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.

Physical anthropology

This whole section needs to be removed, and I did so. "while the Nordic race is a typical masculine one": what is this supposed to mean? I am new to editing here and sorry if I broke any rules deleting this whole section, but nothing was worth keeping.

New definition

As I suggested that I would earlier, I tried to take a stab at a new definition for Asian fetish according to the discussion so far. Key points:

• Main point: trying to make a distinction between attraction and fetishism -- suggestion that fetishism is strongly tied to inability to be with a non-Asian woman.
• Seems that everybody thinks the term is important enough that it can safely be upgraded from "slang" to "colloquialism."
• Kept the "attraction" part, parenthesized "obsession" -- might want it the other way around, or even, to delete one or the other. Seems like both should be there, parenthesizing the latter was the more conservative option.
• Keeping both Taiwanese and Chinese in the expansion on East Asian. Seems there's enough cultural differences to warrant it.

Those are all the notes that I have. Let's see some comments. --Wzhao553 07:07, 29 December 2005 (UTC)

Sorry, but I like the new definition less. I find it POV by describing only the most radical form of the phenomenon -- a man who can only find sexual attraction with an Asian must surely represent a small minority. Especially considering that there are many white men who would say "yeah, I have an Asian fetish" but only mean that they like Asian features.

What would you think about something like this --

--

"Asian fetish", also called "yellow fever", is a colloquialism which generally describes the attraction that many white men have for Asian women (particularly East Asian women). While often applied humorously or non-seriously, it describes a wide range of phenomena -- from a seemingly innocuous attraction to Asian physical features to an intense attraction to perceived Asian cultural features, which can involve racism and stereotyping -- and both the term and the underlying phenonema it describes generate intense controversy, with many Asians in the West experiencing it as another expression of the racism they have grow up with.

--

Since I just wrote that off the top of my head and it's late I'm sure that could be much better written. But I think it is a good way to ease into a controversial topic without inflammatory language like obsession or "impossible to form healthy, meaningful relationships". Yes, that is one aspect of the 'fetish' but I think it is vital to acknowledge from the outset that the term describes a wide variety of behavior and that the definition at the top should not single out any one of them. Also, I'd like to think that is a paragraph which would pique the interest of the Average Reader without feeling confrontational.ThreeAnswers 08:54, 29 December 2005 (UTC)

Well, there have been repeated calls from many, many users -- of all POV's -- for a sharp distinction made between "Asian attraction" and "Asian fetish" at the very beginning of the article. It seems that most people don't want "fetishism" to cover "innocuous attraction," but instead to be defined as something "bad." (Of course, as I said earlier, Asian fetish shouldn't be considered deviant behavior, so how "bad" is the real matter of controversy.) So it seems "fetishism" should stay closer to a qualified form of "obsession" than to "attraction."

Actually, for the record, the most radical POV would be that Asian fetish refers to a situation where a white male can obtain sexual gratification from all and only Asian females, i.e., any Asian will do, but only Asians will do. A little less radical would be to say that Asian fetish means that any Asian will do, but not necessarily only Asians. Another step down is what I've suggested, only Asians will do, but not necessarily any Asian.

Also, it's a valid point that the term is often used humorously and not seriously, but that's probably better placed in the discussion section. As an analogue, "nigger" can also often used humorously, but one wouldn't dream of including that in its definition. Given the number of comparisons that have been made between "Asian fetish" and "nigger," it's important to keep that in mind. --Wzhao553 22:13, 29 December 2005 (UTC)

Another bit of expansion on terminology for the top of the article. --Wzhao553 23:28, 3 January 2006 (UTC)

Well, the introduction of nigger does note that 'nigga' is slang among young American blacks. Considering that they are both very controversial terms, there's no reason that the introduction to Asian fetish can't also be more than one paragraph and give a brief overview of other points of view.ThreeAnswers 23:47, 3 January 2006 (UTC)

Oh, hm, maybe I should have read your recent edits before opening my fool mouth. Actually I mostly like how the intro is now. I still think, though, that the first paragraph should be moderated.ThreeAnswers

Embedding Pictures

I'd like to embed a couple of pictures into the article. Is this possible? Can I use standard html code to do this? For example, on the Asian Manhood section of the article, I'd like to have this cartoon displayed right beneath it that I think humorously demonstrates the point that section is trying to make:

http://www.imdiversity.com/Villages/Asian/Secret_Asian_Man/strips/SAMHollywoodThanks2.asp

I'm sure the other sections could be visually improved with some appropriate pictures as well that would serve as a visual confirmation of the concepts discussed in the article. OneViewHere 21:20, 4 January 2006 (UTC)

You will have to obtain permission from the copyright holder and then upload the image. After that you can link to it as you would to an article, but it would be best to learn how to position it on the page rather than sticking it in. Try this page.--ThreeAnswers 04:20, 5 January 2006 (UTC)

Thanks. That link explains everything. After reading through it, it may be easier to just link to the image rather than try to obtain copyright permission from the owners. I do think though that the article would benefit from having a few well placed images in it that visually represent the stereotypes that this article addresses. After all, the concept of Asian Fetish is all about imagery and the conclusions and stereotypes that have been derived from that imagery over the years.OneViewHere 19:07, 5 January 2006 (UTC)

I just noticed there's no article on Secret Asian Man. Why not write the article yourself and put the image there? As it is I think there is too much material in the Asian Fetish article that really deserves to have its own article. Asian American contemporary issues, for example, just as there is African American contemporary issues. As far as I can tell there is no such article but there really should be.--ThreeAnswers 19:49, 6 January 2006 (UTC)

That's a really good idea. I moved "Model minority myth" to its own article, because after thinking about it for quite a while, I could not for the life of me figure out how it was related to Asian fetish. --Wzhao553 05:20, 7 January 2006 (UTC)

There's a page for Model minority already. What I'd like to see is an article that can touch on that (linking to it to avoid redundancy) and have an in-depth discussion of stuff that this article has, like the sections on Asian-American manhood/womanhood. I do see that as germane to a discussion of Asian Fetish but it shouldn't dominate the article and go off on tangents the way it does. This article isn't the place to refute the stereotype of Asian men being short, but the article I'm thinking of would be.

This way we can touch on those issues and explain their relevance to the Asian Fetish theory, without launching into an extended tangent that will confuse the average reader. Also I noticed that someone added back the sections you took out, so I hope he contributes to this talk discussion.--ThreeAnswers 05:55, 7 January 2006 (UTC)

In the News

Link: http://www.sfgate.com/cgi-bin/article.cgi?f=/c/a/2006/01/09/MNGM2GKMFT43.DTL

Sounds to me like another prime example that should be included under the "social consequences" section. OneViewHere 22:17, 9 January 2006 (UTC)

Ahh, nevermind, I see that the original article already references this incident. It is an updated account of the sentencing though....OneViewHere 22:26, 9 January 2006 (UTC)

Done. Also removed text of article to save some space. --Wzhao553 04:30, 13 January 2006 (UTC)

From the criticisms section

"There are serious claims that Asian women (e.g. belonging to the Nesid race from the Philippines)are the most pedomorphous of the about 40 races, i.e. more childlike both in physique and in character (e.g. stated in the Knußmann anthropological manual, 4. rev.ed. 1996,Fischer Verlag, Stuttgart).As very masculine men are said to be attracted by very feminine women this could explain some Caucasian men's asiaphilia."

This is actually very interesting material. However, I don't understand why this would explain some Caucasian men's Asiaphilia. If anything, it would seem to provide a possible link between Asian fetish and pedophilia, and an explanation for the popularity of the Phillipines as a sex tourism destination. --Wzhao553 04:38, 13 January 2006 (UTC)

I don't think I buy that theory. First of all, Asian women are often stereotyped as having small breasts and less than voluptuous figures. How does that make them more physically attractive? Secondly Asian Fetishm can encompass more than just physical attraction. It can be a combination of perceived physical and cultural attributes that create it. Also, not all Asian women fit into those stereotypes yet they are still the object of this fetishm. There are plenty of tall, large Asian women out there who are outspoken and hardly submissive. Yet oftentimes they are still perceived in stereotypical ways so I don't think this theory is sufficient explanation nor do I think it belongs in the article. OneViewHere 18:16, 13 January 2006 (UTC)

There's nothing to buy because this is one man's crackpot theory. The anonymous user who added it clearly has no understanding of anthropology, pedomorphism, or Ahley Montagu. It takes only a basic amount of research and a check of the website he linked to to see this. What scientist could still have a career after claiming that Asians are mentally more like children than white people?

Also he is the user responsible for the lengthy and profoundly stupid edit war regarding the virago article, ending in the deletion of that article which he appears to regard as an accomplishment. Based on comments he left on my talk page I assume he intends to get this article deleted as well.--ThreeAnswers 21:27, 13 January 2006 (UTC)

Yowza, you're right. I just looked at your talk page and this "virago" user admits on your talk page that his ultimate purpose is the "deletion of this leftist article". Since he admitted this, any and all edits he makes to this article can safely be assumed to be made with malicious intentions. From now on, if I see this user making any edits I'm going to revert them.OneViewHere 02:53, 14 January 2006 (UTC)

Yes, it looks like he's most persistent on the German discussion page of virago. Wow... so that comment was added by a real live Nazi? Wikipedia:Articles_for_deletion/Virago_2#.5B.5BVirago.5D.5D: "I started to learn Russian due to be a prisoner of war in the Second World War where I lost 2 fingers in the battle of Stalingrad as a lieutenant." Wow... anyway... --Wzhao553 05:14, 14 January 2006 (UTC)

What? Not his head? Awww, shucks.

