About.......Contact.......Society.....................
Showing posts with label Femininity. Show all posts
Showing posts with label Femininity. Show all posts

Monday, May 15, 2017

Eve vs. Mary for Mother's Day


Mosaic of Mary
St. Michael's Hospital Chapel in Toronto
[Photo By: KPA]


Fareed Zakaria, "host of CNN’s flagship foreign affairs show," interviewed writer "and I'm not even a Christian" (what is he, Jewish?) Bruce Feiler on CNN on mother's day. The topic was "Eve and modern motherhood" to discuss the book that Feiler wrote: The First Love Story: Adam, Eve, and Us.

Feiler explains his choice of a female biblical character to represent Mother's Day by saying:

Being a mother...
"...in some ways is the main goal of the story. The first commandment - it's NOT the Ten Commandments. That comes in the Book of Exodus. It's in the book of Genesis where God says to them 'Be fruitful and multiply." This is the story of Genesis, of generations. In order for the story to succeed, we need this relationship to succeed. And that's in some ways one of the great discoveries of this journey that I've been on."
He's talking about Eve of course.

I say: This is the mother who was kicked out of paradise for seducing her husband into betraying God! How about the purest of mothers, Jesus' mother?!

Fareed of course will never want to discuss that. And I'll bet Feiler has no sympathy for Christians despite his long trek through the Biblical land:
When I did “Walking the Bible [Fieler's travels to find the places the Old Testament stories took place]” it was a very personal journey...Were these stories real? Could I find the places where they took place?
Turns out the CNN conversation was between the Muslim Fareed and the Jew Feiler. I had them both pegged.

Christianity is being debunked in such sophisticated and subtle ways these days that only the seasoned warriors can tell when it is happening.

Here is Laura at The Thinking Housewife writing on Mother's Day and her prayer to Mary:
O Immaculate Heart of Mary, Mother of the Infant Babe of Bethlehem, and Our Mother, enkindle in our hearts the spark of youthful innocence. We know of thy great love for little children. It was to innocent children that thou didst deign to appear, revealing the Message of Fatima, and charging them with its propagation. We know no better way to show our regard for them, dear Mother, than to offer our prayers for all children, everywhere. Therefore, O Mother dear, we ask thee to watch over all children in all parts of the world, to guard and protect their homes, to preserve the schools wherein they learn, and to keep them from being tainted with Godless education. Direct them in their play and in all their works, that they may grow in age, wisdom, and the love of God. Grant too, Blessed Mother, that the prayers of our children may hasten the end of all wars of carnage and devastation, and grant unto this world an era of just and lasting peace. We pray that the world may return to Jesus, thy Son, through Reparation to thy Immaculate Heart.

Our Lady of Fatima, we beseech thee to inflame our hearts with the love of Reparation.

[Source: St. Gertrude the Great Sunday bulletin, Mother’s Day, 2017]

Below is Zakaria's interview of Feiler on the CNN program GPS.


Saturday, May 6, 2017

Ivanka's Roles: Part Deux
Aka:You've come a long way....



Ivanka, author, working mom and all round multi-tasker...
...made ALL of the agents watching her family some sweets that were hand-delivered by Jared and their two oldest children, Arabella, 5, and Joseph, 3.

It is wonderful to see her come out and do something like this for the secret service. The left has been attacking Ivanka in a relentless fashion and it is NOT OKAY. We have had people saying that her family does not deserve to be protected. It does not make ANY sense.
Be sure to add to her coffers by purchasing her book.

Wednesday, May 3, 2017

Ivanka's Roles


The Super Mom/Super Adviser

Is Ivanka Trump, shoe designer, and recently named Executive Branch Employee/ Informal Adviser to the President, so smart as to sit as her father's "Informal Adviser-in-Chief?"

I doubt it.

Behind every Executive Branch Employee/Informal Adviser to the President, there is a Senior Adviser.

“A lot of their real interactions happen when it’s just the two of them,” says her approving husband, Jared Kushner, who was officially named Senior Adviser to the Trump administration in January.

I doubt that. Kushner gets to hear all about the "informal advising" prior to his wife's meeting with her Dad, as he gives her his Senior Adviser's advice.

The Super Mom/Super Busy Ivanka, Executive Branch Employee/Informal Adviser to the President, has a "list for connecting with each of" her three kids before they go to sleep. I doubt this is a daily schedule.
“I put real thought into coming up with ideas for memorable moments I can create with each of them,” she writes. “Right now, I play with cars with Joseph, on the floor, for twenty minutes each day. Arabella loves books, so I make a note to read at least two per day to her and plan ‘dates’ to the library. With Theodore, I commit to ensuring that I can give him two to three of his bottles each day and rock him to sleep at night.”
"We've Come a Long Way..."

Wednesday, August 31, 2016

Blog
I'm in Elite Company

Square One Mall in Mississauga has been pretty active lately, with a newly opened "luxury wing."

The new Mississauga Holt Renfrew at Square One had commissioned an illustrator to make portraits of customers on its opening day .

