7 ms·

It's also common for East Asianers to get plastic surgery to "westernize" their eyes, as generations of Western imperialism has warped their idea of beauty abou

It's also common for East Asianers to get plastic surgery to "westernize" their eyes, as generations of Western imperialism has warped their idea of beauty about their own eye shape. They may not be notably offended by such slit eye drawings, but they are still damaging.

rayiner 6y ago
That line of thinking is incredibly patronizing and paternalistic. When white people do something because they think it looks good, it’s free choice. When non-white people do something because they think it looks good, it’s the “damaging” consequence of “western imperialism.” It’s like how white people think they invented colorism, even though the preference for fairer skin in women exists throughout the pre-colonial historical record in India, Africa, and Asia. (As a dark skinned person whose half white daughter came out darker than him, I applaud the trend away from fairer skin as a beauty standard! But white people thinking they invented the beauty standard to begin with is self-centered and paternalistic: https://quillette.com/2019/02/13/the-origins-of-colourism/ https://quillette.com/2019/02/13/the-origins-of-colourism/ We had colorism in India long before white people.)
- mc32 6y ago
  It doesn’t make sense. Whites can tan or not tan at will to their detriment (melanoma). Japanese used to have a stigma related to being tanned as it represented manual labor. Not being tanned meant you didn’t work like a peasant. In western society oddly being tanned was associated with having leisure time to tan. All in all ‘not tanning’ was all around better than foot binding as a status marker. Now, in Japan you see two situations people who want to look untanned and others who want to look ultra tanned (really dark make up). I’m sure this will make these ultra sensitive types go into a tailspin. Now in South Asia there is a tendency for middle class women to lighten their skin tone. Is that good, bad? I dunno. That should be up to them. To me it’s no different from other make up or getting hair transplants or nosejobs or other cosmetic surgery. But some people want to jam their preconception on other people’s freedoms.
- boomboomsubban 6y ago
  >When white people do something because they think it looks good, it’s free choice. When non-white people do something because they think it looks good, it’s the “damaging” consequence of “western imperialism. White people engage in other forms of plastic surgery because various media has told them a certain form is the most beautiful. The difference here is that Western media has clearly spent over a century villianizing certain with Asian traits.
- nindalf 6y ago
  It’s interesting that you mention colorism in India. The British were not the first group of people to rule India. There has been a history of thousands of years of migration from Central Asia to both India and Europe. These people had light skin. They became part of the ruling class of the places they migrated to. In India that meant dark skinned Dravidian natives were ruled by the light skinned upper classes or castes. As a result of minimal intermarriage, these Central Asian genes are found mostly in “groups of priestly status”, ie, Brahmins. This led to the standard of beauty becoming ingrained. There’s other factors as well, in that it’s a status symbol for some families to make their women stay at home rather than work. Not having to work in the fields means you don’t get tanned, making such people appear more beautiful by this standard. Side note, I’d like to apologise to the Indians who believe that they’re the original inhabitants of the country and that “others” (ie, Muslims) are “invaders”. However, notwithstanding your hurt feelings, you still gotta face facts. Source - A new study squelches a treasured theory about Indians’ origins. The Aryans did not come from India; they conquered it (https://www.economist.com/asia/2018/04/05/a-new-study-squelches-a-treasured-theory-about-indians-origins https://www.economist.com/asia/2018/04/05/a-new-study-squelc...)
