Asian Man, White Woman: Breaking an Enduring Taboo

By: Emil Guillermo, Apr 13, 2008

Tags: Emil Amok, Opinion |

Also: The community division on Tibet

They do IT a lot on the screen in Gina Kim’s Never Forever (opening Friday, April 11, at the Sundance Cinemas Kabuki in San Francisco). That’s good because the people doing IT are an Asian male and a white woman — one of the last unofficial taboos in filmdom and “lovedom.”

Kim puts it on the big screen for the world to see, and there’s no martial arts to be found anywhere in this very real and gritty look at both Asian and Asian American male images in modern times.

The distinction between immigrant and native-born Asian American is important. But don’t expect the film to be a triumph of testosterone. Surprisingly, the film leaves us with a rather bold feminist message.

In other words, the men still get castrated. But that’s OK. It’s a movie. And not before we get our due as sexual beings.

That’s a leap of sorts. When was the last time you saw an Asian man and a white woman doing IT on film for artistic, cultural, dramatic purposes? You know, the greater good.

People mention a 1992 French film based on the Marguerite Duras novel The Lover, which is about a young girl growing up in Indochina. And who can remember the Bridget Fonda/Jet Li pairing in Kiss of the Dragon in 2001? Fonda was a whore, and Li was too busy kicking ass to get any. I’m not sure if they even allow Jackie Chan to have sex in his movies.

The film stars Vera Farmiga from The Departed, who shows her Streep-like ability to change her look for her given project. She’s Sophie, the blond, blue-eyed Caucasian housewife, married to the yuppie Andrew (played by half-Asian David McInnis), a successful Asian American lawyer of Korean descent.

But there’s trouble when the two are unable to conceive. To save her marriage, and to make Andrew think he’s a stud, Sophie plots to get some Asian sperm inside her!

This she does by buying the services of an undocumented alien, Jihah (Jung-Woo Ha), offering him money to get her pregnant.

Jihah eventually develops feelings which can’t be denied. Sophie, too, realizes the only person she can turn to is her immigrant sperm dispenser. That’s when the movie explodes into a cut above Korean soap opera.

You won’t find many films that take the lowly, undocumented Asian immigrant, complete with broken English, as seriously as this one. Jihah is the real love interest and star, not the nerdy Andrew. In a way, that’s too bad because it just adds sexual dysfunction to the negative model minority Asian American stereotype.

In Never Forever, Kim skips the APA and gives the immigrant the leg up with the film’s white star. Now that’s affirmative action. (The film’s not rated, but because of the sex, it’s definitely not for those under 18. My interview with Gina Kim will be posted at amok.asianweek.com.)

The Asian American split on China and Tibet
It will take more than a protest or two to get China to change its position on Tibet. But the hope is the noise will pressure the power players to quietly work toward a peaceful solution.

Meanwhile, the dispute in APA communities seems to boil down to an immigrant versus native-born split. If you are an immigrant or an exile, then China’s use of the Olympics to bolster its image is obscene. If you are a second-generation Chinese American, the Olympics are seen as a source of pride.

“All the Western countries protesting human rights: On what moral ground are they shaking their finger at China?” one high-ranking local Chinese American official said.

Sure, she who is without sin and all that. But that doesn’t excuse China’s poor human rights record. Heritage, nationalism, commercial interests don’t justify violent, bloody crackdowns on individual freedom.

At last Tuesday’s U.N. Plaza rally in San Francisco, Tibetan exiles were out in force.

“We want the world to hear what’s happening in Tibet is wrong,” said Angur Gurong, 38, who came to the U.S. as a former monk and is now a carpenter in the East Bay. “This is the opportunity to put out our voice and be heard.”

In the crowd, I also saw sympathetic Buddhists like Connie and Christine Pham, two Vietnamese American sisters from Southern California. Both were draped in Tibetan flags.

