Event on Tuesday: discussing British Asian identity
All welcome! Here is the Facebook group, and the event page, and the event is partly organised by myself. You need to RSVP if you’d like to come though as numbers are really tight. Regular PP readers Sonia and Nyrone will be speaking on the day too 
| Post to del.icio.us |
Filed in: British Identity
I would like to come – I have RSVPd on FB!
No, not time to take the ‘Asian’ out of British Asian. Ever. If African Americans and Obama are happy to have the ‘African’ in American, why have we got hang ups? Hope there is a good discussion. I’d be interested in hearing who these people are that say lose it – were they born in Britain? That’s always interested me.
Have fun debating…but it’s quite a reactionary discussion they used to have in the 1980s…
If English people are still happy to be referred to as Anglo-Saxon, despite leaving Saxony fuck knows when. I think the only people who would want to run away from their inherited flavour of ‘Asianess’ are those who are (A) either consciously or subconsciously ashamed of it, or (B) believe it to be some sort of hindrance in Britain.
In which case Group B needs to grow a backbone and stop taking the cowards route out. Try opening your mouths about, and combating the hindering wankers instead of joining them in such a lowly pusillanimous way. Group A are essentially self-loathing bastards whose sorry voices should never be heard as they are frequently confused pawns used by nazi whiteists to attack their own communities.
I wonder if that slapper who offers sexual adventures over the net and gets seriously riled up at the mention of self hatred and coconuts is going to turn up on this thread now I have mentioned these things? You know who you are!
Good morning to you all……..
First of all, Asian in Britain meeans South Asian whereas it means East Asian in North America and Australia.
Sticking to Britain, Asian identity has largely been linked to the Punjabis who have been more prominent and productive than all the other lot. Surely Gujaratis or Bengalis are culturallu sluggish compared with the Punjabis. (It’s the silly Sikh folk dance where the men hunch their shoulders that I can’t stand.)
And the poor South Asians are totally ignored as worthless or plain ugly. And what of the Asian Christians? The Goans believe me think differently from the rest and tend to ridicule the Hindus as primitive (cow-worship, dots and dashes on the forehead, marching off their idols like Ganesh for a bath, considering Ganges water as holy when it is awfully polluted).
In short, please don’t just talk of Asian identity – the least we can do is distiniguish between Asian identities for Hindus, Muslims and Christians. So let’s use the term British Asian with a qualifier – Hindu, Muslim, Christian. Cheers.
The rest of us don’t, though! Go on Dalbir, name names.
Dalbir @ 3
You offer a stark & overly simplistic back & white choice in your a or b categories.
Some reject parts of the asian culture that are negative (in fact it is the reasoning behind Sikhism being originally formed) – that does not make them coconuts, slappers (do you include men in that category of yours?) or wanting to eshew asianness because of wanting to succeed in a country or being ashamed of their roots.
Trying to limit or be dogmatic about identity is quite an unrealistic position to take. Personal identity evolves and changes over different experiences through a lifetime.
As for the last aspects of your ‘commentary’ I second KJB – do explain yourself.
Dalbir @ 3
You offer a stark & overly simplistic black & white choice in your a or b categories.
Some reject parts of the asian culture that are negative – in fact it is the reasoning behind Sikhism being originally formed. That does not make them coconuts, slappers (BTW do you include men in this category of yours?) or wanting to eshew asianness because of wanting to succeed in a country or being ashamed of their roots.
Trying to limit or be dogmatic about identity is quite an unrealistic position to take. Personal identity evolves and changes over different experiences through a lifetime. Not to do so would be quite unnatural, no?
As for the last aspects of your ‘commentary’ I second KJB – do explain yourself.
Perse
There is a distinct difference between those who may not like aspects of their heritage and may wish for some positive change, to those who perceive themselves through the negative lens of another community and inwardly feel conflicting emotions due to this which manifests itself in strange ways.
@Edsa: Okay but shoulder hunching beats Morris dancing any day!
PS – I’m going to let sleeping dogs lie and let the person remain anonymous. lol
Dalbir
“There is a distinct difference between those who may not like aspects of their heritage and may wish for some positive change, to those who perceive themselves through the negative lens of another community and inwardly feel conflicting emotions due to this which manifests itself in strange ways.â€
Is that category c then?
Some of what is penned ‘heritage/culture’ is just bad behaviour that is justified under those terms & anyone not colluding with it is seen as looking at it through an ‘outsiders’ lens.
As to whether conflicting feelings are due to seeing life though anothers negative lens, well that conflict can happen by looking through ones own community lens. Conflicting emotions are normal – its how we work out our self identity & not strange at all. The conflict comes from not meeting what others expect you to be/do – normally family elders. I believe it is a sign of maturity, independence, responsibility and courage to go through this.
The asians I have met who do not go through self examination & questioning what they have been taught by the community/family elders remain stunted in their identity and in childhood.
“PS – I’m going to let sleeping dogs lie and let the person remain anonymous. Lolâ€
I see. You are not prepared to be responsible for explaining why you are judging from your own negative lens.
If there is any lens to be looked through it should be through a humanity lens as outsiders & community should equally be in a position to ‘judge’ using that
“Is time to take out the ‘Asian’ in British Asian?”
Together with time, plausibly, to learn how to properly construct a simple English question?
Dalbir does not understand Morris. Fine. *shrugs*
As Sunny often points out, following Sen’s lead, our identities are multiple and different ones will be relevant for different occasions – so trying to fix one identity on yourself or others is going to be difficult.
I’m not sure we can pinpoint what baggage people think comes along with being British Asian, or with being (just) British or Asian, but they somehow help us to place each other within some kinds of discussions, because it helps understand where we are coming from (reasons why we have different perspectives). I interpret the question as asking whether there are any remaining contexts where a British Asian perspective would be different from a British perspective.
Personally, I think there definitely are such contexts, or at least it is useful to keep the terms in order to legitimate differences people feel between their perspectives and to understand the conflicts that people feel in negotiating their public identities.
So if there were no space for me to be a British Asian, perhaps there would be no space for me to be British at all, perhaps I will be told that some aspect of my behaviour means I am essentially British. It feels to me as if it is other people who decide what I am allowed to be and how I should be interpreted. Not so much an internal conflict (of the kind persephone and Dalbir are discussing above), but a conflict among people who want to decide the terms in which I should be understood by others.