Once again in easy English: there are more masculine and more feminine races (e.g. Knußmann- manual 1996);Asian Palaemongolids are the most pedomorphous :Martin-Saller-Knußmann manual since 1914, setting the world standard ,John Randal Baker , "Race",Oxford University Press 1974, for racial pedomorphosis including brain morphology of the Mongoliform Sanids, Egon Freiherr v. Eickstedt Rassenkunde 1934 etc. , all the major works, take what you want, I am preparing a comprehensive bibliography for the Mongolids' racial pedomorphosis comprising several hundreds of titles then you have thousands of pages to read only dealing with the Mongolids' racial pedomorphosis .That these works are not on the net or in controlled bibliographies does niot mean anything. Denying the obvious is ridiculous. Masculine men are attracted to feminine women, feminine men are attracted to masculine women (Knußmann manual, e.g. www.femininebeauty.info.com):The homosexual dominance in the model business e.g. additionally supported the virago ideal being the ideal in general in the West now having malign consequences. Asian Mongolid women in contrast are the most feminine because there is a scale from hard to weak or from feminine-pedomorphous to masculine concerning the facial features which are the most important:the most extreme viragos looking nearly like men are unattracive to masculine Nordids , but the most extreme Asian women with small breasts are 1000 times more appealing to masculine Nordids and vice versa. The indeed existing racial schedule that members of one race favour the looks of his kin is secondary. The future will show that femininity - masculinity is the key in marriage and its balance of power. One even has to say it is a universal important law of history , too.This is the dilemma of the White suprematists nitwits who have the deadly ideal of the Nordid women.Deadly because these viragos are unappropriate to them , Europe will perish , Asia will live. But why on earth did nature do these things ? Because nature is only interested in the survival of the race /species , not in harmonious masculine men - feminine women relationships. In a historic context one has to state that Europe failed because Hitler didn't develop the atomic bomb and the masculine racial virago character of Nordid/Europid women making them extremely prone to the feminist biolgical suicide. I have seen the European tragedy for more than 70 years now with my own eyes.Please don't call me Nazi as I have never been a party member or had affiliation to the regime's racism, a racism which I criticized in 1938 in a personal 48 pages-long sophisticated letter to Heinrich Himmler who was like me very much interested in Asian affairs and peoples.Maybe you know his enthusiasm for Shamballah , a mysterious legendary ancient kingdom in Asia. Probably partly due to my belonging to the Prussian aristocracy with exceptional merits for German science for centuries, obviously partly due to my exceptional knowledge he wrote a acknowledging 10 pages letter back to me. These letters have never been published, but will be. I informed Himmler about the inconsistencies of the National Socialist racialist worldview concerning the Jewish people and the Asians in particular. I think n o other anthropologist or man has dared this in such a direct and scientifically elaborate way during this terror regime.I consider this a maximum effort of a single person in opposing the holocaust others would have been probably killed for, but not me. I can clearly prove that Himmler used four historic details which he only could have got to know through this letter in later writings. When I wrote my nearly deadly letter to Himmler, the Allies did appeasement and later on , they let Auschwitz happen. As I have said before I dislike Hitler,I dislike Himmler, I dislike Egon von Eickstedt , I dislike Kevin MacDonald, I dislike Richard Lynn, I dislike Jean Philippe Rushton and especially David Irving, the idiot.They are no philanthropists.But their works are essentially right (except Irving, the idiot)and partly even unique despite of their faults.And what unique new scientific knowledge could you get from me if you only would listen without prejudice. Yes, you can flush everything down the data toilet, but could you wait a bit and think about it properly. Have you ever wondered why there are no German geniuses after 1950 but hundreds before due to their talent and genes as even Steven Jay Gould admits ? Because what they write or do is flushed down the toilet after World War II being an incredible loss to science.The secret of the universe has been detected by a German genius. Thomas Balwin and "Oxford Bede Rundle"have not detected it. A German man I know personally know has discovered it. Is it arrogant to say that I know someone who is not known to the public having the genius of Aristotle ? Do you want to know why there is something rather than nothing , the most difficult question in the world? You certainly will not hear it from someone else in your lifetime , because a l l others since 1000 B. C. could not cope with the dilemma of the "prima causa" and the "nihil privativum". You want really to know t h e secret of the world American scientists are drooling after ?Incredible stuff ? Why do you know ?

We don't care about the past 100 years of anthropology or about your political affiliations. None of us here are anthropologists. If you can somehow justify why pedomorphous women are more femininine than non-pedomorphous women, then by all means, feel free to do so. You have given absolutely no explanation of the alleged relationship between pedomorphosis and femininity, without telling us to look up some obscure German sources that I at least do not have access to. --Wzhao553 23:00, 14 January 2006 (UTC)

Okay, Martin-Saller-Knußmann is available in all major American libraries (www.worldcatlibraries.org).There are the crucial statements e.g. in the 1996 edition that there are more masculine and more feminine (Palaemongolids ) races.If you don't understand German start with Baker on racial pedomorphosis of the Mongoliform Sanids whose pedomorphosis is due to their Mongoliformness because their are a distinct group from the Negrids.Baker chose them because of their Mongoliformness, pedomorphosis and their extreme primitive culture. Recent studies confirm the childlikeness of them who can be diverted easily having a permanent sanguine happiness (see works of e.g. Knußmann pupils). Unfortunately , Boasianism denies these findings due to multiculturalists ideology. But I have some hope that you ,Wzhao 553, will agree to me after reading Baker and some google translation supported German sentences from Martin-Saller-Knußmann, setting the world standard since 1914.There you can find, too , that according to numerous studies masculine men are attracted to feminine women and the line from childlike-feminine humans to masculine humans according to e.g.Max Hartmann's three laws of sexuality. This manual was one of the highest authorities in the English-speaking world, too. I know Canadian professors personally who taught biology according to this handbook complaining that it was marginalized by Jewish Boasian anthropologists.The relative lack of information on the net is due to this marginalization, too. Classical anthropology deciphering Asiaphilia ?

There have been anthropolgical claims since the beginnings of anthropology that the Asian races and especially the Nesid race from the Philippines and Indonesia are the most pedomorphous of the about 40 races, i.e. more childlike both in physique and in character (e.g. stated in the Martin-Saller-Knußmann anthropological manual,setting the world standard since 1914,unparalleled in the Anglo-American world, 4. rev.ed. 1996,Fischer Verlag, Stuttgart).As very masculine men are attracted by very feminine women (cf. Max Hartmann's world-famous and widely accepted three laws of sexuality concerning e.g. the attraction of feminine men by masculine women),this could explain Caucasian men's potential Asiaphilia. Caucasians or Europids have relatively masculine features and are prone to Asiaphilia according to this explanation. It can be assumed that the misandrous feminism in the West and the masculine physical and psychical character of Western viragos will surely fuel Asiaphilia in the foreseeable future.

Regardless of whether this is true or accepted or even available on the internet or not, if it falls within the historical context of the subject we are discussing at hand, and if it was once considered a legitimate line of research that had its share of adherents, then we can include the pertinent material in a historical context, so long as we avoid discussing the truth or falsity of the sources, and so long as we also include a thorough Boasian counterargument after it, in order to maintain a neutral point of view.

1. J. R. Baker. (1974) Race.
2. M. Hartmann (1956) Die Sexualität
3. R. Knußmann. (1996) Vergleichende Biologie des Menschen.In it also about the blocking of aggression by feminine (Asian) women and their extreme stimulation of male provisioning ("small children pattern",Konrad Lorenz).As Asians start to dominate the world (e.g. Harvard), the genetically intelligent European -Asian couples (mean IQ 100) will maybe produce the coming elite (e.g.in Thailand 50% of the showbusiness people are Eurasians) with their unique genetic and cultural heritage.
4. R. Martin and K. Saller. (1956) Lehrbuch der Anthropologie in systematischer Darstellung mit besonderer Berucksichtigung der anthropologischen Methoden.
5. A. Montagu (1989) Growing Young

Thank you, Wzhao553.Correct.Additionally, "goldsea.com" for Asian female beauty superior to European women, "www.femininebeauty.info" for racial masculinity of Western virago idols and their affiliation to homosexual men

If these citations are correct, then please let me know. I see that Montagu makes the claim that "Mongoloid women accordingly tend to be more paedomorphic than women of other groups... One result of this is the high frequency of beauty among mongoloid males and females, a beauty of great delicacy." Since this is a published source, then we should not shy away from citing it just because we strongly disagree with it personally. At any rate, it'll take me some time to go and track down all the sources, especially the German ones. --Wzhao553 19:27, 15 January 2006 (UTC)

I reverted your changes. You shouldn't be adding entire sections that nobody understands or without a consensus from the contributers. So far it looks like you're the ONLY one who believes in this. The main flaw I find in your claims is that you are defining masculinity in WESTERN terms. There are different standards for masculinity and femininity all over the world, so for one anthopologist to claim that an entire race of people are "childlike and feminine" is the ultimate in cultural arrogance. In addition to this, you have already admitted to us that your ultimate goal is the deletion of this article. As such, any and all changes you make to this article will be considered malicious in nature and I will revert any change you make. If you think you can wear us down by persistantly changing the article to suit your personal agenda, then I will escalate this issue to the Wikipedia admins. OneViewHere 20:39, 15 January 2006 (UTC)

It is me being a German professor of anthropology who introduced this.And I want to thank Wzhao533 again that he supports my valuable contributions. He wrote down the latest editions of the works I mean correctly. So please stop to label my contribution "vandalism". "Vandals" are people who destroy, and not ones contributing valuable material. Remember that my four valuable contributions to the article "anthropology" made it the unbiased first-class article that it is now.

Your additions are ridiculous because you can't even arrive at a single definition of "masculinity" or "Femininity" in the western world. The "research" you cited smacks of the same kind of biased anthopology that the authors of "The Bell Curve" sought to promote. You have already admitted that your ultimate goal was to get this article deleted. Claiming that Asian peoples are more childlike in mentality and physique is the worst sort of cultural arrogance disguised as science.OneViewHere 06:26, 16 January 2006 (UTC)

Race and womanhood

The at least 3500 years old concept of the anthropological virago is notoriously ignored by due to leftist political reasons obviously. From the masculine "salzikrum" women in the Babylonian Codex Hammurapi (1700 B.C.(!))up to Knußmann's "Lehrbuch der vergleichenden Anthropologie und Humangenetik" (1996)it has been an important concept as written above. An anthropological virago is a woman with both a physical and psychical masculine disposition (cf. Martin-Saller-Knußmann manual, 1996,the only recent manual for biological anthropology).The about 40 human races are more or less masculine (cf. cited manual). The feminine Mongolids (especially the Nesid race of Indonesia and the Philippines) and the masculine Europids (especially Nordid race) are the extremes. The high percentage of viragines in the West has been a critical factor for the success of feminists movements.It is doubtful whether feminism would have ever developed outside the West where it is nearly invisible because there is no orthogenesis (cf.wikipedia article "orthogenesis").It has been suggested by J.Ph. Rushton and others that Negrids have less pedomorphous traits being more masculine than e.g. Europids. This view is in contrast to Count de Gobineau's view of Negrids as a feminine race. In spite of several characteristics of the Negrids which can be classified as masculine (e.g. widespread athleticism due to selection for physical combat fitness, masculine skull traits), there are others which are clearly feminine (energetically lower choleric character in contrast to energetically higher melancholic character; this extraversion makes Negrids statistically more unfit for intellectual work in comparison to introverts (cf. cited manual for the extroverts' failing in intellectual occupation).Additionally, there is a lower Negrid average IQ of 70 (cf.Richard Lynn, "IQ and the Wealth of Nations").

