Timeline: A Brief History of the Philippines

Invisibility

How is it that Filipinos can be one of the largest Asian American groups while being one of the most invisible? Some scholars have attempted to answer this question by examining Filipinos’ unique history and relationship to America.

​

Erika Lee classifies the history of the Filipino American experience into three distinct periods: 1900s-1920s, 1930s-World War II, and World War II-present. Lee considers the first period to be when Filipinos were deemed “little brown brothers,” a term coined by President Taft that embodies Filipinos’ position as looked down upon and exploited, especially in agricultural work in Hawaii and California (174). As immigration increased and anti-immigrant and anti-Asian sentiment flared in the 1930s, “Filipinos were increasingly characterized not as “little brown brothers” but as another “Asiatic invasion” that was worse than the Chinese, Japanese, and South Asian “invasions” that had preceded them” (184) and their image shifted dramatically to something dangerous, backwards, uncivilized, and criminal. During this time, anti-Filipino violence exploded (Lee 186), and it was not until World War II that conditions improved. According to Lee, World War II was transformative in the treatment of Filipino Americans. This is reflected in both policy—as The Philippines gained its independence, the Filipino immigration quota was increased, and veterans and their families were able to immigrate independent of the quota—and in greater acceptance by their fellow Americans (258). Lee’s explanation of Filipino history seems to mark World War II as the point where Filipinos were finally treated as true Americans and all issues of prejudice and struggle were solved. If this were really the case, it does not explain Filipino Americans’ continued extreme underrepresentation in American culture.

Elizabeth Pisares looks at Filipino history less as distinct periods and more as attitudes and ideologies that persist into the present, to varying degrees. She summarizes:

“Filipino-American social invisibility emerges from the culture of U.S. imperialism, specifically the historical legacies of colonialism and the racial ideology of orientalism that shut them out from the social processes producing institutional knowledge about race. Consequently, Filipino Americans experience the culture of U.S. imperialism as their exclusion from racial discourse.” (Pisares)

​

The issue of invisibility is so extreme and unlike any other Asian American group because their history and relationship to the US in unlike any group. Pisares argues that Filipinos' complex colonial history puts them in a gray area in which their identity cannot be talked about in racial terms. Instead, Filipino Americans have to construct their identities around how they relate to other racial groups, or to gender and sexuality (434-435).

​

There really is no clear-cut answer as to why Filipinos are so underrepresented in American media and academia, but talking about and attempting to answer that question at least brings more attention to the issue. Because the issue is one of silence, discussing and trying to understand it simultaneously contributes to its solution. Ultimately, solving the problem requires that Filipino American issues and narratives be talked about, that their absence be noticed. This gave me the idea for my project.