  - rayiner 6y ago
    > Side note, I’d like to apologise to the Indians who believe that they’re the original inhabitants of the country and that “others” (ie, Muslims) are “invaders”. However, notwithstanding your hurt feelings, you still gotta face facts. People act like Indians had this authentic indigenous culture before British colonization, overlooking that it’s the synthesis of wave after wave of colonization over millennium. I spoke English, even before coming to America, because of British colonialism. But I’ve got a Hebrew last name because Muslims colonized India before the British and brought it over from the Middle East. The food I grew up eating is a product of those same Muslim invaders, plus ingredients (chili peppers) sourced from Europeans who got them from the Americas. If you removed the layers of colonization from the culture I’m not sure what you’d have left. The British, of course, are themselves the result of wave after wave of colonization to the British isles. If you peeled away the influences of the Norman colonizers, the Saxons, the Romans, the Vikings, etc., what would be left?
- AshWolfy 6y ago
  people also look down on plastic surgery influenced by cultural beauty standards
mc32 6y ago
Those eye representations are evident in many kinds of East Asian art, including wood prints and paintings centuries old, before exposure to the West. Wonder if Classical Japanese art like this[1] will get banned? Interestingly lots of Manga and Anime go the other way and give people vertical eye shapes (buggs bunny eyes). [1] https://spokenvision.com/wp-content/uploads/2015/06/Utamaro-Two-Beauties-with-Bamboo-770x1234.jpg https://spokenvision.com/wp-content/uploads/2015/06/Utamaro-...
- boomboomsubban 6y ago
  It's not their use alone that is damaging, it's their use to make them into stereotypical evil characters.
  - mc32 6y ago
    I don’t see Seuss making them into evil characters. I do see woodcuts using the same eye rendering for demons and other underworld characters, but I hope those don’t get banned by a foreign culture because it thinks it misrepresents its own people. At this point people are on a veritable ‘witch-hunt’ looking for their witches and waiting for Bradburys Firemen to come burn them.
    - boomboomsubban 6y ago
      >I don’t see Seuss making them into evil characters He was making anti-Japan propaganda, there's no doubt he made them into evil characters. Proof http://keyeventsofworldwar2.weebly.com/uploads/1/9/6/4/19640425/689958544.jpg http://keyeventsofworldwar2.weebly.com/uploads/1/9/6/4/19640...
      - nec4b 6y ago
        Do you have a problem with anti Japan war propaganda?
        boomboomsubban 6y ago
swader999 6y ago
And western people often get nose jobs.
bobthechef 6y ago
Can you support this claim about imperialism (also, "common" is a rather huge exaggeration)? I hear it made all the time in a hand wavy way with no substantive demonstration. Frankly, it sounds rather condescending, as in: East Asians couldn't possibly find the kinds of eye shapes more common among European stock more beautiful unless they were conditioned into believing that in some way! Seems rather dismissive.
- boomboomsubban 6y ago
  Western imperialism is an obvious factor in the East Asian countries this is popular in, such as South Korea and Taiwan. There's no concrete proof this is a result of imperialism, but the differences between the counterparts North Korea and China provide limited evidence it's the cause. As for common, the estimates I can find show between 1/5th and 1/3rd of South Korean woman receive double eyelid surgery.

