Rename: NEW CROWNER (Alt Titles 12-28-12): Asian Gal With White Guy

Yes it is. What he does with the power has nothing to do with the trope.

And none of those still have anything to do with this trope. Even the last one is about a fantasy culture in which a person of a lower class/race is made the property of someone above her status. That isn't what this trope is, except in the most extreme of cases.

Making some adjustments based on the last rounds of input. Does anyone other than King Zeal and me have any additional input?

Suggested trope description, v8.

An unequal relationship where the powerful one is a white man and the one he has power over is an Asian woman. While this imbalance is a matter of racism and misogyny, it doesn't have to mean that any character or author holds any racist/misogynistic views. Instead, it may be a simple matter of characters living in a world of inequality, struggling to overcome the racist and misogynistic social structures.

She may be socially disadvantaged: economically destitute, uneducated or under-aged. She may be an immigrant who lacks a social network or language skills and is at risk of being deported. There may be a misunderstanding or dishonesty between the two on whether the relationship is short-term or long-term. Sometimes the Ásian girl is meek, or otherwise fits the "China Doll" stereotype. Other times, she is hypersexualized and/or played as an object for fetish (for example, Dragon Lady or Asian Hooker Stereotype). Internalized Categorism may make it a matter of self-esteem. In either case, her disadvantages may make it extremely hard to hold on to er lover against a white rival, while she is also likely to be completely loyal to the white male, either to self-destructive levels or to an extent beyond what her rival has displayed.

Popular in the Fish out of Water kind of story. As problems flare, the relationship could potentially be downright abusive for either party. If the relationship is unfairly frowned upon by others, it's a Maligned Mixed Marriage. Just like with Where da White Women At?, such maligning usually paint the woman as a naive victim - invoking stereotypes of meek Asians and predatory Africans respectively.

When the manly white dominance is cool and the power imbalance is romantic, the woman may become a Damsel in Distress who the White Male Lead has to save. Sometimes from social injustice in general, but more often from abusive and predatory Asian men. Those men may also be a threat to white women, a now discredited theme that was common in the 20:th century Victorian literature. When the white man is the abusive or exploitative one, he may still delude himself into thinking that he's righteously shouldering the White Man's Burden.

Alright, well, I guess I'll add my final draft, and I'll let the crowner decide. For the record, I did borrow a few lines from Xzenu's, but I by and large, I found it much too verbose, with most of the points raised better for an Analysis page than the main description.

---

An unequal relationship where the powerful one is a white man and the one with less power is an Asian woman. While this imbalance is a matter of racism and misogyny, it doesn't have to mean that any character or author holds any racist/misogynistic views. "Relationship" can mean many different things, and includes one-night-stands, sexual propositions, or mere dating.

In Western cinema, most stories of the early 20th Century dealt with some sort of Asian mysticism or Yellow Peril. Such stories were often Wish-Fulfillment for White Male Leads and involved a him forming some sort of relationship with a beautifully exotic asian woman.

The Asian girl was always the decentralized party in the relationship, meaning the perspective of the white male drives teh relationship. Usually, this means she has very little power in the relationship while the white male had all or most of it. This sort of imbalance could take several forms:

1. The asian girl is meek, or otherwise fits the "China Doll" stereotype.
2. The asian girl is hypersexualized or played for fetish (for example, Dragon Lady or Asian Hooker Stereotype).
3. The asian girl is socially disadvantaged compared to either the white male or her (non-asian) romantic rival: ie, economically destitute, an immigrant, not well-educated or under-aged.
4. The asian girl is the Hopeless Suitor, in comparison to a non-Asian (preferrably white) rival.
5. The asian girl is completely loyal to her romantic interest, either to self-destructive levels or to an extent beyond what her rival has displayed.

If the relationship is unfairly frowned upon by others, it's a Maligned Mixed Marriage. However, these things are not inherently bad, and the power dynamic may be used as the basis for Race Fetish.

edited 18th May '12 6:35:38 AM by KingZeal

Cool. As far as I'm concerned, we are ready for the crowner. Version 8 in post 252 versus version 9 in post 253.

edited 18th May '12 12:17:28 PM by Xzenu

Crowner hooked.

"If you aren't him, then you apparently got your brain from the same discount retailer, so..." - Fighteer

Really tempted to add a "Don't Care" option.