I wonder why they care? What are the implications?
Since I can’t go to the meeting, would be interested to know what others get from it.
arif – a good point in that the purpose of identity can be external to ourselves & can be used/misused by others, particularly politically.
I think the reason why people ‘care’ to put others in identity boxes is it is easier to ‘package’ individuals as a group – but it can be misused then to dehumanise them as a group rather than it would be to an individual human
No it wasn’t. Again grasp the difference between people who accept their recent origins, although they may want to alter some aspects of the associated culture, to those that are trying run away and hide this aspect of themselves.
Personally I think we would only ever be solely ‘British’ when colour and religious background does no matter in this country. This is something I can’t imagine happening in my lifetime.
The last few posts have been interesting because they have highlighted how identity formation is not simply a matter involving only an individuals choices but also the cognitions of those in the contextual environment. The recognition that those in this environment can actively seek to deride particular identities is an important one too. But so is the understanding that the visible actions (or indeed inaction) of recognised groups play an active part in the formation of what I would describe as a positive identity.
When the opposite is formed and becomes widely current, some weaker willed people will play down or try and run away from their heritage in various ways. Recently I learnt Ben Kingsely had a very Hindu name and a Guji father, I ask you what compelled him to change this? That Pakistani Dragon’s Den bloke is another example…..Mr. Kahn indeed.
I guess a positive group identity is something people have to fight for and the reality is that some people/institutes here are pretty much obsessed with trying to malign the identity constructs of others. I think sections the English people have become experts at this (from colonial times) and this is most clearly manifest in the actions of lumpen sections of the media here who seem fixated on foisting a negative identity on other races. Another recent historical example of this would be the old ‘martial races’ theory that used to be bandied about so much.
I think that the entire last paragraph of Dalbir’s last comment is an example of the sort of sweeping generalisation about people that should everywhere be avoided.
“Sections of the English people”? What sections?
Dear, oh dear.
@14
The types behind the Daily Mail, The Express etc. etc. The ones behind the institutional racism in organisations that get the light shone on them from time to time.
Do you think these types don’t exist? Or don’t have some sort of ideological basis for their actions? Read more carefully, I’m not saying that every last English person falls in this category but that it is a force that exists in that community. However, that isn’t to say equivalent arseholes aren’t present in other communities.
To me, your post clearly highlights the sort of denial and cluelessness that enable them to get away with what they do easily. Dear, oh dear….
Dalbir,
This is something I can’t imagine happening in my lifetime.
Sorry to hear that, but without being too personal how long would you anticipate your lifetime as being? You strike me as being a fairly youngish bloke. Ben Kingsley thought it expedient to change his name more than thirty years ago, I doubt he would now. With luck and good management your future lifetime should be maybe twice that long? If so, that’s a very pessimistic view.
The guy from Dragons Den apparently changed it as a Godfather joke, which is what on would expect from the kind of person who would appear on Dragons Den.
Who knows Don? I like your optimism although it is hard to share.
I never expected Obama so maybe big changes will happen here in my lifetime also. Saying that, those types I was alluding to in my other posts would vehemently resist this and I believe they are firmly entrenched in most if not all institutes in Britain.
The only way things will change is if there is a seismic cultural shift in Britain. Things like that are rare, especially with people extremely proud of their past, where perceived glory days involved the subjugation of other communities. There will be those who will wish to continue this ‘winning’ formula.
I imagine the people referred to as the ‘old boys network’, who hold so much sway in the UK, are of this disposition too. Until they are replaced with something more positive, nothing is likely to change significantly.
The real question is whether their existence has any relevance to whether you and I can succeed in life.
perceived glory days involved the subjugation of other communities
A dwindling minority, surely? Nostalia for Empire is scarcely something most young people can even conceive of.
The types you allude to are well entrenched, but ageing fast. In my experience most young people just don’t relate to that at all. Those who have power and wealth want to see it passed down to others like themselves and preferably their progeny, but that doesn’t mean it is going to happen.
We’ve come a long way and we have a long way yet to go, but the course is set and we need hands on deck more than we need voices of defeat and despair.
If there is one aspect of British culture worth celebrating it is this; Don’t let the bastards grind you down.
“ highlighted how identity formation is not simply a matter involving only an individuals choices but also the cognitions of those in the contextual environment. The recognition that those in this environment can actively seek to deride particular identities is an important one tooâ€
And also
“ the reality is that some people/institutes here are pretty much obsessed with trying to malign the identity constructs of others. I think sections the English people have become experts at this (from colonial times) “
Dalbir, I expect if you do not want this then we ourselves must also not commit the same wrongs. Its not just sections of English people or colonial times thinking that lead to maligning identity constructs of others – it happens from within asians too. Your commentary on this very post commits the same things – were you aware of this?
Excellent comments from Don and Persephone.
@4 Edsa:
We do? I guess I’ll have to take your word for it, since you clearly know ‘us’ better than ‘we’ know ‘ourselves’.
Perhaps your accusations of generalising should be re-considered. Stones and glass houses, and all that jazz.
Heartily seconding Persephone at #20.
Like how virtually all middle-class young Asian men like to think of themselves as honorary black people, you mean?
Oh, and if you’re still looking to get married, Dalbir, I’m increasingly thinking that my older sister might be a match made in heaven for you! You need to be fairly intolerant of Muslims, religious, no meat, no alcohol and have a sense of humour. Oh, and be able to handle the fact that she has a job that puts her in a position of great responsibility.
First of all, Hindus do not worship cows – and no one that lives in India would think that. Catholic Goan women (like my mom) on special occasions wear traditional Indian dresses and use bindis on their forehead. I never heard anyone in my family ridiculing Hindus. There is a strong sense that our roots derive from Hindus before our ancestors converted to Christianity 400 years ago.
But I guess you know better.
I wonder about the emergence of EDL/BNP types. Are they just the last loud dying gasps of this old way of thinking or an attempted comeback of sorts?
Do you think these guys aren’t clever enough to find and groom like minded jerks to replace them – come on! What is happening to robustly challenge them then?
We need people who know what they are against, who have the courage to face these fuckers and bring them down a few pegs. Just as a matter of principle.
