Discussion Main / MightyWhiteyAndMellowYellow

Well, one way not to write relationships as sexist or racist is by not using racist/sexist stereotypes.

I'll freely admit that this is not my area of expertise. You migth want to ask in the forums.

6 years later, so this may not apply but I'm answering anyway, lol. If you keep them equal in power standing, and have an equal type relationship dynamic, I think it's fine. And that they deal with their cultural differences realistically and the relationship is healthy. If you want an example, I'd look at real life equal-power dynamic mixed race couples or something. What makes it racist is that the lady is asian and submissive, the guy is more powerful, and she gets stomped on by him or suppresses her own needs in favor of his or has a flat personality (do not do that that is a racist trope) or is dependent on him in some way while he is not (and not as attached). (aka do not do a madame butterfly). If they're in equal standing, and well developed it's fine. There should also be some cultural differences dealing with, with some humor. Power inbalance/power can refer to financial support, education, independence/dependence in some way, etc etc. Also her being more devoted than the guy can make it kind of awkward...

This may be somewhat unrelated, but does anyone else think that it may not be a good idea to treat this trope as "any romantic pairing of a European-descended man and an Asian-descended woman"? Most of the examples are of works that involve Unfortunate Implications (the typical rugged White Übermensch, submissive Asian woman pairing). That's all well and good, since that's the trope and is in accordance with the first descriptive sentence, which gives the definition. However, a few do not mention any such undertones, or even indicate that the example does not have any of the stereotypical elements. For instance, we have the example from Troublemaker and Other Saints, which says that one daughter is in a relationship with a Black man and another with a White man, no further description given. Or the example from 1632, which says that a character married a Vietnamese woman he met during the war, no description of their character archetypes given; Re Genesis (says that a Vietnamese woman dated two White men, no further description). Maybe these are straight examples, but it is not clear. The example of the Iron Fist is particularly glaring here, because while Danny could arguably sort of fit one half of the stereotype (wealthy White businessman knowledgeable about Eastern mysticism), Colleen does not come close to fitting the rest of it (rather than being any sort of submissive or laid-back, she is a driven, no-nonsense karate teacher with a personal enmity with the Hand).

It seems to me that without any stereotypical elements in a portrayal, it's just People Sit On Chairs—some men of European descent have dated women of Asian descent, and vice versa and equivalently for all different combinations of genders.

You're correct, it's not supposed to be "a white guy and an Asian woman." Which is why this was renamed from Asian Gal with White Guy to the current title, to try and curb that misuse.

Yeah, and I am one of them, currently dating a Korean chick. Unfortunately we're so few and far between compared to our white guy brothers in that area, the trope would almost be redundant.

Cheer up guys, it's catching on. Did no one see the Karate Kid remake?

It would only count as a trope if one notes that BM/AF relationships, and especially AM/BF relationships were played for laughs until perhaps the last 15 years or so.

I was wondering why it changed.

I have been thinking about that maybe we should give the gender inversions a soft split. Gay and lesbian examples, if any, should go in that category as well.

As for aversions, hmm, maybe some should be pruned, I'll look into it.

Dead Horse Trope? Hopefully moving in that direction, as society becomes less bigoted.

Okay, checked the aversions now.

• Most oft them was legitimate cases where one character want this trope to happen but it doesn't.
• One was a Discussed Trope example, I added that flag.
• Two was simply Not An Example, the trope was "averted" by simply not being a part of the film/show. I removed them.
• One was blatant misuse caused by the extremely racist overtones the trope once had: A straight example was counted as an aversion, simply on the basis that the troper liked the character. The claim of aversion was based on arguing that the character was not an Extreme Doormat - never mind that the later has never been a requirement for the trope. I changed this one to straight example and removed the natter.

The gender-inverted examples are very few and are, for the most part, minor one-shot romances.

In exactly what way is this a dead horse trope? Dead Horse as in attitudes towards this coupling have become more positive, which I agree with. Or Dead Horse as in you will see as much of the opposite coupling, which I strongly disagree with. I am in support of deleting gender inverted tropes.

Or allow examples into Matzo Fever, whichever is more fair.

The old title:

• is a pre-existing racist/sexist slur, used in real life to send the message that all asian women are whores. Alternatively that all asian women have a special duty to be modest, silent, and keep themselves away from all men who are not asian - I have heard asian men use this slur against asian women.
• is a famous quote from a famous movie - however, the trope is about relationships while the quote is about street prostitution and has nothing to do with love.
• made some troper have an outburst about how this trope made him feel as if this site was stormfront or some other white supremacist site.

It *is* a racist, sexist trope after all. I'd have liked it to keep the old trope name for its self-demonstrativeness.

The trope is not inherently racist or sexist, although it can be used in a racist and/or sexist way. If some examples are written in a unnecessarily racist or sexist way, those examples should be updated.

Also, the old title never demonstrated the trope. The trope has always been about relationships between Asian women and white men. The old title is a racist and sexist slur about prostitution, indicating that Asian women are whores. Thus indirectly indicating that Asian women are the property of Asian men and that any Asian woman who dare gang out with the "wrong" man is a Race Traitor. To my knowledge, the trope has never openly made any such claims, although the trope description once upon a time totally reeked of that attitude.

Tropes about racism and sexism is one thing. Tropes with indirect racist and sexist propaganda that's not part of the actual trope, now, that's something entirely different.

Fixing some more wicks mow. Seriously, I can't believe how revolting the old system was. Lots of the wicks are simply potholes made whenever an Asian woman (real life or otherwise) is in a relationship with a western man. So far so good: That's what the trope is, and always has been. However, the page potholed was called "Me love you long time", that classic reference to Asian women being cheap whores. :-(

Seriously... What if someone made a "trope" that is female character, period and named it All Women Are Worthless Bitches Who Should Be Raped? Then everyone could rightly add that trope name whenever a work contain a female character. Only relevant difference is that such a trope would be undeniably People Sit On Chairs while this one is a borderline case. Or... what if someone made a Wheres Da White Women At redirect called Nigger Lovin Race Traitor Bitches and started potholing every white female character in a relationship with a black man? Same racism, same sexism.

Asians are people too. :-(

Oh...my bad.

This trope was designed for racist and/or sexist Unfortunate Implications—not innocuous examples. Otherwise, it would be People Sit On Chairs.