by Ramin Mazaheri
I was flying from New York to Silicon Valley on the “Job Creators’ Red Eye”, and I had a chance to catch up on some foreign cultural news from our nation’s paper of record, The New York Times.
There was a very interesting item about the extremely backward practices of Asians regarding romance. This partly-ironic, mostly-pitying article focused on China.
Immediately, my blood ran cold. It had been running hot, as I was just reading the Times’ recap of the misdeeds of Putin towards my millionaire friends running the Democratic party (pages 1-19 of their Section A). But when the page turned to his eastern ally I got as chilly as a crafty Chinese capitalist, which they all are. (How else could we possibly explain that growth rate?)
The reality is that romance is political: I, for example, date identities and not actual people. If you identify with Trump or (American God forbid) Putin, there is no romantic future for us. It’s really quite logical – how can I date someone I refuse to even have a conversation with?
As a romantic, I accept reality. For example: Yes, there are 1 or 2 remnants of communism in China, but capitalism is a culture and not just an economic policy. It’s not enough for us to have McDonald’s all over China; what good is a Big Mac if the Chinese don’t know why they have to incessantly eat them? Where’s the continuous profit growth?
That’s why articles like these are crucial, because we have to get the Chinese to not just eat like Americans, but to view romance like us too.
The best way to produce cultural changes – since there are no targets for our many bullets – is mocking and shame. The New York Times publishes in Chinese, thankfully, and I hope our withering contempt translates well.
Just as we must attack their political leaders, their romance advice columnists must come an attack no less serious! Both are extremely backwards and ignorant, obviously – just look at one of their leading romantic lights, Yang Bingyang:
“A former model, author of nine books and, she says, one of the first Chinese admitted to Mensa…”
Yes, that is the correct Western order: the fact that she is a model is the most impressive. I was surprised there was not a link to any of her pictures because it has been nearly 11 minutes since I saw a woman nearly naked – what is this, Saudi Arabia?
“Our world has been hijacked by political correctness,” Ms. Yang said. “I’m criticized for telling the truth about the differences between men and women.”
The best journalism hangs them with their own words! PC has only liberated us in every way; there are no differences between men and women. When are we going to start using NSA spy capabilities for apprehending anti-PC terrorists who make such offensive declarations in their own homes? I’m sure Hillary would have implemented this already!
She elaborated: “A man’s M.V. (mate value) is determined by his age, height, looks, wealth, I.Q., emotional quotient, sexual capacity and willingness to make a long-term commitment….The eight elements in a woman’s M.V. are her ‘age, looks, height, bra cup size, weight, academic degrees, personality and family background’.”
Frankly, this is abhorrent – I would imagine this will one day be included in our justifications to the UN for humanitarian intervention.
Not only do I not notice colour, ethnicity or gender, but I am far, far above being concerned about a woman’s age. Surprisingly, this created a problem for me when I tried to take that 13-year old Thai girl out of the country. “I don’t see superficialities like age or looks, you bigoted Trumpers,” I screamed at the Thai border police!
But I guess the Chinese really are White in a way – there’s “bra size” instead of “hip size” Still, I can’t have anything truly in common with such a sexist society.
And I thought they had a fetish for tiny feet? It seems they don’t talk about that enough, but I hope they bring back that practice soon – just during work hours in my Chinese factories, of course.
“Don’t have sex for the first few months,” Ms. Yang tells women.
I immediately fell out of my first-class seat laughing at this. In fact, I had to go back to the coach section and tell my work “teammate” Fazlollah, even though I can’t stand him. We all call him “Lefty” because no one can pronounce his name.
“How long do men have to wait to have sex in your country,” I asked Lefty.
Fazlollah straightened up, leaned forward in his seat to not bother the woman in the aisle seat next to him and worriedly whispered, “Is this really the place for such a conversation?”
Those uptight Asianers…so repressed. I hope many of our soldiers are liberating their women around our many army bases.
Fazollah tried to change the subject to Putin’s evilness, but there are some things which are even more important, so I loudly insisted he tell me how long I have to wait for sex when I visit his native country.
“Well, boss, I’m certainly not going to tell you about me and my wife, but I’ll say that most of my friends waited one year before having sex with their fiancees or wives.”
I burst out laughing again!
Lefty added: “But I have a younger friend and he says the newer generation has no patience and can only wait for 6 months.”
My God, Fazlollah’s people really are a bunch of animals. The way they treat their women is just beyond insulting, because we all know women are desirous of immediate sex as men are. So, really, their women are animals too. But the sheer waste of resources – taking her out, buying her food, spending your time – and then not getting anything out of it?!
I went back to my paper, where the Times interviewed a different romantic columnist, named simply Ayawawa.
“Many of Ayawawa’s fans consider her the personification of the success they crave for themselves: attractive, married to a man she describes as a loving husband, the mother of two children.”
Again, attractiveness is what is important for Chinese women – good, they are learning about Western feminism. Given that odd list of craved-for successes, they clearly still have much to learn.
