You’ve undoubtedly heard the stereotype that every Asian person excels at STEM. According to a Pew 2023 survey, roughly 63% of Asian American respondents said they had faced “model minority” stereotypes in their day-to-day interactions.1 The Model Minority Myth (MMM) is a pervasive misconception that has persisted in America since its founding. Every day, people casually reproduce the myth within offline and online discourse. The MMM not only stereotypes Asian Americans, but also creates expectations and pressures for Asian Americans within their communities; treats Asians as a monolithic people; and is a form of anti-Blackness. The model minority myth persists because its rhetoric disguises racism as praise: by selectively celebrating Asian Americans as hardworking, exceptionally smart, and docile, those who spread the myth recast hard work as cultural merit at the expense of Black Americans and other marginalized groups.

The MMM has persisted for centuries. To understand how the myth began, we must first examine the history of Asian ethnic groups in the United States. In the late 1800s, the Central Pacific leadership wanted to build the Transcontinental Railroad using an all-white workforce, but only a few responded and subsequently left to chase the next gold strike.2 The next available workforce finished the railroad: 12,000 to 15,000 Chinese immigrants. Unfortunately, xenophobia became rampant in the United States soon after they finished the railroad, causing Congress to enact the Chinese Exclusion Act in 1882.3 The act barred Chinese immigration and prevented Chinese immigrants from naturalizing. Fast-forward to World War II: China became a U.S. ally, and Congress repealed the Chinese Exclusion Act.

Following Pearl Harbor, the American government recast Chinese Americans as “good” Asians in contrast to “bad” Japanese.4 Americans feared the Japanese; however, they could not differentiate between the two, leading to Americans harassing the Chinese population. A WWII propaganda piece written for LIFE Magazine highlights this fear by explaining how white American readers can “tell” the difference between the two; already, the word “tell” in the title gives the reader a sense of authority in sorting people into “safe” versus “dangerous.” The diagram claims the Chinese have a “parchment yellow complexion,”5 whereas the Japanese have an “earthy yellow complexion.”6 This piece teaches readers to visually sort allies from enemies based on facial features. While these differences may seem empirical, the rhetoric utilizes scientific authority to justify racial categorizations. The author describes a Chinese public servant, Ong Wen-hao, as “delicately boned,” “slenderly built,” and wearing a “rational calm of tolerant realists.”7 These phrases paint Chinese people as civilized and rational.

In contrast, the author describes Japan’s prime minister, General Hideki Tojo, as “massive,” with a “heavy beard,” and showing the “humorless intensity of ruthless mystics.”8 The author’s diction here portrays the Japanese as primitive and threatening, echoing the fears from Pearl Harbor. The author claims Chinese people are European-adjacent, asserting that “Chinese sometimes pass for Europeans.”9 This claim measures the worthiness of the Chinese through proximity to whiteness, with the Chinese superior to the Japanese. The author constructs a racial hierarchy where proximity to whiteness equates to goodness. In the 1940s, the American government touted an all-Japanese unit that suffered heavy casualties fighting against German forces in Europe during WWII as a positive example of patriotism, reshaping the Japanese American image. However, this logic still underpins the model minority myth.

The rhetoric within the MMM includes the misconception that Asian American success is culturally inherent, which implies that other minority groups like Black Americans fail due to cultural deficiencies rather than systemic racism. During the Cold War, politicians such as Richard Nixon and George Wallace chose to popularize Black and brown Americans as “problem minorities” compared to the passive, hardworking Chinese and now Japanese minorities. Howard M. Imazeki, the longtime English-section editor of San Francisco’s Japanese American daily Hokubei Mainichi newspaper, offers a striking example of an Asian American contributing to the MMM. Born in Japan in 1907, Imazeki immigrated to the United States at age eleven and was incarcerated at Tule Lake during WWII.10 Yet in 1963, he argued that the Black community needed to better itself and its environment to secure equal rights. Imazeki divides inter-community solidarity, arguing that “The Negroes have led their lives of their own. […] in the South especially were people far detached from our lives.”11 Imazeki perpetuates a “racial wedge” against other communities and asserts proximity to whiteness by declaring that Black Americans are separate from the Japanese communities. The separation between “our lives” and “their lives” reflects Imazeki’s belief: there are two different groups with completely different lives. This idea prevails through phrases like “lives of their own” and “far detached,” creating distance between the two groups. The choice to emphasize “The Negroes in the South especially” rather than all people living in the South demonstrates Imazeki’s emphasis on racial separation. He continues, “They blame society for their woman-folks giving birth to illegitimate children and living on welfare checks.”12 Imazeki creates specifically harmful rhetoric about Black women through his diction. By referring to Black women as “woman-folks,” Imazeki contributes to the intersectional invisibility: the separation of Black women from Black men and white women.

