COMMENTBehind the scenes, a dozen NYT staffers groan and bitch about how the plug writers sensationalise their pieces beyond parody.... and here's your advice for today, brought to you by ReverseRacism TM - learn to loath your inner white man!That's right Shirl, with this powerful new package, you too can develop a powerful loathing for your own race - IF you are a white man!Yes, as well as being economically and linguistically dominant on a global scale, white men are now also cornering the market on guilt.Shirl, we have a clip for you today which we're going to play for you right now. This clips introduces us to John. He's a proud father of two, and is a computer analyist from Detroit."I love hating my own race - no one can argue you with for making broad generalisations - all white men are pathologically greedy - that kind of thing."So there we have it! Sign up now for some R and R and let ReverseRacism show you how easy it is to put the racy back into race relations!This message brought to you by well-meaning but quite silly journalists in the south seas with nothing better to do than make fun of first world angst.REAL ADVICE FOR REAL WHITE MENSuck it up, big boy.White men have done more to ferk up the planet than any other 'race' put together, so criticism is to be expected.Don't argue with me now. Resistance is rarely futile.Indeed, whiny white men like some of the above correspondents might try to grasp something other than their over sensitivities - like the historic fulsomeness of white graspiosity, the utter venal western 'civilisation.'Not just historically. Right now.If you don't like complaints about mainstream media (read white, male, likes Japanese schoolgirls), you're living in the wrong century, my fellow white brothers.

Title: "Japanese Girls Sexualized! Again!"The pictures look like normal day kids in Japan. None of them seem sexualized or anything, maybe some a bit adventurous with their style like say a goth or punk-rocker is but that's about it.I don't see the blaring red sirens you're making. You like to jump the conclusion that TNYT is simply the seperate part of America we Asians aren't a part of, and thus haven't the right to attempt to showcase everyday Japanese girls. No, your article implies they're not a part of our community.I guess you don't feel inclusive enough to feel that you yourself are American (maybe not, I truly don't know where you live, but I believe you critisize because you care) or think neither am I. I'm half Korean, half white. Is my devil heritage anathema to you? Regardless if my words are offending to you, I'd suggest relaxing a bit. Just live your life moving forward and take what comes your way when it does. Making doom forecasts of society only makes your prediction true to your experience.

I live in Japan, My wife is Japanese and my son is half black. I will admit Japanese women are beautiful. If you want to see the prettiest Asian women go to Singapore, or Malaysia. They are to die for, man are they. American men you do not know what you are missing. If they became more open to the American public, They would be super sexaulized

its just f**ked up

I think the point Claire is making is more the fascination with Japanese girls as the sole subject matter of a photo shoot, and whilst they tried to make it not so sexualised, they succeeded in perpetuating the fascination with Japanese girls. Just today I was in the UNSW Bookshop and there were postcards of Cosplay girls all over a wall (for sale). If the equivalent wall was covered of 12-18yr Australian girls in similar clothing, there would be uproar about the sexualisation of teens.

I'm quite late on the game in this conversation.As as to the talent of Japanese photographers, it is true; there are a great many. The photo series by van Meene, however, shows significantly less fetishization than, for instance, Araki's women in tied up. I believe an earlier commenter noted that the Japanese culture itself perpetuates the fetishization of Japanese women--this should not be overlooked.The excerpt you quoted from ('Van Meene says she does not conceive of her portrait photographs in the traditional documentary way: while she does not exactly ''stage'' her subjects, neither does she try to capture their true, underlying personality or state of mind. Instead, she chooses to see her subjects as the raw material of her own fictions. ''This is not just you, now,'' she explains. ''This is a sense of you, created by me.'') is an acknowledgement of the art historical arguments surrounding the documentary tradition, and is to my mind a clear acknowledgement of the inherently exploitive nature documentary-type photography, especially portraits. Some might even say the exploitive nature of photography itself.To take a photograph, to paint a portrait, to write a character portrait based on your acquaintance--it is all in a sense to change the "meaning" of a person, to distort it for your own purposes. It seems to me that in saying, ''This is not just you, now... This is a sense of you, created by me,'' she is merely being honest in that postmodern sort of way. People are actually taught that sort of language as a skill in their studio art critiques.Let's consider, briefly, that the photographer is a woman, taking a photograph of girls. What could be going on in her mind as she introduces herself to them, on the street, and asks whether she can take their picture? What is she thinking as she is snapping away at these girls? If "in today's Japanese youth culture--or at least in the forms of it that have international cachet--innocence is pulled in multiple directions," and van Meene already has a body of work consisting of portraits of girls, possibly she is thinking about burgeoning womanhood. Possibly she is thinking about the Other, trying to confront her own ideas of the exotic. Undoubtedly she has seen Araki and all the rest. Was she, perhaps, attempting to photograph girls in a counter to the women tied up in knots? Maybe not. But maybe she was.The schoolgirl photo shows the girls with attitude, not the "distorted and sexualized in the submissive schoolgirls of the country's anime." Note that the NYTM commenter has called the representation "distorted," despite emanating from within the country's own culture.Disclosure: I am an Asian American female.