“Chinese schools don’t offer a proper education in love and relationships,” Mr. Lu, a male romantic advice columnist, said in another interview. “People get their ideas mostly from TV dramas.”
I never heard of any American getting their ideas from TV? We’re a free-thinking people, after all. The Asians are just so inscrutable…that’s why we have given up scrutinizing them for any cultural coherence at all and are just going to turn them into Americans.
True, I was taught about sex in school when I was 12 – we took that as a sign that our community wanted us all to start having sex. There’s no stigma attached to 13-year old pregnancies anymore – it’s just the sign of a good student who pays proper attention. But w never did get any sort of real education about relationships – those are personal subjects never to be discussed, like God and my tax returns!
“For women, spending more time with a man deepens her love. But for a man, the longer he stays with a woman, the less he loves her,” Mr. Lu posted this month.
That’s funny: I told the same thing to my 3rd wife. She got very upset, and that’s when I remembered the David Bowie song, “China Girl”.
The chorus to “Little China Girl” goes: “And when I get I excited, my little China girl, says ‘Oh baby, just you shut your mouth.’”
Cheekily, I told that last part to her.
When I woke up in the hospital I asked the doctor if I had been hit in the head with a frying pan. He said I was hit by the phone my wife uses to have our dinner delivered. I really was asking for it: I knew we didn’t need a land line anymore.
During my recuperation and divorce settlement I had time to listen that whole Bowie album, and I see that I was wrong to quote him in the first place.
The chorus to another song, “Modern Love”, is “Never gonna fall for modern love”. I don’t know why I ever took advice from some impractical romantic musician….
Like I told my 4th wife just before we signed our pre-nup: Love is really all about material benefits. Luckily, the New York Times never, ever takes their eye off this ball.
“Both of them advise women to manipulate men to gain material benefits,” said Ms. Lu, a founder of an online feminist journal in China. Now take it easy – she’s just a feminist and not a communist, because she didn’t dare criticize manipulating people to gain material benefits.
“The question is, Why in China is it women who scheme to get men to commit to marriage? Why, when it comes to marriage, are women the sellers and men the buyers? It’s because women don’t have the space to develop themselves.”
See, this is what modern love is: Romance is a transaction! It should be ruled by the laws of the market, not the laws of nature or even morality. You don’t have to be a feminist to get that! And we’re going to make sure the Chinese understand this.
Let’s give women the chance to be the buyers, finally, eh? That’s equality.
Let’s have men be the ones who scheme to get women to commit to marriage, eh? That’s social and moral progress.
“It’s sad to see, when the economy has produced so many more opportunities, that more and more women believe that getting married is superior to working hard and achieving a successful career,” she said.
I want to hire this person to run one of my factories in Shenzhen! Yes, of course nothing is more important than working hard in one of my factories! Certainly not your family life!
If I had more workers like I her I think I could shave nearly 7 cents off the price of my electronics? But we in New York City can’t do anything with Chinese women who cling to outdated desires and notions.
“Liang, for example, is trying to lose weight and improve her makeup skills and is practicing baking.”
Sophisticated reader that I am, I realise that this poor Liang is meant to be portrayed as a sad, pathetic loser…even though at 29 she has a fiancé, office job and is apparently not fat.
But she’s a loser – and all modern women who read The New York Times will agree with me – because by selfishly putting her future family first, she’s setting back a woman’s right to devote her body and soul to work for me.
The article concludes with this appallingly out-of-date and unfocused woman’s pathetic view:
“The differences between men and women are inborn. I take these ideas seriously because I want a better life for myself, not because I’m eager to make the world better for women.”
There is a word for this type of woman: a misogynist. This Chinese woman, because she wants romantic love, a family, and a home life which includes the smell of fresh baked fortune cookies, is a actually a woman-hating, repressive, backwards misogynist.
And she’s obviously some sort of Putin supporter – or at least Trump – because she doesn’t realise that identity politics requires her to divide the world into women versus men. By not trying to make the world better for only women, she is fighting for the wrong side!
How are we going to divide China if we can’t foist identity politics on them?
And the baking, my God, the baking!!!! For a modern woman she may as well be a Black person asked to pick cotton!
Frankly l don’t know why her fiancé even wants her? She’s clearly going to be a drag on his bottom line: baking can be done cheaper by others; that’s less time spent earning wages; and the emotional ideas she’s taking seriously are so detached from economics that there is no point to even pursue them.
But most appalling, again, is that there are inborn differences between men and women. It’s just not true and you know it!
Both of them work just fine on my factory floor – they are basically interchangeable. I’m proud to report that when a man drops from exhaustion we replace him immediately with a woman with no drop off in my profitability.
Now that is modern, and I love it.
Ramin Mazaheri is the chief correspondent in Paris for Press TV and has lived in France since 2009. He has been a daily newspaper reporter in the US, and has reported from Iran, Cuba, Egypt, Tunisia, South Korea and elsewhere. His work has appeared in various journals, magazines and websites, as well as on radio and television.