rayiner 6y ago

That line of thinking is incredibly patronizing and paternalistic. When white people do something because they think it looks good, it’s free choice. When non-white people do something because they think it looks good, it’s the “damaging” consequence of “western imperialism.” It’s like how white people think they invented colorism, even though the preference for fairer skin in women exists throughout the pre-colonial historical record in India, Africa, and Asia. (As a dark skinned person whose half white daughter came out darker than him, I applaud the trend away from fairer skin as a beauty standard! But white people thinking they invented the beauty standard to begin with is self-centered and paternalistic: https://quillette.com/2019/02/13/the-origins-of-colourism/ https://quillette.com/2019/02/13/the-origins-of-colourism/ We had colorism in India long before white people.)

mc32 6y ago
It doesn’t make sense. Whites can tan or not tan at will to their detriment (melanoma). Japanese used to have a stigma related to being tanned as it represented manual labor. Not being tanned meant you didn’t work like a peasant. In western society oddly being tanned was associated with having leisure time to tan. All in all ‘not tanning’ was all around better than foot binding as a status marker. Now, in Japan you see two situations people who want to look untanned and others who want to look ultra tanned (really dark make up). I’m sure this will make these ultra sensitive types go into a tailspin. Now in South Asia there is a tendency for middle class women to lighten their skin tone. Is that good, bad? I dunno. That should be up to them. To me it’s no different from other make up or getting hair transplants or nosejobs or other cosmetic surgery. But some people want to jam their preconception on other people’s freedoms.
boomboomsubban 6y ago
>When white people do something because they think it looks good, it’s free choice. When non-white people do something because they think it looks good, it’s the “damaging” consequence of “western imperialism. White people engage in other forms of plastic surgery because various media has told them a certain form is the most beautiful. The difference here is that Western media has clearly spent over a century villianizing certain with Asian traits.
nindalf 6y ago
It’s interesting that you mention colorism in India. The British were not the first group of people to rule India. There has been a history of thousands of years of migration from Central Asia to both India and Europe. These people had light skin. They became part of the ruling class of the places they migrated to. In India that meant dark skinned Dravidian natives were ruled by the light skinned upper classes or castes. As a result of minimal intermarriage, these Central Asian genes are found mostly in “groups of priestly status”, ie, Brahmins. This led to the standard of beauty becoming ingrained. There’s other factors as well, in that it’s a status symbol for some families to make their women stay at home rather than work. Not having to work in the fields means you don’t get tanned, making such people appear more beautiful by this standard. Side note, I’d like to apologise to the Indians who believe that they’re the original inhabitants of the country and that “others” (ie, Muslims) are “invaders”. However, notwithstanding your hurt feelings, you still gotta face facts. Source - A new study squelches a treasured theory about Indians’ origins. The Aryans did not come from India; they conquered it (https://www.economist.com/asia/2018/04/05/a-new-study-squelches-a-treasured-theory-about-indians-origins https://www.economist.com/asia/2018/04/05/a-new-study-squelc...)
- rayiner 6y ago
  > Side note, I’d like to apologise to the Indians who believe that they’re the original inhabitants of the country and that “others” (ie, Muslims) are “invaders”. However, notwithstanding your hurt feelings, you still gotta face facts. People act like Indians had this authentic indigenous culture before British colonization, overlooking that it’s the synthesis of wave after wave of colonization over millennium. I spoke English, even before coming to America, because of British colonialism. But I’ve got a Hebrew last name because Muslims colonized India before the British and brought it over from the Middle East. The food I grew up eating is a product of those same Muslim invaders, plus ingredients (chili peppers) sourced from Europeans who got them from the Americas. If you removed the layers of colonization from the culture I’m not sure what you’d have left. The British, of course, are themselves the result of wave after wave of colonization to the British isles. If you peeled away the influences of the Norman colonizers, the Saxons, the Romans, the Vikings, etc., what would be left?
AshWolfy 6y ago
people also look down on plastic surgery influenced by cultural beauty standards

mc32 6y ago

Those eye representations are evident in many kinds of East Asian art, including wood prints and paintings centuries old, before exposure to the West. Wonder if Classical Japanese art like this[1] will get banned? Interestingly lots of Manga and Anime go the other way and give people vertical eye shapes (buggs bunny eyes). [1] https://spokenvision.com/wp-content/uploads/2015/06/Utamaro-Two-Beauties-with-Bamboo-770x1234.jpg https://spokenvision.com/wp-content/uploads/2015/06/Utamaro-...

boomboomsubban 6y ago
It's not their use alone that is damaging, it's their use to make them into stereotypical evil characters.
- mc32 6y ago
  I don’t see Seuss making them into evil characters. I do see woodcuts using the same eye rendering for demons and other underworld characters, but I hope those don’t get banned by a foreign culture because it thinks it misrepresents its own people. At this point people are on a veritable ‘witch-hunt’ looking for their witches and waiting for Bradburys Firemen to come burn them.
  - boomboomsubban 6y ago
    >I don’t see Seuss making them into evil characters He was making anti-Japan propaganda, there's no doubt he made them into evil characters. Proof http://keyeventsofworldwar2.weebly.com/uploads/1/9/6/4/19640425/689958544.jpg http://keyeventsofworldwar2.weebly.com/uploads/1/9/6/4/19640...
    - nec4b 6y ago
      Do you have a problem with anti Japan war propaganda?
      - boomboomsubban 6y ago

swader999 6y ago

And western people often get nose jobs.

bobthechef 6y ago

Can you support this claim about imperialism (also, "common" is a rather huge exaggeration)? I hear it made all the time in a hand wavy way with no substantive demonstration. Frankly, it sounds rather condescending, as in: East Asians couldn't possibly find the kinds of eye shapes more common among European stock more beautiful unless they were conditioned into believing that in some way! Seems rather dismissive.

boomboomsubban 6y ago
Western imperialism is an obvious factor in the East Asian countries this is popular in, such as South Korea and Taiwan. There's no concrete proof this is a result of imperialism, but the differences between the counterparts North Korea and China provide limited evidence it's the cause. As for common, the estimates I can find show between 1/5th and 1/3rd of South Korean woman receive double eyelid surgery.