We need less of this side stepping shite. See above comments.
I pray I get to see some of us grind these bastards down a bit in my lifetime……lol
I think they are the British equivalent of those horrible looking neocon bastards I saw opposing Obama in the senate recently.
Are they just the last loud dying gasps of this old way of thinking
Yes.
Dalbir @ 25,
Nostalgia ain’t what it used to be
There is a serious problem for that whole thread of conciousness that defined itself as, in some way ‘superior’ to others. They are stuck on a tiny island which is itself stuck between the North Sea and the Atlantic and there is nowhere for those second sons, murderers, con-artists, slavers, drug dealers, etc, etc to go.
So we are stuck with them just as they are stuck with us.
These folk are worthy of your ire, they are just not worthy of being considered a worthwhile opponent.
They are like dinosaurs wondering why the sky has gone all bright.
Least, that’s my twopenceworth….
Do they? Really? How do you mean? The ones I have met can outdo whites at being white. Like those BBC ‘brothers’.
No offence to you or your dear sis but she sounds like the typical career type that members of the family have practically forced me (through mental pressure) to go on dates with in the past. We never click sadly……
Anyway I just about got people to stop going on about this stuff, so sssshhhhhhh!!!!
Plus I’ve only ever been intolerent of the idiotic type of Muslim, who likes to try and force their shite down people’s throats through hook or crook. A conservative practising Muslim who keeps the faith to him/herself and their family or wider community is fine with me. I’m no Islamophobe or whatever you call them. “Go ahead, knock yourself out” I say to them.
We need people to have a good grip with reality (like understanding the real impact of the BNP and EDL in their lives), to choose the right battles, and have the courage to move forward without whining or despairing because of something they read on a blog.
Or what Don said so succinctly at 26.
Sunny,
Any chance of getting somebody to video this and sticking it up on U-Tube?
@29
The only thing that makes me slightly despair is the cowardly type of middle class, nadless Asian I see opening their mouths too much these days.
As for the impact of the BNP, Nick ‘Gorgeous’ Griffin is apparently coming to town soon, so I’ll be able to see for myself thank you.
Must be a geographical thing, then. Many of the young Indian men I see are trying hard to emulate the hypermasculine black gangster rapper thing – though of course, they are also good boys studying law and medicine and whatever. It’s cultural tourism, just like how you get suburban white kids buying most of 50 Cent’s stuff in the US. They use words like ‘blad’ and ‘bruv,’ they dress like they want to be black, they listen to all the right music, and they more often than not have 0 respect for women and/or take their gender roles for granted. The novel ‘Londonstani’ is an exaggerated version of what I’m on about, and incidentally the author went to school not far from where I did.
Ha! Neither of my sisters is a ‘career type.’ That’s probably the most tragic thing about my eldest sis – she would love to just settle down and be a fairly traditional Indian wife/mother. Unfortunately, because she is beautiful, a bit clueless and gives off this air of vulnerability, she has always attracted total freaks. I can’t see you going for a divorced woman anyway. As for me, you can be as offensive as you want since I’m certain you’d consider me ‘white’ and ‘self-hating’ or whatever. I can live with that though – it’s all part of being a feminist.
My close friend used to talk a lot about this when we were flatmates. She was of African descent and she’d tell me the difference between what she described as ‘black womenism’ and ‘feminism’.
She would say that the battles she was facing and causes she was supporting was distinctly different to the mainstream feminism ones. I have to confess, those discussions didn’t leave me with a good impression of modern day feminism.
PS – Those ‘blud’, ‘bruv’, jeans off arse ‘asian’ fools are everywhere. Innit…
17-19 years old – that’s my estimate of your age.
What is a feminist these days?
@35
You strike me as quite a pusillanimous conformist type yourself. But seriously, if your fed on an ideological diet of South Indian shanti, shanti, shanti Christianity, it probably isn’t a surprise that you espouse the hippy route all the time. I think it sucks myself. I was around the last time the BNP/NF types were making waves. If asians had adopted your stance back then, the neo-nazis would’ve probably won. Thankfully some people were a bit more feisty than that. You should learn from them.
What kind of argument is that, Dalbir? That’s like arguing that we need to get tough with Germany and treat them the same way we treated them 60 years ago.
Do we live in the same society as our parents did 40 years ago? You have failed to make that case, so your point about getting tough and feisty is totally irrelevant.
Spare me the tough talk. People that talk tough (#25) are usually over-compensating for their lack of fortitude.
If I am going to take the utter piss out of dalbir I’d have invented shit like this:
No they wouldn’t Dalbir, because quite a lot of folk that were on your day, that day, were white.
Now, grow up. You alienate folk, which is bad.
Can I tell you why it is bad, without pulling my punches? It because you are an idiot. And you don’t see any difference between folk that agree with you and people that don’t?
I think you are being a tad silly.
For what it’s worth, Dalbir doesn’t alienate me.
He just says that he thinks Asian people who deny they are Asian do so because they are ashamed of it or find it inconvenient. Those seem like fair enough reasons for people to do so, if that is how they feel. If they have other reasons, then they should say what they are.
For example, it seems a local political fashion to argue that cohesiveness requires a single civic identity, and therefore everyone including Asians should adopt a plain British identity, based around vaguely defined but positive-sounding principles.
That’s part of what I was getting at when mentioning how other people want to construct my identity for their purposes. Personally, I think there are a number of suppressed premises in the argument (particularly concepts of nation states, civic identity and the model of causes of conflict) which I disagree with, and I would hate to think just because I happen to conform to the supposed principles of Britishness, that I am considered to be assenting to (what I see as) a shallow pretence of homogeneity.
Compared to that, I’d prefer Dalbir’s self-critical strategic essentialism any day! Being Asian does not preclude being British, or being feminist or being critical of Asian culture etc etc. As I see it, there are lots of ways of being any of these things, and these labels sometimes cause us to misunderstand each other, and sometimes to understand each other better.
If a label is misused, then I think it is unlikely to be due to the label itself, but due to power dynamics – perhaps related to linguistic structures – and it is these I’m more interested in.
Arif,
Fair enough. You and Dalbir go to this conference! Then come back and tell me whether your minds were changed or not.
As far as I am concerned, Dalbir plays a game on here. He agrees with me, sometimes, he roots the piss out of me sometimes.
