Talk:American-born Chinese/Archive 1

Criticism of the term American-born Chinese vs. Chinese American

An American-born Chinese or ABC is a person born in the United States of Chinese ethnic descent. A Chinese American is an American who is of ethnic Chinese descent. I'm a little confused; is there a distinction? The Chinese American article discusses the post-1965 immigration boom like this article as well as politics and immigration history. Should this article be merged with Chinese American? --Blue387 05:14, 18 Apr 2005 (UTC)

I think someone who created this wanted to use the "ABC" as an acronym for American Born Chinese. In any case, the distinction may be primarily that Americans always affix -American to every ethnicity to state that a person is born in America, i.e. "African American," "Italian American," "Chinese American," etc.

There's an ambiguity in doing that, though. You're not sure whether you're born here, naturalized here, or you're half-American and half-Chinese.

I would vote for keeping this article as a "slang" or colloquial term because I don't think American-born Chinese is intended to cover the history of being Chinese American. We need to debate this more.--lux 06:44, 20 Apr 2005 (UTC)

This article discusses the children of first-generation Chinese American immigrants, while the latter discusses the immigrants more. ABCs are very different from their immigrant parents, with their culture and language totally like "Americans". This article needs to stress more that ABCs are losing their culture and language at a surprisingly rapid pace. Young ABCs today rarely speak any Mandarin. Usually only the immigrant children speak Mandarin daily. — Stevey7788 (talk) 22:08, 16 July 2005 (UTC)

NPOV note: "To remedy this problem" sounds a bit like taking a side on the whole immigrants and assimilation issue. (the other side would say: no problem at all, america is all about assimilation) Isnt there a more neutral way to couch it, like "to remedy this situation" or "to assist the efforts of the parents in maintaining ties with chinese culture"?

Is that better? I wrote it as "Some parents have taken step to remedy this problem" --lux 23:22, 14 December 2005 (UTC)

On the other hands, I rewrote it as "taken steps to ensure their children retain ties to their heritage", after thinking about what you said. It's more the parents' efforts that allow Chinese schools to exist, compared to Hispanics or other immigrants.

I agree with the suggestion that this article be mered with the "Chinese American" article. This article doesn't contain much information, and what information it does contain is equally applicable to "Chinese American". Further, "Chinese American" is generally considered less offensive. A search for "American-born Chinese" should link to the "Chinese American" article. Readin (talk) 02:14, 16 February 2008 (UTC)

The article states, "Some criticize the term for deemphasizing American nationality. By using "Chinese" as the noun, and using "American-born" to modify it, the nuance is that the person in question is not really an American, but just a Chinese person who happens to be born and/or living in the United States. In light of the stereotype of the "perpetual foreigner" in the US, it is argued that terms that reinforce this notion must be used with special caution." However, I have only heard the term "American-born Chinese" or "ABC" used by members of the Chinese-American community--rarely (if ever) by members of other ethnic groups. Should it be noted that the term itself is generally used by those in the overseas Chinese community? Otherwise, this paragraph could be read to imply that this is a term used by other Americans to reinforce the "perpetual foreigner" idea. Epstein's Mother 05:11, 30 April 2007 (UTC)

I agree that the term is largely used by those within the "ABC community." I wasn't saying that the mainstream US population uses it to perpetuate the perception of Chinese Americans as foreigners. I was pointing out that some believe that by using the term and giving it the imprimatur of people within "the community" it gives the impression that Chinese Americans are not "real", loyal Americans. If you think that's unclear, by all means please clarify my explanation. Penser 07:16, 1 May 2007 (UTC)penser

Very simply: the "ABC" term is most often used by Chinese nationals, ignorant of the fact that Chinese-Americans are just as American as any other Americans. In the US, if someone said a Chinese-American is somehow less American, that someone would clearly and rightfully be labeled a jerk. Within China, however this is common practice; the upbringing of Chinese-Americans is ignored, and only static ancestry is deemed important. If I'm really wrong in saying this, please let me know. If not, this article really needs to reflect this double standard. Spettro9 (talk) 07:23, 18 November 2008 (UTC)

