39 Responses to “Ed Wang-Yao Ming of American football?”

1. buru Says:
   May 4th, 2010 at 7:19 pm

   well, he looks pretty much like a Native American, esp NorthWest tribes…but then Native Americans are relatives of Asiatic ppl hmmm..all the best to him.

2. Jason Says:
   May 5th, 2010 at 12:07 am

   @buru

   Too much exposure to the sun will gave any Asian to be look like Native Indians.

3. raventhorn4000 Says:
   May 5th, 2010 at 12:50 am

   That assumption is rather general.

   Asians and Native Americans have great diverse appearances among themselves.

   Some Native American tribes have distinctly more European looks, as do some Asians and Africans.

4. pug_ster Says:
   May 5th, 2010 at 3:30 pm

   I don’t think Ed Wang is like Yao Ming for many reasons. Yao Ming was picked up in the first round where as Ed Wang was picked at the 5th round. Ed didn’t get the coveted positions like a running back or a quarterback. Most offensive and defensive tackles are just utility positions anyways and their careers usually won’t last 30 years old because of the amount of punishment that they take.

5. Jason Says:
   May 5th, 2010 at 6:37 pm

   @pug_ster

   You should see Ed’s father saying that Ed Wang will be the next Yao Ming of American football while Ed’s mom giggling the same time on the video: 5:08.

   Who knows when will Ed be in a NFL playoff atmosphere but when he does and has several moments in a crucial situation (s), I think it might be something special and gave him more popular exposure in the NFL universe.

6. Buru Says:
   May 6th, 2010 at 7:58 am

   raventhorn4000:

   “That assumption is rather general.

   Asians and Native Americans have great diverse appearances among themselves.”” of course, but you got the point right?

   “Some Native American tribes have distinctly more European looks, as do some Asians and Africans.”

   Most ‘Native’ Americans today have 75-90% European blood; they claim ancestry mostly to enjoy the special rights on Reservations etc. I am not aware of any true-blood Indians with European looks ( as evidenced by vintage photos/videos/paintings/accounts by past writers etc).
   Similarly I am not aware of any Africans(leaving out Arabs and Nilothics)that look ‘more’ European..

   Jason :
   “Too much exposure to the sun will gave any Asian to be look like Native Indians.”
   And vice versa, thus suggesting that both are of close descent..

7. raventhorn4000 Says:
   May 6th, 2010 at 1:27 pm

   http://www.cartage.org.lb/en/themes/sciences/lifescience/humanraces/ideaofrace/ideaofrace.htm

   Young Kootenai woman from Idaho and a San Juan Pueblo man from New Mexico whose features are more “European”

   *Some features that are considered “European” can also be found in other “races.”

   For example, it is well known that some Northern European’s high bridged nose and barrel chest are developed to compensate for high altitude cold climates.

   While similar terrains are scarce in Africa, some African mountain tribes also developed similar features.

8. raventhorn4000 Says:
   May 6th, 2010 at 2:01 pm

   The point is, racially based attributed physical characteristics are stereotypes.

   There is no such thing as what an “Asian” or a “Native American” should look like.

   To make the generalization that “Too much exposure to the sun will gave any Asian to be look like Native Indians” is stereotyping Native “Indians” and “Asians.”

   Native Americans don’t just look like Asians with darker skin color. They are as diverse in appearance as Asians are.

   There might have been genetic common ancestry between Asians and Native Americans, but that was over 10,000 years ago.

   Evolution can change appearances greatly in 10,000 years.

9. Buru Says:
   May 6th, 2010 at 3:32 pm

   RVen4000″Young Kootenai woman from Idaho and a San Juan Pueblo man from New Mexico whose features are more “European””
   1.I was talking of a tribe/community with European features, not the exception.
   2.Indians were already absorbing Whites into their genes from rapes by Europeans, intermarriages,runaways,captured prisoners etc for 400years by the time this photo was taken so its not surprising if a random individual has some European traits.

   “*Some features that are considered “European” can also be found in other “races.”

   For example, it is well known that some Northern European’s high bridged nose and barrel chest are developed to compensate for high altitude cold climates.

   While similar terrains are scarce in Africa, some African mountain tribes also developed similar features.”
   I dont see much resemblance between a Sherpa and Northern Euro other than the barrel chest. U can only take the argument so far.

   The point is, racially based attributed physical characteristics are stereotypes.

   There is no such thing as what an “Asian” or a “Native American” should look like.

   To make the generalization that “Too much exposure to the sun will gave any Asian to be look like Native Indians” is stereotyping Native “Indians” and “Asians.”