The line was surprisingly short and the illustrator was fortunately quick and skilled. Within twenty minutes, I had mine.

I looked up Monica Smiley of Eightyseventh St. and found that she has had a long career of illustrating cartoons of various famous people.

I am in esteemed company!



She said it is easier when people have a distinguishable feature. Mine happened to be my big orange hat!

Vogue's Anna Wintour's are her giant sunglasses which she wears even indoors. And of course her bob.



Hudson's Bay across the mall wasn't gong to be left out, and was promoting a new make-up line called Teeez that I blogged about here. Un-hip that was, I didn't realize that a Selfie actually meant me pointing an iPhone or some such contraption at myself. I asked the sales girl to take a photo of me instead (actually, I can take a Selfie with my "tablet" computer).

Here I am below in my "Selfie", getting "ready for a revolution" as the poster behind me asks. Little do they know!



I think I look better than Anna Wintour - at least I have a better smile. And my signature look (my big orange straw hat) is a far more interesting than hers, an over-sized pair of dark glasses.


Anna Wintour at the Spring/Summer 2016 Collection
during London Fashion Week


It's funny, these "power women" when it all boils down, are like frightened little girls underneath it all.

Meryl Streep played it perfectly in The Devil Wears Prada, as a fashion mogul who was supposed to be, well, fashioned after Anna Wintour. At the end of the day, this Miranda Priestly/Anna Wintour impersonation was intimidated, and beaten, by a simple college graduate intern. Now, when will this college graduate intern morph into the monster that Streep's character became, and when will she collapse at some point in her career, unable to rise to some "challenge?" And how many ruins will she have stacked behind her of failed marriage(s), family, and feminine happiness?

Here is a photo op (is it one for Hillary or one for Anna?) taken in 2013, where fashion meets (Democrat) politics. What is a then 64-year-old business mogul like Anna Wintour woman smiling like a 12-year-old? And why so deferential to Hillary Clinton (66), who herself is grinning like a mad woman? So much for modern "strong" women.


Anna and Hillary in 2013

What would they do if they came across Martha Washington, who was the same age as them in this portrait below?


Martha Washington, by James Peale, 1796
Mount Vernon Collections

Sunday, August 28, 2016

Blog
Fun and Vice for the Contemporary Teeez Girl
And Where's the Money?


Teeez Girl in Contemporary Neon and Vampire Teeth
Morphing from sugar and spice to vampire and vice
Photo for a promotional card for Teeez Cosmetics to enter a contest to win make-up
She doesn't look like she's having much fun, and doesn't look like much of a teeez
But she does have her vampire teeth ready.
I wrote yesterday about the regular occurrence of the word "fun" in people's vocabulary.
Fun is everywhere these days. On sitcoms, in commercials, on billboards, and on everybody's lips.
I went yesterday to the cosmetics section of the Bay department store, and noticed promotions being handed out for "complementary make-overs" and a chance to win prizes.
"What should I do?"
"Just take a selfie, and send it to us."
Well not being of the "selfie" generation, I asked her to take a photo of me.

I had intended to send it in but it does not qualify, of course, and when I investigated the prize they were promising, it was a Top Shop gift voucher. Top Shop is Hudson Bay's British import, a boring, dark "goth" place where neon colors do not exist, let alone a pretty yellow or red, with over-priced clothes where prices are actually labeled in pounds and dollars, causing confusion at the cashier. It wasn't worth being associated with one of those self-centered selfie-cover-girl-wannabes.

Here is the Instagram page where I could have posted my photo (had it been a true selfie) and won a prize to Hudson Bay's British import.

Back to more serious matters.

I got a promotional card from the selfie regulator, and reading its message of Teeez giving me the power to "create a killer look you can call your own" prompted me to ask her what I think about the "Teeez" brand (is it three or four "eeeeez"?). She didn't look very powerful to me.

"It's fun," said this twenty-something woman who stood in front of me with pink hair.

That's more like her!

I thought she (or her "team") came up with that word in an attempt at translating the Dutch company's made-up word. Later, I searched online dictionaries and Dutch websites and blogs, but none gave me anything for "teeez" - to tease in Dutch is a completely different word). Perhaps it is the Europeans' propensity to incorporate English words into their languages, sometimes with new spellings and even meanings. Or it could just be a smart business strategy to make the word and product sound (American) English (Europe is fascinated by America), giving it more popularity and therefore business success. Well they've landed on our shores and it is a short cross over from Hudson's Bay to Macy's.

"Oh. I like the pink," I said to the pink-wigged teeez girl.

"Thank you [with a pose - she got my joke]."

This counts for the "beauty revolution" that was advertised on the billboard behind the pink-haired rebel.

I found a make-up lady and asked her what was so great about this new make-up.

"I got 'fun' from the girl in pink hair," I quipped.

She laughed and continued with:

"Well we have a large variety of colors and styles. And we are about fun and bold, with a contemporary edge."

Strangely for someone in the teeeze department, this older woman looked dowdy and bland. But then she is the other end of the (very narrow) spectrum where people either look ridiculously cartoonish or depressingly bland.

