Your are viewing a read-only archive of the old DiS boards. Please hit the Community button above to engage with the DiS !
Sometimes I really don't understand people.
I just typed my opinion in invisble ink
for all the bad movies he was in...
you're nor referring to 'An Officer and a Gentleman'!
One of the only two films I have cried at
I couldn't help it. We all have those times
Boys don't cry !
you hurt them !
but forgot his viagra !
with all his clothes on.
richard gere is a Buddhist and goes to india all the time. How did he not know not to do something like that?
but can't these people realise that all incidents like this do is inflame relations between countries that really needn't have such problems with each other?
Shilpa Shetty is a political pawn and nothing else, these days.
are essentially attention-seeking bastards who want to get on telly. There's no other reason to do it.
why contravening relatively inconsequential cultural protocol should result in one's effigy being burned.
Mild annoyance, yes. Even indignation. But burning an effigy? I genuinely can't see any reason to do this other than to attract media attention. Can someone explain any other ones?
(grockle is good at it).
basically - their culture is so different to ours that you can't apply terms like "attention seeking". The effigy burners are REALLY pissed off by things like this. they really don't give a shit about being on TV.
"one of their lot?"
i'm now leaving this thread.
get back to eating soggy chips out of yer daily mail, cuntface
but I do hate social censorship. A country full of 1 billion people shouldn't be run along these Victorian lines.
Thankfully, when it comes to ancient traditions and ways to behave, India doesn't give a flying fuck what you think
functioning democracy then it should behave like one.
I hate cultural relativism, its incredibly counterproductive.
Who gives a fuck about democracy, and what has that got to do with the issue
Repeat after me children- its okay for other places to 'gasp' do things differently to good old blighty
Implying that social conservatism is steaming bullshit not = implying that Britain and America are as socially permissive as I'd like. That's not true. They aren't.
do you believe that it's ok for someone to be arrested for publically hugging and kissing somebody?
If so why would you fail to apply this to people in India? Seriously, either you believe in a universal standard of what is acceptable, or not.
Do you seriously think this law represents the collective will of the billion odd people in India? Or is it the product of several thousand years worth of authoritarian religious prescriptions?
In some countries they put people in prison for being gay. Hey that's ok guys, they do things differently there!
But the fact is, that government was voted in by a public who wanted them in there. Because when it comes down to it, most people (and I include EVERYONE in this) side with 'tradition', with 'culture', with some misguided idea of 'nationalism' when REALLY, IT'S ALL BULLSHIT. Hence this stupid government's comical attempts to 'define what's British' as an attempt to appeal to the massive wankers who believe that eating crumpets, not speaking to people on the tube and girls in gingham dresses are somehow emblematic of 'what it means to be a Britisher'.
I don't believe in nationhood, and I don't believe in Britain, and I don't believe in this whole East v. West oppositional dialectic. Bunch. Of. Shite. Sadly, though, it's never going to get away.
agree with you more.
You can have a cabinet position in my benevolent world dictatorship.
"do you believe that it's ok for someone to be arrested for publically hugging and kissing somebody?"
Personally, no, but despite this I'm able to grasp that there is such thing as a culture that is different from the one I've grown up in, and am able to respect that.
"Do you seriously think this law represents the collective will of the billion odd people in India? Or is it the product of several thousand years worth of authoritarian religious prescriptions?"
How do you know the reason you think that isn't because you've been similarly brainwashed by several thousand years of permissive and amoral shit?
Seriously get a grip! Although its nice to see all types of people, including the culturally ignorant, such as yourself, represented on this site.
I don't even know where to start with that comment. Other than perhaps that it is the least accurate accusation anybody has ever levelled against me.
The entire idea of 'culture' was originally a Western colonialist preoccupation. A totally reactionary idea that seems to have fallen into the hands of people that think they are being progressive.
that you feel the need to respect something that you don't agree with?
