eatphotographtravelrepeat:

Pan mee with poached egg and chilli flakes. I miss this so much. - Kin Kin Pan Mee, Malaysia

eatphotographtravelrepeat:

Pan mee with poached egg and chilli flakes. I miss this so much. - Kin Kin Pan Mee, Malaysia

burmanoodlebar:

Our classics - OHNO KAO SWE & KAO SWE THOKE. YUM!!

burmanoodlebar:

Our classics - OHNO KAO SWE & KAO SWE THOKE. YUM!!

vivafilipinas:

Ube Ice CreamPurple Yam Ice Cream 
(taken from darrylmaria)

vivafilipinas:

Ube Ice Cream
Purple Yam Ice Cream 

(taken from darrylmaria)

To My Dear Fellow Singapore Chinese: Shut Up When a Minority is Talking about Race.

People of Chinese descent make up 70% of the population of Singapore. Singapore Chinese, as they are termed, enjoy systemic, racialized and institutional privilege in the country as opposed to the countries’ minorities (primarily racialized as Indian and Malay).

“Chinese privilege”, as Sangeetha Thanapal has named it, functions very similarly to white privilege in the United States and Europe. To use Peggy McClintock’s notion of white privilege and the invisible knapsack, Chinese privilege functions like an “invisible package of unearned assets which I can count on cashing in each day, but about which I was ‘meant’ to remain oblivious. [Chinese] privilege is like an invisible weightless backpack of special provisions, maps, passports, codebooks, visas, clothes, tools and blank checks.” As a Singapore Chinese person, when I am in Singapore, I never need to think twice about whether my race/ethnicity is represented on mainstream media, whether my languages are spoken, whether my religions are allowed to exist, whether I can catch a taxi. All these things are little aspects of Chinese privilege which is very similar to how white privilege functions. You can find out more about the concept of white privilege here.

Despite Chinese privilege in Singapore being very real, there is little or no recognition of this concept within the national public sphere and discussions of race. Attempts by minorities such as Thanapal to name this privilege often receive hostile attack from Singapore Chinese, who employ defensive mechanisms similar to deniers of white privilege—to name privilege is divisive, to name privilege is not a solution, to name privilege is rude, to name privilege is racist. In a stroke of unfunny irony, what happens then is that minorities who call out Chinese racism are then termed racist by their aggressors.

This is very sad because Singapore Chinese themselves often complain how they are victims of racism themselves, particularly when they visit Western countries. They complain about being complimented on their command of English (don’t these people know we were colonized by the English?!), complain about being treated as second-class citizens while abroad. However, they are in complete denial of how they take on the very role of what they claim to be victim of at home. In other words, they complain about racist treatment while overseas while being racist towards minorities in Singapore.

So if you are a Singapore Chinese person—and I am a Singapore Chinese person myself—if someone who is not white or not Chinese starts talking about race, you should really think about doing the following things.

1. Shut up and listen. Because of your privilege, the speaker will be saying a lot of things that are foreign to your experience. But that you don’t think they are “true” doesn’t mean that they are untrue, it’s rather than your privilege shields you from seeing these things.

2. Stop asking them to justify their thoughts and for facts, statistics, data, argument. It’s not the job of marginalized people to educate you. Undertake your own education.

3. Your point of view is not important. If someone is speaking about race in Singapore who is neither white nor Chinese, their stories are not told as frequently as yours. So stop making their narratives about you and what you think. This is not your party.

4. It’s also not up for you to decide whether the person speaking is “right” or “wrong.” That you think your opinion is important is already indicative of how much privilege you have, and how ignorant you are of it.

5. Because you experience racism yourself in other locations, this should not inure you to your own racism at home, but rather, encourage you to have more *empathy* for those who are more marginalized than you are.

6. EDITED TO ADD. If you want to help, next time someone asks you for a perspective on race, ask a minority who studies racial dynamics. That means asking people like Thanapal to speak rather than a Singapore Chinese like me.

eekhor:

#Breakfast #Curry #Noodles #Singapore #Vegetarian (Blk 406 Sembawang Drive, Kopitiam)

eekhor:

#Breakfast #Curry #Noodles #Singapore #Vegetarian (Blk 406 Sembawang Drive, Kopitiam)

vurtual:

YeePeng Festival ChiangMai Thailand (by chattakan kosol)

vurtual:

YeePeng Festival ChiangMai Thailand (by chattakan kosol)

fyeahvpop:

Justatee-crying over you

How Are Different Asian-American Groups Faring Economically?

