Female Asian bloggers

This has the potential to be an emotionally charged post, so I’ll need to measure every phrase carefully to keep from stepping on the third rail or scattered landmines.

I’m going out on a limb and writing this based on two recent incidents in our regional blogosphere:

1. Over at Glutter, Yan has posted an extraordinary post requesting (demanding?) that HK bloggers remove her from their blogrolls. This was the result of a very heated debate in her comments over her suggestion that some HK bloggers might be homophobic.

2. The newly discovered Chinese blogger Hailey Xie wrote a post on Taiwan a few days ago, that also generated some very spirited comments from the foreign blog community; I was going to post a comment of my own last night, but when I went over to her site, I saw that the post had been deleted. And that’s a bad sign.

In both cases, there was a pattern. A bright young female Asian blogger expressed her honest feelings about a controversial issue, and was “attacked” (or at least criticized) by an army of bright older, mostly male foreign bloggers. Each of their posts generated heated threads of comments which, in the end, resulted in extreme action, ending the comments and denouncing the HK bloggers (Yan) and deleting the entire post and its comments (Hailey).

Both of these reactions saddened me because I think both of them are terrific bloggers and they obviously both went through some pain in this process. It also sadened me bacause I think they both made the wrong decision. Putting myself in their shoes, I completely understand why they did it; still, I wish they hadn’t.

If you read the comments to Yan’s post, you’ll see they get pretty intense. To a degree, as some commenters pointed out, Yan set herself up for this by having her own racial stereotyping on her site, referring to some HK blogs as “The Sick World of White Men with Asian Fetish who has the Pleasure to live in Asia and the Dumb Women who Date them.” So, with some justification, some criticized her for living in a glass house and recklessly throwing stones.

Hailey Xie in her post on Taiwan expressed wonder at the fact that Taiwan is so strenuously resisting unification with the PRC. What Hailey wrote was completely in line with what many in the PRC believe. It is simply inconceivable and amazing that Taiwan would not welcome reunification. The commenters, equally amazed, asked why a country with free elections, a true free-market economy and a high regard for human rights would want to be subsumed into a country that offers none of those things.

(This was strikingly similar to an interaction I had with a young Chinese blogger last year on Tibet, which she said was now modernized and liberated and free of an oppressive theocracy where most lived as serfs. I printed her entire email in that post, which blew me away. But living in Beijing, I was to learn that this belief is totally status quo, and I strongly recommend you not get drawn into an argument about it; you won’t win.)

Anyway, I have a point here, somewhere, but it may be challenging to articulate without sounding racist on one end and patronizing on the other.

So here comes the controversial suggestion: Maybe we Western bloggers, who were brought up in a way very different from those in our host countries, should exercise a little more cultural sensitivity. This applies especially to the PRC, where the sort of aggressive challenging we do with one another might not be understood by the local blogger.

I know that sounds patronizing, but I’m not sure how else to say it. Shouting at each other the way we Western bloggers do, with aggressive assertiveness, sometimes is simply difficult for the young Asian blogger to digest and process.

At the risk of sounding racist, I tend to put on a gentler tone with these bloggers. There are so few young Asian bloggers writing in English about political and social issues, and I want to encourage them, not intimidate them. Even if they are wrong, maybe we should try to let them know in a way that won’t injure their pride. A double standard? Yes. But we all know that communicating with a native Chinese person is not the same as communicating with a native New Yorker. This is true in international negotiations as well as in blog comments.

So to summarize: I think that in both cases, the comments made by the Westerners were shrewder and more likely to hold up in court. I just think it’s a shame that in both cases it resulted in the blogger in question shutting down, getting hurt and most likely feeling she had been overwhelmed with criticism.

The real shame is that while I absolutely do not agree with Hailey’s view of Taiwan, she offers us a fantastic (unprecedented?) opportunity to see such situations from the eyes of a bright, sensitive Chinese citizen. In English. It would be a real loss if she now decides to avoid such topics, fearing a repeat of yesterday’s full-frontal assault (at least in her eyes).