Additionally, Imazeki’s generalization that Black women have illegitimate children and rely on welfare checks implies that Japanese women do not behave similarly. Not only does this rhetoric contribute to the wedge between Black and Japanese communities, but it also contributes to society’s stereotype of the Japanese (and later other Asian groups) as hard-working people, a culturally inherent result, who, according to society, do not need “handouts” from the government to succeed. Imazeki emphasizes this point: “they blame all of their anti-social habits and cultural maladjustment on the ‘unjust’ community in which they live.”13 Imazeki not only denigrates Black Americans but also argues their inability to integrate into American society stems from their own lack of discipline and work ethic, unlike the Japanese.

Black activists led the struggle for the Civil Rights Act of 1964, which benefited Asian Americans.14 Simultaneously, the media and politicians doubled down on the model minority narrative and the assertion that Asian Americans are the ideal minority. Two landmark articles in 1966 cemented this.

Sociologist William Petersen affirmed this narrative in “Success Story: Japanese-American Style.” Petersen’s use of “success story” in the title frames the Japanese as a model group, priming readers to interpret the article as the triumph of the Japanese over their historic struggles in America. He claims Japanese Americans are “better than any other group” because they succeeded with “almost totally unaided effort” and produced a success story with “ no parallel.”15 His rhetoric echoes Imazeki’s idea that the Japanese do not rely on welfare, inherently putting other groups down through his praise. He deepens that praise by describing them as “exceptionally law-abiding,” associating them with “achievement orientation.”16 Petersen’s diction connotes that other groups are prone to breaking the law, unlike the respectable Japanese. The phrase “achievement orientation” serves a similar purpose: Japanese Americans excel academically and professionally, achieving success beyond what other minorities have achieved. His rhetoric continues when he paints Japanese Americans as the hardest workers, followed by the Chinese, demonstrating roots for the MMM. Petersen emphasizes their “greater attachment to family” and “greater respect for parental and other authority.”17 Petersen’s rhetoric frames Asian Americans as the “best minority” because he praises them as the epitome of many American societal values, like being family-oriented and hard-working. Petersen’s descriptive rhetoric contributes to another side of the MMM: Asian Americans are studious and good at schoolwork. He calls Japanese American students “squares” who dress with “unostentatious neatness,”18 language that frames Japanese Americans as modest and disciplined. This rhetoric does more than compliment Japanese Americans; it constructs them as a model minority whose value lies in hard work, obedience, and closeness to dominant American norms. Petersen uses that idealized image to imply that other minority groups fail because they lack those same traits rather than because they face systemic racism.

Chinese Americans faced similar praise from American society, laying the groundwork for the MMM. In 1966, an uncredited author praised Chinese Americans: A Protestant pastor explains, “we’re a big family […] nobody will respect any member of the family who does not work and who just plays around.”19 The author uses a community leader’s authority to frame the Chinese American community as obedient, attributing this to their familial upbringing. Rhetoric describing Chinese culture and familial expectations as “expected to attend school faithfully, [work] hard at their studies—and stay out of trouble,” frames Chinese American children as academically focused and well disciplined.20 The diction and attitude present these behaviors as normal for children, as if built into Chinese culture: Asian students are naturally studious and obedient. The author’s repetition of “strict discipline” emphasizes control and obedience, constructing the stereotype that Asian success comes from rigid family discipline.21 A high-praise attitude underscores this rhetoric: “if school performance is poor […] there is an immediate improvement” and “schoolteachers reportedly are competing for posts in schools with large numbers of Chinese-American children.”22 These comments emphasize the belief that Asian students are naturally good students because of their families and culture; however, they socially validate and reward the stereotype about Chinese-American children. Teachers view Chinese students as desirable because they seem easier to teach. This emphasis on Asian success resulting only from inherent cultural differences overshadows Asian achievement by reframing it as a cultural inevitability.

Redditor Mindless_Engineer asks, “why Asians are stereotyped as good at math and science?”23 Redditor TheDratman answers, “Culture. Their culture promotes rapid learning and more work, which leads to more developed knowledge of math and science. If we studied and worked the way they do, we’d be the same.”24 This answer reflects how Asian American successes are not only diminished as the norm culturally, but also how Asians are exemplary because their achievements are a result of their cultural discipline. Furthermore, TheDratman’s closing line implies that success is simply a formula, which erases the structural barriers other groups face.

Redditor JcDonovan154 says, “Asians are the best race: They’re super open-minded and respectful.”25 Commenters like JcDonovan154 might ask how this type of comment could be harmful despite its complimentary tone. Shouldn’t people be happy to be praised? While these positive stereotypes may seem flattering, they perpetuate the idea that Asian Americans are a monolithic group that holds the same behavioral characteristics regardless of ethnic origin, culture, or background. In this view, East Asians, Southeast Asians, and South Asians share the same qualities: intelligence, docility, and hard work. These “positive” stereotypes also offered no real protection for Asian Americans from anti-Asian violence related to the COVID-19 pandemic. Between March 2020 and December 2021, Stop AAPI Hate received 10,905 reports of hate incidents against Asian Americans and Pacific Islanders. Race was cited as a reason in over 90% of these reports.26 People engaged in hate speech and crimes against Asian Americans regardless of their individual ethnic origin.

