Not all Asian Americans fortunate enough to avoid racism, hate incidents
To the Daily:
As an Asian American, I am disheartened by the letters to the editor from Cindy Chu (Racial debate leaves out other side of the story, 10/03/2005) and Haosi Wu (Asian Americans need more productive activism, 09/29/2005) concerning racism against Asians. While they are entitled to their viewpoints, I find their justification for minimizing the amount of racism faced by Asians flawed. Both of them take their own personal experiences and use them to generalize the experiences of millions of Asian Americans living in this country.According to both Chu and Wu, because neither of them have experienced racist acts such as the urination incident, then racism against Asians must not be a big problem – or in Chu’s words, “taken with a grain of salt.”
It may come as a surprise to both of them that there are millions of other Asian Americans and minorities who have experienced life differently. In 1982, Vincent Chin, a Chinese American, was beaten to death by two white autoworkers in Detroit, who mistook him for Japanese. According to both Chu and Wu, because neither of them ever personally experienced that incident, then it should be “taken with a grain of salt.”
Both of them also use double-standards. Apparently, because Asian Americans are involved with Asian extracurricular groups or have Asian friends, they are “self-segregating.” That is ironic, because when I see the sororities and fraternities on campus, I see almost all white faces. When I look at the rosters of the hockey and volleyball teams, I see predominately white faces. Are those groups self-segregating also by their definition? I do not think so. Chu ends her letter by urging us to look “past the shell to what’s inside all of us.” Apparently, she forgot that what is inside of her should not be used to generalize what everyone else experiences.
Information graduate student
Quit complaining, change the channel instead
To the Daily:
Is it just me, or is everyone on this campus being hypersensitive about the issue of race? The latest instance of overreaction is the outrage that Asian student groups are expressing over the comments of a local morning talk show (Asian students protest radio show content, 10/4/2005). Here is a bit of advice to anyone who sees something on television or hears something on the radio that offends him: Turn it off, or change the channel. It bothers me that every time a racial group takes the slightest offense to something, its members demand a public apology and want someone to be branded as a racist for the rest of their life.
After the alleged urination incident that began this campus uproar, people have tried to label the alleged urinators as racist, insensitive bigots. While I do not support what the alleged urinators did, I refuse to look at it for more than what it was: a couple of drunk college students acting like idiots and doing something that they will undoubtedly regret someday.
It would be nice if we could shed all labels and stereotypes we have, and join together in a cause really worth fighting for: getting rid of the bum who tries to fight me every afternoon when I walk to class.
Liberal rhetoric vindicates conservative ‘coming out’
To the Daily:
What is it with these continuing responses to Conservative Coming Out Day? You have lodged several complaints about that harmless event, including several gems from your editorial board (What closet?, 09/26/2005) and its members (Conservatives are not victims, 10/04/2005).
How open can our campus political atmosphere be if conservatives can’t hold a peaceful event on the Diag? Should any event that offends your bleeding hearts be pushed into the closet?
You claimed that coming out as a conservative doesn’t set oneself up for a lifetime of misperceptions, but then editorial board member Jared Goldberg proceeded to accuse conservatives of supporting, “tax breaks for the rich, the elimination of women’s choice, the destruction of the separation between church and state, the continuance of the war, etc.” Clearly he has labeled us in a perceptive, truthful way.
You also completely misconstrued the point of Conservative Coming Out Day altogether. It was most certainly not to claim that conservatives across America are more persecuted than lesbian, gay, bisexual and transgender individuals or that conservatives are victims, but to encourage conservatives to be more open about their beliefs. As for the relationship between conservatism and LGBT issues on this campus, this was a clever observation about the political climate on campus, not an attempt to belittle LGBT struggles across the nation.
I think it’s interesting to go back to what LSA junior Kim Peters said in your original front page article (Conservative students come out on Diag, 09/22/2005) about the event: “It would be great if we could all come out freely without being targets of aggression from liberals.”
Was Peters wrong about what happens when conservatives stand up for themselves and their beliefs on this campus? I think the editorials, viewpoints, columns and letters following the event show just how right she was. Shame on conservatives, you say? I don’t think so.
The letter writer is chair of Young Americans for Freedom on campus.
Columnist misses key facts, regurgitates talking points
To the Daily:
Apparently Sam Singer didn’t read the news on Monday before his column (Why DeLay will get off, 10/04/2005) was printed. On Monday, former House Majority Leader Rep. Tom DeLay (R-Texas) was indicted by a new grand jury, this time for money laundering – not just conspiracy to do so. I do not claim to be an expert on Texas law, as Singer appears to be based on the tone of his column, and believe it best to wait – and check the facts – before jumping to conclusions.
I also might add that it’s a shame to see the Daily’s editorial page used for shameless political spin no better than that of the mass media. Please be more creative (and up to date) next time.