London-born rapper Sway is to be honoured at the BET Hip-Hop awards in the US...

Everyone needs just chill out about this. It was intended as a spoof, but obviously it went wrong.

I have a collection of Details' "Gay or ..." series dates back from August 2003, when it was first published. Since then groups like "guido", "British", "Magicians", "Democratic Front Runner", "Jesus", and "Preppy" were featured.

http://tian.cc/blog/comments.php?id=P341_0_1_0_C

Hey, my grandfather did have pretty big (not giant) white eyebrows and he lived 94 years to earn them. So there!

I'm not stepping on anyone's toes in regards to cinematic appreciation or homage. Hell, I LIKED Kill Bill Vol. 1...or at least the few here and there minutes I caught when my brother got the DVD. I'll probably even see Vol. 2 this weekend...

All I was trying to do was draw a parallel between the stereotypical images of Asians in Kill Bill and the stereotypical image of Asians in Details. That's it, man. No bigger agenda here. I'm not trying to protest the movie or get people to call it racist or take away the artistry of the movie or anything.

My point, really, was to get Gothamist to explain to me how it could find Details magazine more offensive than Kill Bill. Simply said, it's undeniable that there are stereotypical images of Asians in both, what makes one offensive and the other not? As a person who IS NOT offended by either, what's the qualifier of racism that I'm not seeing or that separates the two?

So, Pilot, I'm not trying to take away your right to love and appreciate Kill Bill or Bruce Lee movies or any of the samurai movies they show on IFC. I was just trying to draw a simple parallel between stereotypical images in two readily available examples in the media...Kill Bill was just the first movie I thought of that had an Asian theme...I could've used "The Last Dragon," but it didn't occur to me at the time....

So chill, have a good weekend, and enjoy Kill Bill Vol. 2.

my grandfather doesnt have giant white eyebrows...do yours?

while im not disagreeing with you on the pervasiveness of stereotypes, i think your extractions of racial stereotypes step over the toes of cinematic appreciation and homage. because if this were the case, then the whole of cinema, eastern and western, could be deemed racial.

Pilot, what's the difference between stock characters and stereotypes? To me, there isn't much of one. The stock characters are just the images ignorant people conjur up in their heads as they stereotype an ethnicity.

Like I said, I'm not offended by the movie and I'm not knocking it either. I'm just trying to bring attention to the fact that Kill Bill's images of Asians are just as sterotypical, and possibly just as hurtful, as Detail magazine's image of the "Gay or Asian" man. Sure, one has derivations in cinematic history and the other is taken off the street, but a stereotype is a stereotype is a stereotype. And all of these stock characters or stereotypes or archetypes or caricatures have shaped and continue to shape people's perception of the Asian culture.

As an Asian woman, I can't tell you how many times I've been fetishized by some ignorant non-Asian guy telling me he likes me b/c of my exotic features, my long black hair, my narrow eyes. I can't count how many times I've been asked if I know kung foo. Or if I wear a kimono when I'm home. It's ridiculous how often I get told, "Wow, you're really outspoken for an Asian girl...aren't you supposed to be all quiet and subservient?" Now, do you think those ignorant men who spit ignorant pick up lines at me got those ideas from nowhere? I don't think so. I'll bet about 85% of their "knowledge" of the Asian culture comes from movies (perhaps Shaw Brother movies?) where stock characters DO know kung-foo and where the women are kimono wearing, silent set-decorations.

So, Pilot, the derivation of the stock characters in Kill Bill really doesn't matter. It should be readily apparent that the repeatedly stereotyped depictions of my culture offend and hurt an inumerable population.

cc473, it should be readily apparent that the depiction of asians in kill bill are stock characters from an inumerable body of shaw brothers productions from hong kong. nothing wrong with some homage to the flying guillotine...dont be knockin' white eyebrows.

doshin-

I would argue in all seriousness, that yes, the details spread does indicate that american culture is racist. That's the whole point - that people accept those stereotypes as truthes. American Studies 101...

Yes, you can read this content as ironic, but are most of the people buying the magazine? I think that's a copout justification to make the details ppl. producing it feel less guilty.

Maybe I'm the only one who finds humor in all this, but isn't it a bit racist to say that 'Asian Culture' is shamelessly racist? I would have preferred it if he hadn't painted with such a large brush. I would hope that everyone be a little more specific to what offends instead of lumping in the myriad of culutes of an entire continent.

Is 'American Culture' racist because Details runs a shamelessly racist spread? Of course not.