So can we all just get along? If our regional blog community doesn’t have voices like Hailey’s and Yan’s, it runs the risk of getting mighty dull mighty fast.

The Discussion: 34 Comments


I disagree, at least in the case of Yan. I agree she is a great blogger and refreshing voice in the HK blogging world. But following the comments thread of the post, the rhetoric ratcheted up equally on both sides of the debate. At any point either side could have backed away but neither did. I don’t think that makes it right, but if you are going to swim with sharks you have to be prepared to get bitten sometimes. I don’t think Yan is above blame for some, but perhaps not all, of what happened.

I would hate to think that double standards should apply to local and/or female bloggers. That said I agree that those of us from “Western” backgrounds need to be sensitive to cultural sensibilities too.

Finally I agree we should all “get along” at least to the extent that we should be grown up enough to agree to disagree and respect each other.

November 25, 2003 @ 2:42 pm | Comment

While I agree with your main point about Yan that both sides pushed the levers, I thought there was a slight (but significant enough) bit of excess in the way we reacted to her. It might not have escalated if, instead of challenging her so bluntly, some of us simply decided to let it go or at least not hammer away at her.

I hope this doesn’t become a question of who was right or wrong or who drew first blood. I am making a much more general point about how we need to put ourselves in their mindset for a moment before we blast away.

November 25, 2003 @ 3:00 pm | Comment

Sorry. But I don’t think I was “wrong,” Richard.

I never wanted to swim with sharks. You linked me.

I never got personal during the debate. They did. That’s my biggest objection to this whole thing.

I don’t think you guys get it. There are lot of different kinds of blogs. Mine is PERSONAL, I may talk politics because I care about that, but I am not a political site. It’s mine diary. Kind of like what you get at blogspot. Just that I write better.

But you guys can carry on talking about it all you want. I am talking about my favorite albums now.


November 25, 2003 @ 3:35 pm | Comment

That is such bullshit Yan.

If you want a personal diary, either get yourself a pen and a notebook or password protect your site. When you put it on the interenet it is public.

When you use your public site to accuse others of bigotry, you had better by-God be prepared to defend yourself. And, if your not equiped or prepared to do that then, as I said yeterday, keep your mouth shut.

You publically called me a homophobe yesterday Yan — your “not that there’s anything wrong with it” quote came directly from my blog. Where ever you got the idea that you are permitted to insult and accuse others but are immune from like treatment, I can’t imagine. But if you’re going to attack me on the internet, I’m gonna disabuse you of that illusion real damned fast.

You’ve been posting idiotic offensive sterotypes on your site for a while now. It’s about time someone called you on it. It’s just an added extra bonus that you made an ass of yourself in the process.

And no, Richard, as you can see, I’m not taking your well-meaning advice. But then, you’ve gotta know me well enough by now to have figured that I wouldn’t.

November 25, 2003 @ 4:19 pm | Comment

Well, I said I was going out on a limb with this and I didn’t expect everyone’s agreement. And I didn’t think my post was going to turn Conrad from a lion into a lamb (it didn’t).

So all I can hope for is that my general point came across, that sometimes we’d do well to stop for a second and take into account the culture and mindset of those with whom we’re sparring. Whether they are right or wrong is irrelevant.

November 25, 2003 @ 5:04 pm | Comment

I stand ready to be “Fisked” by anyone who wants to (and have been a few times). I’ve seen other bloggers criticize you, and you didn’t run off and cry. It’s part of the game.

The debate in your comments can get vigorous, and have you seen mine lately? We deal with it.

Yan, on the other hand, has been dishing out offense, left and right, since I discovered her largely unread blog. But when a little of it comes back at her — in her own comments section, over which she has full control — she starts blubbering like a spoilt child.

I’ve got no respect whatsoever for a blogger that can’t take the slings and arrows of spirited debate, much less for one so pathetic, she can’t even exercise control over her own sites comments.