   Native Americans don’t just look like Asians with darker skin color. They are as diverse in appearance as Asians are.

   Indeed there is no watertight compartment like ‘race’ but we are simply talking of the stereotype appearance here rather than engaging in pedantic debate on its biology.To illustrate, if somebody asks to differentiate a Mongoloid (egChinese) from a Negrito( eg Congolese)it should not be a difficult exercise.If a White European is asked to be picked up from a crowd of Amazon Indians it should not be difficult either. I think Jason meant it to be that way too.I am talking of the general rule, not exceptions.

10. raventhorn4000 Says:
    May 6th, 2010 at 4:55 pm

    Buru,

    I don’t think my examples were isolated individuals. If you read the website, the photos (OLD photos) were illustrative of entire tribes.

    And as you are admitting that you are using the “general rule”, then I rest my case about this being “rather general.”

11. Buru Says:
    May 6th, 2010 at 6:38 pm

    Ok fine Raven..

    this gives a good idea of what I am talking about (1877!)
    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:Creeks_in_Oklahoma.png

    There are many tribes today which requires 1/16th blood lineage to be called a member of a ‘tribe’ !

12. raventhorn4000 Says:
    May 6th, 2010 at 9:34 pm

    Buru,

    How about this one: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:Colbert.jpg. (1850’s)

    Holmes Colbert, A Chickasaw Native American, helped write the Chickasaw constitution

    Note the prominent high bridged nose.

    I don’t doubt that modern Native Americans are well mixed in bloodline, but it is historically documented that some Native American tribes have “European” looking features.

    Even in your photo, the 2nd man (unnamed), (I supposed also a Creek), has some “European” looking features.

13. S. K. Cheung Says:
    May 6th, 2010 at 10:31 pm

    On the one hand, Ed Wang will always be “historic” because he’ll be the first NFL player with fully Chinese heritage. In that sense, he shares such precedent-setting history with Yao, or the first black player to play in MLB, or the first Russian or first Swede to play in the NHL. At the same time, if you look at other historic “firsts” in terms of blazing a whole new trail, this is of much less significance. After all, he’s American by birth, and he honed his skills as a Hokie, which means the only distinguishing thing is skin colour. The trail-blazers in other sports brought new training methods and playing styles in addition to the new ethnicity/heritage.

    It’ll also be much more difficult for Wang to have the same impact on the game as Yao does in hoops. A big dominant 5 is a high profile player on both ends of the floor. The only time an OT gets noticed is when the DE beats him to sack the QB or to tackle the RB in the backfield. If an OT does his job perfectly, the casual observer would never notice him.

14. Buru Says:
    May 7th, 2010 at 4:36 am

    Exactly raven..in fact the photolink I gave was to illustrate the thorough mixing of White and Black blood with Reds by 1877 ..all the members in that photo were ‘Creeks’.

    The Chikasaws were perhaps already mixing with Whites by 1600s, the photo was taken 1850s.

    * On a related note, does the Entry of Yao, Ed Wang etc into traditionally white/black bastions like football and basketball illustrate the changing physical status of Chinese as a ‘race’ ? eg the Japanese were always portrayed as 5foot dwarves with little physical prowess during WW2 times, and even today in ‘Commando’ series comics based on WW2 stories..but their height/wt is almost at EU levels(non-Nordics) now, and we see them slugging toe-to-toe even in SuperHeavyweight categories of masculine sports like K1 and UFC/Pride.Similar depictions were made re the light physiques of the Chinese, Koreans and Viets etc. in their respective wars with the US/EU countries. South Koreans have made similar progress like the Japanese.Is it Chinese next( a reflection of its economic growth)? Here I am leaving out HK/S’Pore/Taiwan .
    I am mostly talking from a socio-economic argument, not racial.

15. raventhorn4000 Says:
    May 7th, 2010 at 1:18 pm

    Buru,

    I don’t know if there is any valid grounds to make the speculation that those men in the photos were already mixed in 1877. (which ones?) (Do you conclude that they were mixed BECAUSE they look more like Europeans or Africans, and then also conclude that their European like appearances must be result of mixing? That would be circular logic.)

    Surly, if the Japanese and the Chinese are changing in their physical characteristics, in terms of height and weight, (without mixing), Native Americans can have characteristics that are similar to European without “mixing”.

16. Buru Says:
    May 7th, 2010 at 4:56 pm

    Raven, there is no speculation or circular logic in what I posted..
    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Blood_quantum_laws

    If you are equating a quantum gain in height or weight as a result of better nutrition with evolution then I have nothing more to say.

