses from a non-Afrocentric to an Afrocentric to a multicultural identity. During this transformation, the individual ideally progresses from a complete oblivion to race then to embracing black culture exclusively and finally settling on a commitment to embrace all races and cultures. The model ends with an integrated sense of self awareness.

I followed this framework of racial transformation very squarely in America. I was fed with images of white superiority and power in this country. The low-income neighborhoods in Boston comprise mostly of minorities. The wealthier parts of Boston were predominantly white. In the media, I saw colorized images depicting racial discrepancies in crime versus honorable popularity. In my preencounter stage of racial identity formation, I respected the dominant racial culture, white culture, highly. I tried to assimilate to reap the benefits that come with being white. I surrounded myself with white popular culture, made white friends, ate Western food, dressed more Western, and behaved in a more American fashion. I am not implying that assimilation is reprobate or white culture is abominable. However, in retrospect, I did not give much credit to my own culture and did not have much racial pride, despite the countless achievements that Asian Americans have achieved in this country.

My token sense of racial pride also stemmed from the fact that I was an immigrant. As an immigrant coming from an impoverished background in China, my expectations coming to America were simple: work hard in school, get a good job, and repay my parents. My priorities were focused on education and family life; I did not care much about anything else. When I was discriminated, and I do clearly remember being discriminated many times, I brushed it off and pretended like nothing happened. I did not expect to be treated equally or with respect. I only expected to be treated better than I was treated back in China. Under an oppressive political climate and living in substandard conditions, life in America was milestones more viable. Because I felt less swayed by negative racial stereotypes portend a diminution in Asian Americans racial group identity and a gradual assimilation into mainstream, white America.

The Cross racial identity model discusses an intersection between racial perceptions of others (racism) and racial perception of self (racial development). Although our perceptions of others are important and act as triggers for development and consciousness, there is great value in the consideration of racial and ethnic identity for oneself and groups of individuals. When I first entered the US, not knowing any English and being socially reserved, I found an unchallenged notion to be happy with my lot. Although I lived in a white blue-collar neighborhood in Boston and was a target of racial intolerance, battered with verbal abuse and jeering glances, I did not stand up for myself, my culture, my race. However, as I improved on my English and matured physically and mentally, I grew out of my reclusive shell and one day, decided to confront a few teenagers who were throwing racial slurs at me. Looking them in the eye, I simply but affirmatively told them to stop, in clear articulate English. To my relief, the same kids never pestered me again. Had I not stayed there to confront my oppressors, I would regrettably remain a reticent victim of racial injustice. This experience resonates with that typical in the encounter stage.

Racial identity is a situational construct evolved over time. Because of competition and conflict with other groups, heightened racial identity based on group solidarity and similarity of experiences might form. My racial identity emerged out of the aforementioned incident, aligning with the immersion/emersion phase of the racial identity development spectrum. However, I gradually grasped that Americans are diverse, some are discriminated, others are the oppressors. America, itself, is not a country on an island in and of itself. Racial conflicts all across the world reveal the challenges we need to overcome to build cohesive, tolerant, and multicultural societies. I learn from my own experiences the injustice that plagues our society but I also learn the power of activism and speaking out. I try to promote my dream of a tolerant multicultural society by appreciating all people. As hostess of the local Boston show “Girl TV”, I often shared how I felt growing up and being discriminated. I encouraged the show’s viewers to stand up for who they are. Every time I received appreciative letters or calls from viewers, I feel even more committed to my dream. Overcoming my experiences with racial discrimination has provoked me to help others accomplish the same. I hope that those who are victims will work to have their voices heard and those who discriminate against others will learn to stop and understand. In this manner, I have satisfactorily internalized my racial pride with a greater sense of community and made a commitment that transcends the self to the group and beyond.

Asian vs Asian American

As I have discussed in an earlier post, I feel like I fit the fortune cookie analogy: yellow on the outside but both yellow and white on the inside. I am Asian American. I was, however, born in China so I did experience my fair share of being an immigrant. Being a Chinese, an immigrant, and an American, I am very interested in where these fine lines of separation lie and what turning markers blur these lines. When does an Asian immigrant become an Asian American?