How does this square with any beliefs you might have on a subject such as international law? Is there a limit to this relativism?
I'm not trying to attack you personally, just trying to interrogate your argument.
As Deadcats said- its about what you've grown up knowing and understanding...
I have a healthy disrespect for most of Britains laws, but as a member of this society, I am informed enough to be able to do that. I'm not a member of Indian society, so I must respect that there are certain traditions/ways of behaviour that I'm not gonna be able to understand.
this is a pretty gloomy position. Is there no hope for 'cross-cultural' understanding? Isn't this what politics is about - trying to develop a common language whereby people with different ways of life can get on with each other? Is India not now firmly part of a global economic/social/political debate?
If you boil your position down to its bare bones, you are essentially saying that you need to respect things you don't understand. As I said, its ultimately a reactionary way of looking at things.
Ha ha ha
You could start by explaining how you come out with culturally ignorant shit, and yet aren't culturally ignorant.
"In some countries they put people in prison for being gay. Hey that's ok guys, they do things differently there!"
WE put people in prison for being gay until 1967. By 1967, our society was ready to change that. Some societies are not, and though that is 'wrong' to me personally, I am not arrogant enough to think that those societies are 'wrong' the just haven't reached a place where they are going to make that reformation.
New Zealand allowed women to vote many years before we did. Do you think they then sat on their asses saying how backward we were in Britain?
Things happen in different places at different times. That's just the way it is. Things may seem odd/wrong to you in relation to this society, but unless you are a product of another society, to criticise said society for not being the same as here is off. That sort of change has to come from within
so it's inevitable, and compared to some countries britain is ahead of the curve?
It's possible...not inevitable
at which point I have tried to compare India with our own society/country, or in fact even mentioned Britain, let alone placed it on some pedestal of virtue?
I was talking about my own personal ethical standards, nothing more. I am not criticising anything for 'not being the same as here'. Britain has enough of its own problems to worry about.
So India is not 'ready' to change? Fair enough, this is quite possibly the case. So does this mean people shouldn't try to change it? Every democratic country needs progressive people with some kind of vision for the future.
"at which point I have tried to compare India with our own society/country, or in fact even mentioned Britain, let alone placed it on some pedestal of virtue?
I was talking about my own personal ethical standards, nothing more"
You didn't, but being a subject of this society means your opinions are guided by your experiences here, not in India
Again- your own personal ethical standards are not something formed in isolation. If you'd grown up in India they would be totally different
ps- leaving the house now, so will reply later ...good debate
in a small town on the Isle of Wight. I am white and middle class. I probably didn't experience an upbringing anything like 90% of people in this country.
If this is the case am I, according to your argument, even qualified to make any judgement about 'British society'?
Don't be silly...you are British, you grew up in Britain, subject to British laws, customs etc.
It is possible to have experience of both a country and a region- and therefore be able to make valid comment on the country as a whole, or your own region, but not necessarily on a different region. The set of issues you'd be discussing on a local and national level would be completely different
'How do you know the reason you think that isn't because you've been similarly brainwashed by several thousand years of permissive and amoral shit?'
Valid point, and one which can't really be argued around. Our views are influenced by our experiences and, had I grown up in an Indian town, I may have ended up thinking differently.
But being opposed to the idea of culture, as chiaroscuro and I are, doesn't equate to being ignorant of different cultures. And I think most people would say that there aspects of certain cultures that they really couldn't bring themselves to respect, such as female circumcision, oppression of women and the like. So it goes with imprisoning someone for three months for kissing in public. Yes, it's wiser to abide by that rule if you're supposed to, but obeying a rule doesn't necessarily extend to respecting it.
and more's the pity. Well, the BJP were voted in there for a long, long while, and the BJP are a bunch of useless fucking retards. Just goes to show that wherever you are in the world, the general public will always be a bunch of cunts, on the whole. Otherwise, Blair wouldn't be in.
entirely misconstrue a comment
I've been to India several times and had no idea it was still so restrictive.