Response to One(leftist)ViewHere: The worst sort of leftist fashism is to destroy the West as described by Kevin MacDonald.This is your leftist masterpiece of the 20th and the 21th century!You can be proud of it. No normal East Asian and no normal Chinese would doubt the peculiarities of the Chinese Sinid Han race e.g.The page "Goldsea.com"is written by Asians, they are proud of the superior feminine racial traits of their women.Watch it!Wake up!The highest anthropological authorities claimed it!I gave you enough information to verify the correctness of it all(Martin-Saller-Knußmann, John Randal Baker, Freiherr Egon v. Eickstedt,Ashley-Montagu(even this Jewish Boasian) and hundred else .Learn German and get rid of your false destructive leftist bias! You can manipulate the world, but not the truth!Give up!

What is the title of the Martin-Saller-Knußman manual? We need a name. Also, there should be no problem with citing Knußman's Lehrbuch in the article, since it is very pertinent, but we do need to point out that there are numerous academics who consider it racist, e.g., [1] among many others. --Wzhao553 07:28, 17 January 2006 (UTC)

"Vergleichende Biologie des Menschen: Lehrbuch der Anthropologie und Humangenetik,1996,Gustav-Fischer-Verlag,Stuttgart." Please don't take Mr. Osborne's (a musician !)criticism page as he is an anthropological lay and cites from different books from Knußmann.The quote about frustration and pelvis width cannot be found in this manual !and doesn't recognize that Knußmann hasn't created new "evil" knowledge, but has analyzed the recent literature and again has drawn the same conclusion as Rudolf Martin and Karl Saller setting the world standard since 1914.

Okay, I have finally been able to find something on Max Hartmann's theory of sexuality, in the form of a book review of a biography of the biologist, located here: [2]. Of course, it would be ideal if I could obtain the book myself, but nonetheless, it does not seem that Hartmann's laws of sexuality apply directly to humans. So I must ask, what exactly are the three laws of sexuality, and how do they apply to humans? And if it's the case that Hartmann did not intend his laws to apply to humans, then who was the first to do so? --Wzhao553 02:23, 21 January 2006 (UTC)

Hartmann has been explicitly applied to humans, too (see Knußmann 1996). 1.law: there are two sexes (bipolarity) 2.law: there is a continuum between the two sexes 3.law: every individual human has a special (e.g.hormone induced) position on this continuum Statistically "feminity" seeks "masculinity" to mate, less masculine men seek less feminine women (viragos).The male instinct is to intrude the female, the female one is to be intruded; the more e.g. masculine a woman is (including racial feminity-pedomorphosis) the less she is feeling pleasure to be intruded or dominated by a male (e.g. statistically less heterosexual Nordid Western viragos supporting feminism as an ideology of virago masculinization).

Okay, I have done a complete rewrite of the section. It's a very rough draft and so I haven't even polished up the citation format or anything. We'll have to see if my understanding is correct and get feedback from other members. (I am not a biologist or anthropologist!) Then we can add some basic criticisms of the view to maintain neutral point of view. --Wzhao553 13:35, 21 January 2006 (UTC)

Hello, this is the German anthropology professor.Wzhao553,I did some minor corrections so that the section is now 100% scientifically correct. Now we should eliminate the bias presenting the European partners as "sickos" in this leftist propaganda article.

I've restored the deleted section from "Alleged social consequences". It is generally bad form, especially in a controversial article, to delete anything without providing good reason. In this case that would require producing one or more scholarly articles which demonstrate that mixed Asian-white relationships are more likely to be unhealthy.

In general I would like to say that I am very concerned that this article is ballooning with even more information that truly belongs in a separate article.--ThreeAnswers 19:39, 22 January 2006 (UTC).

No, you have only general unsupported stuff.You have the burden to prove it. I deleted it, because the whole anthropology section shows scientifically clearly that it is anti-interracial propaganda.The gettoization of unloved information to new articles is no solution.There are articles which are much longer, your wish to gettoize unloved information is a matter of taste, but not necessary.— Preceding unsigned comment added by 80.138.181.226 (talk • contribs) 20:17, 22 January 2006 (UTC)

I've made some more changes to streamline the rhetoric, trying my best to simplify but not alter the underlying meaning. In general I would agree with you, however, I believe that once we replace the uncited information with cited material, we can then begin removing all the irrelevant and anecdotal information from the article, only keeping what is most important. --Wzhao553 20:37, 22 January 2006 (UTC)

And I will produce some scholarly and anthropological well-supported articles by the highest authorities that this is leftist.One could label you a Nazi because you state that a majority of those interracial couples have sick relationships while anthropology and sociology says the contrary. As the West does not use eugenics the southeastern women are e.g. much less genetically sick and neurotic as Western viragos not to say anything about their masculine leftist feminist terror.Have a short look at the polemic, but essentially right page www.nomarriage.com.The Western viragos are the "sickos".For you, the modern "Jews" are the interracial couples.You perpetuate the "yellow peril" panic.You are nothing but a modern Dr. Mengele which I had the unwanted "honour" to meet during my time in the Ahnenerbe.This was a statement by the German anthropology professor.80.138.189.79 12:38, 23 January 2006 (UTC)

AsianGuy.com and ModelMinority.com vanity vehicle?

Strong POV in this article and apparently very much a vehicle for disseminating the POV missions of AsianGuy.com and ModelMinority.com. Does this article really feel encyclopedic to anyone here? Strange. --AStanhope 04:05, 23 January 2006 (UTC)

When I read it it seems like someone writing a school report for Asian-American Studies 101 rather than an encyclopedia article, and trying to cram in as much as possible. But this does point up the need for an Asian American contemporary issues article.--ThreeAnswers 04:23, 23 January 2006 (UTC)

Ashley Montagu obviously means Mongoloid in the Eickstedtian sense which is the most precise: Mongolid : Asian races; Mongoloid : similar to the Asian races ; Mongoliform : having some characteristic traits of the Asian races

Sexuality and stereotypes

Yes, it is true that there is a lot of superfluous and unverified information in this article that does not make it encyclopedic. The Model Minority and Yellow Peril sections don't actually have anything to do with Asian fetish, except in the broader context of both being Asian American related issues. The negative stereotypes section is loosely associated with Asian fetish, in the sense that (negative) sexual stereotypes may be considered the alleged source of fetishism, but the section itself does not implicitly state this. Plus, while the Platonist division of stereotypes into physical, emotional and cultural levels seemed very cute at the time, I was really just making up stuff then, and I think that after several protracted edit wars, the Negative stereotypes section really serves no purpose anymore.

In my personal informed opinion, the best way to fix this is to remove the yellow peril and model minority sections, and then merge the Asian American manhood and Physical stereotypes section into a subsection, which, along with the Asian American womanhood subsection, would belong under a section entitled Sexuality and stereotypes. The Yellow peril and Model Minority stereotypes would then be mentioned in passing in the introduction to this section, which would then move on to the stereotypes that are of importance to Asian fetish.

ThreeAnswers, let me know what you think of this. I'll go ahead and make the changes if other people agree. --Wzhao553 04:41, 24 January 2006 (UTC)

Sounds good to me. --AStanhope 05:23, 24 January 2006 (UTC)

That sounds great. I would probably go further and trim the Sexuality and stereotypes section further by condensing the arguments to their theoretical points rather than having them spend a lot of space trying to refute the stereotypes. It's enough to put it in a few paragraphs that the stereotypes exist, are very controversial, and how they allegedly contribute to fetishism. More than that, I feel, really goes beyond the appropriate scope of the article and also makes for confusing clutter that obscures what it is really about.--ThreeAnswers 05:31, 24 January 2006 (UTC)

I've made the first round of revisions, and condensed whatever I thought possible. I've also moved the references up to the section. I'd rather not combine references to different sections as they're coming into place, since that will easily lead to confusion.

I think we're making good progress on this. It's now a matter of supplementing the material here with some additional sources. --Wzhao553 15:27, 24 January 2006 (UTC)

After making the changes, it seems that the Sexuality section deals with the effects of media better than the Effects of media section, which serves no real purpose. I'm also going to change the titles of some of the later sections into titles that are more meaningful. --Wzhao553 00:39, 25 January 2006 (UTC)

If I were writing this article from scratch, it would have come out something like this --

• Introduction and brief overview
• Historical and contemporary social contexts
  • The Yellow Peril
  • Contemporary media portrayal
• Controversy
• See also
• Sources
• External links

That's a bit rough but I think you can see what I'm getting at. "The Yellow Peril" would discuss changing perceptions of Asian-Americans through history and mention that even the term 'Asian-American' itself is of recent vintage. "Contemporary media portrayal" would be the place to talk about stereotypes and the disparity in portrayals of AM/WF and WM/AF. In "Controversy" I would discuss accusation of reverse racism and double standards.--ThreeAnswers 01:04, 25 January 2006 (UTC)

In my experience, contemporary medial portrayals are usually presented in two sections, one for AF and one for AM. This avoids some potentially confusing back-and-forth between reference points. That's probably the best way to deal with it. I can't see why an entire section on Yellow peril would help, though. For one, it would necessarily reduplicate information in the yellow peril entry itself. Secondly, it doesn't actually have anything to do with stereotypes of AF's -- there weren't any AF's around to be stereotyped at the time. Yellow peril simply states that Asian men are a threat to white men economically and white women sexually.

