Comments

  • What is "cultural appropriation" ?


    It's clearly not only about money. Even in the examples given, that's only part of the equation. Aping cultures' (especially endangered ones') traditions in a way that stereotypes or denigrates them, regardless of financial considerations, is just as much, if not more, a form of unwelcome appropriation. How damaging it is would depend on the power relations involved, the type of cultural behaviour copied, its importance to the culture, in what way its appropriated, the level of impact on the culture and so on. @Bitter Crank tucking into a bowl of Irish stew would not bother an Irish person in the least (though they might wonder why he couldn't find something decent to eat). On the other hand, a well-known actor wearing an American Indian headdress and traditional tattoos for fun and encouraging others to do so could be offensive and damaging. Etc.
  • What is "cultural appropriation" ?


    @Coben has pretty well covered the type of examples I'd want to talk about though I may dig up a few more later. In any case, my issue here stems primarily from the fact that cultural appropriation is another buzz concept (like PC), the misuses of which are presented in the media as typical in a way that obscures the potential import of the issue in certain contexts. It's much more entertaining and profitable—and often politically expedient—to select examples of misguided, or even downright perverse, accusations of cultural appropriation—the "Unhand that burrito!"/"Unmouth that German phrase!" type—than to seriously explore the other side of it. And the result is a sowing of seeds of ignorance, the harvest of which is not only bushels of increased ad revenue but streams of useful idiots to spread an anti-PC, anti-left, anti-progressive message. (Of course, if overzealous/confused liberals kept themselves more in check, the media wouldn't have so much to buzz over, so it's not all on the newsies.)
  • The Blind Spot of Science and the Neglect of Lived Experience


    Ok, I'll leave my defence of our apehood at that. It is more or less off-topic.
  • What is "cultural appropriation" ?
    I will leave this here though which presents a fairly balanced view of an issue that is not about PC outrage over people eating burritos or using German words.

    http://jan.ucc.nau.edu/~rar/papers/RogersCT2006.pdf

    "Cultural appropriation ... is an active process ...The active ‘‘making one’s own’’ of another culture’s elements occurs ... in various ways, under a variety of conditions, and with varying functions and outcomes. The degree and scope of voluntariness (individually or culturally), the symmetry or asymmetry of power relations, the appropriation’s role in domination and/or resistance, the nature of the cultural boundaries involved, and other factors shape, and are shaped by, acts of cultural appropriation."
  • U.S. Women's Soccer - Belittling the Gender Pay Equality issue


    I tend to agree in this case. Male soccer players of a similar skill to those female players also get paid considerably less than the best male players. And if it's not skill or revenue or difficulty of work that determines pay, what is it?
  • What is "cultural appropriation" ?


    Lol. Have I now upset your PC sensibilities? It was a joke. At least you got it, I suppose. Anyhow, try Googling cultural appropriation to find out what it is and why it may be more than what Fox News (or whoever) tells you. I'm not going to hold your hand on this.
  • The Blind Spot of Science and the Neglect of Lived Experience
    So the appeal to humans as simply being apes is biological reductionism...Wayfarer

    I don't remember anyone saying we were "simply apes". And I have no idea what that would mean or why it would be reductive. Is there a claim anywhere we can't speak, think, or do things other apes can't? It just suggests to me you're hung up on a hook of your own making on this.
  • What is "cultural appropriation" ?


    Oh dear, I hope you find a more appropriate place to put them. :halo:
  • What is "cultural appropriation" ?


    It's a misused and misunderstood term as is apparent from your post. There are cases where vulnerable/dominated cultures may suffer degradation through misuse/misrepresentation of their practices/traditions by others and cases where they may not. But rather than analyze them, let's just bash a strawman, and by extension all things PC, because that's much easier and more fun than actually exploring the real damage to people and their way of life that can potentially be done by stupidly fucking with stuff that is very serious to them.
  • The Blind Spot of Science and the Neglect of Lived Experience
    We're clearly not apes.Wayfarer

    It may not be the point at issue but let's be correct. We are, unequivocally, apes and there's nothing wrong with that

    "A hominoid, commonly called an ape, is a member of the superfamily Hominoidea: extant members are the gibbons (lesser apes, family Hylobatidae) and the hominids. A hominid is a member of the family Hominidae, the great apes: orangutans, gorillas, chimpanzees, and humans."

    https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hominidae
  • What's your D&D alignment?
    I got:

    You Are A:

    Chaotic Neutral Human Monk/Sorcerer (3rd/2nd Level)