ABC is used all the time in my Chinese American community by ABCs themselves. More importantly though, source it!--Tznkai (talk) 12:33, 18 November 2008 (UTC)

I took the sentence out about where the terms might be used, but the rest is really not that subjective...; give me some time to find a citation...., (I know this is is far from the place for a debate about citation, and I know about the encyclopedic content concept, but what if there is no source other than original research... and everyone who reads it agrees, because they have all observed it? isn't that the power of Wikipedia? just because it's not sourced, doesn't mean to take it out...) Spettro9 (talk) 07:36, 23 November 2008 (UTC)

I never remove something just because it doesn't have a citation, I remove it because it doesn't have a citation and I also have reason to believe it isn't true. My Chinese American community, most of which are descendant from those who fled Chinese civil war to Taiwan/ROC, use the term ABC to talk about the generation born in the U.S. I found the term very frequent when I run into Chinese American communities across the states. I can't say how much about how it is in Taiwan/ROC and in Mainland China/PRC though.--Tznkai (talk) 15:49, 24 November 2008 (UTC)

Small Penis Myth

I look through the history and see that nicksinif, a well-meaning member of Wikipedia, has repeatedly added to the list of stereotypes that Chinese men have small penises. Must we talk about small penis? I'm not sure how appropriate that is to an encyclopaedium that all manners of people might be reading, from the elderlies to the kidlings.

None of all the stereotypes listed are positive or negative. The stereotype of Asian-Americans being overly smart, for example, often leads to stigmatization against the Asian-Americans that might choose to become a car mechanics or janitors over that of doctors and lawyers.

Another thing: I might agree with leaving the stereotype of Chinese people owning restaurants because that's a visible and widely discussed aspect in media and Chinatown. I would want to expand it with an explanation of how that's not true. However, penises cannot be seen, judged, or compared. --Lux 23:00, 8 January 2006 (UTC)

Stereotypes

I don't think that this article should not be used to dispell generalizations as that seems more opinion oriented and wikipedia articles should inform and not persuade. I think the stereotypes should just be listed and not argued with "Myth" and "Fact". As of right now I don't think this article follows NPOV.

Some of the arguments are flawed as well, for example "Myth: The Chinese Americans are skilled at classical instruments — typically the piano or the violin, instruments of professional and high prestige. Fact: This is found prominently only in the sons and daughters of the immigrants; the immigrants themselves may also know how to play the instruments as symbols of the high-class living that they hoped to achieve for themselves or their children. It does not necessarily apply to ABCs." I can't tell if this is supporting or against the generalization. Asteron 19:12, 17 January 2006 (UTC)

Yeah, I was the one who added the Myth and Fact because people were just adding more and more sentences, making the stereotypes a mixture of what is stereotypical and what is not. It's probably better to just list the stereotypes, rather than writing explanations of how the stereotypes are wrong (we can just use links or off-line citations that can point out the origin of the stereotypes). If you want to delete all the "facts", leaving just the stereotypes, I'll support that.

I don't know who implied that "This is found prominently only in the sons and daughters of the immigrants", because I agree that it seems to support, rather than counter the stereotype. I just mindlessly cleaned up the article without checking whether the sentence makes sense. --Lux 06:05, 18 January 2006 (UTC)

Unless some source or citation is actually provided for it, I'm simply going to comment out the entire section. The entire section seems dubious and uncyclopedic, is unlikely to ever be verifiable, and looks like it was written by a high schooler. --Yuje 02:27, 12 March 2006 (UTC)

Please see external links. I suggest reverting your error and discussing the problems before you comment out the page.--Lux 06:48, 12 March 2006 (UTC)

To clear the myth or stereotype, the reason specific group of Asians are better at mathematics or performance arts are due to education or family influence. Immigrant children who came older are better at arts and sciences because of their personal or education experiences. It is in no ways "genetically superior" but "merely statistics" when comparing with other American ways-of-life. Family backgrounds also influenced such. CalvinWg

Yes, some Asians are "genetically superior" at mathematics. See Race and intelligence.

really? ....really really? and just some? genetically superior? who says so? haha...jeez... Spettro9 (talk) 10:41, 18 November 2008 (UTC)

" and make about about 20% of the students of Harvard University, Stanford, and MIT."