17. raventhorn4000 Says:
    May 7th, 2010 at 7:39 pm

    Buru,

    What a group of mixed people look like does not prove or disprove what their ancestors look like.

    Evolution does have relationship to dietary changes.

    for example, it is well postulated that the increase in fatty meat consumption in humans lead to evolutionary development of larger brain size (which is mostly fatty tissue).

    And I wouldn’t call Ed Wang a “quantum gain in height or weight.” There have been plenty of tall and big people in China. It’s not like Ed’s parents are both short and skinny folks to start with.

18. buru Says:
    May 8th, 2010 at 2:45 pm

    Raven,

    1. you are repeatedly trying to put words in my mouth by design or default. You said I am speculating that the photos of creeks i presented were of mixed origin and using circular logic. I provided the new link to prove that they were actually photos of bonafide creeks illustrating the level of mixing even as early as 1877 ..now u simply pull this out of empty air “What a group of mixed people look like does not prove or disprove what their ancestors look like.”

    2.Nobody said evolution has no relation to dietary changes . I just put the examples of Japanese and South Koreans in achieving their full potential height/weight due to good nutrition and healthcare ,as an aside,and you twist it to mean I am suggesting diet has no relation to evolution.When there is no change in genetic composition there is NO evolution..since I dont expect the Japanese and South Korean genes to have been altered in 50 years I wouldnt call their collective weight/height gain as EVOLUTION but rather as simply fulfilling their genetic potential.

    3.European looks of Native Americans: You didnt say Caucasian, you said European. So the features you pointed out like higher ridge of nose are seen from Chinese Turkestan down to Srilanka, Arabia, Africa to Europe among Caucasoids. Since you pointedly said European looks I would have expected to have been presented with evidence of features almost-wholly/mostly seen in White Europeans and not among other caucasoids–like very low pigmentation, colored irises, colored hair, abundant body hair,stature etc .The links you provided have not shown any of these.

    4.The discussion is losing its utility so its best to close it. All the best.

19. raventhorn4000 Says:
    May 8th, 2010 at 6:16 pm

    Buru,

    1. 2. 4. I missed the part where you disputed my original assertion about some Native American tribes looking similar to “European.”

    3. That’s your misinterpretation of my original statement. As a reminder, Jason’s original statement was about “Asians with darker skin looking like Native Americans.” So obviously, we were not talking just about skin pigmentation as the similar characteristic. and in case of Ed Wang, we are obviously not talking about “stature.”

    Similarly, I don’t see any discussion about eye color, hair color, body hair above.

    So, beats me why you are deciding to go to those physical attributes now.

    Incidentally, the word “caucasoid” is an outdated term used in scientific racism, a concept that asserts the superiority of one race over another.

    In any case, the word “caucasoid” completely lacks scientific meaning, as the range of people you are describing, probably are mixed over time. (However, that does not prove or disprove which physical features are result of mixing or originally present in a group).

    Frankly, use of such outdated terms as “caucasoid” is stereotypical.

20. Buru Says:
    May 9th, 2010 at 2:52 am

    1.2.4. If you were not paying attention I disputed it from post1; That the phenomenon is mainly a result of recent absorption,or simply that the “European” features you pointed/showed were very non-specific traits applicable to many races .

    3.If I misinterpreted ur definition of European kindly set it in print here, then we will go from there, since you are constantly resetting ur ‘standards’. You flippantly use words “European looks” then engage on pedantic lecturing on stereotypy of “Caucasian” ;funny?

    Hows this look to you?

    incidentally, the word “European” is an outdated term used in scientific racism, a concept that asserts the superiority of one race over another.

    In any case, the word “European” completely lacks scientific meaning, as the range of people you are describing, probably are mixed over time. (However, that does not prove or disprove which physical features are result of mixing or originally present in a group).

    Frankly, use of such outdated terms as “European” is stereotypical.

21. Jason Says:
    May 9th, 2010 at 4:53 am

    I should have put this on to show what Ed Wang does best.
    

    Yahoo Sports wrote another piece on Ed Wang and the growing eruption and enthusiasms by the Chinese media.
    http://sports.yahoo.com/nfl/news?slug=ap-nflschinesehope

22. raventhorn4000 Says:
    May 9th, 2010 at 1:37 pm

    Buru,

    1. 2. 4. If you are suggesting that some physical characteristics are “typical” for a race, be my guest. As far as I know, anthropologists and geneticists have not been able to locate such “typical characteristics.”

    For skin pigmentation, according to (Norton et al., 2006), the light skin observed in Europeans (with deep red and/or yellowish skin tones), non-Indian Southeast Asians, East Asians, and North Africans (Maghreb) is due to independent genetic mutations in at least three loci.

