I saw Justin Chin as having double minority status—as being “otherized” twice, once for his ethnic/racial identity, and once for his sexual orientation. In “Slammed”, Chin was acutely aware of his double minority status: “in Ann Arbor, I was one of three Asians in a sea of over three hundred competitors. And as far as openly queer work goes, I was again in a serious minority” (81), and probably rightly so, as the audience did not react well to his works. I was appalled at the reactions his work incited, such as the straight couple who “decided to start making out” (82) and a man who had to be restrained so he wouldn’t hit Chin. It’s ridiculous that people would have such adverse reactions to someone reading poetry. Chin’s poetry didn’t hurt anyone, at worst, it offended, and at best, it touched and moved people, opened up their lives to “a different reality” (82).

Chin moves on from the negative reactions to his controversial poem to an article written about “issue poetry” (83). The article’s argument portrayed minorities as people who exploited the guilt of everyone who was not a minority for a good score in a slam, not as people who simply want to share their experiences. It sounded more like they were people who had had these experiences because of their minority status, but then instead of accepting these experiences and moving on, they would use their experiences to create the optimal amount of guilt. The article made a point, and yet at the same time, essentially said that people shouldn’t try to share their experiences of racism and sexism because “some issue poetry is actually also well-written and personal but those poets are in the minority by a long-shot” (84). “Playing the Race Card” (85), as Chin puts it, was a common accusation, but it was only made if the poem received a good score. If the poem received a low score, “obviously… the Race Card wasn’t played, or was played but the white judges (and they usually are) were too smart to fall for it.” (85) The effect of the “Race Card” is the portrayal of people of color as self-interested and manipulative, as people who use their experiences to guilt trip the judges and get good scores rather than just to share them, which just isn’t true. It is conceivable that a few people would have played up the issue of race to gain points, but it’s just not fair to accuse any person of color who receives a good score of “playing the Race Card”.

This issue brings to mind anti-feminist (and anti-minority) arguments that claim that we are already equal, and thus women and minorities should stop complaining, or that women and minorities play up the inequalities to gain an unfair advantage over the white male American. This is a counter argument that is made often, and it can be applied to anyone claiming discrimination or inequality. Essentially, the argument made in the article Chin mentions and the accusation of “playing the Race Card” are the same.

I noticed that Chin described his team as “like the Mod Squad, a multi-culti group (woman, Chinese, Black, gay, straight, Filipino/Latino, white)” (80) This description seemed a little off to me, although it may just be because I’m taking a women’s studies and an Asian American studies class. Why is it that he mentions that a woman is on the team, but not a man? (And we know that there is at least one man on the team.) He mentions two minorities as well as the dominant ethnic group (white), and yet he doesn’t bother to mention men. It’s as if we automatically assume that a person is a man, unless otherwise specified. He seems to give differences of race and sexual orientation attention, but he doesn’t delve into genders. I might be reading too much into it, because it’s just one line, but I did circle it when I was reading, so I must have thought it was important. (On a possibly irrelevant sidenote, when I typed asian american in word, it automatically capitalized American, but not Asian. Is that a coincidence?)