What happened to the styled and stylish older woman with her well-fitting suits and tailored dresses? Walmart actually sells such clothes as does Sears and they're not expensive. In fact a pair of Levi jeans (or those "lady" jeans which these women love to wear) cost as much, and add to that the durable sweat shirts with patterns on them (often the only bright color in this get-up) and of course the sneakers, or sneaker-type shoes from Naturalizers, and they're're spending close to $1000 to look dowdy.

And there's that word fun again, and after I joked about it (mocked it really). So "fun" is part of the teeez "meaning," as even this sales lady acknowledges. I suppose she has no choice but to use it on the job, even as she looked adult and serious (and bland), to promote the company's "mission." Either that, or she changes jobs and leaves matters to the pink wigs.

I really didn't hear much else of what she said, looking for "a large variety and styles and colors" in the display counter, unimpressed.

Here is what the back of the promotional card says:
Fashion Vendetta gives you the freedom to overpower any fashion dictate and all the beauty ammunition to invent your own sartorial style. Your partner n crime? A collection loaded with full-on metallics, mattes, enticing neons and edgy pastels, along with provocative transparent and changeants. A powerful palette of prêt-à-porter products to create a killer look you can call your own.
Perhaps it is good that young women are encouraged to look attractive. But they are hardly encouraged to look feminine, where instead they're hit with words like "powerful," "killer," "edgy."

The neon-lit young girl on the postcard above hardly looks bold, or even "edgy." She looks frightened and bewildered. What is she supposed to do? What is she supposed to feel? What is she supposed to wear?

Fashion Vendetta for whom? What does a vendetta and killer looks have to do with looking pretty? What is a young girl to do?

There is a horde of people to give her just that information, and to sell her the make-up.

In the meantime she can cake on that make-up and make some wallets very thick.


Soft as Sin Cream Blush going for CAN$27. Not for your average girl.
L'Oreal and Revlon have perfectly good make-up, which I've used for years, for under $15 (and much less when on sale).


Below is the pink-wigged "teeez girl" who answered my questions and who was much sweeter-looking in person than this. I wouldn't have gone near the monster portrayed below. These "contemporary girls" with an "edge" have to play a role, but the truth is they would rather be sweet, feminine and kind.



The irony is of course lost on these opportunists who call their product "cruelty free," but where they psychically mistreat their young staff and all the other girls who walk by their counters.

Peta describes their "cruelty free" products thus:
Looking for compassionate companies that you can depend on to find quality, cruelty-free products? You’ve come to the right place! These are some of the leading go-to brands that you can be sure do not test their products on animals anywhere in the world. They’re also widely available, which means you don’t have to search too hard to find them!
"We'll just tell young girls to look like, and behave like, monsters, but we will be saving the planet as we do so."
But on further investigation I could find nowhere any written documents from Teeez that their products are "free from animal testing." All the references I could find are either anecdotal or the opinion of an obscure blogger.

This writer from Vancouver Sun's Beauty Bar "informs" us:
Our tester was especially pleased with the fact this brand claims to not be tested on animals. And the majority of the Teeez Cosmetics products appear to be free of parabens and dermatologist tested.
Where is the "claim" of the product's apparent freedom from those alarming chemicals? Where are the dermatologists' statements vouching for the safety of these products? And what about the "minority" Teeez Cosmetics which contain these ominous chemicals, and what do/could they do - cause our skin to fall off?

So who has the back, or more precisely the skin, of these young girls, including the pink-haired promoters?

Tuesday, February 10, 2015

The Good Wives


The Good Wives
Left: Julianna Margulies as Alicia Florrick as the wronged wife, in the television show The Good Wife
Right: Michele Obama at the 2015 State of the Union


---------------------------------------------------------------------------

It had been a while since I've "reviewed" Michelle Obama's attire (here is one example from about a year and a half ago).

Above is Michelle Obama at the State of the union address on January 20th. I glanced at her ensemble, and all I could think was that it looked like a cheap tweed suit which one could get at Walmart - not that I'm knocking Walmart, but I wouldn't buy it even there.

The New York Post asked:
"Who wore it best, the Good Wife, or the President's wife?"
First, I would say "neither." What a dull, lusterless, cheap-looking dress (look at the zipper against the black strip at the front).

It is perhaps understandable in the television series The Good Wife, which is about an woman attorney. But for the wife of a President?

Obama was at one point intent on supporting "American Designers," which is a noble effort. But, I would rather she wore a smart Christian Dior than this dull Michael Kors.

I don't blame Kors. He does what he does (and gets very rich doing so). It was ultimately Obama's decision.

The suit's jacket (now out of stock, which I presume is due to all those First Lady Followers who bought the suit after the SOTU) was $1595 at Nordstrom. And the ensemble probably more than doubles with the skirt.