According to the postcolonialists, the correct place to find the historical context of Asian fetish is in the consumer culture of 19th century Romantic Orientalism. The basic idea is that the Asian woman is objectified as a commodity, and then consumed as a sexual object. Hence, the "Asian" in Asian fetish comes from the Orientalist perception of the reified Orient, and the "fetish" comes from the Marxist idea of a commodity fetish in consumer culture.

With that in mind, the section that discusses that will probably be the last one that we should work on, given how complicated the literature is. Just read the first page of Homi Bhabha's profoundly influential postcolonial work The Location of Culture to see! [3] So we should probably work on the Stereotypes and Criticisms sections for now. --Wzhao553 05:09, 25 January 2006 (UTC)

The fetish of Asian women as little petite submissive cuties ("Nadeshiko Yamato"being the term for the submissive Asian (Japanese)woman ideal ) has its basic origin in the Asian women's anthropological feminine pedomorphous traits. In contrast to that it is not possible feature Nordic virago valkyries (1,9 m,athletic)as little petite submissive cuties.

Yamato was used to mean the spirit of Japanese imperialism in. The phrase "Yamato Nadeshiko" was coined during WWII to denote a woman who was completely subservient to her husband but ready to die defending her home and honor from Western aggression. There is no height requirement This ideal was used as imperialistic propaganda to foster nationalism during wartime. It has parallels in the expected conduct of the noblewoman in medieval Europe, who was expected to serve her husband when he was present and to maintain the household when he was away. This concept is by no means exclusive to Japanese or Asian culture. --Wzhao553 03:53, 26 January 2006 (UTC)

Nadeshiko Yamato

Of course it was coined during the war, but it is giving a name to the much older woman ideal which is differing from Europe significantly. It is usual in history that a much older concept is labeled relatively late (here in a time when the behaviour of the women became problematic and should be redirected to tradition).While the social position of women in Europe was relatively high, the position in Islam, Jewry and Eastern Asia was very low. Women have been thought to be "unclean" in many Asian countries and are not allowed to touch Buddhist monks e.g.Undoubtedly the Asian "Nadeshiko Yamato" signifies a femininity and submissiveness which is unique in the world.As it is a metaphorical name for the fetishized women it should be included here ( Nadeshikos are e.g. shown in "The last samurai" or "You only live twice").

Problems with this article

Over the past few weeks, this article has developed some serious problems. An anon editor (IP 80.138.xxx.xxx) has systematically been adding highly questionable material to it. At first his stuff was reverted by ThreeAnswers and OneViewHere and there was discussion (above) about including the material. It was noted that this anon has made problem edits on the subject of Virago in both the English and German Wikipedias. The anon has described himself as both a German soldier who "lost two fingers at Stalingrad" and an "anthropology professor." If you think about it for a minute, he cannot be both. An examination of his sources reveals that the material he keeps adding to the articles is about equally valid. Sources he regularly uses, such as R. Knussmann and v. Eickstedt are not acceptable references. They both present theories of race that have not gained acceptance in anthropology. While widely adopted by white supremacists, they are not suitable for an encyclopedia.

The article is in need of major repairs. It now has two reference sections in the middle and several questionable sections. I will proceed to edit it and hope to get some cooperation from the regular editors. Oh, yes, and please, lets all try to keep in mind the dictum: Don't feed the trolls! Sunray 18:48, 28 January 2006 (UTC)

Now the Rubenstein gang even denies my existence and biography. Funny stuff, isn't it? Your lies don't become more credible with further repetitions. Have you never thought of the possibility that there is a brilliant German granny scientist with unique experience sitting in the back-office being superior to you by far ? Many German anthropologists were in the Wehrmacht or the Ahnenerbe, even v.Eickstedt continued his career in Germany after 1945.Why ? Because inofficially all liked to cooperate with this country's excellent scientists who invented the atomic bomb, the atomic rocket, the jet and the carrier, which fought its enemies bravely and had by far the best anthropologists being the home of physical anthropology beside France. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 80.138.174.234 (talk • contribs) 20:35, 28 January 2006 (UTC)

Gang? I'm not "feeding" into this. Sunray 20:42, 28 January 2006 (UTC)

You are a Jew and a helper of "Steve" as you call Mr.Rubenstein. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 80.138.174.234 (talk • contribs) 22:02, 28 January 2006 (UTC)

As usual, you are wrong. However, were either of these assertions true, what of it? Sunray 22:09, 28 January 2006 (UTC)

Martin, Saller and Knußmann are all listed as Berühmte Anthropologen in the Anthropologie article. There is a 1990 biography entitled Der Anthropologe Rudolf Martin. John Baker Randal was a professor at Oxford. To dismiss these authors as questionable would be akin to claiming that Aristotle is a fraud because parts of his Physics have been invalidated. It would be incorrect to say that the sources present theories of race which have not gained acceptance in anthropology; rather, they are theories which have either been discredited as pseudoscience or have otherwise fallen out of favor among modern anthropologists. Nevertheless, since they are relevant to the historical context of the article, they should be included in their proper context, and so long as sufficient counterarguments from modern anthropologists are provided afterwards.

• As you correctly state, these theories have been discredited. To use them without peer review and discussion from a recognized journal would be unencyclopedic. Sunray

So long as the article both accurately reflects and does not assert the truth of Knußmann's work, it should be an acceptable reference for the section. However, I do agree that the anthropological material should be constrained to the anthropology section, and should not appear in any sections after that, as this material is not relevant outside of so-called classical anthropology. --Wzhao553 23:58, 28 January 2006 (UTC)

The heading "Classical anthropology" is incorrect since Knussmann is not a classical anthropologist. Moveover, his work is not accepted in mainstream anthropology. To include it in such a way as to be neutral would require inclusion of the work of several other anthropologists. But this is not an article on anthropology and, as you have said, you are not an anthropologist. I appreciate your efforts to attempt to edit the section to make it readable, but I think you are missing the point. As noted in my edit summary, the way it was written, constitues original research. I am therefore removing it. If you really think it should be in the article, please outline your reasons here. Sunray 00:27, 29 January 2006 (UTC)

As I understand it, Knußmann was the institute director for human biology at the University of Hamburg. He was an editor of the Journal of Comparative Human Biology from 1990 to 1998. Those fall well within the realm of anthropology. As you must be well aware, I have already said at least three times in this very talk page that the article should include counterarguments from modern anthropologists in order to maintain NPOV. It's possible, however, that you may be misunderstanding the idea of original research. The 1914 manual by Martin and Saller was considered authoritative in their day. Knußmann used his 1996 book as teaching material at the University of Hamburg (which caused a student protest, in fact). There is no dispute that the manual contains a wealth of valid physical anthropological information. Simply put, the POV nature of the section at present is itself quite correctable and is not grounds for deletion.

• It is original research because the work of Knussmann and others work has not been accurately sumarized in this article. You will need to provide direct quotes in order to use these references. Sunray

Moreover, those of us familiar with postcolonial studies will understand the importance of including late 19th and early 20th century anthropological research within the historical context of the fetishism of the Other in Western Europe. If you wish to invite an actual anthropologist like Rubenstein to revise any inaccuracies and to help provide NPOV, then I would of course be happy; however, if you wish to dispute the fact that anthropological studies played a role in the construction of stereotypes of Asians, then you would need to provide references to back that claim. --Wzhao553 01:38, 29 January 2006 (UTC)

Wzhao553: What you propose will not meet the requirements of WP:NPOV, which states:

"The policy requires that, where there are or have been conflicting views, these are fairly presented, but not asserted. All significant points of view are presented..." (emphasis miine)

Do you wish to rewrite that section to meet the requirements of the policy or remove it? Sunray 03:30, 29 January 2006 (UTC)

Asian Americans

Why do we talk about "Asian Americans" when we really seem to be referring to "Asians"? In particular, the sections "Asian American womanhood" and "Asian American manhood" seem mislabeled. Or should we just rename the article "Asian American fetish"? -Will Beback 21:00, 28 January 2006 (UTC)

A good idea, I corrected it.

Good lord, I haven't checked back on this article in a while and look at this mess. When it comes to Asian fetish and racial stereotypes. These stereotypes are mostly prevalent in America as America is the one that created and continues to perpetuate most of these Asian stereotypes via the Vietnam/Korean War and Hollywood movies, so I think it's accurate to have the titles refer to Asian Americans. OneViewHere 19:40, 30 January 2006 (UTC)

actually i have read a book in Chinese (you know, like women talk over like marriage and man and so on),when talking about one of her Taiwanese friend at the ending edge of marriable age, said she married those non-Asian ambassador in Beijing within a month. She said that all of those ambassador's wife have auite a lot of Chinese, from like Asia or North America, are usually really catty and so on..... And those ambassadir is easily fooled by them -_-'||| I am full Asian, so basically I dont know wut to say...

Biological anthropology

All detailed references for the "Biological anthropology" section have just been edited. Any questions left ?

My question has not been addressed. The section is not written from a neutral point of view and is not acceptable for an encyclopedia. Sunray 16:34, 29 January 2006 (UTC)

Sunray, you sound like a very reasonable person so far. However, I'm not exactly sure what it is that you want. If you were to read through, say, this article harshly summarizing Knußmann's Lehrbuch, you will find that the anonymous editor has done a fairly good job at presenting what Knußmann has to say accurately enough. You wanted direct quotations, you have been provided with direct quotations. Furthermore, we have agreed that there is a lack of alternate points of view, but I expected that you must be aware that according to the deletion policy, POV issues are not problems that require deletion.

Now, I can cite sources on cultural relativism that present a different point of view and ignore Knußmann's type of research and I can cite sources like Wissenschaftlicher Rassismus which directly criticizes Knußmann; or I can sit here and argue with you over whether or not we should delete this section; but I simply do not have the time or effort to do both. If your goal is to get this material off the internet at all costs, then I can't say that I would agree with you, but if you do want to help improve this article by expanding on the section and helping to provide a more balanced POV, then you must know that I have already given you my support in that endeavor. --Wzhao553 18:30, 29 January 2006 (UTC)

I agree to Wzhoa553 completely.Additionally, there are many mistakes in this article which I will present here in detail. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 80.138.134.141 (talk • contribs) 18:45, 29 January 2006 (UTC) I will never stop to resist this Boasian manipulation of science.80.138.134.141 19:06, 29 January 2006 (UTC)

Wzhao553: I'm not sure where you get the idea that POV problems are not problems that require deletion. That is not what the link you provided above states. The material that the anon editor keeps adding to various articles is a highly controversial and marginal theory within physical anthropology. To include that in an article absolutely requires balancing it out with other points of view. If you doubt this, please read or re-read WP:NPOV, which is one of the five pillars of Wikipedia. As to re-writing it, I don't see any merit in doing so, but if you do, by all means, go ahead. I would suggest that you do that offline and discuss your changes here before putting them into the article. In the meantime, I am (once more) removing that section from the article. I appreciate your reasonable approach, but fail to see why this material is so important to you.