Also, side note: I have met several women in SF who have left Japan and never want to return, precisely because they feel repressed/oppressed as women.

I think that it should be noted that race as a concept is invalid. Every person that has posted on this article is guilty of grouping people into what seems to be one of 4 socio/biological catagories (white, latino, black, asian).People in the real world are not so clear cut. Human biological variation is much smoother. Variation is clinal instead of modal. The noted biological anthropologist C. Lorring Brace gave the example that if one was to walk in the pre-columbian (this ethnocentric for ignoring institions such as the silk road and roman empire that lead to human displacement, nevertheless, it is still valid) 60 miles from any given point in the world that there would be no significant biological differece in any person encountered. The race concept in America developed in a modal fashion due to a complicated history of immegration, initially with large populations of english, africans, and the often overlooked native americans (in actuality showing small amounts of clinal variation between east asians). Later, east asian and latinos(native american/europeans) were added to the ethnic mix in the US. Here we have the 4 race concept emerging out of the forced proximity of people from widely far flung geographical regions, giving a false modal sense of human variation.To further support the clinal view one but has to look at the near east, do average Greeks (european), an Turks (asian), and an Egyptians (african) vary in appearence drastically? No, of course not.In liew of argueing about about harmful portrayal of ethnic minorities in media from within an outdated paradigm of seperate races, much more could be accomplished by argueing from the more plausible clinal paradigm. Here the concept of race can slowly be deteriorated and social equality could be facilitated.

I won't argue against the idea that we have more biological similarities than differences, but in the real world "race as a concept" is more valid than race as a genetic definition. People in the real world have TV, books, magazines, movies, etc. The real world is not DNA testing or facial scanners, it's the way we conceive of ourselves and others, it's tribal identity. You know, when you're a Jet, you're a Jet all the way, from your first cigarette your last dying day.The clinal argment may be valid in a genetic idiom, but to declare race invalid in the "real world" ignores the nature (pun intended) of constructed human cultural history and living identities. Pre-Columbian real world perhaps, but not the contemporary one, definitely not the one in the USA which, as noted, has been forced together with genetic mixing still far from really taking hold. I'll admit that if you presented me with a Serb and a Croat or a Hutu and a Tutsi, I probably couldn't tell the difference reliably, but I'm pretty sure the concept of race (and relatedly, nationalism) is very real for those groups.Does expounding similarities of races really foster social equality or does it just reinforce the idea that difference is not desirable? Finding common ground is important, but so is agreeing to disagree.Speaking of social equality, how does the clinal viewpoint relate to class? I can't imagine it applies any more to pre-Columbian cities than it does to contemporary cities.

I'm implying that the clinal view should be taught and adopted instead of a modal view of race on the grounds that as a paradigmatic influence on human equality, much more is possible than or current focus on seperate races.The social lense used to differentiate people based on this invalid biological concept is taught in america through formal and informal education and with the cessation of this sort of flawed reasoning only good can come in terms of equality. Nationalism (analoguos to the race concept) could indeed take a hit, but pride aside, in this case it seems the ends may justify the means.This concept does not support the the desirability of sameness in appearence or in genetic mixing as a means towards equality, instead it teaches that human variation is subtle, not drastic, and that the american race concept is a relative invention based on a specific history instead of reliable science. All in all the clinal approach is a scientific approah at human variation and its application to the social milliue argues against the half baked informal education on race and race relations most americans recieve.Class is another beast all together...

I still don't get how showing the our ability to perceive subtleties of genetics is going to trump the impetus to create tribal identity. If you're saying that we look are more than just differences in genetics (and governemtal burdens) because there are other factors at play, I agree with you, but to say that race isn't a factor in personal identity is ignoring a lot of important history.Maybe I'm unclear on the "american race concept" because I haven't done any formal study and have only lived in the USA, but it seems like it's not unlike other race concepts other than that it exists under one government.Class is indeed another beast altogether and it's one, especially in the USA, that has to be taken into account when working to facilitate social equality.

