Abstract

Empirical and evidence-based researchers have neglected stigmatization, bias, name-calling, intolerance and even hatemongering experienced by military Filipino Amerasians and other biracial Pan Amerasian progeny who were abandoned abroad by their U.S. servicemen fathers. This condi- tion persists in the Philippines and has been reliably documented in other East and Southeast Asian nation-states, such as Japan, South Korea, and Vietnam. A relatively recent multiple-case study investigating psychosocial risk and mental health among Amerasians in Angeles, Pampanga, site of the former Clark Air Base, substantiated long-reported anecdotal claims that Anglo (White) and particularly African (Black) Amerasians were targets of victimization and traumatized by verbal harassment, hate, and occasional violence by mainstream Filipino natives or foreigners. These marginalized Amerasians faced stigmatization and ridicule because of skin color and pig- ment differences, uncommon facial features, hair texture variances and dif- ferential personal demeanors. Even more severe criticism was against Africans and Anglos because of the unproven, stereotypical view that the vast majority of Amerasian mothers were sex workers. For this reason, it was held that many servicemen rejected these children. The notion that within a pluralistic, multiracial society Filipino Amerasians experienced less discrimination and prejudice than might be expected within a more racially homogenous in part set the stage for the U.S. Citizen and Immigra- tion Services to diminish easements for Amerasians. In contrast to other nation-states where Amerasians reside (e.g., South Korea, Vietnam, Thai- land, and Cambodia), the belief is that stigmatization and its correlates are higher. However, these faulty conclusions take on exceptional geopolitical sensitivity in the realities that marginalized Amerasians face in the Philip- pines, a former U.S. colony and commonwealth.

Highlights

  • Estimates vary widely and inconclusively as to the precise number of mixed-heritage, biracial military Filipino Amerasians living in the Republic of the Philippines (“R.P.”) today

  • What remains uncontested is that for a long time anecdotal accounts, news media reports, and a sparse volume of empirical researchers have contended that military Filipino Amerasians and Pan Amerasians face significant stigmatization largely due to their mixed-race characteristics and controversy of birth origin

  • Attention to the AMO Triangle and the human travail that Filipino Amerasians confronted rapidly lost its luster once the U.S Court of Claims in Washington D.C. dismissed before trial a $69 million class action suit, Acebedo vs. United States (1993)

Read more

Summary

Introduction

Estimates vary widely and inconclusively as to the precise number of mixed-heritage, biracial military Filipino Amerasians living in the Republic of the Philippines (“R.P.”) today. The height of contemporary public concern over the comparatively obscure if underreported Filipino-Amerasian human tragedy seemed to reach its apogee not long after entrenched, permanent bases relocated in 1991-1992. At this time, the Philippine Senate voted not to renew extension of the Republic of the Philippines – United States The suit was brought against the U.S Government and the Department of Navy on behalf of stranded, abandoned, and orphaned Amerasian children in the areas surrounding U.S Naval Base Subic Bay, Naval Air Station, Cubi Point, and the U.S Naval Communications Station- Philippines, San Miguel, all located near Olongapo City, Zambales. The cause of action sought child support, day care, job training, and other compensation (Maclear, 1995; Montes, 1995) for many thousands of impoverished Filipina national mothers, caretakers, and foster parents

Methods
Results
Discussion
Conclusion
Full Text
Published version (Free)

Talk to us

Join us for a 30 min session where you can share your feedback and ask us any queries you have

Schedule a call