Articles From March 2006

The Evolution Of Language, The Evolution Of Hapa by Frank Y Pak Agostinelli

The stealing and/or raping of the word hapa has been debated and argued about for some time. The intensity at times has been downright insulting and personal. It is one thing to discuss, another to throw verbal blows. When there is a lack of professionalism, consideration, and a large amount of stubbornness on both sides, a flat worm can sense this is a recipe for destructive behaviors. In the end, there is no progression.

Most mixed Asians, if not all are familiar with the word hapa. Many have been inundated with texts claiming it was stolen from the Hawaiian language. In addition, the definition was changed to embody a certain description, half or part Asian. Stealing is not a good thing. Firstly, most of the planet has laws against stealing with punishments ranging from the most minute to the most severe. Secondly, if one is a follower of God, then one is familiar with one of the Ten Commandments, “Thou shall not steal.” With that said, how can something be stolen when still in possession of the owner? Nothing can be stolen from you if you still have it. Metaphorically speaking one can say the word hapa was stolen. In the same breathe, is it fair to say the whole English language was metaphorically stolen from other languages? The English language is a mish-mash of words borrowed from different languages that had the definitions transformed, added to, and changed almost all together except for the core meaning or meanings. One can borrow sugar, milk, and even the neighbor’s John Deere ride-on lawn mower but borrowing words from another language? Can this really be called borrowing? There is the assumption whatever is borrowed is borrowed for the interim and to be returned in due time.

Taking is not always a nice thing. It sounds like nothing was given in return. In most cases, it can be the fact. A lack of reciprocity. The definition of take is sometimes misconstrued with the word steal and is never mistaken for the word rape. The word rape has been seen over the internet intertwined with the word hapa. It seems extremely heinous to use a word that is better known for its suggestion of forced sexual intercourse but in this case has zero to do with the sexual definition. The author feels rapacity is a better word for there is no confusing sexual undertone. The rapacity of the word hapa is a better fit in fact fits perfectly if one examines the plight of the Hawaiian people. Unfortunately, as with every ethnic group there is infighting and posturing that is conducive to this culture’s dissention, stagnation and the growth of separate agendas. We can discuss Athens and Sparta to make a point simply and effectively. Being on the same page and showing interest in getting on the same page is a matter that has plagued every culture. It doesn’t take empirical evidence to show the collective that a unified effort will go much further than Michael Jordan alone. There are Hawaiians who feel the spread of their culture, no matter how belittling it may appear in the opposition’s opinion, is better than nothing. At the same time, there are other Hawaiians who desire purity of their culture. The idea of purity is archaic in thought and borderlines a supremacist mind set. There is plenty of resentment that comes from the latter group of Hawaiians that stems from the colonization of the islands. This is understood. Then again, I haven’t had a Jewish person tell me how much they despise Germans for lying about and executing the Holocaust. A perfect example of perseverance without reveling in their victories or revealing their ancestral scars.

Evolution dominates every aspect of the world seen and unseen. There is no way around it. Everything evolves. Everything. An open-minded discussion sans personal agendas will solidify properly what has taken place with the word hapa. Evolution. This does not mean anything that goes through the process of evolution is a positive metamorphosis. One may examine our ancestor’s matriarchal beginnings that somehow evolved into our present day patriarchal society as negative. Our own evolution from homo habilius, homo erectus, homo erectus erectus, to homo sapiens is by all means to the collective, positive.

The author is not downplaying the significance of an indigenous people’s language, Hawaiian or any other. A true votary will not look at something of value, of importance with opalescent vision for it will ultimately evolve into a road of frustration and irrational cognition. Socratically speaking, how does one argue with evolution?

Growing Up Multiracial by Frank Y Pak Agostinelli

“What are you?” For biracial and multiracial people, this question is all too common. An old School House Rock song described the United States as ‘the great American melting pot.’ Thirty years ago, 1 in every 100 children born in the United States was of mixed race. Nowadays, the birth rate is 1 in 19 and as high as 1 in 10 in the states of California and Washington. From Ann Curry to Tiger Woods, everywhere one looks diversity reigns supreme. In particular, the Asian-Caucasian mix. A child born of mixed ethnicity is a child born with an identity crisis. Obvious by appearance, not so obvious in what cultural guidelines the parents plan to instill in their newborn. How does an ‘Eurasian’ deal with parents from two different worlds? What is it like growing up Eurasian? The following is one individual’s assessment on growing up multi-racial, multicultural.