Do Asians become Asian-Americans when they naturalize or does the transformation occur sooner, e.g. when they learn to combat Asian American issues, take on American values and standards, or become proficient in speaking English? By extension of the latter theory, do immigrants from English-speaking countries become Americans sooner than those who do not? If we hypothesize that becoming American relies not simply within a legal document, how can we hash out the traits that separate Asian from Asian American?

One can make the argument that Asian Americans are perpetually foreign in the United States (Sue: "Racial Microaggression"). They originate from lands where the languages and customs are vastly different from Western society's. Asian immigrants continue to roll in abundance to the United States, as well as countries all over the world yet they all share one commonality in their physical phenotypes: faces that irrevocably distinguish us as members of a minority race with recent origins in perpetually foreign countries. This physical identification factor may explain why many Asians believe that they neither have the ability nor the incentive to assimilate like European groups. When asked where they are from, Asian Americans would naturally reply "Boston," "New York" or another American location but unsatisfactorily to the inquisitor: "Where are you really from?" Despite this extra layer of assimilation barrier, many Asians have boldly tried to identify themselves as Asian American, for example, writer Ha Jin and musician Yo-Yo Ma.

Despite wanting to assimilate, wanting not to become a foreigner in our own country, Asian Americans themselves have blurred the lines between Asian Americans and Asians. Many members of the Asian American community, for example, have embraced famous Asians like Jackie Chan and Jet Li as their own. While these Asian celebrities may help publicize the Asian American community, they also reinforce the Asian stereotypes that Asian Americans generally do not want to be associated with: broken English, traditional Asian values, etc. What do Asian Americans want to be seen as? As someone who considers herself Asian American, I, too, will embrace stars like Jackie Chan as people who help elevate my "race" and bring it to public discourse. These people characterize the "Asian" in "Asian American" and their talents, values, and characteristics represent positively for all Asians and Asian Americans. However, I will be quick to identify other celebrities like Amy Tan or Michelle Kwan as well, individuals who are born in the U.S. or who have lived here for a number of years. These stars fully encompass Asian Americanism in their experiences with conflicting cultural values and generational divides, experiences that Asian Americans face (Cross' "Racial Identity Development Model").

I consider myself both Asian and American, hence Asian American. However, my parents generally see themselves as more Asian than American. We are all U.S. citizens and have been in America for the same number of years. However, I feel more emotionally tied to America; I have a heart-to-heart commitment to America that my parents lack. Emotional commitment sounds like a vague standard, but I think it is the best explanation for why some immigrants will never truly feel American despite temporal and locational associations. For example, individuals who moved to America against their will, like refugees, are not going to feel a sense of commitment to their new land. No matter how long they spend in America, they see America as a place of displacement and their native country as their true home. Being emotionally committed to a country is really open to interpretation. Once must feel a senses of national pride, of course, but I feel like the individual should also make a serious effort to learn the language (English), participate in civil society (e.g. vote or take on activism projects), associate with diverse people in America, carry appropriate emotions in national times of crises and triumphs, and feel a need to give back to America because it has afforded the individual certain rights and privileges. Because of all these malleable requirements, I feel more Asian American and my parents, more Asian.

What the individual thinks and what society thinks of the individual are often two very disparate notions but they definitely influence each other. When one starts to feel American and thinks he/she is American, then society will reciprocate these affections. Into the melting pot I go!

A Thought

Reflections on Teresa Williams-Leon's "The Sum of Our Parts"

I am a student, daughter, sister, friend, enemy, nap enthusiast, caffeine addict, techno music lover, writer, artist, thinker, progressive, quirky, pint-sized, Bostonian.

I have black hair, brown eyes. I am YELLOW.

None of these things define me, but they are the building blocks of who I am.

I am the sum all these things, my parts, and who I am is more than a sum of these parts.

A White Man's Burden Is A Colored Man's Responsibility?

Race And Privilege In The "Age of Obama": NPR

Privilege is tied to power, allowing certain individuals to assume unearned assets that can elevate social status or reputation. Markers of privilege are varied and many. In a capitalist society, individuals with higher incomes enjoy more respect, comfort, security, and power. In a male-dominated culture, men enjoy more autonomy and power than do women. In a color-coded society, those who are white are less disciplined by racism and more privileged to unspecified rights associated with skin color. Those who carry more markers of privilege are higher up the social ladder of power and prestige. Sadly, social institutions such as universities, and courts reflect and enforce certain forms of privilege and subjugation. Minorities, homosexuals, women, and other "Other" groups continue to be discriminated. This pervasive relationship of dominance and subordination involve all of us, participating often blindly.