Absolutely pathetic. If it were me, I’d quit blogging out of sheer embarrassment.

November 25, 2003 @ 5:18 pm | Comment


Feel free to delete all my comments from this thread, if you like, without risk of offending me. It dawns on me that I’m hijacking your site for my own purposes — in this case to provoke Yan. Which, despite the fact its fun, isn’t fair to you.

November 25, 2003 @ 5:41 pm | Comment

It’s okay; Yan understands that once you’re swimming with the sharks anyone and everyone is fair game. I do think, however, that we now know where everyone stands so there’s not much point in continuing the debate about her thread. It’s not going to take us anyplace new.

I still hope, at least in regard to Hailey, that you got my main point, i.e., that there are times when we might be wise to tone down our usual colorful styles. Hailey didn’t criticize anyone (in case you missed the now-deleted post) but simply stated her feelings about Taiwan. It would make me feel sick that after introducing her to the blog community, I set her up to be pounced upon…. Know what I mean?

November 25, 2003 @ 5:52 pm | Comment

I agree with your point Richard but I certainly agree with Conrad too. If I had been accused of the same I too would be looking to defend myself. In this case it’s kind of hard because the charges are broad and the proof flimsy. If Yan wants a private site that’s all her perogative, but in the meantime acusing others means there’s likely to be blowback. That applies regardless of cultural background.

Yan has virtually admitted she made a mistake but probably hasn’t made it too clear. Hopefully the SCMP will come up with something stupid enough to distract everyone from this, but in the meantime it feels like this hasn’t got closure. (that’s another for the Seinfeld fans)

November 25, 2003 @ 6:17 pm | Comment

This is a tough one. I felt I had every right to respond to Yan’s post. She did make it in public and and she did blurt out the stereotypes which I have every right not to ignore. If I made the same mistake I would expect to get hammered and like Conrad have been more than once. I have been wrong and corrected more than once and I never delete or close except in one case where I discovered someone was using my comments in an act of defamation and I had no choice but to delete.

Were we hard on Yan? Perhaps. Comments made elsewhere about her family background were absolutely wrong but she caused much of this herself, sadly.

I agree btw, I think she is one of the most potentially capable bloggers in these parts.

She made public statements and people responded. Yan is no shy chinese girl. It is not for me to reveal what I know of her upbringing but she is not comparable to Hailey in this regard.

I might be tempted to agree with you on Hailey but not with Yan. Nevertheless, it is Yan’s site and if she wants something to stop then she can pull the plug.

SHe must learn however, that if she publishes something outside of a password restricted area about other people they absolutely have the right to reply. If she cannot accept that she must not write anything in the public domain about anyone.

She is most certainly not immune from accusations of libel or slander.

November 25, 2003 @ 6:17 pm | Comment

Richard, I take your point, to an extent, regarding Hailey. Like you, I considered responding to her Taiwan post and thought better of it. She’s so obviously a sheltered child that Fisking her would be like beating a puppy.

However, it’s entirely possible that the strident offense taken to her Taiwan post was actually good for her and made her at least think about the nationalist propaganda she was repeating.

This Yan person is no sheltered child. She started the fight. Nevertheless I stayed out of it right up until she made the asinine demand to remove her from blogrolls, at which point I couldn’t resist.

Okay, and also, I was drunk (you’ll note that my comment came at 2:45 AM, and I’d just returned from LKF).

The bottom line is, she’s been spoiling for a fight for a while. She finally got one. She got her ass kicked. Boo hoo, she doesn’t like it. Tough.

November 25, 2003 @ 6:46 pm | Comment

I hope I wasn’t a part of the community that took Hailey to task. I thought my post was pretty tame. I discussed the issue under her terms. I did not get personal in the least.

Apparently what happened, is that people emailed her that said some pretty negative things. I wonder how much is that my fault.