When I asked why it was important to protest, Christine, 20, had a simple answer. “Because,” she said, “ I am an American.” (See the latest on Tibet on my blog at amok.asianweek.com.)

emil@amok.com

Comments

Emil:
I don’t know or care about “filmdom” and “lovedom” here, but, were I you, which, of course, I am not, I believe I would limit, delimit?, references to “immigrant” and “native-born” Chinese reflexes in re “China/Tibet/Olympics” to your specific, subjective perceptions, and NOT to anyone else, immigrant OR native-born, myself included.
You can have NO idea of the complexities and the ambivalences AND the backgrounds of any but your own, including those of 20=year-old attendees at an admittedly fractured and problematic confrontation.
A forum is no more and no less than a symposium, and a pulpit, bully or not, is more often than not misused, abused, and otherwise misconstrued.
Frank Eng
P.S.: As a native-born Chinese citizen, I not only am bemused by Mainland “pride” and “face” in such as “the Olympics,” or “Oscar” for that matter, I find it more than ironic that a “nation” and “people(s)” that have survived? five millennia, today bother to bow to such spectacle when it should, instead, be “honoring” its own prideful past that includes the likes of “the Tao.” And I don’t mean “kowtow,” merely contemplation and respect.

–Frank Eng on Apr 13, 2008
“never forever” sounds more like a gender spin on the “asia phile” phenomenon–not about breaking a taboo. as such, i think the label of “breaking taboo” as it relates to asian men and their romantic counterparts, would perhaps be more apropos for black women (as opposed to white women).

–chopstix on Apr 13, 2008
Never Forever
I and some of my colleagues share similar view and interest, in hope to see more of such movie portrait Asian Man and Caucasian Woman.

This society does not portrait Asian Man well and I think it is asham and it is up to each and everyone of us to make the different. Step up to be bold, take on a career to be in front of the public, take on unconventional career. Be more supportive to event promoting Asian Man and Caucasian Woman relationship.

–EL on Apr 13, 2008
I am a second-generation Chinese-American and am not proud of the Olympics being in China at all. Sure it shows that China has “come a long way” in the last couple decades but it is a still a communist country that oppresses its people and denies them their most basic human rights. I think you greatly over-generalized the feeling of American born Chinese towards these Olympics as I know many others who also feel no strong kinship to China….I have no desire to attend the Olympics in China as I don’t personally care for being spied upon and followed around when I’m on vacation (I have had many friends go to China and report this sort of behavior by the Chinese government).

–Joyce on Apr 14, 2008
Hey Chopstix: Black women and Asian male is a cool pairing. But the taboo goes back to the anti-miscegenation laws in the U.S. when intermarriage was banned–specifically White with anything non-White. Asians and Blacks could get together anytime.

–Emil Guillermo on Apr 14, 2008
1) As for Never Forever, if you just watch it as what it is and not to over analyze about the white female/male lead, you will enjoy its great filmmaking and its story telling:

http://ynotmovies.blogspot.com/2008/02/never-forever.html

2) As for Tibet, stop China basing, because it doesn’t do anybody good:

http://www.xanga.com/YNOTswim/651604463/thoughts-after-the-olympic-torch-relay.html

As Joan Chen wrote: “Let the Games Goes On”
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2008/04/08/AR2008040802907.html

–Tony on Apr 14, 2008
Tony: Make no mistake. Calling on China to be humane and responsible is not China bashing. As my previous column called it, it’s “urging” not “bashing.”

As for “Never Forever,” my critique does praise the filmmaking and storytelling talent of Gina Kim.

As for Joan Chen: My columns never have advocated stopping the games, only the brutality and repression.

For more on China and Tibet, see my blog at http://www.amok.asianweek.com.