The percentage of Asian Americans (more than Chinese) is 18% at Harvard College, 22% at Stanford, and 27% at MIT. Such a blanket statement is inaccurate and unsubstantiated. The precise percentage of ABCs need to be looked up. --Jiang 06:36, 22 Aug 2003 (UTC)

(This has been commented out in the main article long enough, I'm moving the list here so people will know that it's been sitting there.) --Lux 23:11, 5 November 2006 (UTC)

The stereotypes below have at various times been applied to the American-born Chinese population:

• That Chinese Americans are the "Model Minority," in that Chinese Americans are the smart, hard-working students that excel in prestigious subjects, gurus of math and science by virtue of being born Chinese. While many sons and daughters of Chinese immigrants tend to excel in school, subsequent generations have borne americanized groups with similar attributes and skills little different from the typical American.

• That Chinese Americans are skilled at classical instruments — typically the piano or the violin, instruments of professional and high prestige. The sons and daughters of the immigrants are often persuaded to play the instruments as symbols of the high-class living. This does not necessarily apply to ABCs.

• That children attend only Chinese private schools as an alternative to public school — or they may attend Chinese school on weekends (in local church, for example) while going to public school on weekdays. While these schools and churches do exist with a purpose to teach children Chinese culture and language, only a minority attend these functions.

• That all American-born Chinese can speak Chinese, as well as Greek, Latin, and French. There is a dual (and contradictory) perspective. First, some may view Chinese Americans as slow and incapable of speaking English, so they may talk slowly to them in a condescending manner; otherwise, they may see Chinese Americans as an over-achieving group of individuals who know a variety of languages, math, and science, but are alien to mainstream American culture; however, these stereotypes are true of few American-born Chinese. A majority can speak English well but usually do not know Chinese or other languages, similar to a typical American.

• That all Chinese Americans are either Christian church-goers or devout Buddhists. While Buddhism may be more widespread, it is increasingly common for ABCs to convert to Christianity; however, some are secular.

• That all Chinese Americans are associated with the restaurant business. This stereotype is similar to that of Hindu people managing hotels and gas stations. While Chinese restaurants are prominent in and outside of Chinatown, a majority of ABCs are not associated with dining services.

Jok Sing

In Cantonese, ABC's are called Jok Sing's. Is there any formal translation of this in written chinese, Mandarin, or english? 128.6.175.59 20:50, 13 April 2006 (UTC)

I don't think "Jok Sing" comes from Cantonese, and I don't know if it is actually from Taisanese(or Toisanese) because the dialect sounds similar. I would say it is a euphenmism of "ABC" meaning "the center of a bamboo" CalvinWg

Actually, "jok sing" is from cantonese. I just asked my mom about it, and she explained that it most closely means "hollow bamboo [center]", and it refers to how the chinese (at least among the older immigrants)think of ABC's as inept, not knowing how to speak chinese or english fluently. And also, "jok sing" should be more accurately spelled "jook sing". 76.246.38.51 (talk) 00:11, 20 January 2008 (UTC)

love boat

I find this info. astonishing and hard to believe. It definitely needs to be backed up, specifically the part about Love boat. I dont' see why the chinese people (PRC in this case), would be interested in learning chinese culture from the ROC gov. (Taiwan)?? Plus, why would the Taiwanese gov. promote "relationships" between Taiwanese and Chinese overseas when PRC is their biggest political/military rival?? The whole thing just doesn't seem to make sense. Thanks--Bonafide.hustla 23:13, 9 July 2006 (UTC)

Traditionally, the KMT has maintained better relations with the Chinese diaspora than the CPC. This had to do with issues of ideology, trust, and mutual interest. If you go to San Francisco Chinatown, you will still see flags of the Republic of China flying in slightly greater quanities than flags of the People's Republic of China. Almost every one of those "gates" to the established Chinatowns was donated by the ROC government, with a Blue Sky White Sun Symbol and Sun Yat-sen's "Tian Xia Wei Gong" calligraphy etched in.