And, to show the blind adulation that goes on, here is the black magazine, Essence, showering praises on this outfit:
Mrs. Obama was stunning in a tweed Michael Kors skirt suit with a wide collar and zipper details, channeling her inner Gladiator and giving all of us life.
The "inner gladiator" reference is to the suit that Obama wore on a previous occasion. I don't know how it got into the fashion vernacular of Michelle Obama. I wonder if it came from here ("she reminds me of the muscle-bound Victor Mature in a 1950s gladiator pic")!

How could it have been better?

Perhaps making it in a tweed green rather than this dreary grey.


[I Photoshopped the green color, and all the rest
Better than that grey (Michael Kors should hire me!)
]

But the real question is, why is Michelle Obama channeling a television program replete with adultery, marital discord, and a single ("separated") woman aggressively pursuing a career?

Could it be the "presidential" connection?

But, even that is a negative reflection on politicians:
When a very public sex and political-corruption scandal lands her husband, Peter, in prison, Alicia Florrick must get past the humiliation and betrayal and assume responsibility for her family. She resumes her career as a defense attorney, shedding her persona as the embarrassed wife of a politician, and takes charge of her destiny. Four years later, Alicia decides to leave Lockhart/Gardner and start a new law firm with a colleague, Cary Agos. Now that Peter has won the gubernatorial election, Alicia must balance her evolving career and family responsibilities with her new position as first lady of Illinois. [Source]
This is supposedly a reference to the New York governor Eliot Spitzer who resigned from his position after his trysts with prostitutes became public.

But, Michelle's channeling is more convoluted than that. It is to showcase the "bravery" of this politician's wife (in the T.V. show that is), who started a career as an attorney to provide for her two sons after her husband was jailed. She "decides" to not divorce her husband. Yet, she has an affair with a partner at her law firm. Then she decides to run for politics, and uses the same rough strategies her husband used to win his political battles.

It is a strange mixture of victimhood (the good wife), feminism (women can be tough attorneys and even tougher politicians), marital loyalty (the Good Wife doesn't divorce her husband, merely separates form him), motherhood (she goes to work for her two kids), femininity (she always dresses prettily), equality (women can have affairs too), and so on.

What an odd show to emulate.

But not really. It is all about the "strength of the woman" after all. And she can have it all, or rather, do it all: adultery, motherhood, high powered careers - even in politics, and of course wifehood.

And any woman who stays married despite the humiliations this TV Good Wife faced is, well, a good wife. Look at Hillary!

I wonder how President Obama feels about all this?


The President and his Good Wife
Arriving at the State of the Union, January 20th 2015

---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Posted By: Kidist P. Asrat

Monday, December 29, 2014

She Was So American

I took these photographs below of posters outside at the Bay's department store's "women's clothing" floor. I'm not sure why they have it there, and the sales women were unable to tell me. But I was struck by the femininity and beauty of the dresses, which were worn by:
That woman [who is] always seen lunching at smart restaurants - charmingly aware of the interests she excites. She's the woman who has traveled, whose leisure allows her wide cultural activities. She throws her time and energy into drives for her favorite charities, she encourages the opera, the ballet, the symphony, art exhibits. She's the influence behind the fashions that have carried our designers' names around the world. She's so American.[Text from the bottom of one of the posters]
I looked around the floor, which was the "fashion" section of the store. But there is nothing comparable to these clothes! There are a couple of nice red winter coats, but the dresses that may compare are glittery and shiny, and only good for a holiday outfit, and now for New Years (if anyone will wear them, and I doubt there will be many who will).

What a long way we've regressed with femininity and beauty!









Text at the bottom of the poster:
That woman always seen lunching at smart restaurants - charmingly aware of the interests she excites. She's the woman who has traveled, whose leisure allows her wide cultural activities. She throws her time and energy into drives for her favorite charities, she encourages the opera, the ballet, the symphony, art exhibits. She's the influence behind the fashions that have carried our designers' names around the world. She's so American.
[Photos By: KPA]

-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Posted By: Kidist P. Asrat
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Friday, November 21, 2014

Commenting on Commenters

I've shortened my post Truth Doesn't Have To Be Palatable to this version below.

-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

I commented on an Asian immigrant’s response to Laura Wood’s post at The Thinking Housewife on Obama’s plans to give amnesty to border-crossing Mexicans.
Asian Immigrant commenting on The Thinking Housewife
I feel a sense of helpless dread after reading that five million illegals are going to be given legal status next week at the stroke of a pen. I am a new citizen who did everything correctly.
- My answer at The Thinking Housewife (portions):
-  I don’t have much sympathy for the Asian...
- He sounds like he’s sorry for himself. He’s put himself in the victim’s role. It was he who made the difficult and risky decision of leaving his country to come to the U.S. and try his luck. No one pulled him here.
- ...he seems to be saying that because he “did everything correctly” he is owed something. Why?
- Lawrence Auster talked [and wrote] about the perils of LEGAL immigration.  That if people came from backgrounds and cultures incompatible with the Western, Judeo-Christian, American culture, then they will feel alienated.
- All Asians know how CULTURALLY different the U.S. (and Canada and Europe) is [from their countries].
The whole post, and interaction, is available here.
The interesting thing is that the Asian immigrant has remained silent, and instead it is another correspondent who has responded to my comments.
I will refer to the correspondent, David J. as DJ (how apt, he is the deejay for the AI). Below are his comments, and my response (here on my website).