While I appreciate Gothamist's views, I can't help but wonder how this site can call Details racist at the same it does happy little jumping jacks that Kill Bill, Vol. 2 is coming out. I'm an Asian-American woman who is NOT offended by the movie or the article, but isn't Kill Bill chock full o'racist stereotypes of beautiful dragon lady, lotus-blossom killers and white-bearded kung foo masters who teach their grasshopper students to murder with the greatest of sly Asian ease? What makes these two portrayals of Asians different, Gothamist? Is it because Gothamist didn't find the Details article entertaining, and your lack of chuckles damned it to the "Unfunny Ethnic Humor = Racist" file? Are the Kill Bill movies not racist because they're "cool"? Why doesn't Gothamist organize protests or show alarm whenever a Lucy Liu movie comes out? 'Cause if anyone is blatantly cashing in on and exploiting HUGE Asian stereotypes, it's her.

Simply said, I'd like to challenge Gothamist to define what it considers to be racist. Because from what I've gathered from this Details magazine issue (and the "Everyone loves an asian girl" issue from a few weeks back), your site seems to condemn things as racist or offensive if it's not witty or cool. But BLATANT Asian stereotypes in the media seem to get a pass if it's all the buzz in your local coffee house.

For the future, I suggest that before you start calling things/people/articles/movies out as RACIST, you should define WHY. Doing so will allow you to EDUCATE the population (or at least level the playing field so everyone knows what you're making a stink about), rather than just putting something out there to show how culturally aware you are.

I'm fascinated by the strength and range of opinions this topic has sparked. Maybe we need to establish a Gothamist discussion group around the topic of ethnic humor (see http://www.google.com/search?sourceid=navclient&ie=UTF-8&oe=UTF-8&q=history+of+ethnic+humor)

And James's point is a legitimate one. I've heard secondhand that particular Asian cultures' depictions of blacks can be very negative.

It's rice!!! It's who pissed in my rice and egg rolls!!!

"I find it all pretty ironic considering how openly and shamelessly racist Asian culture is to this day."

What happened? Did a chinese girl spurn you on the bus when you told her konichiwa?

I'll joking aside...

I'm Asian and while I don't think the spread is funny, I wouldn't protest it. But, I also wouldn't simply say that the protesters should lighten or shut up. That would be pure hypocrisy. You can't say Details has a freedom of speech, but these Asian groups don't.

Tien, the 'Hoboken Chat' is over at (see link above). ROFLMAAO.

"Are Asians some kind of special group that noone can ever crack a joke at the expense of? Gimme a fucking break."

No, those are Jews.

On my way up 5th Ave. to check out the protest, I noticed that the Museum of Sex's next exhibition is called "Among the Lotus: 2500 Years of Chinese Erotic Obsession."

Celebration or abomination? I dunno, but I'm not going to pay the $17 admission fee to find out. Someone else can let me know.

Ziegfeld-

I think a major difference in the gay stereotypes and asian stereotypes is that the asian ones are more hurtful/negative. The stereotype of the "superfag" that is all over the media right now is a huge step up from the murdering sexual predator/mindless sex addict image of gay men that came before it. Most hegemonic stereotypes are distructive, but I think that this has touched a nerve in the asian community because there are so few images of asians in the media. That gives more weight to the images that are produced.

That said, I think it is a valid point to question why gothamist has de-emphasized the gay community's reaction. If anything, the common thred here is that the perception of being gay is something to avoid, which is obviously homophobic. Gay men are used as the final punchline in these comparisons. And ironic, given how many trends start with gay men. I thought Details ran a funny comparison a few years back when it was gay style today/straight style in 5 years.

Jen- any response to that question?

I appreciate gothamist's editorial voice - it is compelling and the reason why gothamist is successful. I've always read gothamist as gay friendly, and the use of fag in the positive, reclaimed, pomo bent, btw.

saltydog, i believe the person that posted that thread, furey, asked for the removal of it. that's my understanding, anyway.

steveo, i'm with you on that. i hate the whole william hung "phenomenon".

This was topic was played out after the infamous Gay or European site, years ago (which used real candid photos of guys on the street, not art-directed stereotypes). That was funny to everyone - straight, gay, even european (love the short shorts!), this is:

A) not funny

B) offensive

C) Beating a horse that died in 1999

So please protest, although I think it's just a ploy for Details staffers to check out hot Asian...guys.

And I'll go a step further.

I hope the editors at Details make like the producers of Terrence & Phillip on South Park and tell the placard wavers, "Hey, go fuck yourselves. Our magazine is selling even better with the controversy. Wave your little placards all you want. We'll be inside counting our money."