Discuss this topic

Moving out

 - the voice of Li'l Polar Bear

Parents of a Banana:
"They're only 25 and they want to move out!"

Parents of a non-Banana:
"They're already 25 and they're *still* living at home!"

Birds of a Feather . . .

 - the voice of Fervidus Humanus

I spent many hours thinking about this question, realizing that bananas, like any other cultural group, cannot be categorized so generally. In the end, I've decided to go through some of the more straightforward differences within my circle of friends. I don't imagine there will be anything particularly shocking here.

Bananas tend to gather together, and stick with other bananas. Presumably, this is because of some similarity of nature, interests, or just because we're all yellow on the outside, and it would look more normal to others. This perception sometimes drives bolder bananas to seek out and approach non-bananas, often for no reason other than to prove: "See, people? I'm cool enough to have non-banana friends, too. So there!" Bananas tend to act more naturally and comfortably amongst other bananas, than in front of non-bananas, projecting an image that is sometimes more false than truth. For some reason, we are more intimidated by non-bananas. Likely, this behaviour stems from our Asian upbringing; Asians tend to be more conservative, and generally treat strangers with respect and dislike causing arguments and conflict. And this makes us bananas slightly more cautious around non-bananas. We tend to not express our views too vigorously or say anything that might be construed as argumentative or negative. I am able to connect better with my banana friends, and talk about banana issues in far greater detail, which is something that I can rarely do with non-bananas.

My non-banana friends tend to be slightly less concerned with cultural clash, but maybe that's because I don't talk to them about it. It doesn't come up because I assume that there wouldn't be much to talk about, having come from different backgrounds. They bring their own set of interests, but somehow, I usually feel less close to them, simply because of our racial and cultural differences. They are usually more independent and tend to hang around with other bananas, aside from our group. This shows (at worst) tolerance or (at best) amicability to bananas. And some of my non-banana friends like to hang around others of their kind: fobs with other fobs, whites with other whites, oreos with other oreos. And those people usually have their own alpha groups before hanging out with me/my group, so they already have their niche.

Given the choice between a Banana and a non-Banana, I'd likely approach the banana. This cultural difference may not occur to some people, but it occurs to me, and I consciously take it into consideration during social functions. That's why most of my friends are bananas.

All friends are created equal, but some are created as Bananas

 - the voice of Pi

All of my friends are different. They all have some qualities that make them unique. The problem arises when grouping the similarities between my friends. As much as it should be that Banana and non-Banana friends are equal, they are not. That's not to say I value the friendship of my Banana friends more than my non-Banana friends or vice versa, but rather my Banana friends share traits that are not shared with my non-Banana friends.

Let's start with the similarities. I met many of my non-Banana friends in my program in university, so the fact that we're all engineers isn't that surprising. What is surprising is that a large majority of my Banana friends are also engineers when my route to meeting them was not related to engineering at all. So in general, we're all engineers so we have a certain type of geekiness associated with us, not much of a deviation from one of the protoypical images of Chinese students.

I've noticed that despite the stigma of geekiness, my Banana friends try very hard to break out of that image. They listen to cool music, appreciate literature, art, and architecture. Perhaps it's an attempt move away from the geeky Asian stereotype to the Asian hipster stereotype. I myself am guilty of this. Although some of my non-Banana friends are also like this, I would say that most of them are either amblivious to the fact that they are geeks or they don't care that they are.

And now personal problems. I find the parental relationship to be most interesting. This topic has been previously discussed on Banana Blog, but I will reiterate some of the key points. Banana children have a Western sense of independence, yet have the traditional sense of duty. This creates a conflict and many of us have difficulties dealing with it. For the non-Bananas, the parents simply kick their kids out of the house when they are old enough to support themselves and there isn't that sense of filial duty. It's a big problem, and only a fellow Banana will understand the pains.

I could give more examples, but I think I've touched upon the basic similarities and differences to illustrate my point.

Viva the WMAF bias

 - the voice of angeline

Matt Ridley and the WMAF thing. I've just finished reading a book called "Red Queen" by Matt Ridley. The book is about human evolution and sex/sexual preferences. The book poses/rehashes a couple of interesting theories about our preferences in sexual partners. The basic premise (nothing new, see Dawkins, Gould, et al.) is that living things exist as a byproduct of our genes wanting to propagate themselves. Not surprisingly, the genes that each of us carry have survived millennia because they cause us to act in a way (collectively speaking) that ensures their reproduction and thus survival. So ... how does this apply to the WMAF thing?

Take sexual selection of genes. When a majority of humans decide that a particular human form is pleasing as part of some random cultural shift, e.g., blondes as opposed to brunettes, then sexual selection ensures the continuation of that shift because we all "want" what is popular. Because if we don't want sexual partners with the traits that are popular or desired by others, our children will not inherit those desirable traits and have fewer chances, in turn, of being desirable. Some theorize that this drive to have what is perceived is desirable is part of our genetic makeup, because those who don't have this drive have failed to reproduce themselves.

WMAF. Asians living in the West live in a society where Caucasians have typically been at the top of the food chain and being other than Caucasian was an automatic minus. Doesn't take a rocket scientist to figure that our common human genetic makeup drives us to seek a way to make our genes replicate by seeking a "better" partner. In this society, Caucasian = better partner, hence Asians will probably have a tendency to want to have Caucasian sexual partners over non-Caucasian sexual partners.

Yes, but this still doesn't explain the WMAF bias. Well, Matt Ridley also explains that in social hierarchies, females tend to move up the food chain faster because higher-ranking males usurp the females in such a society. Viva the WMAF bias.

Two Sided

 - the voice of banana_appeal

I value all my Banana and non-banana friends equally. They help me express different parts of myself.

Around my non banana friends I can behave and act like there are absolutely no differences between us. And around my banana friends, I can be as politically incorrect as I want, ranting and railing against the minor injustices done to Canadian born Chineses, and asians in general.

It's not so different from joining various clubs because of diverse interests. It just means that by virtue of racial circumstance we all belong to the same club.

Not to say that non chinese can't be part of this "Banana" Club. There are alot of people of cultures out there that share similar and frustrations with CBCs. They can be Canadian born East Indians. Or Canadian born Japanese. Or Canadian born Koreans.

I see us CBCs as a branch of a larger club of 2nd generation (or higher) immigrants/ and their children.

And this also doesn't mean just because you're a canadian born chinese you will automatically identify with this group. I know of many CBC's who don't feel part of the "banana" club. Partly because they feel comfortable with their double identity and partly because they're not as active in identifying with it. Or maybe they only have Asian friends.

We are each unique and it can be lonely. Because of that we usually want to find others who are like us, empathize, understand without explanations. And with the proliferation of WMAF couples and hopefully soon to be AMWF couples, their offsprings will also feel isolated as well due to their unique upbringing.

Before long, Banana-ness will not be such a big deal. Soon we'll have "mixed heritage" websites and groups out there for support to this flegdling group. There is already to a small extent. There just isn't a critical mass yet. And hopefully their Banana (and other) forebears will have helped in mapping out some of the difficulties already for them. Where "Bananas" are dual identities, and offsprings of mixed couples are dual heritage. In the end we're not all that different.