Hollywood story-lines would lead one to believe love conquers all no matter the circumstances involved, culture included. The concept is nice but the euphoria will wear off and reality will set in. The end result will be a child born to opposite worlds; the individualist society and the collectivist society. Undoubtedly, parents whether from the animal kingdom or an intergalactic domain, on a whole will do anything and everything for their new born child. We have heard the comments in a sincere and a patronizing manner, children produced by an Occidental parent and an Oriental parent are “beautiful, exotic, gorgeous, the best of both worlds, blah-blah-blah.” Looks are not everything. What most people fail to realize is the cultural realm of the two parents. Each parents cultural upbringing dictates ‘a certain way’ to raise a child. For the child, it is which way is the best way?

In Western cultures, individualism prevails. The independent self is defined by individual traits and goals. It is me first and do not conform to anything. Eastern cultures place greater emphasis on collectivism. The interdependent self is defined by its connections to others. It is we first and egotism is frowned upon. Do the parents have in depth discussions on individualism and collectivism: how it relates to their child’s upbringing and which way will be better suited for the child? The answer is no. Then eventually yes. Unbeknownst to the parents their own cultural upbringings come into play and aid as well as confuse the child. For example, the Asian parent has a strong affinity of family and having the child identify with the family, accomplishing things in the name of the family and the idea he/she can always depend on the family. The American parent shares the same sentiment but as an independent entity. How can an Eurasian child learn to be independent if the interdependent umbilical cord is still attached? Throughout adolescence, the child is learning the essence of independence as well as interdependence. It is cultural tug of war. The Oriental parent does it this way. The Occidental parent does it that way. Case in point the Asian parent lives for the child. In turn when the parent gets old, the child now an adult reciprocates by caring for the parent. This is the collectivist way. The American parent lives for the child too, in some cases until college graduation or until Healthmate no longer offers coverage. In turn the child now an adult reciprocates by sending the parent to the local nursing home. This is the individualist way. Balance of the two cultural ways cannot be achieved by the parents for the child. The child has to learn this on his/her own and be the deciding factor on how to incorporate the two opposite halves into one single whole.

As stated earlier, the child’s identity crisis is tied to both parents attempting to instill the best the both of their respective cultural backgrounds can offer. Playing devil’s advocate, what would happen if an uprooting took place? What if a child’s geography was changed from the United States to South Korea? The Oriental parent whether female or male would have in a sense home-field advantage. The child will adhere to the customs, rituals, folklore, religious beliefs and language implemented by ancestral hierarchy. In addition, a correlation will take place in that as the child is being assimilated into the Oriental culture, a gradual decrease in his/her Western ways is imminent. Collectivism wins out. If the same scenario takes place in the United States, individualism wins out. Ultimately, primary and secondary cultural attributes will be intertwined within the multiracial . . . multicultural child.

Discipline is a ‘touchy’ matter in Western societies. Children now parents themselves exclaim, “I will not physically abuse my child like I once was!” In the United States, just the hint of physical discipline conjures up images of the DCYF in full fatigue with a battering ram at their disposal blasting through the front door of an unsuspecting ‘abusive’ parent. This is not to downplay the importance of the DCYF for there are parents who are abusive physically as well as mentally. Asian action/movie star Jackie Chan was brought up in a Chinese Opera school. A vigorous exercise program, schooling, and physical discipline were part of every day life. To loosely quote Jackie Chan, “It is obvious physical discipline didn’t harm me but helped me.” Imagine a scenario where one parent believes in physical discipline and the other does not. When ‘catching a beating’ from the Oriental parent, it is only natural for the child to look for some kind of help from the Occidental parent. “What is going on?!” the child is thinking. “When I screw up in front of dad, I get yelled at. In front of mom, it’s wooden spatulas and switches!” A case can be easily made from a cross-cultural perspective. While many teenagers in the West are generally ‘good’ kids, the emphasis on parental discipline went out the window during their pre-adolescence. They have a tendency to ‘go off track’ with the knowledge mom and dad will not physically reprimand them. Asian teenagers living in the West, although bombarded with the ideas of ‘independence’ and ‘be all you can be on your own,’ do not stray from the cultural boundaries set up and ‘policed’ by their respective parents. Combine this idea into the coupling of two culturally diverse parents. What you will get is a generally ‘good’ kid who entertains the thought of ‘going off track’ but knows the ramifications involved with engaging in shenanigans.

