I commented on an Asian immigrant’s two-sentence response to Laura Wood’s post at The Thinking Housewife on Obama’s plans to give amnesty to border-crossing Mexicans.
- Asian Immigrant commenting on The Thinking Housewife: I feel a sense of helpless dread after reading that five million illegals are going to be given legal status next week at the stroke of a pen. I am a new citizen who did everything correctly.
- My answer at The Thinking Housewife (portions):
- I don’t have much sympathy for the Asian...
- He sounds like he’s sorry for himself. He’s put himself in the victim’s role. It was he who made the difficult and risky decision of leaving his country to come to the U.S. and try his luck. No one pulled him here.
- ...he seems to be saying that because he “did everything correctly” he is owed something. Why?
- Lawrence Auster talked [and wrote] about the perils of LEGAL immigration. That if people came from backgrounds and cultures incompatible with the Western, Judeo-Christian, American culture, then they will feel alienated.
- All Asians know how CULTURALLY different the U.S. (and Canada and Europe) is [from their countries].
The whole post, and interaction, is available here.
The interesting thing is that the Asian immigrant has remained silent, and instead it is another correspondent who has responded to my comments.
I will refer to the correspondent, David J. as DJ (how apt, he is the deejay for the AI).
1. David J. (DJ): For quite some time, I have tried to hold my proverbial tongue about the opinions of Ms. Kidist Paulos Asrat concerning Asians, but her post above is about all that I can take of her seemingly undeserved criticisms of this human group...
Kidist Paulos Asrat (KPA): I am being referred, or my position is being referred to, as “inhuman” in contrast to all these “human” groups that I am criticizing. A subtle, and clever, ad hominem.
2. DJ: Firstly, how can such a short, innocuous, and commonsensical comment...
KPA: Again he’s setting the standards. Since when have short sentences been given full amenity over harm and stupidity?
Who is judging that? He, me, an independent jury?
What are his reasoning, rationale, arguments for these sentences being innocuous and commonsensical?
3. DJ: made by a lone Asian reader
KPA: Since when have the actions of lone individuals not had consequences? Is the Asian absolved because he’s alone?
But is he even "alone?" I asked if the Asian was married, had a girlfriend, had a family. He never responded. How do we know he is not making this statement with the backing of other Asians around him?
But even more interestingly, is he absolved because he’s Asian!
So, how do we know that his opinions are his alone? I claim, based on research, readings and interactions, that many Asians think like this. I am sure he would agree with me.
This is where I claim that he is looking for sympathy, as a “poor, harmed, victimized, lonely Asian.”
4. DJ: warrant such a lengthy diatribe
KPA: Again, a clever interjection of an ad hominem - “diatribe”
He’s basically dismissing, or highlighting, my discussion as some kind of rage-filled, hate-filled rant, incoherent and not worth listening to.
5. DJ: By Ms. Asrat, an Ethiopian immigrant in Canada?
KPA: DJ really quite sophisticated. He is saying that because I am an immigrant (his definition of me), then I have no right to criticize other immigrants.
Why? Because of some unspoken fellowship? A code of language (immigrant ethics)? An obligation to “shut up”?
Is he making me complicit with some kind of “immigrant underworld” of liars and cheats, and that I may be part of that?
Of course, he underlines “Ethiopian” as well. This is clearly a reference to “race” as in non-whites cannot criticize other non-whites.
So, once again, he has lumped me in his “non-white immigrant” category, to which I am supposed to owe allegiance, and if not, at least a code of ethics of keeping quiet about immigration.
I don’t consider myself an “immigrant” by the current definitions, which means someone from a Third world country (Asia, Africa and Latin America). It is very interesting that those Germans, English, Scandinavians who have been here much fewer years than I have are not considered immigrants, nor do they consider themselves immigrants. The original Germans, English, Scandinavians immigrants were also considered "immigrants" but "settlers." The hyphenated immigrant is now mostly from a Third World country.
Previous hyphenations were limited. It is now understood that "German Americans" for example, are only called thus for some authentic referral to their roots. They all eventually became simply Americans.
Now, ALL Third World immigrants present themselves with a hyphenation to indicate their countries of origin.
But I have always called myself Canadian, and never refer to my Ethiopian background except when the conversation requires it. So it is DJ who has set the definitions of the parameters of my identity.
6. DJ: The Asian reader has dutifully obeyed our immigration laws...
KPA: “Obeying our immigration laws” has become a code language for “immediate acceptance.” Applying for immigration should be no guarantee for acceptance. Of course a prospective immigrant should “obey” the immigration laws, otherwise he is simply a criminal. But, just because he follows immigration laws doesn't give him a free ticket into America.