Brasil has at least 13 races, and they are permeable, someone will be one to some people and another, to others. The american concept is just one in sea of possibilities.Ethnicity is a valid concept, as is ethnohistory, but the difference between these and race, in the american context, is that they are binding in a biological sense, as you have stated before semantics and linguistic change are valid approaches to social change. Race and subspecies are homonyms. They were borrowed from taxonomics and incorporated into 19th century eugenics movements. The word carries weight as an exclusionary principle and is colloquially thought of as a univeral principal instead of as a social contruction. By discrediting it as a concept through clines or through genetics (there is more variation within "races" than between) and offering a view of subtle human variation, instead. The last vestiges of unilineal and universal cultural evolution can be removed. Thats where the real problem lies, in a deep rooted superiority complex that displaced europeans enojoy in the US (its not only here, one but has to look at the portrayal of Africans in Japan, the US is only used as an example). Once race is removed as transcendant value and its relative nature is exposed, there is no logical reason for exclusionary thought and the subtle inequality of modern america, because it isnt really real.

Correction- I mean ethnicity and ethnohistory are not binding in a biological sense, as race is.

will someone please point out the ignorantly racist implications eminating from all these dumb-founded euro-centric pseudo-inclusivists in a nice little editorial piece to the nytimes et al.

Would someone please point out that this site – with all its reverse-racist, subtle white-America bashing, one-sided, biased content masquerading as Asian American empowerment – ranks as one of the most hypocritical publications in this country? To attack so vehemently in each edition racism and lazy stereotyping of Asians in this country, and then turn around and apply your own misguided stereotypes, and reveal your own deep-seated racism, toward white America…it’s pretty disappointing.I’ve never once visited this site without either the editorial content or reader comments containing a very disturbing, racist view of white America. A publication like Hyphen, which I hope would consistently strive to combat these issues (regardless of the race), ends up only perpetuating them. As someone like myself who absolutely despises racism, and has a tremendous amount of respect for every race, it’s sad to see so many Asian Americans here that have such entrenched negative feelings toward my race. I guess it’s simply disappointing to know that this has little chance of changing, especially when a supposed catalyst for change, like Hyphen, only fosters the problem.BTW – can someone please explain why one issue that fuels the fire of so many here is the impression (correct or not) that many white Americans find Asian females attractive? Human beings have certain features & characteristics that they find attractive - in the absolute vast majority of cases, I do not see that there is anything racist or belittling toward Asian females about this phenomena. I personally often find myself attracted to females that are Asian. Of course I treat each person, regardless of his or her race, as an individual and respect each person as an individual. But to come on this site, I discover I am the recipient of such intense scorn from so many – apparently I’m a perverted, pasty-white skinned loser with and Asian fetish. How racist can many of you possibly get? Thank God my many close Asian friends are not like this. Anyway, just wanted to express my disappointment.

chris,thanks for your feedback, but you didn't specify WHAT comments--what content--you find to be so racist against whites. could you please look through my blog posting again and tell me specifically what racism against whites, as a race, is expressed there?in your comment i heard you saying, in essence, "whites can't be as racist as you guys say, because I'M not as racist as you guys say."well, we don't know you, chris. we haven't been writing about you, have we? maybe you need to examine why you're identifying SO closely with white america that every time we point out the racism of a white american person or institution, you take it personally. even at hyphen our editors don't identify so closely with asian america that we can't see when an asian american is being racist. we report on that sort of thing, too, by the way.as to your last question: "can someone please explain why one issue that fuels the fire of so many here is the impression (correct or not) that many white Americans find Asian females attractive?" first of all, the word "females" can refer to dogs, infants, insects, tokyo girls, and electrical outlets. when you talk about asian women, please say "women". it makes it sound so much more like you think of us as human beings.secondly, this topic has been heavily canvassed on this site and a thousand others. it's been thoroughly explained. but if you still don't get it, i'll just throw it back to you: why do YOU think that asian americans get exercised over the idea (correct or not) that some white men are sexualizing, overfeminizing, infantilizing and fetishizing our women? why would that bother us, do you suppose?