Another thing we have to remember as bloggers is that mainland Chinese can theoretically get in trouble for interacting with us in discussions of a political nature. We have a right and even a duty to shield them as much as they can.

I feel that if we can support their writings on other subjects in the hope that one day the situation will have improved. Then imagine the dialogue.

November 25, 2003 @ 6:53 pm | Comment

I think your metaphor for fisking Hailey is exactly right, Conrad. I just visited Adam’s posts where he kind of does that, with all good intentions. He also expresses his disappointment with her deleting the post, to which she replies in Adam’s comments:

I’m sorry about this deleting. I appreciate all the comments on my blog. I know all the comments are “levelheaded”. But I don’t want my blog to be packed with political thoughts,(even though it is me that started that discussion. I’m sorry) and I don’t want my blog to be targeted by some guys out there. If you are interested in Chinese politics, I’m sorry that I may avoid talking about it from now. Anyway, thanks for you reading.

I find this really sad. We so rarely have a bird’s eye view of the native mainlander’s perspective on politics, so I see this as a real loss. So again, I’m hoping we can learn something from this episode. I feel quite bad that I introduced Hailey to our world last week, and now she feels wary of it. It’s too bad.

November 25, 2003 @ 6:57 pm | Comment

Hi richard

You don’t have to feel “set me up to be pounced upon” or anything. I don’t think different views on my blog is a bad thing but I can’t stand insults or intense critics. I still appreciate your introducing me to the blog community. I certainly want to get along and have a stop on this.

November 25, 2003 @ 6:58 pm | Comment

Adam our respective comments just crossed. I know you weren’t trying to be hard at all on Hailey. I think it was a whole set of factors (mostly generated by our community, I’m afraid) that put a bit too much pressure on her….

November 25, 2003 @ 7:00 pm | Comment

And Hailey, please do not feel threatened. Every single comment has been very supportive of you. The issue is not about you in particular, but how we can communicate with those from other cultures in a way that does not make them feel insulted or under intense pressure.

November 25, 2003 @ 7:03 pm | Comment

I think the two issues are completely different. I didn’t get involved in Yan’s site because it struck me as completely personal whereas Hailey’s Taiwan post was a rare political post from a native Mainland Chinese blogger. I agree w/ your post here, Richard, as well as the sentiments expressed in the comments by others, we shouldn’t set out to “fisk” any Chinese blogger who goes into new [political] territory on their blog, but obviously the standard’s different for personal attacks, if that’s what really was going on over at Yan’s site.”

A good lesson of sorts I suppose for international relations as well as public domain, libel, etc. Glad you’re promoting rational behaviour, Richard.

November 25, 2003 @ 10:49 pm | Comment

it’s really sad. talking about politicals against the chinese government (click), you could get locked up by the government. talking for the government, you get bombarded by foreign debater attacks. what you expect her to do? what encourages talking about politics in china? i can’t really find anything unless you are a freak who wish to risk your life for it.

November 26, 2003 @ 6:09 am | Comment

Dodo has a point. I’m not sure encouraging Hailey to post on political issues is in her best interests. The risk is real, just look at the “Stainless Steel Mouse”.

November 26, 2003 @ 10:01 am | Comment

But wait a second Conrad. Hailey’s post on Taiwan was totally in line with the government’s! I am not in any way saying she should put herself at risk and challenge the CCP. No way. I thought the value of it was that she was giving us insight into the way people in the PRC see things, and that is something we don’t often see. Just like the Chinese girl who wrote to me about Tibet. I don’t agree with her, but it opened my eyes to a whole new fact of life: the “Truth” that al o f us Westerners know about Tibet is very different from the “Truth” that Chinese people know abou tit. And this is a great way for us to find out how they see it. Maybe we can learn something from them, or at least beter understand how they perceive the world.