—Emil

–Emil Guillermo on Apr 14, 2008
Emil:
Come on, admit it.
No amount of pussyfooting will disguise the fact that your take and your stand on the “China/Tibet/Olympics” issue is, bluntly, ANTI-”China.”
Did you bother to access the link and read Joan Chen’s touching recital of her own personal experience?
That said, I repeat, “American” preoccupations with “human rights” appear to apply only to their “ideological” “enemies” and NOT to their allies.
When they begin to support Jimmy Carter in his pilgrimage to Damascus and environs, then I shall begin to respect their claims.
And how can you, or anyone else, bespeak the lie that whatever is happening in Tibet can come close to the obscene violations of “human rights” ongoing in Iraq under our auspices. Not forgetting the miseries and outrages we support in Palestine. Lebanon?
No, Emil, I fear you are one of “them,” and not one of poor “us,” wherever we may reside.
Frank Eng

–Frank Eng on Apr 15, 2008
Anti-China?
Frank, you insist on black and white rhetoric now when you know we live in a world of gray.
China isn’t even clear what it is. Communist/Capitalist hybrid that it is. So why do you insist that all comments that are remotely critical are anti-China?
Pelosi suggests a boycott of the games. Is she anti-China?
Is wanting China to be responsible in global matters anti-China?
It’s definitely not. Rather, it’s a more realistic of looking at this issue that will bring us closer to a solution than your intransigent position.
Hey, thanks for reading and commenting.
Sometimes you deserve a direct response.
This is one of those times.
—Emil

–Emil Guillermo on Apr 17, 2008
Emil:
As someone who “defended” you in re that little “Uncle Jindal” fiasco, both sides?, and who continues to believe in YOUR right to YOUR opinions, I must riposte herein, to wit:
“Gray,” for sure, is where we ALL live.
Pelosi? I don’t quite share the Mainland reflex to her recent journey to Dhar(a)msala, and have you noted today’s online notation that the PRC gendarmes are trying to “quiet” THEIR “extreme” responses?, but I DO and continue to insist that HER obligation is to HER constituents, in this case, tossing the issue of “impeachment(s):” back “ON” the Congressional table, if only to checkmate the remaining possibility, likelihood?, of a Cheney last-gasp “first-strike.”
Furthermore, I agree, ruefully, that “China” today IS a polyglot “product” of Wal*Mart ripoffs and apologetic socialisme, but, at the very least, the cadres APPEAR to be making the effort, at least, of reining in THEIR profiteers and acknowledging their own shortcomings, Olympics and “face” and pretensions notwithstanding.
Criticisms of the PRC are no less warranted and valid than criticisms of our own idiocies, but what excuse can Jack Cafferty, whom I suspect is merely careless and subject, as the rest of us, to the overpowering consensual perceptions loudly proclaimed in the “media,” make?
Other than that YOU are making herein.
And Pelosi IS anti-”China,” just as she is, obviously, PRO-Likud/IDF/neo-Zionist and AIPAC, which, in effect, makes her PRO-neotheocon.
And, in a word, “barf,” that’s what my reflex is thereto.
Finally, Emil, “wanting China to be “globally responsible” is, by far and a long shot, SECONDARY to trying to make THIS nation responsible, even and especially unto itself.
As for “realistic” “solutions” and “intransigence,” may I beg to differ, and suggest?, that it is this nation, very especially THIS sadsack “administration” or lack thereof, that is UNrealistic and intransigent, forget “solutions,” especially insofar as WE are the ones who created the seemingly insoluble PROBLEMS of unilateral, first-strike, pre-emptive fears and hubris.
Frank Eng
P.S.: I yield to your Harvard-blessed assumptions of preordained proclamations and caveats.

–Frank Eng on Apr 17, 2008
Frank:
You can obscure the subject all you want. The goal is how to make China a more responsible global partner in everything it does. In a previous column, I mentioned how there’s a difference between bashing and urging. That’s where diplomacy comes in. Read my latest column, which I will post on my blog at http://www.amok.asianweek.com

You can still agree with me on some things. And disagree. That’s the “freedom” part in a democracy. No tanks will roll.