First off, thanks for the response, and sorry to address a topic that has likely been covered here ad nauseam. I absolutely do respect your work and this publication - clearly deserving of the Utne award. Back to my post - I'll try to be brief. It is quite surprising to me that after reading my post, your impression was that I am saying, "whites can't be as racist as you guys say, because I'M not as racist as you guys say." This is completely inaccurate, and I truly do not see how you arrived at that conclusion. My point - that a publication that struggles against racism and stereotyping of Asians should, in my mind, not strive to combat it by perpetuating stereotypes of whites and becoming a defacto hub for those who are racist toward whites. I also find it interesting that you feel that I am "identifying SO closely with white america." This could not be further from the truth - and it seems an odd statement from an individual who makes a living from a publication with the sole underlying purpose of identifying oneself to race. Actually, I am terribly disenchanted with much of white America, as is slides further to the right, responsible for the re-election of a dangerous, misguided President. But this disenchantment with my own race (make that nationality), does not preclude me from seeing, what I feel, is pretty hypocritical. Furthering the Asian American agenda does not mean making news of every sensationalized, one-in-a-million story of white Americans embarrassing themselves. Because when I meet Asian American males, sorry, men (btw, that was a pretty poor inclusion to your argument) who call me "white boy" at a club, or Asian women who have concluded that every white guy has some twisted, unhealthy Asian fetish - I see a site like this helping seed those thoughts and build that divide.Finally, to further my point, I go to your contention that, "white men are sexualizing, overfeminizing, infantilizing and fetishizing our women?" Again, the point that you want to make crystal clear to your readers is that "white" men are doing it. Have you been to Tokyo? I was transferred there and lived near Shinjuku for nearly two years from '00 - '01. Japanese society itself could not possibly do more to sexualize, overfeminize, infantilize, and fetishize their women. Nearly every white person I met over there was quite offended by the depictions of Japanese women. Just try to avoid it on the Yamanote line, and I promise you'll be out of luck. Go to the US, and there these kinds of depictions are almost non-existent, except for a very tiny group of otaku while males who may or may not have unhealthy fetishes for some strange stuff. But these guys are not the norm.Anyway - your site has plenty of wonderful content I've read in the handful of times I've visited, but I had needed to get that off my chest for some time.

P.S. Reread my initial post, I want to retract a couple statements that are far more negative than I intended: the statement that hyphen, "ranks as one of the most hypocritical publications in this country." and that it is "masquerading as Asian American empowerment" - both of those were written while a bit frustrated, and do not reflect what I'm actually thinking. Sorry for that. I stand by the rest of it, though.

let's get one thing straight from the outset: i never said, wrote, or thought that "white men" sexualize, hyperfeminize, infantilize, or any other -ize asian women. i said/wrote that SOME white men ... blah blah blah. almost all the discussion of this topic discusses THOSE WHITE MEN who do that. very few people would contend that ALL white men fetishize asian women. that would be silly.additionally, there are plenty of white men out there who are in relationships (or have been in relationships) with asian or asian american women who do NOT fetishize asian women.whew! caveat expressed. BUT, we are not so much interested in the healthy, normal, respectful white men (or women) out there because they are not news. we are interested (some of the time) in the stupid editors at the new york times who waste extremely expensive, full color pagination on cheap photographs of japanese girls that ADMITTEDLY are "alluring" and expressions of the ideas of western photographers.that's all i'm saying.i appreciate your position, but i stand by my initial assessment: that you took a criticism of a specific article--that related that article to a general stereotype or trend of thinking--personally. i get that. as a white american who has spent time in tokyo, it makes sense that you might identify with a venerable american publication's attempt to decode some of japanese pop culture. but i really wasn't writing about you, or any of the other thousands of americans who have actually gone over there to see for themselves. i was writing specifically about that one photo essay which was:1. stereotypical to the extreme2. reifying the sexualized, feminized, and infantilized view of east asia that is most comfortable to a western economy that is fast becoming obsolete3. a humongous missed opportunitytha's all. i don't post on racism or stupidity every week. (well, that's not true. i DO post on stupidity every week) but when i do, it's because something has screamed its stupidity at me.what did YOU think about the photo essay and accompanying text, chris?

Well in my case I love to be with an Asian woman especially Japanese women well I love to have a Japanese girlfreind but I hate to have mixed reviews well I never been to Japan but I got plans to go there.Well people need to focus that there are Asian guys that have fetish on white women and black women well in the United States I am conciderd as a Latino male well Japanese women a very beautiful than any others but beautiful women comes in every race.By the way mixed race women have more chances to win beauty patents than full pured race one like white mixed with Japanese or black mixed with Japanese etc I see that happend well these mixed Asian and balck women well those black/Asian mixed are a total knockouts

well miguel, thanks for sharing.