I think dalbir has a valid voice. Sometimes. I also see him is a willing victim, sometimes. You really do have to stop believing in the psychology of victimhood.
I think dalbir, almost always, overstates his opinions. He probably, sees mine in the same way.
But I am arguing for toleration, he is, apparently not.
I have always tried, and it has been a strain I tell you, to argue here that the things we have in common are more important than the things we hold different.
You would prefer:
Y’know what?
I don’t think of you or dalbir as Asian. I just think of you as folk.
It is you that would divide.
I find that quite sad.
I have lots of victimology on my side. There have been enormous tomes written about how the English fucked up the Irish and the Scots. Jai writes elloquently about the effects of the English on India. There are masters of the English language, nearly as good as Jai, that could tell you just how close to home that philosophy went.
But, let us leave that last paragraph, like a playing card, sticking to a wall.
There is no point in looking to the past, as you, and me and dalbir do, sometimes.
There is no future in grievance
Not sure why people should provide any explanation to what these reasons are. From 3rd gen onwards, the question of what “Asian” is will invariable come up, and it is not a case of inconvenience or shame, but rather how close you are with your ancestral identity. In each generation, we lose part of that identity.
In any case, whatever identity we are comfortable with, it should be respected. Dalbir doesn’t strike me as someone who is used to do that.
Good to know that Lianne and Ravi Naik are Goans. I should have guessed that Naik is a popular Hindu Goan name. So a new welcome to the hybrid world of Goans where the Catholics have unthinkingly absorbed whatever cultural crumbs the Portuguese and later the British threw at them. And why so readily?
Because the Hindu artfeacts were so humdrum (idols, dark, dank little temples, sheets of cloth for dress whether sari or dhoti, primitive folk dances, shocking bigotry and sexism) whereas the Portuguese lured their converts (Hindus to Catholics) with huge church structures, Euro names, eye-catching attire for men & women, colourful church rituals in Latin, priests clad in strange attire, new music scale & instruments, couples dancing together, intro to alcohol amd meat. No wonder the converts readily took to Catholic ways.
Before the dawn of wage employmenyt, Goans became great cooks & ayahs in Bombay; playback musicians in Bolly films, cooks & stewards in British ships. Now the Goans excel as accountants, musicsians and — what else?
I feel I had to say about the Goans; the Punjabis have ruled over this blog for too long.
Ravi Naik,
I thought, wrongly, that I sometimes understood what you were saying on here.
Could you pray tell me exactly how ‘ancestral identity’ manifests itself for you? Is it through religion or some such?
I have looked into my soul, or whatever you’d call it, and maybe yes, there is a tiny bit of ancestral identity.
I try to ignore it. It seems to me to be a bit of waste DNA.
I am interested in how it works for you, not somebody else.
There is nothing that wikipedia can’t cure.
Edsa,
Oh! The anger.
Perhaps the Goans weren’t too happy to have their country taken off them by Indians?
Bit of imperialism there, eh!
Douglas, an Asian identity is not necessarily rooted in grievance or holding on to historic victimhood (although it can be).
It can be a call to solidarity between factions who have in the past fought each other (and it is my guess that the call for being British instead of British Asian is partly to try and forge similar solidarity based on current political borders).
It can be a self-understanding based on cultural differences (which I think Ravi Naik may be talking about in #42 when he mentions the gradual erosion of the Asian part of our identities over generations).
It is probably broader than a “British” identity – in that you can claim to share it with perhaps 10 times the number of folk!
It is only a dangerous identity in the sense that any identity can be dangerous – including national identities, religious identities, class identities and political identities. Which means – for me (and I think for you) – when they get in the way of our identities as sentient beings and becomes an excuse for callousness.
I guess you feel Dalbir uses identity in that negative way, but I have not seen this myself. I have seen him use labels which a lot of us find offensive (“whitey”) and then defines them so they refer only to people who use their identity in a negative way (white supremacists). It’s provocative, I guess, because it could be interpreted as legitimising racist language by making disingenuous definitions. On the other hand it could be an attempt to find ways to talk about something that other people want to deny the existence of. Perhaps there are better ways….
The motion for this evening’s event seems to me to be provocative in a very similar way!
Arif,
I am very interested in this sort of stuff.
Obviously.
There is probably a reason for that, but I won’t go into that right now.
I have been debating with myself, right brain, left brain, just why dalbir’s language upsets me so much.
I think it is probably because it characterises all ‘whiteys’ as exactly the same. He has a legitimate arguement in saying that unacceptable language about Asians has exactly the same purpose and effect. So, rubbing our collective noses in the bullshit is probably legitimate, it is just, kind of wearying. I’m not sure how long it is legitimate to play that game for, y’know?
Purpose – to make someone you know not a lot about as the enemy. Y’know the sort of language that is used to dehumanise folk, you don’t need me in the moderation queue to spell it out. However, I would be interested in how previous ‘gooks’ was for the Vietnamese, before America discovered South East Asia. I suspect it makes my case for thinking that language, and it’s modern construction, matters more than we suspect.
Effect – I have just finished reading Elroy James ‘American Tabloid’ and he makes the point (oh! doesn’t he just) that language has moved on a lot from the casual shit that passed as thought in the 1950′s. It would be foolish to regress back to that. Great book, by the way!
Just my point of view Arif.
Food, language, religion, culture and customs that derive from them.
Ravi,
I’m honestly not being rude here, but how is your ‘ancestral identity’ doing?
I think you have written a check list and maybe, just maybe, some of these things really matter to you. I doubt they all do, at least not equally.
Which things do you continue to do that make you uniquely you?
Just for a brief comparison, I gave up porridge an aweful long time ago, I have never got my head around Gaelic, I am an atheist, I don’t know what culture is ffs!, and my customs would be on the Scottish / English border
Yet, I consider myself Scottish.
What is that all about?
Though if asked to self identify, I’d probably see myself more as a sci-fi geek than anything else. More in common with that somewhat dispersed group of humanity than a dod of historical conjunction.
Shock, horror! I agree on some things with a person and some times don’t. *gasp* The audacity…..
