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

Double posting, so what

Maybe a split is in order, then, as there seem to be two definitions floating around.

Yes, it is Race Fetish but more specific, because Race Fetish does not go into the specifics of the dynamics of the trope. For example, in the west, we probably don't have much of a race dynamic between Arab men and Indian women. But, in those parts of the world, it's far more common. That would be a specific subtrope of Race Fetish.

In this case, the negativity of the interracial relationship is not important. ANY interracial couple is going to automatically be stigmatized, but this is a different beast than WTWWA. WTWWA's core foundation is the assumption that Black men are subhuman. All of the implications of the trope then stem from that. This trope is different: it's the assumption that white men are superior. Even in stories in which the asian woman is a Dragon Lady, this is still in play because that trope was created as a foil and challenge for the Mighty Whitey.

As I said in WTWWA, a maligned relationship goes in Maligned Mixed Marriage. This trope is not about the relationship being maligned or hated. It's about the stereotypes which act as the fuel for the relationship in the first place.

edited 4th Feb '12 7:51:50 PM by KingZeal

The basic premise of this thread is wrong. Twice

First, It assume that "Where..." and "Asian..." are the same trope, although with different racial configurations. However, that's not the case. The forst trope is about prejudices facing a certain kind of racially mixed couples within the same ethnicity (american). The second trope is about the pairing as such, regardless of whether or not they face prejudices and regardless whether or not they are portrayed in a stereotypical way.

Second, it assume that both titles are equally offensive/unoffensive. That is not the case. One title imply that "mixed marriage = race fetish" while the other imply "mixed marriage = the woman is a contemptible Race Traitor whore". It's beyond offensive, bordering on hatecrime.

Also, the claim of trope decay is bogus: To my knowledge, the Asian-white trope has NEVER been about such relationships being problematic in-universe. It has, however, been about how some racist troper or tropers considered the constellation to be immoral in real life. The trope description clearly stated that every Asian woman has a moral duty to stick to Asian men only. That bullshit was purged a long time ago, long before the rename.

Sorry, but that isn't true, either. You're right that WTWWA and MLYLT are two different tropes stemming from two different origins, but what you're proposing would make MLYLT not a trope. If we have a trope that's just about a white dude with an asian woman, why can't we have a trope about an asian dude with with slavic woman? Sure, one appears in media more than the other, but that doesn't make it any more of a trope.

What makes it a trope is the way that the relationship is typically portrayed. It is almost always a power dynamic. Either the Caucasian male is a Mighty Whitey or the Asian woman is a struggling immigrant and/or prostitute. Occasionally, there are other stereotypes involved, such as the Asian Airhead, or the petite Asian, etc. The entire point of the fetish is to invoke the feeling of a "powerful" Caucasian male and the Asian woman who eventually submits to him and Westernization or is a toy for his amusement. This is not inherently "bad"—some women enjoy that fantasy as much as men do.

Also, as I've been trying to say for a while, WTWWA is not a trope that is inherently about the negative aspects of racism. The very trope itself says that it's not always portrayed as a bad thing. It's merely a stereotype, and YMMV on whether or not those stereotypes are positive, negative, neutral, or Fetish Fuel. Same with this trope.

edited 5th Feb '12 6:33:50 AM by KingZeal

I'm sorry but what exactly is the definition of Where da White Women At? because the last paragraph of the page says

"Please note that just like this trope's white/Asian counterpart, not every black/white romance falls under this trope. If the lovers just happen to be interracial and nobody makes a big deal out of it, then it is simply a mundane relationship. Only when it is seen as a controversial mixed marriage and/or one of the lovers express an extra attraction to their partner's skin tone is the trope in effect."

Right, but "big deal" doesn't mean negativity. The second paragraph says that the reaction to this trope can be good, bad or neutral.

edited 5th Feb '12 6:43:09 AM by KingZeal

Ok, but it's just seem your seems like it's making the definition more complicated than it has to be.

That's not my intention, but these types of tropes are very complex, because eventually they evolve into something completely different than what they started as. In the case of WTWWA, it started as the belief that Blacks were subhuman and that a white woman who had sex with one would be Defiled Forever. That mentality is still there, but in a much different form. The axiom "Once you go Black" is nothing but the theme park version of the original stigma.