The challenge, then, is how the privileged should think and behave with respect to their position of power and the implications of status. The underprivileged and the privilege should jointly merge their citizenry responsibilities and set forth a more equal and meritocratic society.

Power and privilege, however, are not necessarily equated with personal choice. The wealthy are sometimes endowed with money since birth. White individuals do not choose to become white. While the privileged may assume power across certain facets, we cannot criticize their power or privilege unless they abuse it by crassly neglecting the less privileged. Obama, for example, is weathy and influential as the President of the United States. While he is American by birth and profession, he chose to be Black by racial ID. Although Black, Obama constantly reminds the public of how his life is different from the lives of the many poor Blacks in America. He can choose a private school for his kids, Sasha and Malia. Washington public schools, among the worst in the country, are out. Like the Clintons and the other presidents before him, he will take advantage of his power and privilege to better himself and his family, but who can blame him?

Privileged people often feel guilty for their entitlement. Thus, many choose to give back to the community to undermine the power structure that benefits them. Yet, other people often dismiss the privileged's progressive worldview as insincere rhetoric. Very few Whites admit their higher incomes are partially attributable to the color of their skin. They feel guilty about racial disparities; they cannot acknowledge that this extra income is a product of a racial hierarchy. The guilt stems from the fact that society tells us to treat the unprivileged not only with our sympathy and our charity, but treat them as equals, and how is this possible when they do not share an equal lot in life? The privileged simply cannot be in solidarity with the oppressed, and they are condemned to that feeling of guilt. Powerful people are much more capable of effecting change, even though their selfishness renders them unwanting to in the first place. With privilege also comes responsibility and with greater privilege, greater responsibility. The privileged should be cautioned of negative dynamics that can stem from oblivion to their own privilege. They should not always assume they are correct over the less privileged. They should not wear the coat of ignorance and become unaware of the circumstances of the less privileged. Finally, they should not assume a legacy of privilege. Power fades, and so does privilege.

Tiger Woods: Race Traitor or Visionary?

Reflections on Kamiya's "Cablinasian like me"

Tiger Woods has often been quoted, questioned, and criticized for calling himself "Cablinasian," a combination of Caucasian, Black, Indian, and Asian. The criticism comes largely from African Americans, who want Tiger Woods to take greater pride in his Black heritage and not become a "sellout." Even Colin Powell responds to Woods' remark by commenting that anyone who looks like him is Black. However, by calling himself "Cablinasian," Woods is not denying that he is not Black. Rather, he is saying that he is Black, proud to be Black, proud to be the honorary grandson of legendary golf player Charlie Sifford, but he is not just Black. He is stating that he is a rich mix of Caucasian, Black, Indian (Native-American), and Asian. "I'm just who I am," Woods told Oprah Winfrey, "whoever you see in front of you."

Does it matter if Woods is a single race or "Cablinasian" as he calls himself? What is the significance of him marrying a blonde white woman instead of a woman of color? Is Woods, a professional golf player well positioned with wealth and respect, "beyond race" by virtue of his societal status? While many people may condemn Woods' self-created racial identity, I personally applaud him for attempting to blur racial lines to affirm what he truly is in his own eye.


They -- we -- have learned to live and thrive within the difference, the racial divide, that so needlessly frightens America. Like them, America has a white parent and a black parent, and an Asian one and a Hispanic one too. It's time for Mother's Day. -Kamiya


Woods is a fascinating example of a melting pot culture in a mixed-race America. He embodies transnational and multicultural ties to a traditionally white sport, and a personal history embedded and crossed with the Vietnam War, African-American slavery, Asian Buddhism, minority exclusion and social agitation, all the while trying to accommodate masses of fans wanting him to be all things to all people. Whoever Woods may be, his refusal to place himself into a single racial category, his rebuttal of the one-drop rule, may point America to a more colorblind society. Woods is simply embracing his true identity and not letting other people dictate who he is. His identity, indeed, has no defined racial name. There are no set stereotypes associated with it yet. No one can justifiably evaluate him as this or that but who he is at face value: one of the top golfers of all time. By inventing his own "race," Woods stands for a greater reality: our race does not define us; we define our race. We can describe ourself and let our accomplishments (or lack thereof) become our stereotypes or associations. Our identities should be based on our attributes as human beings.