November 26, 2003 @ 10:20 am | Comment

One of the reasons I think debate on matters close to Chinese peoples hearts (Tibet, Taiwan etc) often gets nowhere, is that both sides tend to be speaking from a position of ignorance. For example, in Hailey’s posting, there were a lot of people slamming her opinions who didn’t really have much of a clue about Taiwan’s history, or the basis of Chinese claims to the island. I would compare it to a Christian and an atheist having a debate. It will never get anywhere, because neither side really understands the other’s point of view … at least not usually. Now, in my case, I’m an atheist who was once an evangelising Christian … and I find that debating Christians on their own terms (OK, let’s look at what the bible actually says about that particular issue shall we?) is a lot more effective than an argument based upon rationalism, etc. The same applies to China. I find that unless you know a fair bit of Chinese history, any discussion on these issues will go nowhere. If you can take on the issues as they are presented in China (historic proofs of Chinese ownership, etc) then you’ll get a lot further in discussions. I don’t claim that I’ve persuaded many people to change their minds over Taiwan or any other issue … but I like to think I’ve at least left them thoughtfully considering their position. I’ve only read Hailey’s blog, but I’ll go and check out Yan’s now, since it sounds like it could be interesting. Hailey’s reaction kind of reminded me of my own days as a young Christian … arguing strongly for my Christian beliefs, and feeling quite upset when I couldn’t succeed in overcoming someone else’s argument. I guess you could say it planted a seed of doubt into my mind which eventually bore fruit.

November 26, 2003 @ 1:24 pm | Comment

Li En, you are exactly right. And each side is sooooo amazed that the other can’t see the obvious Truth. It is hard to the point of impossible for a Westerner to view the invasion of Tibet as anything like a “liberation.” It as only through my email conversation with a Chinese reader that i got to learn how Chinese see it. (I still don’t see it as a liberation, but at least I no longer believe in the romanticized myths so many Americans have of Tibet being some kind of enchanted Shangri-La.)

November 26, 2003 @ 2:54 pm | Comment

First off, let me say that I think this is so cute. The China blogger community has finally gotten large and diverse enough to have its own nasty squabbles, vicious rumors and hurt feelings. Hooray!

Secondly, at the risk of being flamed to cinders, let me state that I think Li En is exactly wrong. This idea that both sides are equally ignorant is a position taken by the weaker side to deny that it’s position has less validity than that taken by the more educated crowd. Now, I’m not siding wither either side of the Taiwan argument here. But I don’t think the issue is muddy because both sides are ignorant; there was plenty of intelligent conversation from both sides of the argument. And I disagree with his implication that if we were all better educated on Taiwan, we could find a suitable ending for this argument. It’s precisely this intelligence that makes us aware that the issue is not at all black and white, and that the only agreement we could reach is to disagree.

Also, let me address the stereotypes that Richard brings up. Not all Americans are dumb. Many of the world’s most reknowned universities are in the United States. These universities are host to professors and students that are very intelligent, and also are disproportionately represented online. The Americans who think Tibet is a Wonderland either died before the Watergate scandal (where Americans learned to distrust the government), or are out cleaning their gun racks and marrying their cousins. Please give them more credit, and don’t make sweeping generalizations about the nature of ideas held by Americans.

That said, the Chinese don’t have some sort of mysical, Oriental advantage over foreigners when it comes to the facts about modern Chinese history. Or even an objective advantage; the history courses that students in China take are heavily tainted by ideology, and frequently misrepresent or ignore certain facts. You hear how certain Chinese people crow about Japanese textbooks nowadays? I imagine the Tibetans will someday do the same regarding Chinese textbooks. Go back and re-read the Taiwan threads (say, on Brainysmurf’s site) and you’ll find that the more informed comments on both sides of the argument tend to be from Westerners. I sincerely hope that (and look forward to the day when) the Chinese education system will address its shortcomings so that more Chinese people can play a constructive role in the world — but until they remove these ideological blinders, they are relegating their citizens to a default second fiddle.