Some agree with the MMM but do not see Asians as a monolithic people. Responding to JcDonovan154’s post, another Reddit user, confused_ml, asked, “we’re talking about far east asians and not south asians, right?”27 While this perspective may not align with the monolithic people generalization, it exemplifies how the MMM harms those within the Asian community who are not East Asian. This perspective subjects non-East Asian individuals to the same treatment that “problem minorities” face from the racial hierarchy belief.

It’s hard to remain unaffected by societal norms or beliefs like the MMM. While some feel that these stereotypes are positive and important to demonstrate minority success in America, the MMM both harms Asian Americans and other minorities. Before believing and perpetuating these stereotypes, it’s important to recognize their larger impacts: a 2025 study found that “Asian American students reported significantly higher exposure to academic stereotypes than international peers. Academic stereotypes were associated with poorer mental health among Asian American students.”28 Smaller comments about “how math should be easy for an Asian” contribute to the pressures that Asian American students feel.29 By flattening Asian success into a cultural given, the myth leaves Asian Americans feeling that their achievements are never enough. The affirmative action debates exemplify how conservative groups continuously target Asian Americans who weaponize this myth and its rhetoric.

Bibliography

Notes

1. Neil G. Ruiz, Carolyne Im, Ziyao Tian, “Discrimination Experiences Shape Most Asian Americans’ Lives,” Pew Research Center, November 30, 2023, https://www.pewresearch.org/race-ethnicity/2023/11/30/discrimination-experiences-shape-most-asian-americans-lives/.

2. Densho, “Inventing the ‘Model Minority’: A Critical Timeline and Reading List,” Densho, December 15, 2021. https://densho.org/catalyst/inventing-the-model-minority-a-critical-timeline-and-reading-list/.

3. Vanessa Hua, “Golden Spike Redux,” National Parks, Summer 2019, https://www.npca.org/articles/2192-golden-spike-redux.

4. Densho, “Inventing the ‘Model Minority’: A Critical Timeline and Reading List.”

5. “How to Tell Japs from the Chinese,” LIFE, December 22, 1941, 81.

6. “How to Tell Japs from the Chinese,” 81.

7. “How to Tell Japs from the Chinese,” 81.

8. “How to Tell Japs from the Chinese,” 81.

9. “How to Tell Japs from the Chinese,” 81.

10. Densho Encyclopedia, s.v. “Howard Imazeki,” https://encyclopedia.densho.org/Howard_Imazeki.

11. Howard M. Imazeki, “Editorial Grist: A Nisei Speaks To,, Negroes,” Colbert Country Reporter, August 22, 1963.

12. Imazeki, “Editorial Grist: A Nisei Speaks To Negroes.”

13. Imazeki, “Editorial Grist: A Nisei Speaks To Negroes.”

14. Densho, “Inventing the ‘Model Minority’: A Critical Timeline and Reading List.”

15. William Petersen,“Success Story, Japanese-American Style,” The New York Times, January 9, 1966, 2-3.

16. Petersen,“Success Story, Japanese-American Style,” 11-12.

17. Petersen,“Success Story, Japanese-American Style,” 13.

18. Petersen,“Success Story, Japanese-American Style,” 8-10.

19. “Success Story of One Minority Group in U.S.,” U.S. News and World Report, December 26, 1966, 6.

20. “Success Story of One Minority Group in U.S.,” 6.

21. “Success Story of One Minority Group in U.S.,” 6.

22. “Success Story of One Minority Group in U.S.,” 6.

23. Mindless_Engineer, “ELI5: Why are Asians good at math and science? Or are they not?,” Reddit, 2015, https://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/2tdw9z/eli5_why_are_asians_good_at_math_and_science_or/.

24. TheDratman, comment on Mindless_Engineer, “ELI5: Why are Asians good at math and science? Or are they not?”

25. JcDonovan154, “Asians are the best race,” Reddit, 2019, https://www.reddit.com/r/unpopularopinion/comments/apdwk2/asians_are_the_best_race/.

26. Stop AAPI Hate, “National Report,” March 2022, https://stopaapihate.org/national-report/.

27. confused_ml, comment on JcDonovan154, “Asians are the best race,” Reddit, 2019, https://www.reddit.com/r/unpopularopinion/comments/apdwk2/asians_are_the_best_race/.

28. Changyue Li, Linda Serra Hagedorn, and Hang Cui, “The Model Minority Myth and Asian Students’ Mental Health: A Comparative Analysis of Asian American and international Stuents and the Moderating Role of Citizenship Status,” Cultural Diversity & Ethnic Minority Psychology, Jul 28, 2025, https://doi.org/10.1037/cdp0000764.

29. Li, Hagedorn, and Cui, “Model Minority Myth and Asian Students’ Mental Health.”