To the anon editor (IP 80.138.134.141): Please do not revert again and do not accuse me of vandalism. I've explained my actions. If you cannot adapt to NPOV and the fact that Wikipedia is, above all, an encyclopedia, perhaps you should take your material elsewhere. Sunray 22:52, 29 January 2006 (UTC)

It is all too obvious why the Rubenstein group does that censoring.They want to finish the work of their "scientific" forefathers.80.138.134.141 00:43, 30 January 2006 (UTC)

Sunray, if you had actually looked at the link that I had provided, you will find that it says that a problem in which "Article is biased or has lots of POV" should be handled by adding an npov or POV check tag, as it is a problem that does not require deletion. Perhaps you are forgetting that Wikipedia is a public encyclopedia that everybody should contribute to, or perhaps you have simply failed to understand anything that has been written so far. Whatever the reason, it is clear that you have some personal issues with the anonymous editor that I truthfully do not care about. I would advise that you handle this in a private discussion with him, and leave those who are working on improving articles alone.

For the last time, the anthropology section will stay. When discussing racism against Asians, the citation of racist sources is not only necessary but also encouraged. If you were to refuse to see this, then, by denying that racist anthropology was ever influential or ever took place, you would be openly racist against Asians as well. Also, the presentation of these sources must be made as strong as possible, without asserting the truth or falsity of the positions. It is immediately necessary to the topic. Moreover, the anonymous editor has never denied that the sources are racist; he simply wants the research expressed. Your complete failure to understand this is a personal issue which you need to work out on your own, and which should not spill over into useless argument on this talk page. --Wzhao553 04:51, 30 January 2006 (UTC)

Wzhao, I disagree. The way the article is structured now, the anthropology section DOMINATES the article. It's the frist topic listed after the definition of Asian Fetish and it's length is far greater than any other part of the article. By adding that section you have completely changed the focus of the article away from its original intent. If you feel you must include it as an contrasting point of view, then I think the length and scope of the anthropology section needs to be drastically pared down so that it is in proportion with the rest of the article. OneViewHere 22:33, 30 January 2006 (UTC)

In an edit summary you say: "Censorship of historical details amounts to Racism." Such spurious logic is an example of why this article is in such bad shape. At this point, I'm not sure what can be done about it. It is that bad. I was only trying to work on one part of it. Not only is the article not NPOV, it is based on a bogus concept in the first place. Sunray 16:12, 30 January 2006 (UTC)

Sunray,the concept of "Asian Fetish" is definitely a valid one, as it does exist and is perpetrated against Asians every day in this country. The whole anthopology section though, is questionable in it's value to the article. Racist anthropology like the one quoted by this Virago wackjob falls into the same realm of research as the authors of that book "The Bell Curve" which tried to claim that blacks are naturally less intelligent than other races. Should an article on black racism use "The Bell Curve" as an explanation of why some people are racist against blacks? This article is taking a bizarre direction and the fault lies with this racist German "anthropology professor" who is trying to expand the scope of the article in directions that are not relevant nor applicable to the topic at hand.OneViewHere 19:46, 30 January 2006 (UTC)

• You're right, I withdraw my remark about the concept being bogus. However, the article has serious neutrality problems throughout. Sunray 02:24, 31 January 2006 (UTC)

As much as this is a contentious issue about what many believe to be a racist phenomenon personal attacks are proscribed by Wikipedia policy. The history of this talk page shows a lot of people making personal attacks rather and debating the issue rather than assuming good faith and debating how to make it a better article. Let's avoid accusations of racism or anything else.--ThreeAnswers 20:29, 30 January 2006 (UTC)

• That goes for you too ThreeAnswers. Sunray 02:24, 31 January 2006 (UTC)

Hello, Wzhao533. For our pertinent and excellent anthropology section, I am now called a "wackjob" and a "racist" by the Rubenstein group again. Those about 20 people described on silsor's page see now that they cannot control the wikipedia any more because more and more people stop to tolerate their censorship.To put it in a greater context, some "groups" have a vital interest in the manipulation of the media which is c r u c i a l for their own survival.80.138.193.187 21:33, 30 January 2006 (UTC)

I have decided today (on 30th of January 2006) to take over the about 50 most important strategic articles in the wikipedia and to break the censorship on my own. Others are heartly welcomed to join me if their time allows it. From now on will dedicate 14 hours a day to reach this goal. Among the strategic articles is e.g. "relativity theory" where I will contribute unique critical material."Atonal music" and "Ludwig van Beethoven" have just been edited by me. It will take the Rubenstein group now many experts in many fields including some translators for German, French and numerous other languages to cope with this new situation.80.138.193.187 21:44, 30 January 2006 (UTC)

I'm going to humor you for a second and ask you what the heck you are talking about when referring to the "Rubenstein Group". What "censorship are you talking about and who the heck is "silsor"?

And yes, anybody who states that they will spend "14 hours a day" on Wikipedia can objectively and realistically be called.....a wackjob. Your writing is barely comprehensible. As best I can make out you are a right-wing conspiracy theorist who engages in stream-of-consciousness rants against Jews and "leftist articles". Your tin-foil-hat musings are not appropriate for this article. And most importantly, the fact that you are fancying the idea of "Taking upon yourself" to correct what you perceive are biases in some articles shows that you are not willing to engage in the Wikipedia community in developing a consensus or act in good faith. It's obvious that you are here to promote a personal agenda, not engage in dialogue. OneViewHere 22:29, 30 January 2006 (UTC)

This is a prime example of the ludicrous irrelevancy of the anthropology section:

G. M. Smith, 1956. The Role of Study of Algae in the Development of Botany. American Journal of Biology, 43:(7), pp. 537-543.

What does the study of Algae and Botany have to do with Asian Fetish?????OneViewHere 22:37, 30 January 2006 (UTC)

Hello, Wzhoa533.Now they blame it on the "silly algae".They don't want to read about Hartmann's world famous laws or read at least a Cheng abstract. What was just the name of the bird ignoring everything by putting his head in the sand ?80.138.193.187 22:55, 30 January 2006 (UTC)

Hi, just wanted to say, fascinating stuff in the anthropology part of the article, should be expanded, it could also include some stuff from Steve Sailer, a well-known internet author. Real racial differences are the basis for the interracial trends of having more white male/Asian female and black male/white female pairs than vice versa, that is also my firm opinion. I'm also German, by the way.

Here is a well-known piece by Steve Sailer on the subject that should be incorporated into the article:

http://www.isteve.com/IsLoveColorblind.htm

--80.137.13.203 23:44, 30 January 2006 (UTC)

Please answer my questions. Who is this "Rubenstein Group" you keep referring to?OneViewHere 23:03, 30 January 2006 (UTC)

Push the search button for "silsor" then you can see on administrator Mr.Bonham's page from Toronto (who has nothing to do with the allegations personally) the quotes from others about the "cabal" which Bonham wants to present as ridiculous obviously. I can confirm these allegations essentially by my own experiences and observations. 80.138.193.187 23:29, 30 January 2006 (UTC)

That's it. And if you google "jews control wikipedia" you find certainly a wiki talk page (deleted in the meantime but not on google?) of a certain user:silsor where you can read the allegations about Rubenstein and 15 others. Strangely enough there were some impostors (!) of silsor as I have seen.80.138.193.187 23:39, 30 January 2006 (UTC)

So let me see if I'm understanding you correctly. Is it your assertion and/or belief that "Jews control Wikipedia"? Is this what you are saying?OneViewHere 00:15, 31 January 2006 (UTC)

Why anthropology matters

Very briefly and without lengthy justifications. The Neomarxist, postcolonialist view of "Asian fetishism" is that it is the process by which Asians are invested with stereotypes such as submissiveness, innocence, femininity, etc. In short, to fetishize is to trivialize and stereotype. To understand Asian fetishism is to understand (sexual) stereotypes of Asians. So we need to understand where the stereotypes come from. One proposal is as follows:

1. Asian fetishism means accepting stereotypes of Asians as reality.
2. Stereotypes come from folk anthropology.
3. Folk anthropology comes from physical anthropology.

We include work such as Knußmann's because it reflects folk anthropology. For example, if we were to go out and ask the first 100 people we meet whether they think that

1. Asian women are more feminine than women of other races, and
2. Southeast Asian women are physically more childlike than women of other races,

then we would see that Knußmann's theory resonates well with folk anthropology. There exists convincing evidence (which I will not provide here) that people do think like this.

Thus, according to this view, a discussion of folk and physical anthropology necessarily precedes discussion of stereotypes, which themselves are at the core of fetishism. This is why I placed the anthropology section above the stereotypes section. Also, note that I'm assuming here that the article has a terminology section which reflects postcolonialist definitions. Nevertheless, it is correct to state that the Stereotypes section should be the centerpiece of this entry. --Wzhao553 23:33, 30 January 2006 (UTC)

These differences really do exist, regarding paedomorphy for example, even in a place like China, if you look at the Southwestern provinces like Guangxi you already have women with very paedomorphic facial characteristics (high forehead, small noses etc.).

Regarding femininity, Asians tend to have less muscle mass on average and commit fewer crimes, show less violent behaviour etc., signs of low levels of testosterone.

Websites like modelminority.com only take sociological factors into account, while ignoring possible biological racial differences that may make wm-af couples and bm-wf couples more likely than other way round.