    3. If you want me to set in my definitions, kindly not jump in to dispute my original statement before you asked.

    Actually, I engaged on your use of the word “Caucasoid” just to be accurate.

    and my original point was about there is no typical physical characteristics for race.

    My original statement, “Some features that are considered “European” can also be found in other “races.””

    Note: I didn’t say I considered those features “European”.

    I see nothing about the word “European” as outdated.

    “Caucasoid” however, http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Caucasoid

    “The term Caucasian race (or Caucasoid, sometimes also Europid, or Europoid[1]) denotes the race or phenotypes of some or all of the indigenous human populations of Europe, North Africa, the Horn of Africa, West Asia, Central Asia, and South Asia.[2][3] The classification has been used in scientific racism, a concept that asserts the superiority of one race over another.[citation needed]”

    If you consider “European” as an outdated word, set in print a more accurate word.

    (Because frankly, people still use “European” in print today as a common word, I don’t see many use “Caucasoid”.)

    I don’t object the word “Caucasoid” per se. However, your use of the word says much about your understanding of “race”. (also note your use of the word “Mongloid” and “Negrito?” in similar line for concept of race.)

    Let’s just say I can’t discuss this further based upon such an outdated theory from the 1800’s.

    And I would agree with you, the use of the word “European” is stereotypical. (Unfortunately, the word is not outdated. I wish it was, but people still use it.)

23. buru Says:
    May 9th, 2010 at 5:06 pm

    Raven,

    you go through my first posts as to what I mean by the ‘looks’ of a Negrito,White or Chinese– where I clearly stated that race cannot be compartmentalised by looks/genes but that I am using the most commonly associated features of a race( otherwise called stereotypy). You have yourself accepted “European” is a stereotypy but you want to continue using such words but has problems when others use such descriptive words?? You dont have to obfuscate by a pseudo-knowledge on what Norton et al said. That was never a point.Mine was simply a question on “European looks” which you volunteered first,not me.I never said whether European or Caucasoid or Martians were having same or different genes, its you who is dragging them in when you cant defend your original statement.

    I am still awaiting your definition of “European looks” so I can gauge where I stand again?
    And please dont try to wriggle away by giving some pseudo-scientific dribble.

24. S. K. Cheung Says:
    May 9th, 2010 at 9:03 pm

    To Jason,
    looks like he plays left tackle, which would be the “glamour” position, at least relative to other offensive linemen.

25. raventhorn4000 Says:
    May 9th, 2010 at 9:09 pm

    Buru,

    words like Caucasoid, Negrito, and Mongoloid are pseudo-scientific dribble.

    That was the point.

    At least we agree that race cannot be compartmentalized.

    If you wish to wait for my definition of “European Looks”, I guess I don’t know what your dispute with my original statement was all about.

    If Norton et al. (2006) is “pseudo-knowledge” according to you, then I don’t know what high academic standard would allow the use of “Caucasoid” (term from 1800’s). (“European” is still a currently used common word.)

    Well, how about you define your academic standard for “knowledge” first, so I can gauge whether we are even on the same page/era in history of human knowledge.

    Why is Norton et al. “pseudo-knowledge” in your opinion? Perhaps that would enlighten us more about your theories.

    Seems that you attack Norton et al. and then say it is irrelevant. (Norton addressed the skin pigmentation you brought up as a genetic mutation that occurred in 3 different locations on Earth).

    By all means, since you call it “pseudo-knowledge”, elaborate, so we may know what is “pseudo-scientific dribble” to you.

26. Buru Says:
    May 10th, 2010 at 2:43 am

    Raven,

    I said your pseudo knowledge on what Norton et al said.Its obvious you are picking up bits from journals which have no relevance to discussion and then conveniently misinterpreting my reply to mean I am challenging Norton duh* This attempt to steer the conversation to non-topics is what is dribble.

    Since U say words like Caucasoid are pseudo-scientific how about the complete passage from the link u provided(u tried to trick by quoting in part)? “The term Caucasian race (or Caucasoid, sometimes also Europid, or Europoid[1]) denotes the race or phenotypes of some or all of the indigenous human populations of Europe, North Africa, the Horn of Africa, West Asia, Central Asia, and South Asia.[2][3] The classification has been used in scientific racism, a concept that asserts the superiority of one race over another.[citation needed]

    In common use in American English, the term “Caucasian” (rarely supplemented with the word “race”) is sometimes restricted to Europeans and other lighter-skinned populations within these areas, and may be considered equivalent to the varying definitions of white people. The term continues to be widely used in many scientific and general contexts, usually with its more restricted sense of “white”, specifically White American in a US context.”
    The argument arose because you said Native Indians( unmixed) had European looks. I presumed to mean it as White Caucasian features, but you pontificated that there is no ‘race’ so talking of appearances by race/region is wrong.I agree race is not a fixed quantity but variable; now since the argument started with the “European looks” I ask you what you define are features of an European looks are, but you try to escape by posting all sorts of unrelated stuff including the genetic mutation leading to pigmentation.
    Now please define “EUROPEAN LOOKS” and settle the topic will you?

