Talk:Asian fetish

This article was nominated for deletion on December 25, 2005. The result of the discussion was KEEP (closed early). An archived record of this discussion can be found here.

This is the talk page for discussing changes to the Asian fetish article.
Please sign your comments using four tildes (~~~~). Place comments that start a new topic at the bottom of the page and give them ==A Descriptive Header==. If you're new to Wikipedia, please see Welcome to Wikipedia and frequently asked questions.	Talk page guidelines Please respect Etiquette, assume good faith and be nice.

Archives

Previous discussion can be found at:

• Talk:Asian fetish/Archive
• Talk:Asian fetish/Archive 2
• Talk:Asian fetish/Archive 3
• Talk:Asian fetish/Archive 4.
• Talk:Asian fetish/Archive 5.

Sections for deletion

Now listed at Wikipedia:Requests for comment/Society, law, and sex. --Wzhao553 05:04, 5 February 2006 (UTC)

The entire previous talk page has been archived. Since this talk page was getting both long and ridiculous, it is obviously in the benefit of all parties involved to start from scratch. What I wanted to do now was to do a AfD style voting system for both the Physical anthropology section and the Testosterone section. If you don't know how this works, please see the archive for the AfD for Asian fetish located here: Wikipedia:Articles_for_deletion/Asian_fetish. Since the article will likely not be unlocked until this dispute is settled, I think the only way to handle this situation is democratically.

Also, everyone should remember to be civil and stay on topic. Please stick to voting, and do not let the discussion go out of control. I also hope that those of us who know how this works can help out those who do not. --Wzhao553 05:08, 4 February 2006 (UTC)

As I said, there is to be no more arguing over the sections, and definitely no more personal attacks. All the relevant points for all sides have already been made in the fifth archive. Please restrict your comments to straightforward voting. --Wzhao553 04:49, 5 February 2006 (UTC)

Physical anthropology

Keep or Delete: Asian_fetish#Physical_anthropology_and_sociology

• Keep. I wrote it in its entirety, I looked up all the sources, obviously I support it. --Wzhao553 05:13, 4 February 2006 (UTC)
• Keep but REMOVE Knußmann references. He has 715 hits on google and is not encyclopedic. The wikilink on his name links to a list of anthropologists on the German wikipedia where his name is in RED. See User:Infinity0/Vandal_report for more details. Infinity0 ^talk 13:20, 4 February 2006 (UTC)

• Strongly keep both the anthropology section and the correct testosterone section, I initiated the whole section and gave detailed references . 80.138.158.108 15:27, 4 February 2006 (UTC)

• Delete, I just don't see its relevance nor have I ever seen it mentioned in any writings about Asian fetish.--ThreeAnswers 23:18, 4 February 2006 (UTC)

• Strongly keep scientific explanations needed, like anthropological, medical and biological causes as elucidated in the sections on anthropology and testosterone, afterwards we could still add a historical section to summarize the article. Remember folks, this is not about our feelings, but about the facts. The rest of the article consists mostly of anecdotal "evidence" and/or original research about individual people. The testosterone and anthropology sections are the only objective, scientific parts and are very NPOV, since both aspects that speak in favor of Asians and areas that may be disadvantageous are mentioned--Mr Phil 05:41, 5 February 2006 (UTC)

• Keep I vote to keep along Wzhao's lines. If it becomes necessary I can become deeply embroiled in the matter myself but I trust that nonsense can be averted. "Feelings" lol, talk about projection and rationalization, really MrPhil ;) Heaven's knight 06:00, 5 February 2006 (UTC)

• Keep but REMOVE Knußmann and Mongoloid references. Those references perpetuate racial prejudices. Keep Sheridan Prasso's statements. Lycheng 06:21, 5 February 2006 (UTC)

• Week Keep Interesting speculation, might need some less WP:NOR sounding statements. Ronabop 06:27, 5 February 2006 (UTC)

• Delete. Knaussman's material is not related to Asian fetish. Despite the attempts of editors to clean it up, it doesn't belong in an encyclopedia article on Asian fetish. Sunray 17:06, 5 February 2006 (UTC)

• Keep Obviously, it provides some historical/cultural background by examining the "pseudoscience" that has often underpinned race relations between Western civilization and other cultures. --Gar2chan 00:06, 6 February 2006 (UTC)

• Delete - Read comments in section below. Any views or so called "evidence" discriminating, insulting or denigrating any group or people are considered racist and completely unacceptable. I mean if you allow the article to remain largely how it is, then your basically saying it is ok for someone to create any article saying a group of people or "race" is more physically attractive, diversified or "superior" than another group. This whole article is ridiculous and utter garbage. 69.157.121.76 05:27, 6 February 2006 (UTC)

• Delete the whole article, or re-write the entirety of it from scratch with more valid and supported research and more POV from other users. Right now, it comes across as ignorant racist POV. Epf 05:46, 6 February 2006 (UTC)