-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
David J. (DJ)
For quite some time, I have tried to hold my proverbial tongue about the opinions of Ms. Kidist Paulos Asrat concerning Asians, but her post above is about all that I can take of her seemingly undeserved criticisms of this human group. Firstly, how can such a short, innocuous, and commonsensical comment made by a lone Asian reader warrant such a lengthy diatribe by Ms. Asrat, an Ethiopian immigrant in Canada? The Asian reader has dutifully obeyed our immigration laws and is disheartened that admitted lawbreakers will unjustly receive the same reward of American citizenship as he. Were he white or Hispanic, would Ms. Asrat have taken him to task for such a simple expression of despair over an obvious injustice?
Here is my response:
- Since when have short sentences been given full amenity over harm and stupidity?  
- He is saying that because I am an immigrant (his definition of me), then I have no right to criticize other immigrants. 
- He underlines “Ethiopian” as well. This is clearly a reference to “race” as in non-whites cannot criticize other non-whites.
- Just because the Asian has followed the immigration laws doesn't give him a free ticket into America. 
- I think DJ's cleverly saying that I am racist towards Asians. 
- I have always called myself Canadian, and never refer to my Ethiopian background except when the conversation requires it.  
DJ continues with a post I wrote about a year ago about swimwear designer Jessica Rey:
Further, I have read her unreasonable criticisms of an Asian Christian woman named Jessica Rey. What are Mrs. Rey’s wrongs? She sells relatively modest swimsuits (are such not needed to combat the whorish swimwear of today or should women avoid the water entirely?).
DJ continues:
[Rye] runs her own business, even though she has a husband and children (did not the Bible’s model of a virtuous woman in Proverbs 31 diligently work to sell linens and handle commercial affairs while simultaneously fulfilling her wifely obligations to her family?)
KPA:  
[Rey's] not selling linens, she’s selling glorified underwear! 
A commenter at Laura Wood's The Thinking Housewife wrote about a year ago responding to my comments on Rey's swimwear:
[Rey's] whole “modesty” schtick seems to be more of a marketing ploy rather than a true interest in modesty and reclaiming beauty.
DJ continues:
If I remember correctly, Mrs. Rey posed while pregnant in a tank top with her husband on a website...
I respond:
So much for modesty - showing her protruding stomach in a “tank top.”










-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Posted By: Kidist P. Asrat
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Thursday, November 20, 2014

Truth Doesn't Have to be Palatable

I commented on an Asian immigrant’s two-sentence response to Laura Wood’s post at The Thinking Housewife on Obama’s plans to give amnesty to border-crossing Mexicans.
Asian Immigrant commenting on The Thinking Housewife: I feel a sense of helpless dread after reading that five million illegals are going to be given legal status next week at the stroke of a pen. I am a new citizen who did everything correctly.
- My answer at The Thinking Housewife (portions):
-  I don’t have much sympathy for the Asian...
- He sounds like he’s sorry for himself. He’s put himself in the victim’s role. It was he who made the difficult and risky decision of leaving his country to come to the U.S. and try his luck. No one pulled him here.
- ...he seems to be saying that because he “did everything correctly” he is owed something. Why?
- Lawrence Auster talked [and wrote] about the perils of LEGAL immigration.  That if people came from backgrounds and cultures incompatible with the Western, Judeo-Christian, American culture, then they will feel alienated.
- All Asians know how CULTURALLY different the U.S. (and Canada and Europe) is [from their countries].
The whole post, and interaction, is available here.
The interesting thing is that the Asian immigrant has remained silent, and instead it is another correspondent who has responded to my comments.
I will refer to the correspondent, David J. as DJ (how apt, he is the deejay for the AI). Below are his comments, and my response (here on my website).

-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
1. David J. (DJ): For quite some time, I have tried to hold my proverbial tongue about the opinions of Ms. Kidist Paulos Asrat concerning Asians, but her post above is about all that I can take of her seemingly undeserved criticisms of this human group...
Kidist Paulos Asrat (KPA): I am being referred to, or my position is being referred to, as "inhuman" in contrast to all these "human" groups that I am criticizing. A subtle, and clever, ad hominem.

[KPA: I will break down the following comment made by DJ into the next 4 parts (2-5):
DJ: Firslty, how can such a short, innocuous, and commonsensical comment made by a lone Asian reader warrant such a lengthy diatribe by Ms. Asrat, an immigrant in Canada?]
2. DJ: Firstly, how can such a short, innocuous, and commonsensical comment...
KPA: Again he’s setting the standards. Since when have short sentences been given full amenity over harm and stupidity?
Who is judging that? He, me, an independent jury?
What are his reasoning, rationale, arguments for these sentences being innocuous and commonsensical?
3. DJ:  ...made by a lone Asian reader
KPA: Since when have the actions of lone individuals not had consequences? Is the Asian absolved because he’s alone? 
But is he even "alone?" I asked if the Asian was married, had a girlfriend, had a family. He never responded. How do we know he is not making this statement with the backing of other Asians around him?