--80.137.13.203 23:59, 30 January 2006 (UTC)

Asians commit fewer crimes? Less violent behavior on average? Where are you getting these insipid generalizations? They sounds like the "model minority" stereotype that many Whites like to thrust on Asians. Was the Kmer Rouge non-violent? How about the Japanese soldiers who fought in WWII? Were they known for their submissiveness? Any kinds of behaviorial claims would have to take into account cultural factors regardless. You're essentially arguing that there is a biological basis for violent or "manly" behavior". You might as well take it to the logical extreme and say that Jews are naturally greedy and Blacks are naturally violent because it's just in their "nature". Does this sort of racist psuedo-science have any place in this article? There are plenty of Asian Americans who have grown up in America and are just as aggressive, violent, and testosterone-pumped as the average American male (unfortunately!) Human behavior for any particular race spans the entire spectrum and to claim a genetic basis for this is exactly the type of racist thinking that led to Hitler's rise to power. As a German, I'm sure you are familiar with Hitler.OneViewHere 00:13, 31 January 2006 (UTC)

Look at the "Color of Crime" report which circulates the internet and is based on FBI crime statistics. Asian Americans actually commit fewest crimes, especially violent crimes. Asian countries like Japan and Korea are also well known for very low crime rates. The communists you are talking about were about politics and not regular "Tookie Williams" type street crime, which is strongly related to testosterone levels, just look at the universally much lower violent crime rates of women compared to men. You also have to differenciate between recognizing racial differences on the one hand and racial hatred on the other. I do not condone racial hatred in any way, in contrast to many folks on Asian American websites like modelminority, by the way.

--80.137.13.203 00:21, 31 January 2006 (UTC)

Your ignorance is painful. Just painful. There are many, MANY reasons why the crime rate for Asian Americans is lower than for other demographic groups. Culture plays a big factor. Asian culture emphasizes harmony. That doesn't mean that Asians are genetically predisposed to passiveness. It is a learned, cultural behavior. Also if you want to compare Asian crime rates to American "Street crime", -America leads the world in "street crime", so any comparison is flawed. Europe has a lower rate of crime than America does too. There are other reasons: Immigration is self-selecting. (educated people immmigrate). Educated Asian Americans as a group have higher rates of income and richer people committ less crime. etc. etc. Basically what I see coming from your mouth is an endless stream of racist stereotypes. Your thinkly veiled Tookie Williams "Street crime" euphemism is obviously your way of saying "BLACK CRIME". You're about as racist as they come.OneViewHere 00:34, 31 January 2006 (UTC)

Well, I'm sorry Mr. Political Correctness, screaming "racism" won't make racial differences go away, just as screaming "sexism" won't make men and women the same. Also culture reflects biology, the passive, diligent and family-oriented biology of Asians makes for a corresponding culture. Immigrants don't generally have lower crime rates, only Asian immigrants do.

--80.137.13.203 00:51, 31 January 2006 (UTC)

I forgot to add, that many Asian immigrant groups have quite high rates of crime. There are many Chinese and Vietnamese gangs in many urban cities that are quite violent and are a serious social problem in those communities. You're demonstrating complete ignorance on this issue. Also, please explain to me what "biology" is present in Asians that makes them "passive, diligent, and family oriented". I wasn't aware that I have a "family-oriented" gene. Perhaps you can show me where it is? OneViewHere 21:50, 31 January 2006 (UTC)

If you were actually a real professor, then you would know that immigration is self-selecting. This is, only the most industrious people are willing to emmigrate to a different country. Lazy Asians ain't gonna pack up their bags, get up off the couch and move to a different country. And a high percentage of Asian immigrants are college-educated professionals. They don't reflect the entire Asian demographic. So to draw BEHAVIORAL conclusions from a biased sample is the worst science possible. If you really think Asians are passive, then the obvious truth is that you don't know very many Asians, if any. You're just regurgitating the same racial stereotypes that western media has been perpetuating for over a hundred years. You don't have an original thought in your head.OneViewHere 08:02, 31 January 2006 (UTC)

Asians in Asia tend to show rather similar behaviour, but sure there are cultural differences to a degree, and there is also selective immigration, I don't doubt that. Still Asians in Asia show many of the same behavioural traits, I would say they are at least as hard-working as Asian Americans, for example. Passivity was only meant to a relative degree, of course there are hyperactive Asians, just relative to other groups they appear somewhat more passive on average.

At least from what I know, the dating habits of selective and non-selective Asian immigrant groups in the US both point in similar directions anyhow, with more wm-af couples than vice versa, which is after all the subject matter of this article.

Websites like modelminority create all kinds of conspiracy theories trying to explain these trends, many of them openly racist against whites, when the real explanation may be much more simple.

--Mr Phil 13:27, 31 January 2006 (UTC)

You're neglecting many factors that contribute to the phenomenon of AF-WM. One huge one is economics. White males from Europe and America are generally much wealthier than the average citizen of an Asian country. Wealth, combined with social/racial stereotypes and fetishism are the main factors at work here. The ridiculous argument that the psuedo-anthropologists are trying to make here is easily disproved by the mere fact that many of these Asian women who date white men are dating white men who are small in stature, lacking in social skills, and can for all intents and purposes be called "nerds". These men have the same physical stature (oftentimes less) than the average Asian man, so this is where their theory falls flat on its face. Physical stature can be considered ONE factor, but not the definitive factor. As it stands now, the anthropology section is given more importance in the article that it deserves as it's relevance is minor when all other factors are taken into account. OneViewHere 21:44, 31 January 2006 (UTC)

Ironically,Tookie shot some Asians.80.138.193.187 00:45, 31 January 2006 (UTC)

Hallo, HerrPhilipp,danke für das große Lob. Ich habe mich auf deiner Page gerade gemeldet.80.138.193.187 00:14, 31 January 2006 (UTC)

--80.137.13.203 23:59, 30 January 2006 (UTC)

Sure, but we can't assert the truth or falsity of biological differences contributing to marriage disparity, since that's just one (some might say, unabashedly racist) view among many. As we all know, according to the cultural relativists (aka mainstream anthropology), biological differences don't matter. As for me, I'm just puzzled as to why people here think that this line of research has no followers; and as for Sailer, he's no anthropologist, but it wouldn't hurt to include his now-infamous article in the external links. --Wzhao553 00:23, 31 January 2006 (UTC)

I'm not sure if Steve Sailor's article is appropriate, considering it is mere wank. The contributions of certain suspect Germans shall be left out as well; this is not a showcase for racist theories. -Heaven's knight 01:22, 31 January 2006 (UTC)

There are many mediocre and low self esteem people to be found in mainstream white american society. there are an obvious even greater many who, although they may be nice and good people, are confused as to the functioning of the world and their place in society. what do men/women want, etc. The truth of things shall be left to the best and hopefully the objective too, hehe, not to whoever can string together a bunch of fancy words, spin up a nice fancy web of theory, especially not those who are admittedly mediocre and obviously ill intentioned.

Why trust nerds and rejects with explaining social phenomena? -Heaven's knight 01:26, 31 January 2006 (UTC)

Let's be honest, people truly in the know are not watching with angst from the sidelines, they are not biding all their time trying to construct a fairytale of how wonderful people of their skin color supposedly are so that they themselves can try to ride coattails, live vicariously through these magical gods they have created. To deny the operation of racism in American society is foolish. There are a great many good and decent people, there are a few cool and badass people, and there are the obvious dorky newb racists, of course not only in America. We do not need to give them a voice; after all, it obviously does them no good, and they only seek to do harm. Perhaps more later -Heaven's knight 01:29, 31 January 2006 (UTC)

Please tell that to the people at websites like modelminority.com who are attacking interracial couples.

--Mr Phil 01:48, 31 January 2006 (UTC)

Dude, your German talk page is hilarious! --Wzhao553 01:57, 31 January 2006 (UTC)

Wzhao553 said: "We include work such as Knußmann's because it reflects folk anthropology." This sort of generalization is problematic. Knaussman's work is marginal because it is not supported by folk anthropology (which, by the way is a branch of social anthropology, not physical anthropology). While there are many studies on racial prejudice between cultures, Asian fetishism goes against the very strong tendency in human societies to fear and mistrust people from other cultures That is why Knussman's work must be handled with caution. It is very hard to bring it into the article without doing original research. Sunray 16:33, 31 January 2006 (UTC)

Yes, I understand and agree with this statement. I would still argue that the average European citizen accepts the stereotype that Asian women are more feminine and childlike as a reality. However, that doesn't overcome xenophobia. Although I think that I could answer this objection in theory, it's questionable whether one can do so within the realm of the physical anthropology presented by Knußmann. --Wzhao553 18:46, 31 January 2006 (UTC)

The mate seeking according to the 36 races' "Rassenschablonen" (prefering mates from own race) is not as biologically powerful as the female -male heteroracial attraction (Knußmann).Everything has been criticized by now, but nothing scientifically pertinent.80.138.168.54 20:24, 31 January 2006 (UTC)

Added testosterone differences to the physical anthropology section

As biological explanation --Mr Phil 16:53, 31 January 2006 (UTC)

I would think that your additions are acceptable, except that I also see that you were recently banned on the German Wikipedia for "diskriminieren Beiträge" on Rassentheorien. The majority of users would probably agree that it would be best that you not make major additions until we fully understand the reasons behind that. --Wzhao553 19:09, 31 January 2006 (UTC)

The things which disturbed the moderators on the German site was some weird stuff the other German user who only uses his IP address posted on my discussion page yesterday evening, so talk to him if you have a problem with what he wrote. I have already asked him not to post any more controversial stuff on my user page, if you look at my discussion page. --Mr Phil 19:33, 31 January 2006 (UTC)

Higher levels of testosterone in men produce more masculine physiques and more aggressive personalities, which in turn lead to higher sexual attractiveness for women. [4]

The source given does not match the claim. Infinity0 ^talk 20:59, 31 January 2006 (UTC)

Not to mention the fact that if you were to take this questionable reasoning to it's logical conclusion, then all women or a huge disporportionate amount of all women would be dating Black Men.OneViewHere 21:30, 31 January 2006 (UTC)

Phil, can you move or reincorporate that section into the Asian men subsection? If you're only talking about testosterone, then it would be more appropriate there. --Wzhao553 22:03, 31 January 2006 (UTC)

Ok, I don't see why people here react in such a hostile way anyhow, the theory is as good as any of the other theories presented in the article, it's supported by people like Steve Sailer and even Arthur Hu wrote in a similar vein already, I don't see anything hateful about it either. I also did a better job at providing evidence and references than is done in any other part of the article, most of which just consists of anecdotes.