• Delete This section suffers from a severe case of reductionism. It speculates about why people "ought" to be attracted to one group of potential mates or another rather than citing evidence of discoveries of actual causes for attractions. "There's no accounting for ohter people's tastes" is still a good rule of thumb. Typically these investigations must delve into the minutiae of individual socio-sexual history. 金 (Kim) 06:55, 6 February 2006 (UTC)

• Delete -- Regardless of the weight of the "paedomorphosis" and other cultural anthropology citations, there is no cited primary research establishing the link between this observation and attraction between asians and westerners. As with the section noted below, this clearly violates WP:NOR. This is not an observation on the scholarship of the piece itself, but that the central theme (as opposed to the secondary evidence) of the section is not itself supported by any cited research except the author's. -- Gnetwerker 07:04, 6 February 2006 (UTC)

The role of testosterone

Keep or Delete: Asian_fetish&oldid=37923714#The_Role_of_Testosterone

KEEP' The section on testosterone is really the only one worth keeping. Hormones and hormonal levels are at the basis of all human behavioral patterns. Testosterone is the very reason for the sexual nature of male - female interaction (and essentially all human interaction). Masculine and mentally-functional men seek feminine women, and feminine and mentally-functional women seek masculine men. Both male and female East Asians are relatively sexually immature compared to Caucasians and Blacks. This need not be supported by studies. Go to any Chinatown in the world and you will see 20 year old men and women who look like 15 year olds by Caucasian or Black standards. Greater femininity in Asian women due to lower levels of androgen makes them appealing to non-Asians. Asian (Mongoloid) men are frequently not selected by Asian (Mongoloid) women when given a choice that includes the typically more masculine non-Asian men. Merely because East Asians (Mongoloid) visitors here feel offended by the truth about the lower testosterone levels in Asian men and lower androgen levels in Asian women is not a valid reason to censor a Wikipedia page. Wikipedia should not allow censorship as though this is Google in authoritarian China.

None of the sources are relevant. This section is bogus content. Infinity0 ^talk 11:57, 5 February 2006 (UTC)

• Delete. I've looked into this, and I simply cannot find any sources that directly deal with this subject. It seems like somebody just slapped some purported evidence together and formed his own conclusions. --Wzhao553 05:13, 4 February 2006 (UTC)

• (Moved) Comment. Wzhao553, I'm disappointed by your stance, what's wrong, couldn't you figure out a good response to the section on testosterone and so therefore you want to delete it now? If you are objective and disregard any personal feelings you may have about the subject matter, you must admit that the section is much more rational and encyclopedic than the previous parts of the article dealing with anecdotal accounts of individual possible asiaphiles and reviews of movies. The critics here seem to put their personal feelings above article quality and want this to just be a hit piece that fits their own identity politics agenda. I can understand, if some teenage boys like infinity think that way, but from you I would have expected more objectivity. --Mr Phil 05:52, 5 February 2006 (UTC)

• Delete I'm disgusted there is even a vote on it. I spent about 30 minutes showing that all the sources were complete bull; see archive 5 for details. Infinity0 ^talk 13:14, 4 February 2006 (UTC)
• Strongly keep, see my comment above.The hormone levels are even the result of the positive Darwinian selection for paedomorphosis in Asia and are crucial in the matter. 80.138.158.108 15:33, 4 February 2006 (UTC)
• Delete as original research and my reason for voting delete on the anthropology section.--ThreeAnswers 23:18, 4 February 2006 (UTC)
• Strongly keep, well documented scientifically, the only reason Asian people here are voting against it is that they don't like the implications and it doesn't fit in with the ideology espoused at websites like modelminority.com --Mr Phil 05:35, 5 February 2006 (UTC)

• Delete Let's not waste our time with racist nonsense. The world is not made for them. If need be long speeches can be made, but, I think the truth of the matter is easy to see.Heaven's knight 05:56, 5 February 2006 (UTC)
• Weak keep Has some interesting infos --212.251.72.145 06:20, 5 February 2006 (UTC)

• Week Keep Interesting speculation, might need some less WP:NOR sounding statements. Ronabop 06:27, 5 February 2006 (UTC)

• Delete Very racists statements being made. The so called masculine traits are all very subjective. Lycheng 06:31, 5 February 2006 (UTC)
• Keep I agree that the section should be toned down though, maybe present some counterevidence as well, too onesided --Luan22 06:34, 5 February 2006 (UTC)

• Delete. Uh... back to the topic at hand. This verbose presentation is only tenuously related to the article. It is unencyclopedic in the extreme. Sunray 17:28, 5 February 2006 (UTC)

• Delete - this has to be the biggest load of non-sense that I've ever seen. How can such a ridiculous concept be included in an encyclopedia ? Not only does this article have some sort of hidden ideological objectives, but so does the data and examples used to support it. I can't believe racist statements on how peoples supposedly appear "masculine" or "child-like" can even be allowed to be posted on Wikipedia. Views such as this will simply anger many people and fuel other racist movements and ideologies. This can only be very bad for Wikipedia. 69.157.121.76 05:17, 6 February 2006 (UTC)