So, how do we know that his opinions are his alone? I claim, based on research, readings and interactions, that many Asians think like this. I am sure he would agree with me.
But even more interestingly, is he absolved because he’s Asian?!
This is where I claim that he is looking for sympathy, as a “poor, harmed, victimized, lonely Asian.”
4. DJ: ...warrant such a lengthy diatribe
KPA: Again, a clever interjection of an ad hominem - “diatribe”
He’s basically dismissing, or highlighting, my discussion as some kind of rage-filled, hate-filled rant, incoherent and not worth listening to.
5. DJ: ...by Ms. Asrat, an Ethiopian immigrant in Canada?
KPA: DJ really quite sophisticated. He is saying that because I am an immigrant (his definition of me), then I have no right to criticize other immigrants.
Why? Because of some unspoken fellowship? A code of language (immigrant ethics)? An obligation to “shut up”?
Is he making me complicit with some kind of “immigrant underworld” of liars and cheats, and that I may be part of that?
Of course, he underlines “Ethiopian” as well. This is clearly a reference to “race” as in non-whites cannot criticize other non-whites.
So, once again, he has lumped me in his “non-white immigrant” category, to which I am supposed to owe allegiance, and if not, at least a code of ethics of keeping quiet about immigration. 
I don’t consider myself an “immigrant” by the current definitions, which means someone from a Third world country (Asia, Africa and Latin America). It is very interesting that those Germans, English, Scandinavians who have been here much fewer years than I have are not considered immigrants, nor do they consider themselves immigrants. The original Germans, English, Scandinavians immigrants were also considered "immigrants" but "settlers." The hyphenated immigrant is now mostly from a Third World country.
Previous hyphenations were limited. It is now understood that "German Americans" for example, are only called thus for some authentic referral to their roots. They all eventually became simply Americans. 
Now, ALL Third World immigrants present themselves with a hyphenation to indicate their countries of origin. And this hyphenations has now persisted for decades.
But I have always called myself Canadian, and never refer to my Ethiopian background except when the conversation requires it.  So it is DJ who has set the definitions of the parameters of my identity.
6.  DJ: The Asian reader has dutifully obeyed our immigration laws...
KPA: “Obeying our immigration laws” has become a code language for “immediate acceptance.” Applying for immigration should be no guarantee for acceptance. Of course a prospective immigrant should “obey” the immigration laws, otherwise he is simply a criminal. But, just because he follows immigration laws doesn't give him a free ticket into America.
7. DJ: ...and is disheartened that admitted lawbreakers will unjustly receive the same reward of American citizenship as he.
KPA: DJ is contradictory. He puts the word “reward” here, indicating that even legal immigration requires its stringent process. 
8. DJ: Were he white or Hispanic, would Ms. Asrat have taken him to task for such a simple expression of despair over an obvious injustice?
KPA: I think it is DJ's clever way of again saying that I am racist towards Asians.
9. DJ: Further, I have read her unreasonable criticisms of an Asian Christian woman named Jessica Rey. What are Mrs. Rey’s wrongs?
KPA: Here we go into interesting territory: a post I wrote about a year ago (and which Laura posted on, as well as on Rey, at her website here here and here.
10. DJ: … An Asian Christian woman...
KPA: I will start with the "Christian" part.
11.  DJ: She sells relatively modest swimsuits (are such not needed to combat the whorish swimwear of today or should women avoid the water entirely?).
KPA: Here’s a comment at Laura’s site, and what a correspondent wrote about Rey’s modesty ploy and not-so-cheap swimwear, so her "Christian" angle seems like a marketing ploy.
Kidist also mentions the swimsuits being something you could easily buy at Sears or Wal-Mart. I can’t speak for either of those stores but I can attest to seeing very similar styles at Target for considerably less so I do wonder what exactly Jessica is adding to the market, other than more expensive versions of items already available for purchase. Her whole “modesty” schtick seems to be more of a marketing ploy rather than a true interest in modesty and reclaiming beauty. See above
KPA: Plus, Rey is “limited.” She focuses solely on swimwear, where one can get the same design at a fraction of the price at Walmart, Target and Sears.
I’ve bought such swimwear from Walmart, and the color hasn’t run, and the suit hasn’t shrunk. I think I got a pretty good deal. 
The only problem is it says “Made in China.” Now, I think the Chinese are actually getting designs from American prototypes, so their merchandise is proxy-American. My big battle now is to try and buy everything Made in America. And it is getting cheaper these days to do so.
And it is not clear where Rey has her swimwear manufactured.
KPA: Regarding Rey's limited merchandise:
She is now writing a book (or has written a book) on how young girls can chose "modesty." This is the swimsuit designer talking about modesty! She calls it "Decent Exposure." Why "exposure" at all? Strange choice of word for a "modesty" advocate.
I think she's just trying out other venues for income generation. I doubt her swimsuit enterprise has been very profitable.