--Mr Phil 22:10, 31 January 2006 (UTC)

I don't agree with those additions. First of all, it is disputable that East Asians have a lower crime rate as there is ample evidence that Asian gangs are a serious problems in areas with high numbers of Asians. Secondly, the links you refer to compare white people with other white people, -not whites against Asians. Thirdly, the addition of this section makes the anthropology section the largest section of the article. It dominates the article. This is not about anthropolog. This is about a social phenomenon. If you want to argue that testosterone levels make for physical attractiveness then why aren't all women dating black men? OneViewHere 22:39, 31 January 2006 (UTC)

Regarding Black men, do you have more Asian men having sex with Black women or Black men with Asian women? Fits right into the picture. Most of the research articles directly compare Whites with Asians, not Whites to other Whites. --Mr Phil 22:43, 31 January 2006 (UTC)

The Arguments being made here.

I want to get back to this Karl fellow who never signs his messages. Please explain why you think that "Jews Control Wikipedia". Also, if you are trying to make an argument that Asian's are "passive" due to their "lower testosterone" and natural tendancies, then do you think other groups....say Blacks, are more violent and aggressive due to their natural tendancies? That is the logical extension of your argument. And if that is the case, please explain how that is not utterly and completely racist. I don't want to see lengthy anthropology dissertation psycho-babble. I want a direct yes or no answer to my questions.OneViewHere 21:27, 31 January 2006 (UTC)

anthropology section

The anthropology section stands for itself. Are there any scientific well-supported objections to it ?Mr Phil, Wzhao533 and me are respectable scholars of medicine, humanities and anthropology and we have given very,very detailed information to you.By the way, the anthropology section is unique on the net as e.g. Mr.Phil's warm comment is a hint for ("fascinating").I will now go on eliminating the bias in the about 50 strategic articles in the English wikipedia on my own. Others are heartly welcome to join me.I have just improved "Ludwig van Beethoven ", "atonal music" and "relativity theory".And it will take the opposing group a lot of experts in different fields including translators to cope with it.I look back on more than 60 years of scientific experience being a member of the Ahnenerbe,too.As I have said above, my intents were always benign to humanity. My opposing the oversimplifying Anti-Asian Nazi racialism in the very dangerous letter to Himmler in 1938 is more than any indivual could have achieved.Given the fact it had changed the plans of Himmler it could have saved the lifes of millions of people. Not too unlikely as Himmler was totally irrational.It was clear to me from the beginning that there is something as individualty. Race is only one constituent of the human, sex and individualty are the two others. Nevertheless, all constituents are very significant.As I share Beethoven's ideals, my vision is a community of all people. But as many scientists and artists have shown us, this is a utopia with only a small chance to be realized. War, fight, rape and greed and average humans determine the human existence.The expeditions to Tibet in 1934,1935 and 1937 in which I took part showed me the attractiveness of the central Sinid women in the Himalaya. Of course, if you google for "Nazi Tibet expedition" you will find that the scientists don't know anything about those mentioned expeditions. Furthermore , I have many files in my archive the NARA would be keen to get. Now, I am a fit, but a very old man. And as the racial model doesn't determine everything, the model that members of the SS or the Ahnenerbe were all gangsters, is not correct. I was called Nazi by you, but I have never been a party member nor did I belong to the Ahnenerbe when it was integrated in the SS. There is never a collective guilt or a simple yes or no, good or bad. As the German Nikolaus von Kues has put it, there is a "coincidentia oppositorum" in everything, one of the deepest thoughts of man. This article is only a preliminary for further edits on the "Holy Grail" and other fascinating topics which could be of much, much value for you. "In diesen heil'gen Hallen kennt man die Rache nicht". As I know that you are young people who have not found their way in life yet, I will see your hostilities as a kind of misunderstanding due to a knowledge gap.Good afternoon, gentlemen. 80.138.168.54 23:16, 31 January 2006 (UTC)

If you are trying to admit that you were a member of the SS, then just say so. If the only comment you can muster up about your visit to the Himalayas is that you found central Sinid women "attractive", then I think it's pretty clear why you are interested in this article..... 143.127.3.10 18:28, 1 February 2006 (UTC)

Unsourced section

The role of testosterone

One possible explanation for the higher incidence of White male - Asian female couples as compared to East Asian male - White female pairings may be higher average levels of testosterone found among Whites as compared to East Asians. Higher levels of testosterone in men produce more masculine physiques and more aggressive personalities, which in turn lead to higher sexual attractiveness for women.

Evidence for this theory includes:

• Less muscle mass found among East Asians as compared to Whites.
• Lower levels of violent crime committed by East Asians.
• Larger average testicular volumes of White males as compared to East Asian males.
• Possible differences in average penile size, which shows a strong relation to prenatal and childhood testosterone levels.
• A lower prevalence of androgenetic alopecia (baldness) among East Asian men.
• The higher average life expectancies of women and East Asians, fewer incidences of prostate cancer and heart disease among East Asians.
• The dating discrepancy is not found among East Indian - White couples. [5] East Indians show physical characteristics more similar to Whites than East Asians.
• The larger number of Black male - White female couples as compared to White male - Black female couples, which may reflect a similar dynamic.

All the provided sources were of no relevance to these claims. See history for details. Moved to talk page for further discussion. Infinity0 ^talk 22:54, 31 January 2006 (UTC)

Every statement is sourced, but I will add more sources over time to further back up every single point. Instead of vandalizing the article, you could rather add more sources for many of the other spurious claims made in this article by previous authors which aren't backed up to a similar degree. --Mr Phil 23:41, 31 January 2006 (UTC)

The whole section was added by you. You must provide the sources, AND make the section good, BEFORE inserting into the article. We do NOT give readers unverified information "to be verified in the future". Infinity0 ^talk 23:48, 31 January 2006 (UTC)

The section is already heavily sourced, but I will continue to add sources over time. Wikipedia articles mostly don't start out perfect. If you disagree with any of the statements, add a paragraph at the bottom titled something like "Critique", that's how it's done with the rest of the article as well. I don't just go around deleting sections I may not agree with either.

--Mr Phil 00:29, 1 February 2006 (UTC)

Likewise, you shouldn't just go around adding sections to the article without a consensus either. Why does your ability to add unverified material supercede his right to remove unverified content? As it is, I feel that this material is completely unrelated to the source topic of the article. This article is not a discourse in human physiology, and any physical differences that don't take into account DIETARY considerations is not valid. You may not notice, but Asian children born in America usually grow up to be taller and more muscular than their parents. OneViewHere 00:58, 1 February 2006 (UTC)

Ok, then add some sections at the bottom showing that Asians average the same testosterone levels as other groups or that testosterone has no effects on masculinity, muscularity etc.

All the material IS sourced much more extensively than the rest of the article! If you see specific errors, write a critique at the bottom like is done with other points of criticism as well. --Mr Phil 01:05, 1 February 2006 (UTC)

Could you clarify some of these statements more carefully? E.g., instead of

• Larger average testicular volumes of White males as compared to East Asian males

have

• Larger average testicular volumes upon autopsy of Danish males as compared to Hong Kong males

The way that your "evidence" is set up overreaches your conclusions and therefore invalidates your results. --Wzhao553 02:19, 1 February 2006 (UTC)

Content now? --Mr Phil 02:48, 1 February 2006 (UTC)

Well again, as before, I think that we need to present the Testosterone section as strongly as possible. As it stands, it'll be far too easy just to ridicule the position of making simplistic, exaggerated claims based on narrow (possibly biased, possibly incorrect) physical evidence, then presenting some equally simplistic, exaggerated counterexamples, and then moving on. Concluding that all white males have larger testicles than all East Asians, on the basis of one study by one person on a small group of Hong Kong and Danish males 20 years ago is just plain bad science. Claiming that East Indians have "physical characteristics more similar to Whites" especially without citations and in a supposed connection to testosterone is just laughable anthropology. If we write a Testosterone section containing parts that are this easy to dismiss as childish pseudoscience, then we might as well not write it at all. I at least tried to make Knußmann sound presentable; I hope you'll do the same here. --Wzhao553 05:02, 1 February 2006 (UTC)

As the German quotes were explicitly requested by my critics, I edit them again.80.138.168.54 01:29, 1 February 2006 (UTC)

Today (31st January2006) I have decided to build a new Shangri-La in the English Wikipedia.80.138.193.56 02:47, 1 February 2006 (UTC)

I object to this section. The subject of the article is the Asian fetish. So why do we have a section that deals with "White male - Asian female couples"? Are we saying that every such coupling is the result of a fetish? Further, what experts ascribe the fetish to lower testosterone levels among Asian males? Why would that lead to a fetish among While males? -Will Beback 06:01, 1 February 2006 (UTC)

Further, the American Renaissance (magazine) is not a reliable source. -Will Beback 06:03, 1 February 2006 (UTC)

The crime stats are based on FBI uniform crime statistics, American Renaissance just compiled the data.

The differences in sex hormone levels make White men relatively more masculine, contributing to the dating disparities, which seem to be a major sore point for many Asian American men, giving rise to "Asian fetish" theories.

Websites like modelminority suggest there is some kind of vast conspiracy against Asian males, this is an alternative explanation.

Basically we have now included an alternative biological explanation for the "fetish": That Asians are on average more paedomorphic, which is considered attractive in women (explained in the physical anthropology section) and that average differences in masculinity (explained in the testosterone section) make certain ethnic sexual combinations more likely than others.

Readers can judge themselves whether the biological explanations or a media conspiracy are more realistic models for understanding the dynamics of interracial dating trends and sexuality.