I don’t pursue the path of victimology. To my mind the things I highlight are genuine forces. I have learnt so much from doing this by the way. The parallels between people playing down the prevalence of racism within British white society totally mirrors the denial I see from many fellow Sikhs in discussions on casteism within the community. Curiously, in both cases the denials mainly come from those who are least likely to be on the receiving ends, which can explain the phenomena to an extent. It’s not complicated Doug, I just believe in facing these things head on. If you ever saw past the lack of finesse and diplomacy (on my part), I think you’d probably be on my side.
Herein lies the rub. If I’m to be ‘British’ don’t expect or ask me to tolerate neo-nazis running around in various guises. Be honest, there is a job that needs to be finished there – face it.
Arif – You’re pretty much on the money with your interpretation of my posts. I’m thankful, I was beginning to think nothing was getting through….
Doug:
This is sensitivity on your part. I clearly defined what I meant by my use of the term and even refrained from using it by replacing it with the more accurate term whiteists. Still you fail to understand?? I know you aren’t intellectually challenged, so I’m wondering why this is happening?
Slightly tongue-in-cheek comment here — I think “whiteist” is a very accurate term for the political ideology involved, like the “Islamist” counterpart — but perhaps “Victorianist*” or even “Redneckist**” may serve as suitable alternatives, if “whiteist” is deemed to leave too much room for misinterpretation and accidental offence…..
* Since the historical origin of certain racist attitudes towards the Indian subcontinent and people with roots in that region lies mostly during that era and various associated activities, at least where Britain is concerned.
** Self-evident.
dalbir @ 51 and 52,
Cheers.
At least we know where we stand. So:
But that is hardly the point, is it dalbir? Your point is quite witty. But it does not get to any understanding. It assumes too much, which is your issue with me, and frankly mine with you.
See, when you try, you can write better than anyone else that writes here. That was beautiful stuff, and I am on your side. Just don’t assume that the punks you are hitting are gonna remain flattened. The bastards will bounce back up.
OK, I realise it is an issue for you.
Can I say that I hate the BNP and all they stand for? Could you take that as truism?
It is not just Asians that hate the BNP. The vast majority of white trash – which I include myself in – hate them too.
You, who are probably about to go to Oxbridge, have nowt to worry about from most of the whiteys you so despise. try to be a bit more specific.
And try to recognise, as I have had to, should have always, that there is another human being at the other end of this discussion.
I can assure you that I have no KKK regalia and that I am posting in a friendly way.
Do not hate.
You are better than that.
No you aren’t.
You are a fucking site better than that!
Least, that’s what I think…..
Bit stream of conciousness, sorry.
@ 38, 39, 47 & 48
Its not just the use of the word whitey but also of the word slapper.
In his defence of the word ‘whitey’ Dalbir mentions he has provided an explanation of why he used the former. There has not been an explanation of his reasoning for the latter. In fact he avoided it when picked up on it which is quite surprising as he is always exhorting others not to be weak kneed & to face things head on.
It’s not solely the language but the inherent double standards.
Just saying there has been a fair amount of discussion here (& on previous posts) as to use of word whitey but not the word slapper.
The word was used in reference to a particular person. On reflection a part of me wishes I hadn’t.
I don’t usually try and be a gentlemen, but to spare someone potential blushes, I suggest we let this matter slide.
@ 56
Whether or not it is used in reference to an individual matters little because it is one of those social identity constructs that pervade across a group, in this case women who say/do/are perceived to behave by others in a way that does not conform to others expectations … or should I say prejudices. This identity construct is used to ostracise women. And its usage ought to be challenged every time. Not to do so means it is acceptable or not deemed offensive – just as racist terms once were.
And the subsequent ‘want to spare some blushes’ is also part of that same construct as it demonstrates a mentality whereby you have judged that person to be doing something you judge they ought to be embarrassed about. I am surprised you still refer to yourself as a gentleman (another identity construct) since your comments leave little high moral ground for you to stand upon.
When you say things like that it puts you in the same mentality camp as the BNP.
And remember it is a comment you have made that is in the public domain for all to see & comment upon.
I don’t usually try and be a gentleman,
If you have to try, you’re doing it wrong.
@57
Honestly, I don’t buy into any of what your singing Pers. Promiscuity is not something I’d promote. It is certainly not something that has been encouraged in my family (for males or females). I am unashamedly judging it. It is my choice to prefer the notion of fidelity over frivolous encounters. It helps to form more stable societies in my opinion and it is much better for children to be raised in such environments.
I don’t have to accept everything other people/societies do as wonderful. Interestingly this issue is one that characterises the differences between ‘Asian’ and ‘British’ thinking quite well.
So it isn’t really worth me trying then….
Nah, never have myself.
“slapper” ? When I hear this word , the south asian in me, usually thinks the bloke in question needs a (symbolic) tupper. Is that the right hindi? I am quite old fashioned when it comes to treating ladies with respect.
“I suggest we let this matter slide.” Point taken.
First “whitey” now “slapper”?
Hmmmm… that kind of talk reminded me of something.
From the fertiliser bomb trial:
“JAWAD AKBAR: “You could get jobs like this, yeah, like for example the biggest nightclub in central London. Where now here, yeah, now no one can even turn around and say ‘Oh they were innocent,’ – those slags dancing around.”
http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/uk/6466817.stm
Oh, yes, cjcjc, nice contribution to a discussion British Asian identity, of course, predictable as usual from you.
Telling me slapper isn’t a word in the English vocabulary? Slapper is a very English invention actually, I’ve mostly heard it from all the white boys at school in the East End of London – did that make the white boys potential terrorists? Typical of you to bang on about your favourite Muslim hating hobby horse at every opportunity.
“For what it’s worth, Dalbir doesn’t alienate me.”
Nor me. Worth a debate and I disagree with some of what he and lots of other people say – but i think he raises quite difficult issues sometimes which middle England ( in which I include middle class British Asians) finds hard to absorb and discuss. I am from the camp that dislikes words like integration, assimilation, accommodation etc. Politically all such language assumes I am an outsider. I am not.
Well apparently “this issue is one that characterises the differences between ‘Asian’ and ‘British’ thinking quite well.”
cjcjc@65
‘Asian’ isn’t a synonym for ‘Islamist terrorist’ you know……..
Douglas Clark #46: you are well informed about India’s take-over of Goa in 1961. I didn’t know the facts you recounted.