7. DJ: ...and is disheartened that admitted lawbreakers will unjustly receive the same reward of American citizenship as he.
KPA: DJ is clever again, putting the word “reward” here, indicating that even legal immigration requires its stringent process.
8. DJ: Were he white or Hispanic, would Ms. Asrat have taken him to task for such a simple expression of despair over an obvious injustice?
KPA: I don't understand this question. But I think it is DJ's clever way of saying that I would favor "Third world" immigrants, or that I may be loyal to these countries because of my country of origin.
Of course, my answer is "No." See above.
9. DJ: Further, I have read her unreasonable criticisms of an Asian Christian woman named Jessica Rey. What are Mrs. Rey’s wrongs?
KPA: Here we go into interesting territory: a post I wrote about a year ago (and which Laura posted on her website here and here----She’s LIMITED - sub-par
10. DJ: … An Asian Christian woman
KPA: I will start with the "Christian" part.
11. DJ: She sells relatively modest swimsuits (are such not needed to combat the whorish swimwear of today or should women avoid the water entirely?).
KPA: Here’s a comment at Laura’s site, and what a correspondent wrote about Rey’s modesty ploy and not-so-cheap swimwear:
Kidist also mentions the swimsuits being something you could easily buy at Sears or Wal-Mart. I can’t speak for either of those stores but I can attest to seeing very similar styles at Target for considerably less so I do wonder what exactly Jessica is adding to the market, other than more expensive versions of items already available for purchase. Her whole “modesty” schtick seems to be more of a marketing ploy rather than a true interest in modesty and reclaiming beauty. See above
KPA: Plus, Rey is “limited.” She focuses solely on swimwear, where one can get the same design at a fraction of the price at Walmart, Target and Sears.
I’ve bought such swimwear from Walmart, and the color hasn’t run, and the suit hasn’t shrunk. I think I got a pretty good deal.
The only problem is it says “Made in China.” Now, I think the Chinese are actually getting designs from American prototypes, so their merchandise is proxy-American. My big battle now is to try and buy everything Made in America. It is getting cheaper these days to do so.
And it is not clear where Rey has her swimwear manufactured.
KPA: Regarding Rey's limited merchandise:
She is now writing a book (or has written a book) on how young girls can chose "modesty." This is the swimsuit designer talking about modesty! She calls it "Decent Exposure." Why "exposure" at all? Strange choice of word for a "modesty" advocate.
I think she's just trying out other venues for income generation. I doubt her swimsuit enterprise has been very profitable.
12. DJ: She runs her own business, even though she has a husband and children (did not the Bible’s model of a virtuous woman in Proverbs 31 diligently work to sell linens and handle commercial affairs while simultaneously fulfilling her wifely obligations to her family?)
KPA: She’s not selling linens, she’s selling glorified underwear!
13. DJ: Her clothing merchandise is more expensive than the counterparts at Sears and Walmart (is such not expected from small businesses that cannot capitalize on the economies of scale and bulk distribution networks of large conglomerates?).
KPA: But it is not any better!!! Unless she can guarantee colors not fading/running etc, and come out with better designs that Sears, Walmart and Target at a fraction the price, or JC Pennys which are still ½ of what Rey charges for hers.
14. DJ: If I remember correctly, Mrs. Rey posed while pregnant in a tank top with her husband on a website -
KPA: So much for modesty - showing her protruding stomach in a “tank top.”
Here is a correspondent at The Thinking Housewife who agrees with me, and adds more to the conversation:
I also agree with both you and Kidist that the pregnancy photo is immodest and inappropriate. It’s an interesting photographic capture of her and her husband’s solipsistic behavior, the way that they ogle the pregnant belly as if to say, “Look at what WE did! This is OUR special moment!” It’s most definitely not about the baby. I feel sorry for their children who were conceived, in all likelihood, for the benefit of the parents. These children grow up not viewing themselves as complete souls on their own because their whole purpose in life is to complete the parents’ empty souls. At least, that’s what pictures like this say to me. It brings to mind the modern wedding, its expense and emphasis on destroying tradition in favor of adding your “personal” touch because when you’re a solipsist the world emanates from you, you don’t inhabit a world separate from yourself. It’s flawed beliefs like this that give credence to a “whatever works for you” or “whatever you need Christ to be” kind of Christianity. And in the case of Jessica Rey, it gives rise to a conveniently commercial modesty that profits.