    Alignment:
    Chaotic Neutral- A chaotic neutral character follows his whims. He is an individualist first and last. He values his own liberty but doesn't strive to protect others' freedom. He avoids authority, resents restrictions, and challenges traditions. A chaotic neutral character does not intentionally disrupt organizations as part of a campaign of anarchy. To do so, he would have to be motivated either by good (and a desire to liberate others) or evil (and a desire to make those different from himself suffer). A chaotic neutral character may be unpredictable, but his behavior is not totally random. He is not as likely to jump off a bridge as to cross it. Chaotic neutral is the best alignment you can be because it represents true freedom from both society's restrictions and a do-gooder's zeal. However, chaotic neutral can be a dangerous alignment when it seeks to eliminate all authority, harmony, and order in society.

    Race:
    Humans are the most adaptable of the common races. Short generations and a penchant for migration and conquest have made them physically diverse as well. Humans are often unorthodox in their dress, sporting unusual hairstyles, fanciful clothes, tattoos, and the like.

    Primary Class:
    Monks- Monks are versatile warriors skilled at fighting without weapons or armor. Good-aligned monks serve as protectors of the people, while evil monks make ideal spies and assassins. Though they don't cast spells, monks channel a subtle energy, called ki. This energy allows them to perform amazing feats, such as healing themselves, catching arrows in flight, and dodging blows with lightning speed. Their mundane and ki-based abilities grow with experience, granting them more power over themselves and their environment. Monks suffer unique penalties to their abilities if they wear armor, as doing so violates their rigid oath. A monk wearing armor loses their Wisdom and level based armor class bonuses, their movement speed, and their additional unarmed attacks per round.

    Secondary Class:
    Sorcerers- Sorcerers are arcane spellcasters who manipulate magic energy with imagination and talent rather than studious discipline. They have no books, no mentors, no theories just raw power that they direct at will. Sorcerers know fewer spells than wizards do and acquire them more slowly, but they can cast individual spells more often and have no need to prepare their incantations ahead of time. Also unlike wizards, sorcerers cannot specialize in a school of magic. Since sorcerers gain their powers without undergoing the years of rigorous study that wizards go through, they have more time to learn fighting skills and are proficient with simple weapons. Charisma is very important for sorcerers; the higher their value in this ability, the higher the spell level they can cast.

    http://www.easydamus.com/chaoticneutral.html
  • Has the USA abandoned universal rights to privacy and free speech?


    In a real quandary here. I'm planning on visiting the US. Should I tell them my Google+ handle is ledzkiltrumpwidfyre? Or should I just leave that one out? :chin:

    It is an annoyance and hypocritical, but I don't see a problem here that could affect anyone with a cunning index higher than, say, an amoeba.
  • Counselling sub-forum?
    Wouldn't the Learning Centre fit that purpose?
    Specifically the Questions section?
    Shamshir

    :up:
  • What is the difference between God and Canada?


    There's a clear ontological difference between God prima facie and Canada and the likes. Problem dissolved.
  • A question for Hanover.
    Anyway, I don't really have anything to add. And it seems you started this topic to get around the last topic being closed, which isn't going to fly. So, closed.
  • A question for Hanover.


    Should I say "Worth getting upset about" maybe?

    It started off as a reasonable question but ended up with what @DingoJones said.



    You did actually flame people Frank. To an extent the rules don't allow.
  • A question for Hanover.
    And we have rules about language use / flaming etc. which we will enforce regardless of what anyone's philosophical position on that is.
  • A question for Hanover.
    What the hell is going on?Frank Apisa

    You're obsessing over an idea that no one else but you thinks is important and repeated expressions of incredulity at the fact that no-one else thinks it's important are superfluous to our philosophical requirements here.
  • About my thread, "Adult Language"...


    I suggested we close it and @Hanover agreed and closed it. I thought it had some promise at the beginning but it seemed to have run its course philosophically and was developing more into a Shoutbox-type thing, largely at your direction.
  • Existence is relative, not absolute.
    I'm not deleting all that. Too much work. But if we could just call cut on the Life of Brian redux and get back on topic. Pretty please.
  • What is the difference between God and Canada?


    Any atheist with any sense would only claim that Canada is as real as it's supposed to be whereas God isn't. There's nothing more to it than that.
  • What is the difference between God and Canada?