These "overseas Chinese" attending Love Boat are those who have family ties with Taiwan.--Jiang 02:11, 10 July 2006 (UTC)

Then it should be specified. Plus since these people are Taiwanese-Americans who are attending, it shouldn't be under this article. (a violation of NPOV since whether Taiwanese are Chinese is controversial)--Bonafide.hustla 08:29, 12 July 2006 (UTC)

It's not controversial, at least not in this context. Please cite your sources. There exists a "Overseas Chinese Affairs Commission", not a "Overseas Taiwanese Affairs Commission", but the use of "Chinese" in this context is completely lost to you. Even the most independence supporters in Taiwan have used the term "ABC" and have not substituted "ABT".--Jiang 17:18, 12 July 2006 (UTC)

We don't call ourselves ABT? You'd be surprised (coughMITcough)...

Well yeah, as long as the word Taiwan doesn't appear in this article. By the way, can u plesae cite your source about the "love boat"? Does it still exist?--Bonafide.hustla 05:40, 13 July 2006 (UTC)

Xanga blogrings: [1]--Jiang 06:04, 13 July 2006 (UTC)

Xanga, google, and myspace are not appropriate citations.--Bonafide.hustla 08:17, 14 July 2006 (UTC)

Well, it exists. You're asking a stupid question, like whether the Boy Scouts still exists and are asking me to "prove" it. I can show you the website, but you wouldn't be able to read it.

"Although the majority attenders are Taiwanese American partially due to the hostility between Taiwan and mainland China. " This is not verifiable. The hostility has nothing to do with this. It has to do with differences in background and origin. Mainlanders don't send their children on this program for reasons beyond "hostility": they have no connections to Taiwan, etc. --Jiang 17:49, 14 July 2006 (UTC)

ABCs compared to native Asians

- Although many Asian-Americans have a stereotype of being bookish and do well in school, the same is not necessarily true in actual Asian countries anymore. This is because their parents immigrated to America when they were brought up being taught that education comes before all else. But in Asia, countries are slowly modernizing, and absorbing more from western countries, so native Asians may actually be less "stereotypically Asian" that American-Asians.

Original research is my explanation for removing this paragraph. --Lux 01:04, 9 April 2007 (UTC) —The preceding unsigned comment was added by Luxdormiens (talk • contribs) 00:06, 9 April 2007 (UTC).

Wow, another article with ONE referrence

I removed some unsourced material from the lead. It looks like 90% of this article is unsourced orginal research. Maybe start over? Is this term/article even notable? I will defer to others for now. Cheers! --Tom 17:52, 5 June 2007 (UTC)

No it's not notable. It should go in the Wikitionary as a colloquial term and then add that as a footer to the Chinese Americans article. As it stands, this article is being used by activists to push their views. 68.46.183.96 (talk) 12:26, 24 September 2008 (UTC)

Unsourced/incorrect claim about where the term is used

I removed this sentence: "This term is almost exclusively used in Taiwan and Mainland China." There's no source, and besides I don't think it's correct. I'm in California and hear it used or use it myself all the time.--Mistakefinder (talk) 13:42, 10 December 2009 (UTC)

Sources

• Bayliss, Jonathan. "Interview: Gene Yang: Writer/Creator of "American Born Chinese"." The Trades. December 13, 2006.
• "American Born Chinese." America.gov. June 4, 2009.
• Valenti, Kristi. "[http://archives.tcj.com/index.php?option=com_content&task=view&id=666&Itemid=48

Gene Yang (excerpt)]." The Comics Journal. Wednesday 11 July 2007. WhisperToMe (talk) 14:31, 7 July 2011 (UTC)