For MLYLT, the original dynamic was that the white man was some sort of superman whose job it was to westernize and tame all of the weird and exotic crap all over the world. The vast majority of stereotypes associated with this trope evolved from that.

edited 5th Feb '12 6:50:02 AM by KingZeal

Also. While not nearly as racist as MLYLY, WDWWA is still dialogue and should be purged for that reason if nothing else. :-)

I seriously do not agree with that.

Trying to being politically correct destroys the whole meaning. I don't see why its so hard for some people to grasp that.

That is sort of irrelevant. "Me love you long time" is a line from a Vietnamese hooker propositioning an American soldier in Full Metal Jacket. It's not a reference to racial stereotypes or romantic relationships or whatever, that is quite a stretch.

edited 5th Feb '12 6:30:43 PM by rodneyAnonymous

No it isn't. An asian hooker propositioning white men is exactly demonstrating the stereotype in question.

In the very same scene, the same hooker then refuses to have sex with a black soldier because she's afraid that he'll hurt her.

edited 5th Feb '12 7:29:47 PM by KingZeal

That's not the same scene or the same prostitute.

Also her ethnicity is practically a coincidence, it's not really important. Could have exactly the same exchange in any country; that movie happens to be about Vietnam.

edited 5th Feb '12 7:39:12 PM by rodneyAnonymous

Was it a different one? My mistake, if so.

But no, her being asian isn't a coincidence. The use of asian women as sexual playthings, conquests or vices for white men is exactly in line with this trope.

It is exactly a coincidence in that sense. That half of the movie is set in Vietnam. It would be weird to have a Swedish prostitute.

edited 5th Feb '12 7:48:59 PM by rodneyAnonymous

Not the point. The power dynamic is the important part here.

It would be no different from having a white woman hook up with a black criminal, thug or pimp because she lives in the hood. Being a justified trope doesn't make it any less of a trope.

And when said hooker is opposite of a white male? Yes. That is exactly what I am saying.

edited 5th Feb '12 7:47:36 PM by KingZeal

You seem to be saying this trope applies to any female Asian sex worker.

Un PC-ness aside, do the names of both tropes really accurately describe them? Now that I wonder since a lot of people are getting this confused with the prostitution part.

Well, my argument is that the prostitution angle is part of the trope. It's even in the description.

Prostitution has never been part of this trope. Back when AGWWG was called MLYLT the trope description included a big disclaimer about the trope namer not being an example.

In the new description, subtype six mention that the woman in the relationship might be a sex worker. That doesn't mean that prostitution as such is included.

Also, the thing about how trope titles shouldn't sound like dialogue. That's not my idea, or even my opinion. However, it is official policy enforced by Fast Eddie.

There are tropes which are exceptions to the dialogue rule, so that doesn't matter.

Also, the trope namer is absolutely an example. The "asian woman as hooker" stereotype is completely part of this trope. I just did a Google search on the words "Asian Hooker stereotype" and "asian prostitute stereotype" and there are many, many links which specifically talk about this trope in relation to white men.

Also, here's a link to the page from November 2010, where it originally mentioned prostitution as one of the angles of the trope. And even if it wasn't there before, Tropes Are Flexible...and the prostitution aspect of it is explored and discussed plenty of places outside of this wiki.

edited 6th Feb '12 3:05:34 AM by KingZeal

I agree that MLYLT is an offensive title for Asian Gal with White Guy, but Asian Gal with White Guy is not a trope.

Asian Prostitute Hookup is a trope. Asian Babymama is a trope. Mighty Whitey is trope. Race Fetish is a trope. Asian Gal And White Guy Sit On Chairs On A Date is not.

@Rodney

No, it's not a coincidence. King Zeal is right that a stereotype is at play here. YOU are right that of course she is vietnamese, the story is set in Vietnam. However, concider this:

This second half of the movie is indeed set in Vietnam. Yet, the ONLY vietnamese character to get any dialogue just HAPPENS to be a sex worker. An engrish-speaking one, just to make the message crystal clear.

We do have a valid trope here, it's just that it's a completly different trope from anything that AGWWG is or has ever been.