But people on the subcontinent seem to love buring stuff don't they. Match and effigy makers must rake it in over there.
Maybe it's like a cultural thing. Like here if a bus/train/shop assistant is taking forever its the done thing to tut and look a bit agitated and moan to the person next you. Maybe over there they burn effigies of buses?
but your rated bands make an interesting accompaniment to your political outlook...
The Beatles knew the difference between Hindus and Muslims, for a start.
i didn't mock. i just said it was interesting.
indifferent to My Chemical Romance? Good job I like them :)
the problem with the uk nowadays is that people are increasingly xenophobic and ignorant and get to hide behind a pretense of speaking their minds.
Just because you have idiot thoughts in your 'mind', doesn't mean they're worth 'speaking'.
it was that cricket guy being murdered.
pin up on the noticeboard a list of all the names of those who've made the debating team this year.
Those of you haven't made it, don't be disappointed.
this entire story is us trying to interfere with them not the other way round.
we invade, they don't.
we apply pressure for them to behave in a way that most suits us.
give me an example of the last time they didn't keep themselves to themselves?
if you can't then you prove youself ignorant.
But listen. This is the agenda of the terrorist. The terrorist's desire is self-explanatory - through the medium of terror, the terrorist wishes to create a climate of fear which he or she can then use to exploit his or her political position. An act of terror is liable to make previously politically moderate victims of that act hold increasingly irrational, phobic beliefs. For example, a Westerner who previously was interested in Islam and had Muslim friends might suddenly lose trust in them after a terrorist attack by someone who called themselves a 'Muslim'. This paves the way for conflict, which gives the terrorist's agenda more chance of being pushed through to completion. As I've said, it's another jigsaw piece in this polarising East vs West dialectic that I was talking about earlier.
In short, saying broadly anti-Islamic things because of what you see and hear on the news constitutes *letting the terrorists win*.
maybe, but that's different to your implication that all those stories are about terrorist attacks on us.
this sort of thing is why you're being called ignorant by people. not because you're being un-PC, because you're lumping a load of unrelated countries together, getting two of the world's major religions mixed up, and generally acting as if the world is divided into 'Britain' and 'their lot'
a) two clueless countries elect two right-wing loons to power
b) terrorists who are unhappy with foreign policy blow stuff up
c) right-wing loons take the bait and involve themselves in a knee-jerk war which creates more terrorists
d) knee-jerk war pisses other countries off to the extent that more right-wing loons are elected
e) more terrorists blow more stuff up
f) right wing loons have a big war of words which leaves everyone looking a bit racist
g) the public get a bit more phobic and a bit more right-wing
h) one right-wing loon is replaced by another right-wing loon
all the way down to
z) world war which the terrorists believe they will win.
Truly 'winning' involves doing something which deflects us from the hopeless path I believe we are on.
with 'us' rather than 'them'.
i just found it funny. i like having certain stereotypes reaffirmed. it's why i love chris is cool.
people keep getting their effigies?
Surely there isn't enough time in the day to wait for the paper machier head to dry out enough to glue the scraggly bits of wool on. There must be a shop with generic body parts that they can customise in case of an emergency outrage.
I smell a business opportunity - it seems like a growing market over there.
n.b. yes, they are prudes
Steve McClaren Man?
how long the Indian government would want Gere in prison if they knew what he was doing with gerbals.
fuck him in jail!
in my opinion, cos im a westerner like, which means i have different moral values to them. People on this thread seem to be outraged that people are opposed to this. If we started burning effigies to show our outrage at them burning effigies surely that would be ok? or is it 'them being outraged = oh its just their culture and tradition' compared to 'us being outraged = we must be ignorant'.
But then again i couldnt really care less if they tossed gere into jail for a couple of months.
outrage is all cool, but it's probably not important enough to be bothered with outrage.