It’s quite fascinating to watch the reactions from different countries to the bombshell interview with Meghan Markle and Prince Harry by Oprah. That most Americans applaud Meghan and Harry for their courage to break away from the monarchy and speak their truth is not surprising, nor is the fact that the Brits are divided with many defending the monarchy while others demonstrating more sympathy towards the ex-royals. The most interesting reactions came from China, a country that should be neutral with no vested interests one way or the other, and it’s overwhelmingly negative against Meghan, accusing her of being a gold digger, a vampire who not only took away the beloved prince but also plotted to destroy the royal family, a schemer who played her race card to get attention and make millions. Some even came up with the revenge story of Harry, of how this is his way of getting back at the royal family for what they have done to his mother.

I don’t claim to be any expert on the subject matter, and admittedly I have been brainwashed by American ideologies, but what I see are two people who are very much in love with each other. They tried to abide by the convention but could not because there is a mismatch between who they are and how the monarchy and the Institution operate. This mismatch and conflict resulted in a painful severance for both sides and the interview is Meghan and Harry telling their side of the story.

These are basic facts but people can come to vastly different conclusions based on their own perspectives. If you believe the monarchy is a symbol of tradition and stability, rebels like Meghan and Harry are disruptors to that world order and therefore a threat not only to the monarchy, but to everything you are brought up to believe in, everything you ground yourself on. And to restore that world order, at least in your mind, you have to believe people like Meghan and Harry are evil in some way or at a minimum unsympathetic – how is the wonderful life of a prince and a duchess not enough for them? What else can they possibly want? But if you believe the monarchy tradition is outdated and built on English colonialism which is unjustified and should have been abolished a long time ago, then you resonate with the pain felt by Meghan and Harry and the yearning they have for freedom. And despite their extraordinary privileges, you find them sympathetic and their story relatable. You see, it’s not about Meghan and Harry. It is all about YOU!

I first learned about how our perception of the world can be shaped by our own upbringing, our past experiences, and our belief system in my social psychology classes twenty some years ago. And I pride myself in being fully aware of the influence of biases and stereotypes and always consciously trying to correct them, but it is not until recently that I came to recognize just how blind we can be to these unconscious biases.

This brings me to Hillary Clinton. Even though I voted for Hillary in 2016, I never liked her as a person. Not that I know a lot about her to pinpoint why I dislike her. I never read her biography or studied her, but somehow, my woman’s intuition tells me that she is not genuine. And I’m not alone – one of the key reasons why she lost her presidential bid is the likability factor – that Hillary Clinton is not likable. My opinion about her started to change, rather dramatically, after I listened to a few interviews with her on podcasts. Granted these interviews are done after the 2016 election at a time when she can afford to be more relaxed, she comes across as someone who is not only intelligent, but also very warm and authentic – someone you would find enjoyable as a dinner companion. Then I watched the Hulu documentary about her and it hit me just how unfair I have been to rely on my biased intuition and make judgments about a woman whom I barely knew and everything I knew about her was fed to me by media which had its own agenda. That the reason why I disliked her was because she seemed incapable of showing her vulnerabilities and she seemed stiff in front of the camera, which I took as a sign that she must have something to hide. Little did I bother to think that as a woman fighting for women’s rights in a world dominated by men, she had to toughen up and hide all her emotions. That hardened façade is her coping mechanism, which paradoxically, has become the authentic her over the years. How unreasonable it is for me to expect her to unlearn everything she has learned over the decades just because I have been conditioned to believe a woman leader must somehow be simultaneously strong and vulnerable. We never impose the same standards on men!

I also came to recognize I wrongfully resented her decision to stick with Bill Clinton after his betrayal and took that as a letdown for the feminist movement, but what I failed to see is even as a public figure shouldering the responsibilities of an entire movement, Hillary had every right to make the right decision for herself and her family. That above all, she was the victim here and Bill, not Hillary, was the one to have resentful feelings towards, and even Bill may deserve forgiveness. The most touching moment in the documentary is when the whole Monica Lewinsky scandal broke out and Bill and Hillary left the White House to get away from public spotlight. That short walk from the White House to Air Force One could have been the longest walk in their lives if it were not for Chelsea who graciously came in between them and held both of their hands. That moment, I saw an ordinary family on a painful journey to healing and my heart went out to all three of them.

That moment I realized I never saw Hillary as a real person. I saw her as an abstract, symbolic figure to help break through the glass ceiling and in order to deserve that pedestal, she had to be perfect, at least much much better than what I can do.  Unconsciously I have been affected by the scarcity mentality – that we came to believe there are only a few spots for women in powerful positions and any women who deserve to be up there have to live up to impossible standards. In fact, I find this a common pattern – we are sometimes the harshest critics of our own kind.

Take Chloe Zhao as another example. Most of her criticism came from China, condemning her as not being loyal enough to her Chinese identity. Interestingly, what made Chloe successful is the fact that in her journey as a Chinese living in America, she was able to identify with people who look nothing like her, who share no common cultural roots or backgrounds. Humanity, at its core, transcends it all, gender, race, tribe, social status, and border. Her critics, blinded by their own biases, have failed to appreciate her as a heroine in her own journey overcoming enormous obstacles, and are instead trying to make her fit into their own agenda while exposing the irony that they are missing the exact point she is making, consciously or not. Can’t we forget for a moment that we are Chinese or American or Chinese American, and just celebrate the fact that regardless of our citizenship, we are all ethnic Chinese and a Chinese woman has come to Hollywood and claimed victory?

And what about Andrew Yang? As the first Chinese American to run for President, he initially garnered a lot of intrigue and support from the Chinese American community. But just as quickly, the backlash began – he has sold his soul to the Democrats. He is not fighting against affirmative action, one of the most contentious issues within the Asian American community. His UBI policy is just another form of social welfare. I don’t agree with Andrew Yang on every issue – in fact, I have never found anyone I would agree everything with – but I admire his seemingly outrageous and yet extremely insightful and innovative policies, I trust his passion for politics came from a true desire to help people and solve problems, I respect the fact in exploring this unprecedented path, he may have to compromise sometimes, losing a battle in order to win the war. But above all, I feel obliged to suspend any negative judgment because I appreciate he has chosen an unorthodoxy and difficult path that could benefit generations of Asian Americans for years to come. And the least I can do is to not be an obstacle.

Yes, it’s easy for us to judge public figures like Meghan, Hillary, Chloe, and Andrew Yang, but we should at a minimum acknowledge our judgment is based on our personal perspectives, and frequently our biased worldview. It is indeed not about them, but rather, a reflection of who we are. And along with that acknowledgement also comes a choice: Who do we want to be? The person who is quick to point out the flaws in these nonconformists because they do not fit neatly into our version of the real or idealized world, or the person who sees these trailblazers as heroes braving a path few have traveled by and as imperfect and treacherous their journeys may be, we will cheer them on and lift them up, because “we rise by lifting others”.