Trip to Germany
in [Europe]
|
Prev: Paris metro Navigo "decouverte" pass now available for tourists
Next: cost of tobacco in the Canaries?
From: Frank F. Matthews on 13 Oct 2007 11:33 Dave Smith wrote: > Jack Campin - bogus address wrote: > >>>>Under the Bush administration, "Women's Lib" has been set >>>>back at least fifty years. >>> >>>what rubbish. If you had actually been around in 1957 I don't see >>>how you can say that. For instance, compare the number of women >>>in the US Senate to the number in 1957. Or the number of women >>>CEOs of American corporations. Or the number of Protestant >>>ministers. >>>Check the number of female doctors and lawyers today to those in >>>1957. >>Check out the number of women in shitty dead-end jobs with no >>prospect of anything but a lifetime of poverty. They are what >>the women's liberation movement was about. > There are lots of men in those jobs too. At least they have the option of > getting a better education that leads to a better job, something that was > not open to them few decades ago. Few decades is a bit excessive. Women have been moving into broad fields of higher education for a long while. At least since my mother's time about seven decades ago. Today they are ordinary in most areas of higher education and have been for at least three decades.
From: Frank F. Matthews on 13 Oct 2007 11:39 Hatunen wrote: > On Fri, 12 Oct 2007 21:28:01 +0200, Doesn't Frequently Mop > <deepfreudmoors(a)eITmISaACTUALLYiREAL!l.nu> wrote: > > >>Make credence recognised that on Fri, 12 Oct 2007 12:48:50 -0400, Dave >>Smith <adavidsmith(a)sympatico.ca> has scripted: >>>Doesn't Frequently Mop wrote: >>>>Let me give you four cases which illustrate why I don't judge comments >>>>on race: >>>>1. I like Chinese food (OK) >>>>2. I don't like Chinese food (OK) >>>>3. I like Chinese people (OK) >>>>4. I don't like Chinese people (&$%#ing RACIST!!!!) >>>>>But if you can't see the harm done by makign bigoted comments and >>>>>jokes in public, far be it from me to interrupt your cognitive >>>>>dissonance. >>>But what if people of a particular race or culture share an attitude that >>>is utterly abhorrent to our own moral standards? What if the person comes >> >>>from a culture where theft and corruption are serious problems, where the >> >>>treat women like third class citizens, allow no dissension and will not >>>tolerate religious beliefs that differ from their own? Sure, they have put >>>on a friendly front and be polite and solicitous, but you know that they >>>have this underlying attitude that is so much at odds with what your >>>personal views? >> >>Sounds like the Japanese. >> >>Why should we Anglo-saxons feel so bad about observing by race? >>Everyone else does it, and that doesn't make it wrong or right. It's >>just the way it is. > Because it's not race being dealt with above, it's culture. > Americans of Japanese descent don't act like Japan's Japanese. > The problem comes from attributing the characteristics of a small > portion of a group to all the members of that group. Strangely some aspects transfer while others do not. It was an interesting feature of the War documentary on US public TV recently that many of the citizens of Japanese decent felt much stronger loyalty and responsibility to the US government that had imprisoned then and their families than was usual in the broad population. Yet the racist attitudes of Japan appear to have died quickly. In any case even the good characteristics often die in a few generations. I had a Chinese friend who was divorcing her husband because he had lost his asian work ethic and become acculturated.
From: Doesn't Frequently Mop on 13 Oct 2007 13:51 Make credence recognised that on Sat, 13 Oct 2007 11:39:25 -0400, "Frank F. Matthews" <matthews942(a)comcast.net> has scripted: > > >Hatunen wrote: >>>Sounds like the Japanese. >>> >>>Why should we Anglo-saxons feel so bad about observing by race? >>>Everyone else does it, and that doesn't make it wrong or right. It's >>>just the way it is. > >> Because it's not race being dealt with above, it's culture. >> Americans of Japanese descent don't act like Japan's Japanese. >> The problem comes from attributing the characteristics of a small >> portion of a group to all the members of that group. > >Strangely some aspects transfer while others do not. It was an >interesting feature of the War documentary on US public TV recently that >many of the citizens of Japanese decent felt much stronger loyalty and >responsibility to the US government that had imprisoned then and their >families than was usual in the broad population. Yet the racist >attitudes of Japan appear to have died quickly. ??? I have no idea just what you are trying to say here, but the Japanese have racism sewed well and truly into the fabric of their culture. Try spending some time there and you'll soon know that you are not equal. -- --- DFM - http://www.deepfriedmars.com --- --
From: EvelynVogtGamble(Divamanque) on 13 Oct 2007 15:07 Dave Smith wrote: > "EvelynVogtGamble(Divamanque)" wrote: > >>>>>But if you can't see the harm done by makign bigoted comments and >>>>>jokes in public, far be it from me to interrupt your cognitive >>>>>dissonance. >>> >>> >>> >>>But what if people of a particular race or culture share an attitude that >>>is utterly abhorrent to our own moral standards? >> >>First define "our"! > > > Ours.... mine. I used the first person as an in individual. > Am I, as an individual, not allowed to be upset about people from a > culture whose moral and ethical standards are at odds with my own? Of course you are - so long as you do not demand that everyone share those standards. > >> More and more, in the U.S., members of >>the religious right are defining "America" by their own >>narrow, fundamentalist Christian viewpoint. (Even though >>our "moral" standards have actually become MORE rather than >>less diverse, in actual fact.) > > I have noticed a general trend toward their arrogance about their personal > rights and freedoms..... so long as there personal beliefs are concerned, > but to hell with the rights of others who do not agree with them. > Aren't you simply confirming what I just said? > >>>where they >>>treat women like third class citizens, allow no dissension and will not >>>tolerate religious beliefs that differ from their own? >> >>Under the Bush administration, "Women's Lib" has been set >>back at least fifty years. As to "tolerating religious >>beliefs that differ from their own", listen to any >>evangelical preacher in the U.S. Most of them would be >>right at home with Hitler's "Kinder, Kuchen und Kirche". > > I am not talking about affirmative action or employment equity. I am > talking about basic rights. There are cultures where young women are killed > by male family members for having disgraced their families, and some where > young girls are circumcised to make sure that, while they may service their > husbands, won't be having any fun doing it. Both regrettable, of course - but rather than sit back and condemn such practices, support the various organizations that attempt to discourage them, and those that offer aid to the victims.
From: EvelynVogtGamble(Divamanque) on 13 Oct 2007 15:22
Dave Smith wrote: > You cited the Spanish Civil War. I would think that would be comparable to > the US Civil War. Not if you consider the issues they were fighting over, and the number of non-Spaniards who participated on either side. ("Lincoln Brigade", anyone?) A great many idealists at that time still regarded Communism as the saviour of the working classes. (It proved to be a false assumption because, as with so many utopian "isms", it failed to take the basic flaws of human nature into account, but the theory still looks good on paper - as does Christianity.) |