Talk:Zoot Suit Riots

Can we get a source for this statement instead of just a number?

By the end of the war, Mexican-American men were over-represented in the United States Armed Forces as a percentage of their population and they had the highest percentage of Congressional Medal of Honor winners.[20]

FILIPINOS ZOOT SUITERS? FILIPINO ZOOT SUITERS VICTIMS OF THE RIOTS?

The article claims that Filipinos were zoot suiters and were also victims of the riots; however, the only source provided for this claim is--literally--a Filipino pride speech delivered at a Filipino pride event quoted from a defunct Filipino pride online newsletter. Does this count as a legit academic citation for this assertion? I have done extensive research on this topic and have even spoken to noted scholars that have devoted a lifetime to this topic, such as Mauricio Mazon, and never have I heard this claim before. Alwaysquestioning213 (talk) 03:40, 11 June 2023 (UTC)

A number of books discuss Filipinos in the context of zoot suits and the riots, such as Creating Masculinity in Los Angeles's Little Manila (2006, Linda Espana-Maram), Becoming Mexipino (2012, Rudy Guevarra), The Power of the Zoot (2008, Luis Alvarez), and Zoot Suit (2011, Kathy Peiss). I've added another ref to the statement; from Zoot Suit: Over the next few days, crowds of white civilians joined in the rampage, targeting mainly Mexican American youths but also some African Americans and Filipinos. Schazjmd (talk) 13:56, 11 June 2023 (UTC)

Again, the authors whose work you refer to are known and avowed extreme Filipino nationalists (like the original author of the “speech” you cited and subsequently suppressed) that habitually flaunt Filipino flags and obsess about all things Filipino, yet interestingly choose to live separated by an ocean thousands of miles away from the Philippines. Flat earthers, hate groups, and extreme nationalists, like the Afrocentrics and their ilk, do the same: they refer to their own discourse and literature to corroborate and substantiate their claims. The fact of the matter is that white-supremacist servicemen specifically sought out Mexican-American civilians to attack. Chicano scholars, and others like Carey McWilliams that closely followed the events of the “Zoot Suit Riots” as they unfolded, maintain that racist servicemen targeted the entire Mexican-American community at the time but especially Mexican-American zoot suiters for unlike other Mexican American men, they not only defended themselves but they fought back! More importantly, the Hearst publications, that created and fueled the whole hysteria in the first place, blamed solely Mexican Americans as the instigators in article after article chockfull of racism and outright lies directed explicitly and entirely against all Mexican Americans including Mexican-American zoot suiters with no mention of either Filipinos or blacks. The late Mauricio Mazón, a renowned historian that has produced several monographs on the topic over the span of decades, sustains that the “Zoot Suit Riots” were part of a larger and continual period of intense anti-Mexican-American racism experienced in Mexican-American enclaves throughout the southwestern United States since the Mexican American War.

The citation you include here is misleading because it reads that, “Filipinos and blacks were [also] targeted” and while that may be true it should rather state not “also” but [because] Filipinos and blacks resembled Mexican-American zoot suiters but not because they “also” were express targets. Quite simply put, theirs was a case of mistaken identity and to say otherwise is not supported by the facts. A particular habit and modus operandi of extreme nationalists is to falsely insert themselves in the narrative by treating the anecdotal evidence as standard and making crafty use of adverbs and conjunctions and other parts of speech, such as “also” and “and”, to revise and even contort historical facts. In recent years, various disingenuous “down for the brown” ethnocentrics have highjacked and arrogated the Chicano Studies departments and discipline to serve their own interests. 97.130.243.78 (talk) 14:17, 12 June 2023 (UTC)

After consideration, I've removed the questionable "speech" source. Schazjmd (talk) 15:30, 11 June 2023 (UTC)

Why write speech in quoation marks? The footnote you removed was quite literally just that, again, a "speech" written by a Filipino nationalist, delivered at a Filipino pride event, transcribed in a now defunct Filipino pride newsletter. I'm curious to know what you would refer to it as? Would you prefer "discourse"? I understand that you're a Filipino apologist and you have every right to be one; all I'm doing is stating the facts. I too love Filipinos and I count them among my closest friends that I worship with at my local parish and work with as well. 97.130.243.78 (talk) 14:26, 12 June 2023 (UTC)

It was a transcript of a speech; I used quotation marks as shorthand for referring to that aspect, no other reason.