And Laura writes here:
Immodest? She looks like she is wearing underwear or clothes for bed. Very tight clothes on a pregnant woman are immodest because they are similar to nakedness in revealing all the contours of the body. A woman’s naked body should be for her husband alone. Modesty is about protecting intimacy, privacy, and mystery, not simply about sex. (Insane people are the most immodest of all. They have no sense of self, no interior life, no restraint.) If there are not some things we reveal only to those with whom we are most intimate, those whom we love and to whom we also disclose our deepest thoughts, then we have no self to give to them. We have no privacy and no depth. “Indiscretion signifies a lack of distinction,” said Rudolf Allers, in his book Sex Psychology. Privacy is exclusive.
Yes, her husband is worshiping her and her belly. He does not look at the camera. He is in the background, his ostentatious crucifix obscured by his wife’s overdeveloped biceps. [Actually, this is not right, because her left arm is slight, so I take that back. See discussion below.]
It is interesting that there is no full-faced photo of her husband on-line, nor anything about what he does. It is the standard fare of these “enterprising” women, often Asian women (look at Michelle Malkin) that they completely put their husbands out of the picture. I can understand keeping their children anonymous, but why the husband? Where is their personal life? How do they influence each other? Etc...
15. DJ: Why were the white wives on the selfsame website, some of whom were nude, not also heavily criticized by Ms. Asrat?
KPA: - I have criticized whites. But this blog is about Asians.
16. DJ: She married a white man (did not Moses marry one of Ms. Asrat’s fellow Ethiopian kinsmen, a marriage that in Numbers 12 was defended by God himself when his sister, Miriam, spoke against it?).
KPA: Moses’ marriage is a very difficult part of the Bible
But historically, and ethnically, you could say that Miriam was similar to Moses, being a Semite, as the Amhara of Ethiopia are still identified.
Miriam was probably reacting to the differences in geographic area, and a foreign woman, as someone who was not from their region. The same way we would react towards a European woman marrying and American man. And I think rightly so.
17. DJ: Let me hurry to qualify that I am not a proponent of mass interracial relationships.
KPA: It is always with qualifiers isn’t it these days? The disease of our times. No-one takes a stand, and softens whatever stand they have with some kind of “I’m not such a bad person because….”
18. DJ: I even recall Ms. Asrat’s complaining about a white family’s Asian nanny who took the young white son to a McDonald’s restaurant! What a crime against humanity and affront to Western civilization is the world’s most popular white-owned restaurant!
KPA: I agree. I was saddened and depressed by the food the young boy was eating. He was drinking a can of coke and eating some kind of candy. I didn’t find them in MacDonalds but close enough in the huge downtown mall, with people charging around by this young toddler’s stroller. The coke and candy seemed like a way to cajole him into silence (or temporary contentedness) while strapped into that stroller in the crowded mall. Here is a post I did on him.
This bothered me so much that I posted a letter I sent to Laura (Thinking Housewife) about the situation:
There are parks nearby, where the woman could have taken the boy.
This nanny was Chinese. I listened to (into) the Chinese nanny’s conversation, and she had a prominent accent, and spoke with grammatical errors. This is the kind of English this young boy is being exposed to at the crucial, language-acquiring years of his life.
19. DJ: Of course, I welcome critical viewpoints about all human groups when the shoe fits: blacks regarding violent crime rates, whites concerning liberalism, East Asians concerning academic testing improprieties, Australian Aboriginals regarding alcoholism, Arabs concerning Islam, and so forth. In the words of Steve Sailer, “criticism makes you better.” However, the quickness by which Ms. Asrat interjects to reproach Asians and virtual refusal to allow a positive comment about them to go unchallenged appear unseemly and biased, especially with regards to a group of people with the lowest crime rates, highest intelligence (save Ashkenazi Jews), and lowest illegitimacy rates. Of course, by “Asians,” I gather that the chief focus is on East Asians.
KPA: This is a bit jumbled. I’ll answer it in two parts.
a. Essentially, DJ is saying that he acknowledges the faults of specific ethnics. (Actually, one point of contention: I wouldn’t say “Arabs concerning Islam” But I would say” “Arabs concerning Jihad, and murdering non-Muslims in the name of Islam”). But that he doesn’t like the way I reproach Asians on criteria that he doesn’t agree with!
b. He criticizes the quickness “by which [I interject] to reproach Asians and [my] virtual refusal to allow a positive comment about them to go unchallenged appear unseemly and biased.”
Since when has criticism been coated with pretty words? Criticism is criticism. I don’t have to make it palatable for you or for anyone else. In fact, even if I do that, you will find it at fault and probably say I’m “sugar-coating” my reproach.
20. My LAST WORDS: TRUTH IS NOT PALATABLE
Posted By: Kidist P. Asrat
Posted By: Kidist P. Asrat