    Canada is the type of thing that can exist by virtue of it being agreed to exist. As can 'marriage', 'the office of the president' etc. It's ontological status is that of a social fact. God is posited as having an existence independent of both society and human beings. 'His' ontological status is therefore more fundamental, metaphysically. So, the question is misframed. A God that exists only by virtue of agreement (as a social fact) is not a God at all (is in fact only the atheist conception of God), but a Canada that exists only by virtue of agreement is fully the Canada we know. It has cashed out its ontology as much as necessary for it to be what we understand it to be.
  • Laissez faire promotes social strength by rewarding the strong and punishing the weak


    I did and your question in response was pointless filler. The reply was appropriate.
  • Laissez faire promotes social strength by rewarding the strong and punishing the weak


    No, as it happens I live in a country with better health care, better education, a higher GDP per capita, higher economic growth, lower corruption, a cleaner natural environment, lower inequality, and more civil liberties than the U.S. So, I really am in trouble I guess...
  • Get Creative!


    Nice. I like the way it fades away, pares itself down in a kind of exhaustion like a spinner that sucks you into its orbit and then spins itself out like the writer's desperate mood.

    And I can relate to throwing ropes to ensnare the myriad pieces that we wish to form a worthy expression. Describes the process well.

    I wonder at some rhythmic choices though. Like why not:

    "Imagery inserted to express imagination" for the second line. Same meaning but sounds better to my ear with a better match of major stressed syllables. As in:

    I'm so SICK of conCEPtualisAtion
    Imagery inSERTed to exPRESS imaginAtion

    But of course I may have missed your intention here.



    Really like this. The second stanza in particular is sublime. :clap:
  • Did I have a thread removed?


    I didn't read it so I'm not going to argue about it.
  • Did I have a thread removed?


    Yes, @jamalrob deleted it for low quality.
  • Laissez faire promotes social strength by rewarding the strong and punishing the weak
    @frank

    The implication of all this seems to be we should all move to one of Trump's "shithole" countries for the good of our souls. Surely, compared to the spirit-strengthening joys of the DRC, Haiti, or Sierra Leone, namby-pamby advanced democracies are only killing us with kindness.

    But seriously... People need struggle, but surely it's preferable to be given the freedom to struggle with our own creative potential rather than to have that diverted into the life-draining swamps of impersonal bureaucracies, corporate greed, enforced poverty etc. It's the great self-defining struggle most people never get the chance to have that we should be fostering, no? And the fact that not all will take the torch passed is no excuse to blow out the light.
  • Adult Language


    It was multi-layered. The comedic equivalent of a lasagne. Next time I'll just throw a spud at your head.
  • Ethics of Interstellar Travel


    It wasn't deleted. It was a spam filter false positive and has been restored.
  • Adult Language
    And we both know that being vulgar means being "of the people"...sorta like the Vulgate version of the Bible.Frank Apisa

    My latin's not so good tbh. I went to a @Hanoverian grammar school where they only taught us how to speak proper Georgian English. :sad:
  • Adult Language
    I really appreciate you coming to this issue and for your comments, Baden.Frank Apisa

    I have a particular interest in the language-oriented threads so suits me.
  • Adult Language
    Common practice.Frank Apisa

    Well, that's more or less what I was saying. It's something that develops organically more than is consciously controlled. Bottom-up. As to...

    and a healthy infusion of upper crust control of what could or could not be written. The word was not even included in any English dictionary until the 1960’s. One of the MOST used words in the English language…NEVER INCLUDED IN A DICTIONARY UNTIL THE 1960’s.Frank Apisa

    There may have been some top-down influence too. That would be difficult to quantify.

    I do not do “believing.” If you are asking if people COULD do this on a voluntary basis…I would respond, “Yes.”Frank Apisa

    We differ here then. While some people may have this level of control, I don't think everyone or even most people do. We generally get offended in spite of ourselves not because we choose to.
  • Adult Language
    The history of the term clings to them, just as it does to Anglo Saxon, English and White.Bitter Crank

    Well, yes, and my point is that language will go its own way regardless of what you, I or frank thinks and words will continue to offend certain people in certain contexts on a visceral level whether we (or even they) like it or not. To think otherwise is a fantasy.
  • Adult Language
    I understand what you are attempting to communicate here, Baden...but I disagree with your first sentence so completely, that the remainder of the comment pales.Frank Apisa

    Ok, who decided to make the word "fuck" (for example) offensive and when? And who would be the "we" that could suddenly decide to designate it as unoffensive, and in what contexts, and how would we control the visceral reactions of others to that word in particular contexts? And what form would this collective decision make? How would it be enforced? Do you believe everyone has the power to consciously switch on and off their negative reactions to offensive words at will? Do you believe people would voluntarily do this on the basis of some democratic mandate or referendum to designate words differently?