My point was cultural. It was easy for the Portuguese (the most backward people in Europe, then and now) to convert the Hindus because it was not just a religious conversion but a cultural transformation – a breath of fresh air from that stifling, stagnant, superstitious Hindu customs and strange gods.
But sadly with the take-over the Indians brought their worst traits in Goa – intolerance, filth, chaos, corruption, indiscipline, floods of destitutes and beggars from the other states. The old serenity and tranquillity of Goa was gone for forever.
The Portuguese failure to resist doesn’t mean that Nehru had triumphed. The same Nehru failed miserably the following year with the Chinese invasion. The Chinese overwhelmed the Indian army and were already 200 miles into India territory before it registered on Nehru’s not too bright mind. The Chinese were gracious enough to withdraw unilaterally but Nehru was reduced to a broken man until his death in 1964.
George,
I am not that well informed, honest!
I recalled the fact that Goa was taken over by India. The rest is Wikipedia.
I am not so sure that the Portuguese are the most backward people in Europe. Frankly I think that is a ridiculous thing to say. I’ve been to Portugal a few times and I found them quite charming.
The quest of Christianity to spread itself as a world wide brand is there to see for whoever wants to check it out. To my eternal shame, I paid money for Christian Missionaries when I was wee and didn’t know any better.
I knew that India and China had a go at each other.
You say:
Which racist web site did you copy and paste that from?
Anyway, I’ll let the huge number of Indians that log on here to tell you that they are not who you say they are. Best of luck. Racist rants tend to get the truck they deserve…..
One may dislike those words , but that does not mean that people should not respect others that do (it works both ways). Clearly, Dalbir’s #3 shows lack of respect on many fronts.
halima,
Why, exactly?
Do you like words like democracy, equality, womens rights, etc?
You write excellent English. Do you want that to disappear from your lexicon too?
Language is the easiest way to show power relations, Douglas. Democracy is inclusive of all, at least, and is in my opinion the least worst option, human rights is OK as I believe it’s inclusive of all, even those that can’t write literary verse.
Integration, and assimilation on the other hand implies one party has a right to ‘home’ and the other has to ‘fit’ in. As far as I am concerned provided i respect others, and other people’s cultures, I don’t need to integrate, assimilate. Accommodation is possibly something that we all need to do, I don’t have a huge problem, just as long as accommodation is a two way process.
Ravi it’s not just a question of disliking words. I always use words in very political ways – I fundamentally disagree with integrationist and assimilation policies. I don’t think it’s just me, my great living heroes, Stuart Hall and Paul Gilroy used to say such things.. and then after 9/11 people started harping back to the good old days when we used to talk about integration .
‘You write excellent English. Do you want that to disappear from your lexicon, too?’ No, not all, all, I am improving it.
halima,
Well you dodged the ‘women’s rights’ question, didn’t you?
Anyhoo, I haven’t a clue what monolithic culture you would be expected to integrate or assimilate to. It probably wouldn’t be one I’d chose to recognise. Or respect. And my next door neighbour wouldn’t really agree with me, either. And so on and so forth.
You are fighting against a blancmange, or a chimera I think.
There is nothing there to adapt to.
Least, that’s what I think.
Dodged the ‘women’s question’? Is this not included in human rights? In any case, I’ll save my gender -bending perspectives for another around..
I am not fighting against anything. I am just saying, let me be.
Glad you don’t think there is a monolithic culture to assimilate to, some folks do, though, which is silly, culture not being static and all that, culture on the move and all…
halima,
My point was that there has never been, never will be, a culture you could adopt and then say:
“I am forever British”
For someone, probably mulitudes of folk to be honest, would say pants to that!
There are, at a guess, as many tribes as there are people in the UK. And that incorporates the whole damn lot of us. Means the whole damn lot of us, even.
we agree….
But learning English is an integration effort, is it not?
What type of policies?
Hmmm, so “Edsa” and “George” are the same person ? Not too surprised, considering the racist comments that George had left on the other thread.. Looks like he is continuing his bigoted rants on this thread as well.
Desi Expat @ 77,
Just curious how you know that? Which other thread?
How do we describe the efforts to preserve a ‘mother tongue’, or a religious language (like Arabic or Hebrew) as many diasporic parents do?
Following your logic, are they in some way ‘anti-integration’?
No, that’s not following my logic. If you follow my logic, an anti-integration effort would be if parents didn’t want their children to learn English or prohibit them to mix with people of other cultures.
Dalbir. I’d love you to explain all this to an Irish audience and tell them how it might be there too.
They just have had a (very rare) racist murder here at the weekend – on an outer Dublin new suburb/estate. Poor lad was a 15 year old schoolboy, whose Nigerian family had lived here for 11 years.
It’s OT I know – but I felt I wanted to mention it on PP some way.
http://www.independent.ie/national-news/courts/brothers-charged-after-death-of-teen-2125286.html
“a religious language (like Arabic or Hebrew)…”
Erm… the Arabic of the Qur’an is markedly different from the living language spoken by a considerable number of people who self-identify as Arabs. Equally, the Hebrew of the Bible is somewhat distinct from the modern Hebrew spoken by the peoples of Israel.
The fact that Scriptures were written in ancestors of both these in fact *living* languages is entirely irrelevant.
Arabs in the West tend to bring up their children with at least a modicum of the knowledge of their Arabic linguistic heritage, as well as assuring that their children also speak the language of their country of residence. My son speaks both Arabic and English quite fluently (at least as fluently as a two and a half year old might). I know this is also true of the children of Modern Hebrew speaking parents of my acquaintance who have relocated from Israel to other parts of the world.
Might I also point out that Greek is another Scriptural language (albeit in an antique form – Koine Greek)? I can think of few modern Greek speakers in Western Europe who would claim their Greek is learned as a result of religious conviction.
Does anyone else think that Halima and Dalbir and Ravi Naik would have been better employed tonight as the guest stars of the event that this thread is supposed to be advertising? It would have made for a heck of a discussion.
Damon@81
If I did that, I might start by playing this for a laugh.
I first heard it being sung in an Irish pub a few weeks ago….made me laugh.
It has a bit of explicit language, just to let the namby pamby know.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=WRjap8s-wjU
An IRA song.