Also, the book is "co-written" with someone else - Leah Darrow, which adds to my list of "sub-par" abilities for Rey. Why couldn't Rey write a book for young children on her own? Was it to capitalize on Darrow's "return to Catholicism?" 

Or on Darrow's "modesty" clothing project "Pure Fashion" which is a service of Regnum Christi, an ecclesial lay movement of the Catholic Church?

Again, there's nothing special about the clothes in Pure Fashion, and nothing that cannot be put together in Walmart, Target or Sears, probably at much lower cost. Is Rey planning on selling her swimwear here? Can she? There are no swimwear in their catalog. 

Darrow is also pursuing a Master of Arts degree in Master of Theological Studies in the Institute for Pastoral Theology at the Ave Maria University in Florida. It is a "mission" oriented program, and Master of Theological Studies enrolees study:
...every aspect of the Church's life: education (RCIA, catechesis, Catholic schools), the permanent diaconate, social justice, pro-life apostolates, marriage and family life, liturgical ministry, and ecclesial administration.
Again, this looks like a savvy connection for Rey to make, by linking herself with a "student of theology."
12. DJ: She runs her own business, even though she has a husband and children (did not the Bible’s model of a virtuous woman in Proverbs 31 diligently work to sell linens and handle commercial affairs while simultaneously fulfilling her wifely obligations to her family?)
KPA:  She’s not selling linens, she’s selling glorified underwear!
13. DJ: Her clothing merchandise is more expensive than the counterparts at Sears and Walmart (is such not expected from small businesses that cannot capitalize on the economies of scale and bulk distribution networks of large conglomerates?).
KPA: But it is not any better!!! Unless she can guarantee colors not fading/running etc, and come out with better designs that Sears, Walmart and Target at a fraction the price,  or JC Pennys which are still ½ of what Rey charges for hers.
14. DJ: If I remember correctly, Mrs. Rey posed while pregnant in a tank top with her husband on a website...
KPA:  So much for modesty - showing her protruding stomach in a “tank top.”


















Here is a correspondent at The Thinking Housewife who agrees with me, and adds more to the conversation:
I also agree with both you and Kidist that the pregnancy photo is immodest and inappropriate. It’s an interesting photographic capture of her and her husband’s solipsistic behavior, the way that they ogle the pregnant belly as if to say, “Look at what WE did! This is OUR special moment!” It’s most definitely not about the baby. I feel sorry for their children who were conceived, in all likelihood, for the benefit of the parents. These children grow up not viewing themselves as complete souls on their own because their whole purpose in life is to complete the parents’ empty souls. At least, that’s what pictures like this say to me. It brings to mind the modern wedding, its expense and emphasis on destroying tradition in favor of adding your “personal” touch because when you’re a solipsist the world emanates from you, you don’t inhabit a world separate from yourself. It’s flawed beliefs like this that give credence to a “whatever works for you” or “whatever you need Christ to be” kind of Christianity. And in the case of Jessica Rey, it gives rise to a conveniently commercial modesty that profits.
And Laura writes here:
Immodest? She looks like she is wearing underwear or clothes for bed. Very tight clothes on a pregnant woman are immodest because they are similar to nakedness in revealing all the contours of the body. A woman’s naked body should be for her husband alone. Modesty is about protecting intimacy, privacy, and mystery, not simply about sex. (Insane people are the most immodest of all. They have no sense of self, no interior life, no restraint.) If there are not some things we reveal only to those with whom we are most intimate, those whom we love and to whom we also disclose our deepest thoughts, then we have no self to give to them. We have no privacy and no depth. “Indiscretion signifies a lack of distinction,” said Rudolf Allers, in his book Sex Psychology. Privacy is exclusive.
Yes, her husband is worshiping her and her belly. He does not look at the camera. He is in the background, his ostentatious crucifix obscured by his wife’s overdeveloped biceps. [Actually, this is not right, because her left arm is slight, so I take that back. See discussion below.]
It is interesting that there is no full-faced photo of her husband on-line, nor anything about what he does. It is the standard fare of these “enterprising” women, often Asian women (look at Michelle Malkin) that they completely put their husbands out of the picture. I can understand keeping their children anonymous, but why the husband? Where is their personal life? How do they influence each other? Etc...
15. DJ: Why were the white wives on the selfsame website, some of whom were nude, not also heavily criticized by Ms. Asrat?
KPA: - I have criticized whites. But this blog is about Asians.
16.  DJ: She married a white man (did not Moses marry one of Ms. Asrat’s fellow Ethiopian kinsmen, a marriage that in Numbers 12 was defended by God himself when his sister, Miriam, spoke against it?).
KPA:  Moses’ marriage is a very difficult part of the Bible
But historically, and ethnically, you could say that Miriam was similar to Moses, being a Semite, as the Amhara of Ethiopia are still identified.
Miriam was probably reacting to the differences in geographic area, and a foreign woman, as someone who was not from their region. The same way we would react towards a European woman marrying and American man. And I think rightly so.
17. DJ: Let me hurry to qualify that I am not a proponent of mass interracial relationships.
KPA: It is always with qualifiers isn’t it these days? The disease of our times. No-one takes a stand, and softens whatever stand they have with some kind of “I’m not such a bad person because….”
18. DJ: I even recall Ms. Asrat’s complaining about a white family’s Asian nanny who took the young white son to a McDonald’s restaurant! What a crime against humanity and affront to Western civilization is the world’s most popular white-owned restaurant!
KPA: I agree. I was saddened and depressed by the food the young boy was eating. He was drinking a can of coke and eating some kind of candy. I didn’t find them in MacDonalds but close enough in the huge downtown mall, with people charging around by this young toddler’s stroller. The coke and candy seemed like a way to cajole him into silence (or temporary contentedness) while strapped into that stroller in the crowded mall. Here is a post I did on him.
This bothered me so much that I posted a letter I sent to Laura (Thinking Housewife) about the situation:
There are parks nearby, where the woman could have taken the boy.
This nanny was Chinese. I listened to (into) the Chinese nanny’s conversation, and she had a prominent accent, and spoke with grammatical errors. This is the kind of English this young boy is being exposed to at the crucial, language-acquiring years of his life.
19. DJ: Of course, I welcome critical viewpoints about all human groups when the shoe fits: blacks regarding violent crime rates, whites concerning liberalism, East Asians concerning academic testing improprieties, Australian Aboriginals regarding alcoholism, Arabs concerning Islam, and so forth. In the words of Steve Sailer, “criticism makes you better.” However, the quickness by which Ms. Asrat interjects to reproach Asians and virtual refusal to allow a positive comment about them to go unchallenged appear unseemly and biased, especially with regards to a group of people with the lowest crime rates, highest intelligence (save Ashkenazi Jews), and lowest illegitimacy rates. Of course, by “Asians,” I gather that the chief focus is on East Asians.
KPA: This is a bit jumbled. I’ll answer it in parts.
19 a. DJ: Of course, I welcome critical viewpoints about all human groups when the shoe fits: blacks regarding violent crime rates, whites concerning liberalism, East Asians concerning academic testing improprieties, Australian Aboriginals regarding alcoholism, Arabs concerning Islam, and so forth.  