Becky: Who are you? The Mysterious Stranger: An angel. Huck: What's your name? The Mysterious Stranger: Satan.

@Rodney: I reccomend you put an up-arrow on both options, then. :-)

Calling crowner, no consensus.

Waiting on a TRS slot? Finishing off one of these cleaning efforts will usually open one up.

Okay. Rodney's "Don't Care" option dominated all along, and eventually won.

While my proposal was leading for 90% of the time the crowner was up, I don't think it was ever leading with more than +2, and often it was at +1. So it was never near qualifying for a consensus.

So, Ccoa... Mind flipping a coin for us, so we can move on to the real issue? :-)

Either that (a moderator flipping a coin or otherwise selecting one of the drafts), or I'll make yet another final attempt to reach a compromise with King Zeal...

King Zeal: The version that follows is based on your last version. Using as much of it as I can, simply adding a few things you left out and making a few minor improvements. Your main point with your final version was that it was easier to read than mine. This new version is almost exactly like yours, so just as easy to read. While I personally don't like the list system you prefer, I included it. Like lebrel pointed out, Hopeless Suitor is the wrong trope. I replaced it with Romantic Runner-Up.

Lets shake hands and move on to the real issue, pretty please.

Suggested trope description, v10.

An unequal relationship where the powerful one is a white man and the one with less power is an Asian woman. While this imbalance is a matter of racism and misogyny, it doesn't have to mean that any character or author holds any racist/misogynistic views. Also, "relationship" can mean many different things, including one-night-stands, sexual propositions, or mere dating.

In Western cinema, most stories of the early 20th Century dealt with some sort of Asian mysticism or Yellow Peril. Such stories were often Wish-Fulfillment for White Male Leads and involved a him forming some sort of relationship with a beautifully exotic Asian woman. In these stories, the Asian girl was always the decentralized party, meaning the perspective of the white male drives the relationship. In modern stories, however, she may be the main protagonist.

The imbalance between them can be highlighted in different ways, such as:

1. She is meek, or otherwise fits the "China Doll" stereotype.
2. She is hypersexualized or played for fetish in one way or another.
3. She is socially disadvantaged: Economically destitute, an immigrant, not well-educated, or under-aged.
4. She is the Romantic Runner-Up who doesn't stand a chance in comparison to a non-Asian (preferably white) rival.
5. She is completely loyal to her romantic interest, either to self-destructive levels or to an extent beyond what her rival has displayed.
6. She has accepted negative stereotypes about women and/or Asians, ruining her self-esteem.
7. He consider himself inherently superior. If he is abusive or exploitative, he is likely to think of it as him rightfully shouldering the White Man's Burden.

If the relationship is unfairly frowned upon by others, it's a Maligned Mixed Marriage. A relationship is not automatically bad just because there is some power imbalance. Especially not if they are trying their best to overcome the problems. Also, an ultimately equal relationship spiced up with some Race Fetish or Property of Love dynamic can easily be mistaken (by other characters) for being truly unequal.

edited 31st May '12 1:17:41 PM by Xzenu

I'm cool with that. Number 7 seems a bit out of place compared to the rest of them, but at this point, I'm not willing to argue it.

Let's just figure out what to name this thing.

Awesome.

I'm discarding all my previous name suggestions in favor of "White Man's Asian Woman".

Literal meaning: an Asian woman who in one way or another belong to a white man.

Connotations: The format implies that the relationship is unequal, that he is the one with the power. It also imply that the relationship is sexual. Also, "White Man" has connotations of Mighty Whitey and White Man's Burden.

For now, I'll simply argue that this name is preferable over the current title. I'll discuss your suggestions, new or old, once you make them.

The current title is "Asian Gal With White Guy".

Literal meaning: An Asian woman is with a white guy, in one way or another.

Connotations:

• "With" doesn't imply anything. It might just as well be about two equals who are out shopping with each other, without having any kind of relationship whatsoever.
• Unlike "White Man", "White Guy" doesn't have any connotations, it's simply that he happens to be white.
• "Gal" and "Guy" may be taken as implying a special kind of work, such as Rom Com or Sitcom.

Thus, my suggested title is appropriate while the current title is not.

Is "no consensus = flip a coin" the right conclusion to draw? That is, "either" instead of "neither".