Why doesn’t that surprise me?
“My point was cultural. It was easy for the Portuguese (the most backward people in Europe, then and now) to convert the Hindus because it was not just a religious conversion but a cultural transformation – a breath of fresh air from that stifling, stagnant, superstitious Hindu customs and strange gods.”
Those “strange gods” would have included, of course, in Goa and elsewhere in India the already existing Indian Orthodox Christian community’s God, Who had been worshipped in India already for quite a while before a single Portuguese missionary hove into view.
George is embarrassingly ignorant about India – despite being originally from Pakistan. An article about Christianity in India can be found here.
@85
You should see the local English boys in action before you jump on your horse. They aren’t any better.
Anyway, I went for a drink that day, didn’t know the band was going to be there.
Besides I’m neutral in the Anglo-Irish conflict. Don’t drag me in.
Those Paddies are good peoples from my experience!
Douglas,
I was referring to his earlier comments in the skin whitening thread. His basic point as i recall was that Indians were ugly because of their dark skin, i think he called it muddy/like dirt etc. He then went on a rant about how Indians had never acheived anything and never would in comparision with other groups.
Dalbir
“Those Paddies are good peoples from my experience!”
In my experience they tend to prefer to be known as Irish, however.
(A Taffy)
There wasn’t too much British Asian solidarity here by the sound of it.
More like two worlds coldiding.
http://www.thisislondon.co.uk/standard/article-23822258-man-killed-by-blackberry-thieves.do
Reading this about British Asians, I am reminded of an article by John McWhorter who argued that now that (real) African people living in America numbered a million, how long more should black Americans go on pretending that they had much to do with Africa.
http://www.dallasnews.com/sharedcontent/dws/dn/opinion/points/stories/DN-mcwhorter_21edi.State.Edition1.28abda6.html
“There wasn’t too much British Asian solidarity here by the sound of it. More like two worlds coldiding.”
What kind of comment is that? Beside the point that the perps would not be classified as “British Asian” anyway, I didn’t realise that muggers were so discriminating.
Oh no, it’s the marvellous McWhorter whom you last pulled out to “show” that some of his fellow Black academics don’t do anything useful and then play the race card when called out.
34 & 36: only just worked out where those 2 comments were which I knew I’d forgotten to reply to!
Dalbir – I would say I’m somewhere between womanism and feminism. I’m not going to claim an automatic affinity with black womanism, because I don’t think I have the right to. I think that British Asians have a far more complex relationship to British white people than say, black people do to white people. Black African-American women, for example, have a lot more shit to deal with than someone like me does, not least the legacy of slavery.
Ravi – Why don’t you answer that question for yourself? You could always check out some sites like the F-Word, Womanist Musings, I Blame The Patriarchy… whatever catches your eye, really. I wouldn’t want to run the risk of patronising you, and I have no desire to sell or explain something which I have no hard and fast ideas on myself, to anyone else. Boiled right down, for me it is simply the belief that ‘women are people too.’
The term ‘British Asian’ is just a convenient term to mean ‘brown skinned’. It’s got nothing to do with nationality or culture. Hell, most of us weren’t even born in Asia. It’s enlightening to note that people with white skin with parents who weren’t born in Britain don’t define themselves as ‘British Irish’ or ‘British European’. Even the African/Caribbean community are described as black, notwithstanding their parents’ national origins.
With regard to culture, I’d conjecture that all the culture brought to Britain by our parents and relatives is now British culture. Every person in this country wants to define themselves in a particular way; by reference to culture; by reference to their interests; by reference to their taste in music. To claim that South Asian diaspora should give rise to a specific definition of an entire culture is tosh.
My parents are Indian. I am British. I have inherited some of my parents’ religious and cultural ways. My skin is brown. This does not make me Asian. I am British and do not wish to be considered different by way of a description that focusses entirely on my parents’ national background or the colour of my skin. Like every British person I have my heritage and am proud of who I am: I am British, just the same as the next British person.
Face the truth that you are in a place that does seem to categorise you by your brown skin. For an indeterminate amount of ‘British’ people this does makes you different to them. I don’t know how many of these people there are here, but it’s probably more than just 2 million odd people who voted BNP as that’s just the ones who are brave enough to be open about it. No amount of whining, intellectualising or stamping your feet up and down about this will change that.
I say don’t hate your browness, love it and embrace it instead. There isn’t anything wrong with it. It’s whiteist people who are pushing the notion that there is.
Everyone is going to be categorised by a physical feature, skin colour being the most evident categorisation. Merely calling that ‘British Asian’ does not alleviate the fact that people will make judgements based on skin-colour. It’s not just the whites that make these judgements.
I don’t hate my brownness by any means. It’s my skin-colour. I’m not ashamed and I’m not proud. It’s just the way I look. It doesn’t define me. I am not categorised by it. My skin just happens to be brown.
The argument that the “whitest people… are pushing the notion that there is [something wrong with brown skin]” is a strawman. The racists would, no doubt, be thrilled if I decided that due to my skin colour I was different to every other schmo born in this country and describe myself as ‘British Asian’. They would be able to point at things like ‘British Values’ and ‘Christian heritage’ as a veil for the hatred of my skin-colour. Well here’s the news for them and you — I am not a skin colour. These people don’t want me to be what I am and that’s a proud Englishman.
Agreed Mo-mo @96
I consider myself English. It does not take away from anything. It does not mean I am ashamed of my skin colour.
In fact as you say @94 being english or british now means a mixture of things including things from other cultures whether they be from asian, black or yellow etc skin colours. I also agree that if we start to define ourselves by skin colour it is using the same tool as the bnp.
Thought about it. I think we are at least three or four generations away from a brown person saying ‘I’m English’ and there being a universal, non blinking type acceptance of this statement. That’s if it ever happens.
Until then, you’re likely to be met with agreement from liberals, contempt/contestation by conservatives and apathy from others who frankly don’t give a damn.
And contempt from people like you Dalbir, with all that talk about problems with self-confidence.
And my estimate is one more generation (20 years) .
Come on! You don’t find strange to see people practically begging to belong in the face of blatant denial. Actually, you could replace ‘strange’ for ‘sad’ in the above sentence.