KPA: DJ is saying that he acknowledges the faults of specific ethnics. (Actually, one point of contention: I wouldn’t say “Arabs concerning Islam” But I would say” “Arabs concerning Jihad, and murdering non-Muslims in the name of Islam”.) But that he doesn’t like the way I reproach Asians on criteria that he doesn’t agree with!

19 b. DJ: However, the quickness by which Ms. Asrat interjects to reproach Asians and virtual refusal to allow a positive comment about them to go unchallenged appear unseemly and biased, especially with regards to a group of people with the lowest crime rates, highest intelligence (save Ashkenazi Jews),

KPA: This is the usual fallacy where Asians are put on par with Ashkenazi Jews. I have written in many places on my blog about this fallacy. For instance, Asians are now asking for affirmative action considerations since they cannot perform quite to the standards expected of them. Crime rates amongst Asians is also debatable. It is lower than blacks, yes, but high-level crimes like intellectual property theft by researchers and university students are becoming part of our news. Chinese students are also getting caught in cheating rings.

Even non-academic crime, like the Chinese/Asian triads (organized crime) gangs are getting reported on a periodic basis.

Asian crime rate is higher than white or Jewish crime rate.

19 c. DJ: ...and lowest illegitimacy rates.

KPA: This is a very interesting point. There may be a lower illegitimacy rate, but Asian divorce rates are going up.

And! There is another form of family disruption that is getting common amongst Asians: the high level of interracial marriage between Asian women and white men, which leaves with the half white, half Asian children in a limbo, where they often associate with their Asian background even though the "pure" Asians wouldn't accept readily them.

So, a different, more subtle, kind of "illegitimacy" is growing in Asian families.
19 d. DJ: Of course, by "Asians," I gather that the chief focus is on East Asians.

KPA: In this particular instance, yes. But I have on numerous instances discussed similar situations regarding South Asians (Indians), as well as Filipinos, especially the high intermarriage rate between Filipinos and whites. So I don't have any particular, personal, malice towards East Asians (Chinese).

Of course, what DJ is saying, again, is that I am racist.

20. DJ: However, the quickness by which Ms. Asrat interjects to reproach Asians and virtual refusal to allow a positive comment about them to go unchallenged appear unseemly and biased.

KPA: Since when has criticism been coated with pretty words? Criticism is criticism. I don’t have to make it palatable for you or for anyone else. In fact, even if I do that, you, or somebody, will find it at fault and probably say I’m “sugar-coating” my reproach.  

And why am I biased, i.e. racist? My argument is not to "give all sides of the situation." You are welcome to do that. Rather than go into such subtle and under-handed ad hominem, you would have been better to refute my arguments with your own clear points.

Perhaps you is simply unable to do so.

So, why should anyone listen to you over me?
My LAST WORDS: TRUTH IS NOT PALATABLE
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Posted By: Kidist P. Asrat
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------