Discipline of the physical kind is dominant in Oriental cultures as is filial piety. Confucianism expresses this idea as very important. It is hierarchical. It is vertical collectivism. The parents will always be respected and given their ‘due devotion.’ This is at any given age. This is the, if not one of the reasons many Eastern societies are not a main player in the retirement home business. Many Asian children take care of their parents when the time is appropriate. But there is no transference of power. As aforementioned, the children will ‘always’ respect their parents even in a potentially Western nursing home condition. In Occidental cultures, parents will be respected but it is a wavering respect. This can be correlated to the idea of individualism. The child will be for a time, tied to the family but with independence comes one’s own ideas, me first, etc. The consensus among young adults is, “We do know all,” and “What about my respect?” Eventually the respect ‘wavers’ back to the parents. Then as old age approaches, the respect ‘wavers’ away, “What is the going rate for the Acme Nursing Home?” It can be compared to a mountain lion teaching her cubs the intricacies of hunting. The mother lion keeps the cubs in line, provides love, shelter, and so on. Once the lion cubs are old enough, they are on their own. The difference being, the mother lion is not bothered by her cubs leaving or not receiving the proper respect for showing them the way. The mother lion will not be around when her cubs need some advice, a hug when their heart was broken or be around to be sent to the Feline Retirement Home. For animals it is instinctual. Humans do not have instincts. In the same breath there is no such course as Parenting 101 or Filial Piety 009 in Western societies. It is a ‘learn as you go’ way. Eventually children raised in an individualist society, with maturation will for the most part tell their parents in a respectful way, “You guys were right, thank you and see you in a couple of months.” Now imagine an Eurasian adult’s predicament. Brought up in both worlds, the Oriental parent desires to have their son/daughter around . . . as much as possible. While on the other had the Occidental parent is very happy to have their son/daughter come by . . . for a visit. The Eurasian adult is compelled to see the parents, spend quality time and maybe do some activities of some kind. At the same time, he/she is saying, “I’ll make this visit short because I’ve gotta do this, this and that.” What happens when both parents reach old age? Does the Eurasian send the American parent to the home for the elderly and take care of the Asian parent? The cultural tug of war will never go away.

“All men are created equal,” has not been and probably will never be greeted with open arms. Observing this statement rationally, one can easily say, “Yes we are all equal. The majority of us have all the vital parts in order to function in day to day activities.” The problem arises from the ‘option’ packages that are bestowed upon us. These ‘option’ packages range from Chinese, Japanese, Korean, Vietnamese, Cambodian, Lao, Hmong, respectively . . .anything Oriental. Differences are not only with physical features but also involve cognition, behaviours, social norms and culture. To say all men are created equal can be deemed shallow, naïve, in some cases ignorant. A chosen few find nothing wrong with diversity whether it borderlines on perversion or a genuine true love for a certain culture. “Love does not conquer all.” Two people from two different cultures must understand the consequences, good or bad of a potential coupling. First and foremost, there must be a combined effort between two people to know each other inside and out. The body is irrational, the mind is rational. To truly know someone of another culture, one must immerse themselves in the other’s culture, being, mentality, and vice versa. It cannot be “You’re beautiful, let’s make babies.” Secondly and very important, this must be passed on to the children for now a Eurasian child will possess more ‘option’ packages than most cultures put together. It will be tough enough for a multicultural child attempting to explain why they look the way they do and at the same time, they will be in state of wonderment themselves. These simple guidelines can provide a powerful bond of love between the Oriental parent, the Occidental parent and the Eurasian child. This sense of security will not lead to “Who am I?” but to “I know who I am.”