27. raventhorn4000 Says:
    May 10th, 2010 at 12:29 pm

    Buru,

    how is Norton’s genetic study of skin pigmentation not relevant? I thought you wanted to discuss skin pigmentation.

    As for “European looks”, or what is considered “European looks”, I point to my previous post# 7, referring to “high bridged nose” and “barrel chest”.

    I thought I rather made myself clear about which characteristics I was talking about, but apparently not.

    So what was the point of bring up skin pigmentation, when talking about the “high bridged nose” and “barrel chest”?

28. Buru Says:
    May 10th, 2010 at 4:46 pm

    Raven,
    you started with “Some Native American tribes have distinctly more European looks”

    and all you can come up after repeated attempts at feigning-off having to elaborate it ,is As for “European looks”, or what is considered “European looks”, I point to my previous post# 7, referring to “high bridged nose” and “barrel chest”.” LOL!
    moreover in a prev post u explained that “it is well known that some Northern European’s high bridged nose and barrel chest are developed to compensate for high altitude cold climates.” now you are suggesting it even encompasses the temperate Mediterranean and Nordic countries below sea level? LOL!
    and meanwhile you bombastically said “There is no such thing as what an “Asian” or a “Native American” should look like.” but has no problem using phrases like ” distinctly more European looks”

    Get a life man 🙂

29. r v Says:
    May 10th, 2010 at 8:43 pm

    Buru,

    I don’t know why you are getting personal about this.

    And I still don’t know what your point was in responding to my post # 7.

    If you want to talk about pedantic lecturing, I really don’t care what you consider as the difference between “European” and “Caucasoid”, since we already agreed that both are stereotypes.

    And as for my knowledge of Norton et al., whether I quote something of Norton neither proves nor disproves the extent of my knowledge.

    Your judgment of “pseudo-knowledge” of others is completely irrelevant to this topic.

    If that’s the extent of your “life”, you need a mirror.

30. buru Says:
    May 11th, 2010 at 12:36 pm

    “I don’t know why you are getting personal about this.”

    Its nothing personal friend..I just got fed up with your smartaleck one-liner answers in repeated threads 🙂

    Barrel chest and high bridge of nose are distinctly European looks, righto?

31. r v Says:
    May 11th, 2010 at 2:01 pm

    Speaking of twisting words and misinterpretations, I wrote “Some Native American tribes have distinctly MORE European looks, as do some Asians and Africans.”

    On that note, was your last sentence a question or some dispute? What’s the point?

    Oh well, you have a nice “life”, friend? Righto?

32. buru Says:
    May 11th, 2010 at 2:14 pm

    rv aka raventorn,

    I already highlighted the phrase u wrote in-toto 2 posts above, so once again u are trying to obfuscate via misinformation duh*

    The point about distictly MORE European looks is this :That assumption is rather general.

    Europeans have great diverse appearances among themselves.

    kekekekeke

33. r v Says:
    May 11th, 2010 at 2:48 pm

    Buru,

    You are rather repeating what I have already written.

    So, again, I don’t know what you point is, friend? Righto?

34. buru Says:
    May 11th, 2010 at 4:49 pm

    r.v. aka raventorn,

    one cannot wake up those who pretend to sleep: old jungle saying 😉

35. r v Says:
    May 11th, 2010 at 10:45 pm

    Buru,

    jungle saying is bananas and nuts. 🙂

36. No99 Says:
    May 14th, 2010 at 7:17 pm

    Well, if this attracts fans, I guess it’s a positive thing.

    Although, I’m not sure how American football will do well in the Chinese market. A lot of places have their own contact sports, like Rugby, Aussie Rules, and Hockey. There’s also wrestling and MMA. It’s really a cultural thing as well. I’m pretty sure there are plenty of people in China who like such activities, but American football is a bit too technical.

37. american football Says:
    July 27th, 2010 at 10:57 pm

    I also think that american football will not be able to deliver there earlier performance in the chinese market.

Trackbacks

1. When is a Chinese not a Chinese? | Asian Correspondent
2. When is a Chinese not a Chinese? | Travel Wire Asia

Leave a Reply