Becky: Who are you? The Mysterious Stranger: An angel. Huck: What's your name? The Mysterious Stranger: Satan.

The way I understand it, everyone (exactly everyone, or at least pretty much everyone) who voted no to one option also voted yes to the other. And vice versa.

So the crowner did get a very strong consensus for using one of these versions, it just didn't get a consensus for which one. Also. Before the crowner, everybody had months to make their own drafts. Nobody but King Zeal and me bothered.

Nobody, except for King Zeal and me, ever voiced any criticism against either version. With us agreeing on version 10, merging the two options, there is no criticism left.

"The way I understand it, everyone (exactly everyone, or at least pretty much everyone) who voted no to one option also voted yes to the other. And vice versa."

I know for certain this is not true, but there is no way to check anyway.

"So the crowner did get a very strong consensus for using one of these versions..."

If you ignore the "no" votes, everything always has strong consensus.

Not saying I know the right course of action, and hey, maybe that is it. But those are bizarre conclusions.

Becky: Who are you? The Mysterious Stranger: An angel. Huck: What's your name? The Mysterious Stranger: Satan.

Well, checking the score only takes a few seconds. I did that several times per day for the last few weeks. Almost every time the score had moved, it was that one proposal had gained a vote while the other had lost one. For each such change of the score, the by far most likely explanation is that one person has voted on both proposals - up on one, down on the other.

24 votes has been made. 6 in favor of each proposal, 6 in disfavor of each proposal. If everybody voted on both proposals, which is likely, this mean that 12 people voted. One likely breakdown is that:

• 10 people voted in favor of one proposal, and thus disfavor of the other (5 of each, since the score ended up even)
• 1 person voted in favor of both
• 1 in disfavor of both

If so, we have 11 votes in favor of going with something like these two proposals, and 1 vote against.

Please note, that if anyone truly was against both options, that person could and should have added a third option, called something like "I'm against both proposals". Nobody bothered to do that.

Mod decision here, please?

The vote between version 8 and version 9 ended up even. The tropers who made those versions then agreed on merging them into version 10. Can we count this version as agreed upon, and move on to the name issue? Or do we need another crowner on the description?

Please give us a thumbs up or attach a new crowner.

(Personally I strongly prefer the first option, obviously. Also. If a crowner is actually made, and people actually turn down the one proposal without explaining why or making any counterproposals - the what?)

I don't see how it is proven that the crowner had "a very strong consensus" to use one of these versions.

This whole thread is mostly two people talking back and forth, so neither version appears to have used input from a large group of people, and it's easily possible that that is why some people disagree with both of them.

What he said. This discussion was all the times between two people. Now, that they have apparently agreed to one option, can some more tropers give their input on this draft here?

"For a successful technology, reality must take precedence over public relations, for Nature cannot be fooled." - Richard Feynman

You guys can't enact a decision that didn't gain consensus. Neither option on the crowner is viable.

Waiting on a TRS slot? Finishing off one of these cleaning efforts will usually open one up.

Okay. So, mods...what do we DO?

Stick with the current one, or Take a Third Option?

"For a successful technology, reality must take precedence over public relations, for Nature cannot be fooled." - Richard Feynman

@Septimus Heap

We have a third option now: Version 10, where King Zeal an I have put our differences behind us and included each other's points in a mutual version. People no longer have to pick a side and choose whether they prefer to have the list system King Zeal proposed or the aspects that I included. They can have both. The new version is far better than any of the versions that was included in the crowner.

As for keeping the old version, we already have a crowner/moderator decision against that. We reached a consensus long ago that the current version is People Sit On Chairs, not a trope.

I can get behind this. Do we need another crowner for this option (followed by the alt-names crowner)?

"For a successful technology, reality must take precedence over public relations, for Nature cannot be fooled." - Richard Feynman

Remember, we started all of this because the current name wasn't indicative of the trope.

I also don't agree fully with Xzenu's "White Man's Asian Woman", because it's only slightly less People Sit On Chairs. I'm still of the mind that the very name Me Love You Long Time or She Love White Guy Long Time or something similar hits more points on the checklist.

edited 1st Jun '12 2:47:00 PM by KingZeal

Lets wait with the name debate until the a mod has announced the final description version. (Crowner on version 10 called, or whatever, it's in their hands.)