I didn't write the article. I saw your question, looked into it, found a better source and replaced the source you questioned. There is nothing in Kathy Peiss's biography to justify your characterization, and I'm done with this conversation. Schazjmd (talk) 15:15, 12 June 2023 (UTC)

Kathy Peiss is a Jewish American associate professor of American history at the University of Pennsylvania and her expertise lies in the field of modern American cultural history and the history of American sexuality, women, and gender. Peiss’ citation you contributed here is from her book, “Zoot Suit: The Enigmatic Career of an Extreme Style” (2011). The focus of the book is Eastern European Americans and Irish Americans zoot suiters but inadvertently alludes to earlier scholars’ (such as Mazón, Obregón Pagán, Mirandé, McWilliams, Griswald del Castillo, and many others) claims that Mexican American youths predated other ethnicities in donning zoot suits but inserts Filipinos here with no reference to any source whatsoever. Like the Filipino nationalists you reference, Peiss’ research is part of very recent scholarship related to 20th century zoot suiters, a scholarship that does not directly deal with zoot suiters but rather as a related issue more to do with Filipino nationalism--and in the case of Peiss--Western and Eastern European ethnic immigrants to the US in regard to gender and sexuality. Your assertion of Filipinos and blacks as targets of the “Zoot Suit Riots” is patently false for, they were not the stated objects of white supremacist servicemen nor the press as proven by historians that closely followed and documented the events in real time such as Mazón, McWilliams, and others. Your reporting on the issue does not supply any credible evidence to substantiate your claims; therefore, is misleading and factually incorrect and represents the very reason why students, beginning in grade school and all the way up to university, are highly dissuaded from consulting Wikipedia as a credible source.

I too am done with this! I can only hope that those seeking more information on the matter consult the original sources and not just nationalist propaganda and unfounded revisionism that distracts from the targeted and heinous white-supremacist racism endured by Mexican Americans in the US for nearly two-hundred years. 97.130.243.78 (talk) 18:16, 12 June 2023 (UTC)

Los Angeles has recently apologized for the Zoot Suit riot

Recently on June of 20203, Los Angeles has publicly apologized for these attacks.

Los Angeles apologizes for Zoot Suit Riots 80 years later (nbcnews.com) Xvfumes (talk) 21:04, 24 June 2023 (UTC)

Downey Boys? Williams Ranch, Texas?

This sentence makes little sense: Both men and women were attacked by the so-called "Downey Boys," and both pachucos and pachucas came back to the 38th Street neighborhood where they had been beaten and moved onward to Williams Ranch when they found an empty 38th Street..

• Who or what were the Downey Boys? They are not referenced anywhere else in the article, nor is there an article on the subject elsewhere in the encyclopaedia.
• Where did the people referenced go? The link is to a place in Texas that does not appear to have survived into the 1940s. Are we saying that the zoot suiters moved from LA to a defunct ranch in rural Texas? Why?
• Which also raises the question, 'came back to the... neighbourhood' from what or where? Whilst we try to nail down the destination, can we clarify the starting point?

I don't want to WP:BOLD the statement away, as I suspect there is some rather cool info hidden beneath the confusing phrase. For some reason, I cannot access the RS cited, and I cannot for the life of me figure out what the info was meant to be. Any suggestions? Cheers, Last1in (talk) 12:43, 3 June 2024 (UTC)

@Last1in, I've reworded that para per the source. The wikilink for Williams Ranch was incorrect. (I used archive.org to access the page in the source that discusses the incident.) Schazjmd (talk) 13:55, 3 June 2024 (UTC)