November 26, 2003 @ 9:52 pm | Comment

There’s some truth to what you say Micah, but I recommend caution when it comes to the blanket generalitites. I promise, there are some extremely well educated Americans who still believe in the myth of Tibet as some sort of mythological shining city in the mountains where loving Buddhist monks lived a life of serenity until the bad Chinese came. The Dalai Lama himself has perpetuated this myth, whether he meant to or not, and if you don’t do your homework on the subject it’s easy to be sucked in by the media hype.

You’re obviously very smart and a keen observer, so I am at a loss as to why you started your comment on such a condescending and provocative note (“First off, let me say that I think this is so cute. The China blogger community has finally gotten large and diverse enough to have its own nasty squabbles, vicious rumors and hurt feelings. Hooray!”) Not really the best way to establish credibility, let alone win friends and influence people. Regardless, welcome to the party.

Last point:
About Li En being so “wrong” — I disagree. It’s not a matter of each side being equally ignorant or informed. It’s about how our Truths are dictated to us, often at an early age, and about how difficult it is to divorce ourselves from these Truths, even if they are proven untrue by rigorous examination of the facts. People resist these facts when they go against their belief systems. I found this out when I debated the subject of Tibet with a very bright young Chinese girl last year. I can honestly say that, despite a good education and two degrees, I had some very fundamental misconceptions about Tibet.

November 26, 2003 @ 10:08 pm | Comment

You’re right, it was pretty petty of me to start off that way. It’s just hard to see such a dynamic and forward-thinking community bogged down in these debates.

And you’re right that there are many bright Chinese who have a clear-headed, but very different opinion on these issues. I just wish more of them would get online so we could have a more balanced discussion… or maybe this is a call for me to be more diligent in practicing my Chinese.

Regardless, I want to emphasize that I greatly appreciate the chance to exchange ideas with mainland Chinese bloggers, and that I support 100% your point showing cultural sensitivity to bloggers on the other side of the cultural divide (and to those in the middle).

November 26, 2003 @ 11:31 pm | Comment

Well, I think I deserve a right of reply, so here it is Micah. Despite the fact that you’re obviously a bright person, your post demonstrates you to be guilty of one of the things I was complaining about. You have failed to understand (or read carefully) what I actually said, and instead you have criticised views which I never stated, nor in fact believe. If you don’t understand the other person’s point of view, you have zero chance of meaningful dialogue. Perhaps you jumped to conclusions because I have a Chinese name? If you have this trouble with a single straightforward text on a blog, no wonder you have difficulty with complex issues related to Tibet and Taiwan. With regards to that portion of your argument, I will say no more, other than to suggest you go back and read what I said. As Confucius said in the Analects“I will hold up one corner of a square, and if the student cannot come back with the other three sides, then I will not go over it again.”

Now, on to your other points. I agree with you that Chinese understanding of history is generally pretty terrible. This is precisely the reason why it is important to argue from a position of knowledge. You need to know what they believe, and why they believe it, and then you can go about refuting those arguments. The problem with most of the postings I saw from Westerners regarding the Taiwan issue is that they were arguing at cross-purposes to the Chinese beliefs. To a Chinese, questions about democracy and economic prosperity etc., are of no relevance whatsoever in the independence/reunification debate. Do you think that a mother cares about what political beliefs her children have? She just wants them to come home. She’s never going to give up her claims to her kids. On the other hand, if you can say “are you sure those are actually your kids?” that’s going to make her stop and ask, “what do you mean?” If you can show that the whole mother-child analogy is actually a false one, and that if anything they are more like estranged brothers, that’s going to be a lot more valuable. However, in order to do this, you have to know Chinese history as well or better than they do. As I said before … if you are going to argue a point with a Chinese, you must first understand his/her point of view. When a Chinese person says “history proves that Taiwan belongs to China” you better be able to prove that Chinese history doesn’t prove any such thing before you start complaining about people with weaker arguments … and Western arguments that don’t do this are missing the point. Of course, if you just want to pontificate about your own opinion and don’t care if you have any effect on people from an opposing point of view, then carry on as you do. However, if you have some desire to actually persuade people … then I suggest you spend less time criticising me, and more time studying Chinese history, listening to what Chinese people think, and trying to understand why they think it.