Anonymous said: North Indian architecture would not really be considered indian. It would be Indo-Persian. Unless it is local Indian architecture in the north before Persians came in, such as Hindi, Buddhist styles in north India. Indo Persian North Indian architecture has nothing to do with indianization in south east Asia as it bore no influence but NATIVE Indian architecture would have significant influence on what you pathetically call "SE Asian" architecture.

allegro-ma-nontroppo:

sahteen:

southeastasianists:

Hello again,

Yeah, I’m not going to discuss Indian architecture, this is a blog about SEA. 

And I really admire the way you keep coming back to this blog to say SEAsian architecture is not a thing and yet I still see no sources from you to backup such claim. 

Bye,

Nat

Anon is just being plain rude. I really dislike the term, “Indianization.” It is so vague and very confusing. Why does the “Indianization” of SE ASIA only include influences from Buddhist and Hindu Indians.  Why is Islamization and Indianization seen as separate processes? While I do not know too much of how Islam arrived in SE ASIA, I think one major way of how Islam spreaded to SE ASIA was by way of Muslim Indian traders from places like Gujarat. 

And one other thought I have : Old scholarly theories on ‘Indianization’ (and even ‘Sinicization’) have always strucked me as being very racist because they imply that SE ASIANS prior to being influenced by people outside of SE Asia were barbarians without any complex culture. We became “civilized” when introduced to Indian and Chinese cultures.

Correct me if I’m wrong Nat, but I think this line of thinking is internalized by some current SE ASIAN cultures. In the countries of Laos, Thailand, and Cambodia there are ethnic and cultural heirarchies that place the “Indianized = those influenced by Hindu and Buddhist Indians” ethnic groups (ethnic Lao, ethnic Thais, Khmer)  on the top and those that are not cultural influenced by India (Hmong, Tai Dam, Khmuu…ect) on the bottom. This heirarchy is reinforced by the idea that non-Indianized groups are at the bottom because their cultures are not civilized. 

I think that’s why anon’s comments really rub me the wrong way. Anon’s comments come from a long racist history of western academic scholarship that painted SE Asians as lazy and unambitious, unlike the Chinese and Indians. And I really think SE Asians internalize this idea too which can have very unfortunate consequences as I mentioned in the previous paragraph. 

-Keep up the good work Nat. :-)

Hello sahteen,

Thank you so very much for your input, because this is exactly what I was hoping to get out from this debate. Thank you for bringing this up.

So Indianization, Islamization and Sinicization are all terms I would deem as imperialist and racist. However, let me point out the subtleties within these terms.

SEA, as a region, has always been very receptive to other cultures for a very long time. Indianization was a “thing” between 200 B.C. and the XV century. However, this influence was “localized”. It was adapted and adopted by the locals. Sinicization came about as a result of the Chinese occupation of Viet Nam…not very “localized”, more like forced upon, because it was an invasion (111 B.C.- X century). And Islamization…well, it happened mostly thanks to trade and sufism…again, it was not a mindless process. But it happened.

In short, we have three processes: Indianization, Sinicization and Islamization, which took place approximately around different times (not simultaneous) and which - as of today - still count as major influences on SEA.

ETA= TBC…

Anonymous said: You should be open to discussing Indian architecture since it's the entire basis for SE architecture as it is utterly influenced by it, if not practically the same thing. That would be like saying architecture in North America isn't European.

I’ve acknowledged several times throughout this exchange the influence of India in SEAsian architecture. I don’t think I need to engage in a discussion regarding this topic with a person who is incapable of providing facts and reliable sources.

Nah, you don’t get to tell me how to run my blog.

Nat

- a blog for Southeast Asians, individuals of Southeast Asian descent and also those who love and study Southeast Asia

- created by Nat, a Chilean and Indian Singaporean, on November 18, 2012

- for reblogged posts, please check the posts' tags for additional information, such as full names of people, places, etc.

- content warnings tagged with "[thing] cw" (send a message if you want something else tagged) (✽)