--Mr Phil 06:22, 1 February 2006 (UTC)

"The differences in sex hormone levels make White men relatively more masculine, contributing to the dating disparities, which seem to be a major sore point for many Asian American men, giving rise to "Asian fetish" theories." According to whom? What are our sources for this theory? -Will Beback 08:05, 1 February 2006 (UTC)

Testosterone is the male sex hormone, higher levels make you more masculine, more muscular, more aggressive etc. --Mr Phil 08:40, 1 February 2006 (UTC)

Mr Phil, the sources you give in that section have NO RELEVANCE WHATSOEVER to the claims being made. Stop inserting lies in the article! Infinity0 ^talk 16:33, 1 February 2006 (UTC)

Once more, what is the source for asserting that Asian male testosterone levels contributes to the White male Asian fetish? Unless we can get a source for this theory then it must be removed as original research. -Will Beback 17:46, 1 February 2006 (UTC)

Try the Steve Sailer article "Is love Colorblind?". Basically higher testosterone levels of Whites leads to an enhanced sex dimorphism of wm-af couples compared to am-wf couples regarding muscularity, aggression etc. For the same reasons you practically don't have any Asian men with Black women.

http://www.isteve.com/IsLoveColorblind.htm

If you consider this to be "original research", which it is not, since all the sources are research done by others, you need to delete the rest of the article as well. Where are your sources that any of the other things claimed in this article contribute to an "Asian fetish" on the part of White males, except for anecdotal evidence? My impression is rather, that you personally don't like the conclusions and you only want this Wikipedia article to feature aspects of the issue you support. Sorry, but Wikipedia is not your personal platform, if that is what you want you need to post at modelminority. --Mr Phil 19:34, 1 February 2006 (UTC)

The word "testosterone" does not even appear in that source, you fucking phoney. Infinity0 ^talk 19:45, 1 February 2006 (UTC)

From the article: "Muscularity may most sharply differentiate the races in terms of sexual attractiveness. Women like men who are stronger than they; men like women who are rounder and softer. The ending of segregation in sports has made racial differences in muscularity harder to ignore."

Muscularity is largely determined by testosterone levels. --Mr Phil 20:16, 1 February 2006 (UTC)

And why do you assume that? And what about ALL THE OTHER CLAIMS WHICH YOU HAVE NOT PROVIDED SOURCES FOR?? Infinity0 ^talk 20:19, 1 February 2006 (UTC)

Where are your sources, I'm talking about any kind of systematic studies, not anecdotal evidence, of the other claims made in the article? --Mr Phil 20:20, 1 February 2006 (UTC)

I didn't write the rest of the article; check up the provided sources yourself. I checked up all the sources you provided for those claims, and they were completely irrelevant. Also, the crappiness of the rest of an article doesn't justify keeping an even crappier section. Infinity0 ^talk 20:24, 1 February 2006 (UTC)

The previous authors have provided no sources of any kind of research on the subject matter at hand, only anecdotal evidence. I provide medical studies showing different racial levels of testosterone and statistics to back up my claims, more than any other part of the article.

So should I also start deleting other parts of the article I don't agree with?

--Mr Phil 20:27, 1 February 2006 (UTC)

Your claims are NOT backed up by your provided sources. If you can find a section that is not backed up by a source, then you can delete it. Infinity0 ^talk 20:29, 1 February 2006 (UTC)

Instead of always talking in generalizations, why don't you tell me which specific claim is not backed up by a source? --Mr Phil 20:37, 1 February 2006 (UTC)

Please don't insult Mr Phil.He is totally right according e.g. to the Knußmann manual where it is stated that there are more feminine races (see the anthropology section)and feminity and masculinity are hormone-driven and even influencing the prenatal brain development (see Knußmann,1996,pp.221-335 "Geschlechtertypologie" and remember e.g. Baker's Sanid brain morphology statements).Please excuse for the "fucking phoney" insult,Infinity0.This "German bashing" shows your helplessness. Furthermore,it is not by chance that some Germans oppose some "Americans" here.80.138.193.56 20:40, 1 February 2006 (UTC)

Like I told you the first time I removed the section, see the page history for the specific reasons on why I removed each source. Infinity0 ^talk 20:48, 1 February 2006 (UTC)

The way I see it, except for screaming around, attempts at insult and edit wars there are no arguments forthcoming.

Which claims specifically are unsourced? The testosterone section is the only extensively sourced part of the entire article, many of the sources are medical research articles. Please work on improving the other parts of the article, instead of attempting to censor the parts you may not agree with.

--Mr Phil 20:53, 1 February 2006 (UTC)

All of the claims in your section. I give specific reasons in the edits of their removal - see the history of this page. Infinity0 ^talk 20:56, 1 February 2006 (UTC)

Sorry, but if you just continue to vandalize, the article can't be improved.

--Mr Phil 20:58, 1 February 2006 (UTC)

You just didn't want to bother searching through history, exposing you as a vandal. Here are all the sources and reaons for removal.

One possible explanation for the higher incidence of White male - Asian female couples as compared to East Asian male - White female pairings may be higher average levels of testosterone found among Whites as compared to East Asians. [6] test between koreans and swedes not generic enough Higher levels of testosterone in men produce more masculine physiques and more aggressive personalities, which in turn lead to higher sexual attractiveness for women.[7] source says nothing about testosterone

Evidence for this theory includes:

• Less muscle mass found among East Asians as compared to Whites [8] that source is for prepubescent children only
• Lower levels of violent crime committed by East Asians [9] source says nothing about east asians
• Larger average testicular volumes of White males as compared to East Asian males, e.g. a study by Jared Diamond, professor of physiology at UCLA and Pulitzer Prize winner, comparing average testes volumes upon autopsy of Danes and Hong Kong Chinese [10] a single diagram is not a reliable source
• Possible differences in average penile size, which shows a strong relation to prenatal and childhood testosterone levels [11] source says nothing about east asians
• A lower prevalence of androgenetic alopecia among East Asian men [12] source says nothing about testosterone
• The higher average life expectancies of women and East Asians, fewer incidences of prostate cancer and heart disease among East Asians [13][14][15] nothing linking this to testosterone
• The dating discrepancy is not found among East Indian - White couples,[16] (this is the only source which has relevance) East Indians show physical characteristics more similar to Whites than East Asians claim not verified
• The larger number of Black male - White female couples as compared to White male - Black female couples, which may reflect a similar dynamic [17] a single diagram is not a reliable source

So, Mr Phil, stop bullshitting, and making sockpuppet accounts through anonymous users. Infinity0 ^talk 21:03, 1 February 2006 (UTC)

• Special:Contributions/80.138.168.54
• Special:Contributions/80.138.193.56
• Special:Contributions/Mr_Phil

I rest my case. Infinity0 ^talk 20:56, 1 February 2006 (UTC)

Mr Phil, you seem to have nothing constructive to contribute to Wikipedia. Stop wasting people's time. You're pathetic. Infinity0 ^talk 21:06, 1 February 2006 (UTC)

Judging from your criticism, no source would be good enough anyway. Fact of the matter is that the rest of the article is just anecdotal, by your line of argument should be deleted.

I already wrote that I will try to improve the section over time, revert vandalism however just slows down this process. Revert vandalism seems to be your only contribution.

--Mr Phil 21:15, 1 February 2006 (UTC)

I have not criticised anything, only pointed out the FACT that all the sources are of NO RELEVANCE. Improve the section on your own computer, then upload it when it's done. We do NOT give readers complete bullshit. Infinity0 ^talk 21:18, 1 February 2006 (UTC)

Meld dich bitte mal, Herr Phillip auf deiner Seite.Danke.80.138.193.56 21:19, 1 February 2006 (UTC)

These claims that "masculine" men are attracted to soft and curvey women" is nonsense. Asian women are by and large LESS curvey than women of other races. Asian women tend to have smaller breasts, narrower hips, smaller rear-ends and are skinnier, not "curvier". If masculine men are attracted to curvy women then you just disproved your own theory. This entire line of reasoning is flawed regardless because there are different standards of masculinity.

And Dr Phil, Infinity is absolutely correct. If you don't have sources to back up your claims, then you don't have the right to just go ahead an input stuff into the article without any way of backing it up. Why does your ability to submit unsubstantiated material supercede his right to delete it?

Also, to our German posters, I think the community would appreciate it if you spoke in ENGLISH, not German. This is an english-language article, and as such if you want to discuss issues regarding it you need to communicate with the other members in English. If you want to act like little schoolchildren passing notes to each other in class then do it in an Instant-Messenger Window.OneViewHere 22:15, 1 February 2006 (UTC)

Pheromones???

What's with the section on Pheromones? If, as the poster admits, that pheromones haven't even proved to exist yet, then why mention it in the article? You might as well talk about "Mojo". ie, Hey, black dudes just have more MOJO and rhythm, therefore they get more action!" This article is going in a ridiculous direction and is straying too far from the core topic.OneViewHere 22:22, 1 February 2006 (UTC)

Oh and also, for Dr Phil or whoever posted a article that appeared in "American Rennaisance" Magazine. That magazine is a white-supremacist magazine. Their readers are anti-immigration, deny the Jewish Holocause ever happened, and believe that Black men have low IQ's. The mere fact that you are reading that magazine pretty much indicts you as a racist.OneViewHere 22:35, 1 February 2006 (UTC)

Your criticism is scientifically impertinent.There are three groups of your "strategies " up to now: 1.insults ( "fucking phooney " (!)to Mr.Phil)2.diversion to other even more controversial matters impertinent to the discussion 3. impertinent connections of holocaust denial etc. to us to present us as impersonified Nazi satans (me)or neo-Nazis (Mr.Phil)("Totschlagsargument",Martin Walser).As I said before, I did more against the holocaust than any single person else (Himmler letter 1938).80.138.193.56 23:10, 1 February 2006 (UTC)

I asked you a very simple question earlier, which you did not answer. Why did you claim earlier that "Jews are trying to control Wikipedia"? Did you not make that statement? Do you still stand by it? OneViewHere 23:12, 1 February 2006 (UTC)

There are three groups of your "strategies " up to now: 1.insults ( "fucking phooney " (!)to Mr.Phil)2.diversion to other even more controversial matters impertinent to the discussion 3. impertinent connections of holocaust denial etc. to us to present us as impersonified Nazi satans (me)or neo-Nazis (Mr.Phil)("German bashing","Totschlagsargument",Martin Walser).As I said before, I did more against the holocaust than any single person else (Himmler letter 1938).80.138.193.56 23:10, 1 February 2006 (UTC).Is this not enough proof of benevolence ? My building a new Shangri-La in the wikipedia is totally independent from your actions ("Don't feed the trolls", a giant underestimation of the progress to come in the next weeks and months. You cannot block free speech.One exceptional person can dominate the whole English wikipedia for the sake of the welfare of all sincere people.80.138.193.56 23:21, 1 February 2006 (UTC)