Open Letter

Dear Econ Grad Student With Whom I Went On Two Really Awkward Dates About a Million Years Ago,

I'm very flattered that you still remember me and my name, because, quite frankly, I would not have recognized you had you sat next to me at the bar. And it's very cool of you to come up and talk to me, however briefly. That's way cooler than the friggin' owner of the bar, whom I had also dated about half a million years ago, who likes to pretend that he doesn't know me, even though I've patronized his establishment regularly for the past 8 years. Thank you, too, for offering to buy me a drink. Had I not already been drinking for much of the night, I would have accepted the offer.

But my saying, "Thanks, but I've already had a few beers tonight" doesn't necessarily mean that you need to cut the conversation short and just scamper off. You could have said, "How about I get you a Coke, then?" Or just continued chatting with me while I sipped at my glass of water. You could reciprocate my question of, "So, have you finished your degree?" with that very same question. Instead, you chose to randomly tell me that you spent some time in China (Was I supposed to be impressed by that fact? Because I'm Chinese and you're white?), and then ended the conversation without asking me what I've been up to. The fact that you then ran away with your tail between your legs only reminds me of why each of our two dates was really friggin' awkward, and why I was relieved when you didn't come around asking for a third.

What is up with dudes like you and the complete lack of follow-through? If you want to talk to me, just talk to me. If you want to buy me a drink, go ahead and do so. If you want to ask me out, just ask. Unless you're a major creeper (like the dude who introduced himself to me by saying, "I'm a pharmacist; What type of birth control are you on?"), I generally won't bite your head off or give you the cold shoulder. I will be my usual friendly, conversational self, as I believe I was with you tonight. I may decline your offer should you ask me out, but that's a risk that we all take, right? Grow some huevos and just take it.

I suppose it doesn't really matter that you totally punked out, given that I had already decided a million years ago that I didn't want to date you or even be friends. But you just reminded me of why I find meeting people so frustratingly exhausting. I cannot tell you how many times I've encountered guys who would initiate and then suddenly veer off course. I used to think that there must have been something wrong with me, that I was suddenly off-putting, that I smelled bad and didn't know it, that I was like that woman from that one episode of Seinfeld who suddenly looked ugly in a shift of lighting. But now, I really don't think that's the case. I'm fucking charming. And always polite. I have impeccable hygiene. So I have to assume that when guys who talk to me run away as if I were the plague, there's something wrong with them.

And you know, I'd might as well apply that assumption to men whom I actually do end up dating. Because the follow-through is key there as well. I've been dumped by a guy who decided after one year into our relationship that he "wasn't sure" if he was ever in love with me. I've been dumped by a guy who acted as though he couldn't get enough of me and then never talked to me again, not even to say "Thanks" when I sent him an email wishing him a happy birthday. I don't walk into every relationship believing that it will end in "happily ever after," but I do think that people should own their choices and actions. When I say that I want a follow-through, I mean that I simply don't want a relationship to end with a "WTF?" It is possible to break up with someone without making them feel as though the whole relationship was a lie. And it is possible, and even comforting, to convey to someone that you care about them even after the relationship is over. Certainly, taking off like a bat out of hell may seem to be the less messy of alternatives. But it also makes you a spastic asshole.

But I digress. What I meant to say was simply this: Thank you for validating my M.O., which is to no longer suffer wishy-washy boys kindly. I want and deserve a man who knows what he wants, and who knows that he wants me.

Best,

Me

Fuck You, Arizona

Dear Arizona,

You really are on a roll, aren't you? First you push SB 1070, which I don't find all that surprising. After all, the atmosphere in your state is such that angry white folks who call themselves "Minutemen" have felt empowered to dress up as law enforcement officers and murder innocent people (including a 9-year-old girl) in the name of "homeland security" and "border control." Of course you're going to enact an immigration law that gives local law enforcement officers the right to determine the citizenship status of anyone they detain or arrest. Before I find myself driving through your state, I'll make sure to tattoo my social security number on my ass. Just in case I get pulled over for speeding or something. Because lord knows that Asian folks don't look sufficiently "American" enough, either.

So to ride on the momentum of that racist bullshit, you decide to also pass HB 2281, which prohibits schools from offering courses that "are designed primarily for pupils of a particular ethnic group" or "advocate ethnic solidarity instead of the treatment of pupils as individuals." Not that the language of the bill explicitly says this, but HB 2281 effectively bans ethnic studies programs, such as the Tucson public school district's Mexican American Studies program. Reasons for targeting ethnic studies? The state superintendent has called such programs "ethnic chauvinism," and state senator Russell Pearce, the architect of SB 1070, calls ethnic studies "hateful speech" and "sedition."

As an instructor of Asian American Studies, I have to lament the passing of 2281, not because I had hoped to get a job as one of your teachers (hell, I'd sooner live in Texas), but because the racial tensions and rampant anti-immigrant sentiments in your state indicate that now, more than ever, is precisely when ethnic studies curriculum is needed.

First, let's just establish that ethnic studies is not now, nor has it ever been, an advocate of "ethnic chauvinism" or "hateful speech." It is the opposite of those things. As a discipline, ethnic studies was established by students, teachers, activists and community organizers who opposed racism in all its forms, advocated for human rights regardless of privilege, and recognized the experiences of all Americans, regardless of ethnicity, as having a legitimate place in American history. Yes, an ethnic studies curriculum is going to educate people on the fact that the 1790 Naturalization Act explicitly declared that only white male persons could apply for citizenship rights, that the Treaty of Guadalupe Hidalgo ceded a large chunk of Mexico to the United States in 1848, that the 1882 Chinese Exclusion Act was the first of many race-based immigration bans to be enacted in the United States, that it wasn't until the 1952 McCarran-Walter Act that race-based and national origins-based immigration legislation even began to be overturned. To teach these historical facts is to acknowledge the existence of white privilege, but to acknowledge the existence of white privilege is not equal to teaching hate. In fact, closer to teaching hate is the refusal to acknowledge this side of American history, for it is precisely ignorance that allows people to shout with anger and entitlement, "We need to keep 'our' country away from 'them'."

While we're on the topic of collective identification, let's touch upon the second gripe I have with HB 2281, which is its implication that "ethnic solidarity" is the antithesis of individuality. Ethnic studies is not just for "ethnic" people. In fact, it serves its purpose of equality and empowerment best when it reaches out to all people. To get rid of ethnic studies altogether does not treat each pupil as an individual. On the contrary, it erases the individual histories and experiences of so many people in America and serves one prominent collective: namely, white Americans. What collective are we identifying when we speak of "our" Founding Fathers? Do we not assume a collective identification when we study our Constitution, which begins with the words, "We the People"? I understand that buzzwords like "individualism" are a handy way to promote "American" values and undermine anything that smells of pinko-commie-socialism, which any critique of our hegemonic social order seems to be associated with. I'm just saying that that supposed opposition is a fallacy. As people who live and work within America's borders, regardless of our citizenship status, we are always called upon to be a part of collective. There's nothing seditious about acknowledging the different ways in which we experience being Americans at the same time that we respond to that call.

Though if I had known that ethnic studies was about overthrowing the government, I probably could have made my courses a lot more interesting...

So this is just my long-winded way of saying, Fuck You, Arizona. Go ahead and practice your racist laws and your historical amnesia. I can only hope that more of your brave citizenry will resist this kind of injustice and stupidity.

Sincerely,

Me