RE: ManForward’s Call to Defund
In an essay, shared over Independence weekend, Manforward joined the growing chorus to defund (really dismantling) the police and the 18 Clan system. But would these suggestions really remedy the allegedly rampant domestic violence issues Hmong Community? I don’t think so. Culture takes time to change — we all know this. The Hmong Community today is not the same as the one that arrived as refugees. Since arriving to the United States nearly 50 years ago, the Hmong community has continued to assimilate, acculturate and change. Change, generally speaking, can be good but not all change is good. Change for change sake can be foolhardy and more so when done without context. Is a conversation about domestic violence in the community important? Yes. But to suggest defunding the police, do away with culture, call for a “new system” is shortsighted and irrational.
When the police be dismantled, laws can’t be enforced. When laws can’t be upheld, society devolves into chaos. The former CHAZ/CHOP experiment in Seattle is the prime example. From the day of its establishment, several assaults and rapes were reported. Local business owners and residents were intimidated, and property destroyed. All of these other crimes ultimately lead to the loss of life. The latest victim, before the CHAZ/CHOP experiment was ended, was a 16-year-old black teenager who was gunned down in his car.
In New York City, where the mayor proposed massive cuts to the police budget and where the NYPD’s “anti-crime” unit was disbanded, shootings increased by 205% in June. It was New York’s most violent month in 24 years. During that time I’ve seen multiple viral videos of random executions take place in the streets of New York… in broad daylight. Meanwhile, in Minneapolis, the city council unanimously voted to disband the police. As council members work to dismantle the line that stands between criminals and law abiding citizens, 1600 gun shots have been tracked, resulting in 100 individuals shot and a number of deaths, including a pregnant woman just a few days ago. And while this is occurring in, three council members have been assigned personal security teams… paid for by taxpayers. So, who suffers? Everyone — particularly the most vulnerable.
As for the perpetual claim that Hmong men and the community at large greenlights domestic violence is simply false. Saying this does not deny the issue of domestic violence; it certainly exists, as it does in every community. This isn’t just my opinion. A study by a Marquette University Graduate, cited by the Asian Pacific Institute of Gender Violance, found that, “Hmong community leaders felt the community does not condone domestic violence”. Despite this, Manforward continues to vilify the community, particularly Hmong men. And this isn’t the first time. So I’ll say it again; Hmong men and the Hmong Community do not condone domestic violence. What would beneficial in this addressing this conversation is to present the community with the information such as how often it happens and how it looks like. From what I gathered, the evidence on domestic violence in the Hmong community is mixed, limited and not conclusive. And to be clear, stating facts and trends is not an attempt to minimize or trivialize such abuses. It is, however, to suggest that we frame the conversation honestly and in a manner that allows people to join rather than polarize the community on an issue there is likely widespread consensus. Let me explain.
In August 2019 the Asian Pacific Institute of Gender Based Violence (APIGBV) published a fact sheet concerning domestic violence in the Hmong Community. According to the fact sheet, one survey, the Minnesota Asian’s Women Health Survey, found that 8% of respondents had experienced emotional, physical, or sexual abuse the last year. When asked if any had experienced these forms of violence in their life time, 15% said yes. In this survey there were 425 respondents, 86 were Hmong. In a state where there are nearly 70,000 Hmong individuals, 85 Hmong responses is not enough to find the data as conclusive. We can certainly extrapolate from the data that domestic violence occurs in the API community, but does it support at the alarming rate of abuse in the Hmong community as suggested by Manforward…? Not really.
As for domestic violence that result in homicide/murder-suicide, APIGBV completed a review called Shattered Lives: Homicides, Domestic Violence and Asian Families. This study compiled news stories from 2000–2005 about DV related homicide cases involving Asians. In their review, they found 160 such cases. Of those cases, 78% of victims were women and 83% of perpetrators were men; something most people are likely to know. During that span there were six Hmong victims (5 Hmong women, 1 Hmong male). Of course, since then there have been additional such cases but the point is to not deny the existence of such cases, but properly frame the issue.
Interestingly, RAINBOW RESEARCH’s found in their “A Report on Violence Against Asian Women and Children in Minnesota” that, “Women and key informants most commonly reported drug and alcohol use as the precursor or confounding variable to domestic violence. Besides alcohol, women reported men using heroine, methamphetamine, and cocaine.” With this in mind, culture and tradition may contribute to domestic, but substance use and possible co-occuring disorders are concrete factors we can point to.
Now, the logical leap made by the author to conclude that the Hmong 18 Clan System, a system that existed a millennia before its first contact with a white man, operates solely to protect men, particularly white men, and uphold white supremacy is beyond me. But in regards to the clan system, many people presume Manforward is talking about the Hmong18 Clan Council of Minnesota. I think that assessment is incorrect, as the Council is never mentioned. It does seems apparent the author is talking about the cultural clan system by which the Hmong community organizes itself.
Undoubtably the clan system has its vices due to its collective nature. And while collectivism does serve a purpose — such as helping individuals to identify relationships, identify a shared common history or lineage, pass on tradition and creates insiders/outsiders — it’s not hard to see why a victim of domestic violence would be shunned or silenced. However, to do away with the clans is to literally sever the shared history, ties and lineage of the Hmong people. It would mean to recreate and redefine what it is and how to be Hmong… but this is exactly what is being proposed. How so? By suggesting a “new system” be created and centered on, “the lives and experience and bodies of women, girls, trans, gender nonconforming.” In this assertions Manfoward essentially identifies new clans (based on gender/sex) and creates a new clan hierarchy. The great irony in all this is that, despite the criticism Manforward levies against the Hmong Clan System, Manforward suggests replacing one clan system for another clan system.
In reorganizing the hierarchy Manforward also reveals their true intention — taking power. This is evidenced by reoccurring focus on power throughout the essay. The also author admits as much, writing that the movement is to “redistribute the power dynamics.” This also reveals that there is not a concern for justice — impartial and equal treatment under mutually agreed upon law. Instead Manforward suggests that individuals be held to account by “gender justice” and “queer justice”. But what exactly is “gender” and “queer” justice? Of those two standards of “justice”, which one is more just? Which system takes precedent over the other? What about trans individuals? Will they be judged as gender or as queer? These logical fallacies demonstrate this as nothing more than a farce. It is another social justice proposition where “justice” is subjective and based feelings of a select few individuals. This is not justice nor does it differ much from the allegedly corrupt and“unethical” practices conducted by patriarchal clan leaders who Manforward routinely dunks on.