• Delete of the whole article in its current form on the grounds that: 1) the limited scientific research mentioned is unreliable and widely refuted, 2) the whole article has some sort of racial supremacist POV, 3) the comments on this page will cause a significant furore amongst many other people, especially those with other unwanted racist views 4) as admitted by other users above, the article is largely of unverified original research which is alone enough to be considered for deletion, 5) not all POV on the article are equally repesented, and 6) the article is overall simply non-encylopedic material and unless the whole of it is re-written with the POV of several people, it should be removed. Epf 05:42, 6 February 2006 (UTC)

Actually the testosterone section was written to give an additional POV, since admittedly nobody really knows the dynamics of the "Asian fetish" and all of it is highly speculative. In its present form the article is just a racist hit-piece directed against non-Asian men with Asian women along the lines of modelminority etc.

In case the testosterone section doesn't go through, I will propose the entire article for deletion on the main VfD page once more and list these arguments.

--Mr Phil 07:02, 6 February 2006 (UTC)

• Delete the discussion of the role of testosterone. It's commonplace knowledge that testosterone attracts men to women. Anything specific to this topic is extreme speculation. Durova 06:35, 6 February 2006 (UTC)

• Delete. Anything that starts out with something like, "One possible explanation may be..." is not even offering to provide reliable information. 金 (Kim) 06:47, 6 February 2006 (UTC)

• Strong Delete -- This is as clear-cut a violation of WP:NOR as I can imagine. There is no primary source supporting the central observation (of a preference for western males by asian females), just a bunch of facts arrayed in support of an original premise by the WP section author. Regardless of the plausibility (or lack thereof) of the argument, this is original research, and does not belong here. -- Gnetwerker 06:59, 6 February 2006 (UTC)

The question is not whether Asian women generally prefer Western men, which I also don't believe, but rather why there are more x-men with East Asian women than other way round. The rest of the article is at least as much original research and therefore would also have to be deleted. --Mr Phil 07:11, 6 February 2006 (UTC)

What else is worth discussing?

To me, the main problem with this article is that it lacks a proper foundation. The question should not, at bottom, be whether something is good or bad, or whether one writer likes it and another writer does not. An objective article should endeavor to explain what is really going on.

John Money has an interesting and useful concept that applies here. It is a concept based on research into sexual preferences. One view of sexual preferences is that all men are attracted to all women. Some men assert that they are, indeed, sexually attracted to all women. Even in those cases, I think that most people who make that claim would also claim to have a discriminating sense of the relative desirability of various possible sexual objects. Money explores the kinds of discriminations that humans make in their choice of sexual objects, from the ordinary and expected range of likely choices to the extreme range of odd choices that are called paraphilias. He maintains that the formation of an individual's love map is a highly contingent process. In the unproblematical cases an individual learns to evaluate potential mates on the basis of factors that can be objectively tied to future reproductive success and accompanying social success. As they mature, humans learn to determine who among their cohorts behave in ways that promote both their own success and the success of other, and also determine who among their cohorts are likely to get themselves and/or others into trouble. They then presumably ought to tend to pick mates with whom they will be compatible and with whom the rest of the community will be compatible. But sometimes the normal course of development is wrenched violently from its normal course by some (usually singular) event, and the individual learns to be highly attracted by certain unsual sexual objects. One of Money's most interesting examples is the case of a man he describes as suffering from "formicophilia." To make a long story short, a young man was violently interrupted by his father's hickory stick while having his first intercourse in a situation in which insects happened to be crawling over his body. He had been oblivious to the insects while involved with the young lady, but ever after he could only achieve sexual arousal if he allowed many insects to crawl over him.

Nothing so dramatic as a thrashing being administered during the time of initial orgasm to establish a life-long preference for a kind of lover that people whose lives had taken other turns might consider odd. The main thing that appears to be involved is what something means to the individual. What has one learned to expect when one meets a person exhibiting certain characteristics? If a white face means yet another member of a group that has systematically sought to trample one down, a member of the opposite sex belonging to that group may not be the obvious first choice as a potential sexual partner. If a member of a group that is "alien" and therefore not associated with prior abuse, or a member of a group that is friendly and openly accepting of one's sexual nature, comes on the scene at a time when one is sexually needy, that could conceivably be enough to establish an initial lowering of the mating threshold. Success in intercouse after a perhaps lifelong period of lack of any social success would surely be an enormous positive reinforcement, a clear path to learning that the "alien" sexual parter was a desirable one.

I am not suggesting that the article be written on the basis of my memories of Money's books (and one on love maps in particular), but that sources of information on what makes one person sexually/romantically/erotically attractive to another be researched and that they provide the foundation for the article. 金 (Kim) 06:31, 6 February 2006 (UTC) (金）