Although "Cablinasian" is certainly a reasonable race for Tiger Woods, calling himself a Black golf player will also serve some respectable purposes. He does not even need to say that he is proud of his African-American heritage. He only needs to say that he is a Black golfer. Much of the public and many of his fans already see him as a Black golfer purely based on phenotypical bases. If Woods embraced his Black identity, he will serve as an empowering force to inspire young Black golfers. As Woods had stated in a Nike commercial, "there are still courses in the United States that I cannot play because of the color of my skin." In becoming a top golf player despite the color of his skin, he will motivate aspiring Black players who have had to experience the same racial and social barriers Woods had to face in his move up the athletic honor ladder.

The One Drop Rule

"Through a long and arduous search for blackness, Obama arrived at humanity." - Gary Kamiya, "The Mix Master"

The one drop rule does not exist? Mr. Kamiya, I beg to differ. Riddle me this. Barack Obama's unique background presents America with both a puzzle and a challenge. With a father from Africa and a white mother from Kansas, Obama adamantly maintains being “African-American." Why does Barack Obama, who is 50% white, not asserting himself as white to the American public? Can he?

It is true that the scientific basis for "race" is shaky. Humans are 99% alike on the genetic level. Our genes say we are a single species. However, "race" continues to be used and defined. In America, "race" has become a slippery sociocultural mental construct that allows us to group people by visual discrepancies, weak but identifiable phenotypes. To this end, race is as present now as it has been since its inception of use.

It is ideal to strive toward a colorblind society, where our actions and behaviors realize the hope of this nation's Founding Fathers: that all men are created equal. However, the visual categories we use to classify and treat people do exist even as we are mentally haunted by this thread that sewed our nation together. Where so many decisions and actions continue to manifest the results of those "in here/out there" illusory categories,” America has proven its firm reputation in socially trafficking people by race.

The one-drop rule exemplifies the significance of the illusory social construct of "race." This notion has mostly been applied to American-born people of “black” (African) ancestry. Any person with any African ancestry, no matter how miniscule, is deemed a “black” person. Because tracing ancestry is complicated, the concept has sustained on the reliance on using color: shades of brown to signify "blackness." When we say "race" in America, we are delving directly into the realm of "drops." Color blindness? Hardly. Human blindness? Sight is a very powerful sense.

If the one-drop rule does not exist, then nearly all of us would identify and be viewed as multiracial. Langston Hughes once wrote: “You see, unfortunately, I am not black. There are a lot of different kinds of blood in our family. But here in the United States, the word ‘Negro’ is used to mean anyone who has Negro blood, therefore black. I am brown.” That only 3 percent of Americans currently identify as biracial pinpoints the dominance of people's perceptions over actual racial makeup.

Most "African-Americans" in this country have mixed ancestry. Obama is no different. He identifies as black because he is perceived at face value to be black. His blood composition is half black and his skin tone is more than sufficient to mark him as black. The one-drop rule has dire implications. For example, if both Obama and McCain were to drive fancy cars at night, who is more likely to be pulled over by police? That one drop sure goes a very long way.

Given the above category illusion, rampant among American minds, “African-American” is indeed the most accurate race to describe Obama. By doing so, Obama has opened our eyes to acknowledge the perpetuation of the one-drop rule. By going linearly with his "African-American" identify, Obama is demonstrating that while our country is indeed a melting pot of all kinds of people from all sorts of backgrounds, racial categorization is heavily dependent on perception. He is changing our misunderstanding that African-Americans are monolithic. Obama's claim of blackness is not denigrating his white heritage because a black person in America, most likely, do have some white ancestry. To accept Obama's black identification recognizes this fact and unravels the reality that blacks have a unique racial history in America.

In acknowledging our own propensity to uphold the one drop rule even as we strive to abolish it, we will inch closer to becoming a colorblind society. Our nation must learn to refrain from making judgements based on people's physical appearance and skin color. This nation is now undeniably multiracial and multicultural; our diversity is more than skin deep. In making friends, hiring employees, electing candidates, we should focus on the personal qualities and characteristics that people can bring to the table. I am far more interested in what Obama can do for me as the President of the United States than how he exemplifies a post-racial society. Reevaluating centuries of American race relations is beyond the job description for presidency!

--
Rap About The One Drop Rule