One thing I’ve learnt from this is not to tie yourself down geographically like that. The way people are moving around the globe these days, it just doesn’t make sense. People are better of with transportable identities I think.
People rattling on about English this, English that, when it appears that some of these ‘indigs’ themselves are quite recent arrivals compared to say the Welsh. Maybe the Welsh could drawn a cut off point and say no one before this time truly belongs here and are ‘unwanted invaders’ (Dan Dare’s quote)?
I said universal acceptance. Are you serious? Those teenage BNPers of today will still be around then? DO you expect a mass volte face from them in adulthood? Even those pillocks in their 30s will still be bobbing about.
I think you misunderstood. I’m talking about when a ‘brown Englishman’ will not bat an eyelid. 20 years seems a bit unrealistically optimistic?
“I think we are at least three or four generations away from a brown person saying ‘I’m English’ and there being a universal, non blinking type acceptance of this statement.”
“I’m talking about when a ‘brown Englishman’ will not bat an eyelid.”
Yes, the people being labelled enjoy the label almost as much as those doing the labelling. Those with the label believe that the label somehow asserts their independence from the populace at large — in this case, people whose skin happens to be white. Those with the label believe that the label enables community with those who also have the same label. However, that doesn’t mean that the label is correct, or should endure — if I’m Birmingham City fan, does that mean I am the same as a ‘British Asian’ West Brom fan? If I’m a Hindu, does this make me the same as a ‘British Asian’ Muslim? Do I have more in common with a racist ‘British Asian’ than I do with a BNP supporter?
The only commonality I have with anyone else to whom the ‘British Asian’ label is attached is that our skin is Brown. Any other common experiences are purely due to upbringing from our parents’ culture; even then the experiences may be extremely diverse between us. If we’re going to wheel out the culture argument (I realise this hasn’t been done), the term ‘British Asian’ to describe a shared culture between people with brown skin is as inadequate the word ‘British’ is to describe shared British Culture (to which the Welsh, Scots, even the Cornish, will certainly attest). In case the point is not clear — we are not the same because of our skin colour.
Therefore, what use is this term to except as a description of my skin-colour? Who cares if other people whose skin is brown accept it? One less thing in common.
The racists in this country will NEVER accept black/brown/yellow skin as British. Racism is as old as time itself. However from my experience the racists are an extreme minority. At the end of the day this is MY country. Mine. I pay taxes. I work to make it a better place. In return I enjoy the benefits of my land — I’m free to practice my religion; I’m free to have opinions on all matters. Hell, I can take my mother to the cinema so she can watch Bollywood films.
My culture in all its forms, is British culture. That I retain some of my parents’ culture does not make me Asian — that culture is British culture. That my skin happens to be brown makes no difference and I refuse to be defined in a way that lumps me in with so many people with whom I [may] have nothing in common except the colour of our skin.
If you are directing the above at me, you’d better hold your horses.
I could go along with most of your post but this bit….
..isn’t very convincing. How did these aspects of your parents culture become British in your mind exactly?
I think you are in luck though. I think we are able to Anglicise ourselves to an extent that a certain section of privileged white society will open the doors wide open for us as a reward. People do this all the time. However, some people also feel this is degrading and essentially acquiesce to the implied notion that their is something innately wrong with your inherited culture/physical features, that it needs to be negated so conspicuously. Both positions have their cases.
Each to their own I guess.
I do wonder though (and I’ve said it before), if a negation of browness is sometimes the symptom of wanting to get ahead and disidentify with that which is perceived as a hindrence to this. There is that subtle type of ‘corporate’ racism that can cause pressure in this respect. This isn’t something to be brushed off so lightly. I’ve heard similar comments from very successful ethnic people in private conversations enough times to know it isn’t a figment of anyone’s imagination.
So being brown does seem to have some impact. Whether we acknowledge it or not. This doesn’t mean it makes anything impossible though. I guess it’s all down to plain old power dynamics in the end, which are by no means static in themselves.
Strangely (and I may be well off the mark here), I get the sense that in our own ways we both desire broadly similar outcomes in that we both wish our browness isn’t somehow used against us.
Anyway, enough of this already. Just because I am brown and vocal and you are indifferent to it, doesn’t make us enemies (doesn’t mean we have to be pals either okay!). lol
You seem to have failed to address the question. I am addressing the label of British Asian and describing that it’s just another label for ‘brown’. That there is racism, and that there will always be racism, does not necessitate such a label based upon where your parents happen to come from. I don’t see why it’s perfectly acceptable that Ian Wright (Arsenal & England footballer) be patriotic and be considered by all and sundry to be English through and through, even though his skin is black, but that I should not be because my skin is brown.
I don’t agree that I have Anglicised myself. I was born, brought up, educated, lived, and worked in my country the whole of my life. Anglicisation isn’t necessary — since the day I was born I was British.
I’m quite sure that ‘corporate racism’ is very real although I have no wish do dissociate with my skin colour for that or any purpose. That I am brown is self-evident. That I will suffer racism, whether intentional or not, is obvious although the racism is not on the basis of where my parents come from, but my skin colour. Labelling me as ‘British Asian’ will not change that. I am British. My skin is brown. That’s it — nothing more; bring on the racism.
There’s nothing wrong with being vocal. We’ve all suffered racism and it is abhorrent. The only way that is going to stop is if we shout from the rooftops that it isn’t acceptable. I’m not trying to be white, I’m just being what I am — British.
I agree with the idea that the word ‘Asian’ in the UK is really a code word for brown.
I’m sure there are plenty of people who would dispute your assertion about Ian Wright, plus you open up a whole other debate about the closeness (and otherwise) of various sub communities to the majority white one. I would say there are historical and present day differences in this respect. I think it could be argued that ignoring the potential impact of this today is tantamount to ignoring realities. Are some sub communities considered to be closer to the white majority? Seems like it, especially if they have long histories of..err…exchanging DNA and similar religious backgrounds, however that situation came about.
I’m not trying to be white, I’m just being what I am — British.
That’s the thing though. You say that with such conviction, yet from where I’m standing, people who’ve had that label a lot longer than you frequently seem pretty perplexed with what it means today. Yesterday’s Brit is today’s Scottish nationalist. Britishness is also closely related to the union, now that this appears to be teetering itself, I’m not sure how much weight people can give to the identity that underlies it?