By Yullianne L.

Picture this: you’re a young Asian woman on TikTok, vlogging GRWMs and lip-syncing to songs. Everyone is supportive of your platform—until you show your white boyfriend.

Suddenly, your comment section is flooded with one phrase: “Oxford study.”

The phrase refers to an academic study out of Oxford University that examined how TV advertisements shaped perceptions of romantic relationships between white men and Asian women. The study concluded that Asian women are disproportionately sexualized and objectified—but it’s been misquoted online to claim that Asian women “prefer” white men.

That so-called “finding” has taken on a life of its own on social media.

This trend—an oversimplification at best and a dangerous distortion at worst—shows how the degradation and racialization of Asian women is normalized on TikTok.

The Oxford study didn’t prove desire or preference. It revealed patterns shaped by algorithmic suggestion and historical power dynamics. It showed how Asian women are often reduced to tropes of being submissive or exotic. These narratives didn’t emerge overnight—they’re rooted in media portrayals and colonial histories.

Nowhere is this more misleading than on TikTok, where the narrative has morphed into a toxic trend. Videos featuring Asian women and white men often go viral—not in celebration of love, but because they reinforce the tired “white savior/exotic Asian girlfriend” trope.

The comments that follow push these toxic narratives even further, turning actual people into caricatures for clout.

This dynamic is baked into the platform itself: TikTok’s algorithm rewards content that conforms to stereotypes while burying or punishing content that challenges racial or gendered norms. Meanwhile, Asian women who speak out against this fetishization are often labeled ungrateful, angry, or divisive.

The “Oxford study” has been weaponized to justify the very thing it tried to condemn: the ongoing objectification of Asian women, valued only through a white lens.

We need to call this out for what it is—not “preference,” but another face of misogyny, wrapped in pseudoscience and likes.