November 27, 2003 @ 8:20 am | Comment

Oh, I’d like to cite an historical precedent to go with my earlier comments. Why do you think the Jesuits did so well in breaking into the closed shop of court politics in the 17th Century? It’s because they showed themselves knowledgeable in issues that the Chinese cared about. The successful prediction of an eclipse was especially useful. Even more than this, they could cite the Chinese classics with the best of the Confucian gentry. Matteo Ricci astounded them by being able to recite the classics from memory, not only forwards but backwards! Well, we can’t all be geniuses like him, but I hope you get the point.

November 27, 2003 @ 8:31 am | Comment

Replies are always welcome, Li En. On a second reading of your original post, I can see where your point is, and how my own post was a good example of the single-mindedness you were pointing out. I think the reason some people spend so much time “pontificating” on their own points is because they don’t understand what you are saying, that their argument is totally orthogonal to the Chinese reasoning and so completely fails to convince. And that’s why these arguments go on for so long, because both Chinese and Westerners are aiming at the wrong targets.

I think that what I wrote is still true, but I see now how it is one-sided and not very useful. Please have patience with me, I’m still learning how to think about this stuff. Your explanation helped a lot.

November 27, 2003 @ 11:16 am | Comment

Micah … what a reply! I regret the really condescending tone of my own replies to your posting, and hope you’ll forgive me for that. It’s a disease I suffer from as a result of too much time in the classroom. I must say that I’m most impressed that instead of being defensive (by far the most common reaction in any kind of debate/argument) you took it as a learning experience. I’d say that you would probably be one of the people who can successfully debate matters with Chinese. One of the things I’ve noticed again and again with many asians (not just Chinese either) is an expectation that white people don’t respect them. There’s a feeling that westerners still have that old colonial mentality towards asians. If you see it from that point of view, it’s no wonder they respond with hostility and stubborness when they feel they are being lectured to about how they should behave. By contrast, if you can successfully overcome this initial wariness, you’ll often find them quite open to what you have to say, though of course it doesn’t mean they’ll agree with you. I found it surprising that some of the postings said that they can never get Chinese to talk about politics … I shouldn’t be prejudging them, but can’t help feeling that it might have something to do with what I’ve just said.

November 27, 2003 @ 11:50 am | Comment

Micah, Li En — thanks for coming to terms with this so beautifully.

November 27, 2003 @ 2:55 pm | Comment

hello, hypocrite

You know what’s ironic? We have the same players that voted me off the island last week for responding to a post I considered to be bigoted and an example of cultural snobbery now criticising another blogger’s opinion as, in…

November 30, 2003 @ 9:21 pm | Comment

Capturing China: 2003-12-19

DEC 19/03 TOPICS INCL: PRC and Taiwan give-and-take; Chinese interaction with expat bloggers … The Information Revolution is coming to town … Economic indicators … Asian Weblog Awards … And your one-stop shopping for China-based blog commentary.

December 20, 2003 @ 12:57 am | Comment

Capturing China: 2003-12-19

DEC 19/03 TOPICS INCL: PRC and Taiwan give-and-take; Chinese interaction with expat bloggers … The Information Revolution is coming to town … Economic indicators … Asian Weblog Awards … And your one-stop shopping for China-based blog commentary.

December 20, 2003 @ 1:02 am | Comment

Capturing China: 2003-12-19

DEC 19/03 TOPICS INCL: PRC and Taiwan give-and-take; Chinese interaction with expat bloggers … The Information Revolution is coming to town … Economic indicators … Asian Weblog Awards … And your one-stop shopping for China-based blog commentary.

December 20, 2003 @ 1:05 am | Comment

RSS feed for comments on this post. TrackBack URL

Sorry, the comment form is closed at this time.