"to go with the package, they included a photo essay, by Dutch photographer Hellen Van Meene (because Japan doesn't have any photographers, I guess)"

Why make a point of the nationality of the photographer? Should artists stick to portraying their 'own' people? Hellen van Meene was actually chosen because NYT magazine liked her 'Portraits' book, which features work made in Japan. Work made for the Japanese Pavilion of the Venice Biennale for Architecture in 2000.

"by reiterating their anime-inspired images of erotic Japanese girlhood? 'Cause, you know, the huge-breasted fiberglas sculptures didn't quite say it all."

Please tell me which of these images you think are:

1. erotic;
2. anime-inspired;
3. huge-breasted?

"In case anyone wondered why, the NYTM explained their choice of photographer and subject thus:'In today's Japanese youth culture ...innocence is pulled in multiple directions: exaggerated into mere cuteness in the kitsch of Hello Kitty; mock-heroically ennobled by the child heroes of manga (comic books); even distorted and sexualized in the submissive schoolgirls of the country's anime pornography."

"In other words, we needed the NYTM to commission a Dutch photographer to fill in the blanks about 'everyday Japanese girlhood' because Japanese artists weren't doing the job."

I think the answer is quite clear: they asked Van Meene because Hello Kitty wasn't available, manga is not photography and anime pornography might scare some readers.

"Why the world needed to know about everyday Japanese girlhood isn't addressed here, so we're left to speculate on our own. Don't worry, I won't speculate for you, 'cause I'm not just post-Asian, I'm also post-feminist."

Let me speculate for you: to counterbalance the cliche of 'huge-breasted' 'anime-inspired images of erotic Japanese girlhood' they asked someone known for making non-stereotyped images of everyday girlhood. In Japan. Go figure.

"Of course, in case you were worried that Van Meene was just documenting what she saw rather than shaping an extremely distorted, sexualized, feminized and infantilized vision of an Asian country that apparently continues to threaten the West on both cultural and economic fronts:"

That's quite a series of hefty accusations. Let's go through them:

1. 'extremely distorted': OK, Hellen van Meene did try to avoid stereotypes and cliches when making the portfolio. She has even been accused by a girl actually from Tokyo (http://www.kissui.net/mt/archives/000953.html) of making people "think that Tokyo girls suck": "can you tell her that the girls in the photos are ugly, old-fashioned, and not in style just like the countrygirls, not Tokyo?".
2. 'sexualized': OK, I dare you: what photo is a good example of sexualizing its subject?
3. 'feminized': Mmmm, let's see. Definition 1: "To give a feminine appearance or character to." Uhm, they are, like, all female? Definition 2: "To cause (a male) to assume feminine characteristics." OK, what photo is actually a boy?
4. 'infantilized': many of the girls are children, so I assume that you don't mind them being infantile. How about the other ones? Please let me know which one offends you.

And for the record: I'm white, male and married to the defendant. For links to the portfolio and a mirror of the (by now archived) article please go to:http://www.hellenvanmeene.com/library/press/2005/new_york_times_magazine/