–Emil Guillermo on Apr 18, 2008
The difference between urging and bashing is not the subject but the tone use. Publicly threatening to boycott the Olympics is bashing. The whole condescending tone of many Western governments about human rights is bashing. The whole of China online would not be up in arms if the tone was urging. If you were urging your wife to lose weight, you would not be telling your neighbors and writing an article about her weight problem. If you do, you are bashing her and deserve to be slapped.

–Huang Fong on Apr 19, 2008
We are still living in a world where the whites (real also Christians) dominate the main stage in most respects, politics, finance and of course, the media. They try to dominate world opinions according to their collective imagination or wishes by all means. Their distorted views, prejudices and/or ignorance, arrogance have caused most of the problems existing in the world today.

Asia is rising fast, very natural the whites feel threatened, resentful, afraid and jealous in addition to disrespect, even some hatred. China bashing is only one of the consequences of such emotions. Behind all the “benevolent” criticisms of human rights, etc. the real motivation is just too clear.
We don’t want you to move into my neighborhood.
You don’t belong here.

–Jendall Suparto on May 23, 2008
Jendall Suparto:
Yeah, but who WANTS to move into those neighborhoods?
Some of us were born here, before THEY moved into the neighborhood.
So who belongs where and whose priority is “prior”?
On the other hand, I don’t believe it’s “whites” OR “Christians” as such or per se, it’s the ignorant and the fearful and the bigoted, of ANY race, creed, or color who are “exclusionary.”
Fears and fences exclude only the fearful and those fenced “in,” where they belong.
The rest of us should be so lucky as to be “excluded” from their precincts.
As Sam Goldwyn was said to have said, by way of some wily press-agent, paraphrased, “exclude me out” herein.
Frank Eng
P.S.: Emil, this pre-emptive, first-strike aggressor nation is an exemplary member of a civilized and law-abiding “state,” as in sovereign?, in a convocation of peers and wannabes?

–Frank Eng on May 24, 2008
Interesting comments! Now back to the movie. I have bedded many Causasian/white (whatever) women and they are just the same as any other. Why the big hoo ha.

–Asianman on May 26, 2008
Emil,
I think you are a White-want-to-be. And you are very ANTI-China. Your manipulative and circular reasoning is very much a technique used by Whites in the US and the West. You are a hypocrite and fake and lack of self-confidence when it is coming to truth.
You are not real because you are too soft in nature. Being a real man, you must have the multifaceted thinking ability and stand firm when needed to be no matter what consequence. As a matter of fact, you don’t have that quality in you.

If you don’t have anything to write, it is better for you to do some thinking or reflection or retrospection than to bash China all the time.
I am fed up with the way you bash China all the time. Do something else. Don’t make career out of bashing China, there are consequences in doing so. See what happened to Sharon Stone. Think about it???

By bashing China and belittling Chinese, it will not make you feel better or elevate your social position or change who you really are.

Be real with yourself and stop writing all those non-sense.

–Roger Liu on Jun 02, 2008
what’s on the menu next?

hey, roger it’s the tianamen square massacre

anniversary on the fourth!!

long live the western press! acceptance

is a path to enlightenment…

–kwaninator on Jun 02, 2008
Guys:
Emil is as Emil “writes.”
He is also “intermarried” as in “miscegenation.”
Aren’t we all?
But the bottom line here is that Emil is a “victim” of the “American dream,” as in a Harvard degree will gain me admission.
Sorry, Emil, you’re not “white” enough, and your apologies for your antecedents not nearly sufficient unto the demands of those who promised to “return” but have yet to begin to address their debts and obligations, such as the remuneration of Filipino vets and their beneficiaries. Talk about el cheapo.
Frank Eng
P.S.: Roger, don’t sweat this one. Not worth it.

–Frank Eng on Jun 02, 2008

Post your comments.

Comments using inappropriate language will not be posted. AsianWeek reserves the right to re-publish comments, into "Letters to the Editor," in which case, we reserve the right to edit comments for length and style. If you would like to write a letter to our editor, please email: asianweek@asianweek.com.