Well, given that in the continent of Asia, an "Asian" identity is virtually non-existent, I think it's safe to say that "Asian" as an identity is a social construct that pretty much only exists outside of Asia. (This might be a generalization, but I would still argue that within Asia itself, most people would subscribe more to a national identity than a continental one...)
So, basically, since it's a social construct to begin with, trying to define it, or limit it, or set boundaries for it in any way seems to be adding even more artificiality to an already artificial construct.
In short, IMO, if the writer thinks its Asian, its Asian. Who else should be the judge?
![[community profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/community.png){kind=small}
![[personal profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/user.png)
timeasmymeasure
no subject
Date: 2010-11-13 08:24 pm (UTC)So, basically, since it's a social construct to begin with, trying to define it, or limit it, or set boundaries for it in any way seems to be adding even more artificiality to an already artificial construct.
In short, IMO, if the writer thinks its Asian, its Asian. Who else should be the judge?