Frank,Thanks for your response. I'll follow your protocol and quote you directly."Why make a point of the nationality of the photographer? Should artists stick to portraying their 'own' people?""I think the answer is quite clear: they asked Van Meene because Hello Kitty wasn't available, manga is not photography and anime pornography might scare some readers."No, artists should most certainly not stick to portraying their own people. However, the NYTM made it clear that they wanted to present a photo essay that was, in some sense, a rebuttal to the hypersexualization of Japanese girlhood presented in Japanese anime-inspired art and culture. Why must this rebuttal come from an outsider? Why must it come from a westerner? The implication of this editorial choice is that Japanese artists are only capable of exploiting their own girls, but not of critiquing this exploitation. (In fact, Murakami's work is a critique of this exploitation, but whatever.)There are hundreds of excellent, world-class, Japanese photographers engaged in documenting, commenting upon, and critiquing their own culture. It would have been infinitely more graceful, appropriate, and interesting a commentary on "The Murakami Method" for the NYTM to spend their hard-earned dollars commissioning one of them to do this essay. Or does the NYTM believe, as you seem to, that Hello Kitty, manga and anime pornography are Japan's only cultural product?"Let me speculate for you: to counterbalance the cliche of 'huge-breasted' 'anime-inspired images of erotic Japanese girlhood' they asked someone known for making non-stereotyped images of everyday girlhood. In Japan. Go figure"I guess the sarcastic tone I was going for in my blog entry didn't allow me to be direct and explicit, so let me be so now. As a rebuttal to Japanese-produced, anime-inspired images of stereotyped Japanese girlhood, the NYTM presents Western-produced "fashionable", "ingenuous", "tender", "teenaged allure" (their words) images of Japanese girlhood. Whether the girls in the photo essay were large or small-breasted, anime-perfect or endowed with more realistic features, they are still being presented as "fashionable", "ingenuous", "tender", and possessing "teenaged allure". This combination of effects is exactly the combination of effects that anime porn is going for.Ultimately, it doesn't matter whether or not your wife was going for these effects herself. The editorial decision of the NYTM as stated openly and directly in their introduction to the essay, was to present photographs that, in their view, presented these effects. So I ask you, in what way is this photo essay a rebuttal of anime-inspired, hypersexualized Japanese girlhood? My answer is: it's not. The photographs portray more "realistic" images of Japanese girls, but to the same, if more muted, effect.To respond to your final comment, let me quote myself rather than you:"shaping an extremely distorted, sexualized, feminized and infantilized vision of an Asian country"I was not taking your wife to task for distorting, sexualizing, feminizing, and infantilizing the girls in the photographs. I was taking the NYTM to task for distorting, sexualizing, feminizing, and infantilizing America's vision of Japan. The entire country. The entire culture. I mean, really. Am I wrong?Go back to the magazine and have a look at the entire issue, especially the Murakami/Tokyo package. The point of the package is that Murakami-inspired art is taking over the international art world. These images are what is being presented as the first internationally high-impact and relevant Japanese cultural export. And what images do we see? A few little photos of Murakami and his disciples, a number of images of Murakamiesque art (including huge-breasted anime-style schoolgirls), and your wife's photographs of Japanese schoolgirls, pouting directly at the camera. Tell me that isn't a distorted, sexualized, feminized, infantilized view of Japanese culture.My point was, first and last, that here is an opportunity for the NYTM to present a more balanced and complete view of what is going on in Japanese art by presenting a photo essay by a Japanese photographer of ... well, pretty much anything other than Japanese girls, again. Their editorial decision to attempt to rebut the hypersexualization of Japanese girls by presenting only somewhat sexualized photos of Japanese girls is ridiculous, something you might even see if it hadn't been your wife they hired to do the job.From year's end to year's end, week after week, the NYTM presents long-form, well researched articles, essays, and photographs of institutions and microcultures from around the world. This Murakami package may be the only in-depth look at Japan the NYTM takes all year. And it is distorted, it is sexualized, it is feminized, it is infantilized. Again. Good job to the magazine for not challenging perceptions.

I believe in one race; the human race. Hug me.

rock on claire! stick to your guns.

"Cake and eating it too" day has obviously ended around here... I continue to be amazed by some Asian women disliking online the heavy fallout of the bombs most of them seem like very much dropping around them in daily life. If you dislike a certain class of Caucasian men treating you all as fetish dollies, the solution is simple: stop playing into that image.But then it has definite benefits and certain ones of you are extremely loathe to give them up. I saw a Japanese girl only yesterday in a mall in Glendale, California, wearing the big white socks, a kogal skirt as brief as a rubber band, and giggling girlishly to as many white men in the vicinity as possible. The men were clearly affected, she was clearly enjoying her power, and she was setting up the entire female population of your race for future stereotyping and trouble. If you don't like it, don't do it. It seems simple, right?I just feel incredibly sorry for all the Asian men out there.

Uh. Hello, Heather .. are all Asian women lumped into one collective to you? There are those of us who have major issues with the sterotypes being portrayed, and we are definitely not perpetuating them in any way. Then there are the others.

Now, Japanese boys are becoming sexualized as well, as you can see from the blogging of "mobile cock portraits" all last week.http://del.icio.us/tolvuvit/gay+japanese

Interesting. Thanks for the link, Hiro. But those Japanese boys are sexualizing themselves .. more power to them, but its not the same issue as the original post.

Heather, I like your post. It points to a aspect of that situation which seems to be ignored or overlooked - there are those girls/women who, and are no small percentage of the whole, 'work their stuff' to a white male audience to the exclusion of asian, black and latino men. THIS IS IN NO WAY ALL ASIAN WOMEN!!! So, what's a 'concerned' person to do??? I mean, ask any guy - if a 'PYT' struts her stuff and flirts with you, then what would be a reasonable response? Does that equate to a 'class' of white men or a fetish? I don't know... What do the guys here say?One that is unreasonable is snipping hair and contaminating people's drinks...That's grounds for the lock up!

I was just looking for porn when i came across this site damn :(

Ha ha! Serves you right!