Comments on: In some cultures, the elderly are sent out to sea on an iceberg with a bucket of whale blubber, while in others they take as many people with them as possible.

By: Zombie Muffin

Zombie Muffin — Sun, 26 Sep 2010 00:09:05 +0000

Or pegasi. They fly!

By: Ch3dd4r

Ch3dd4r — Mon, 12 Apr 2010 20:18:14 +0000

Of course not. There needs to be thracesian man-eating unicorns as well.

By: BK

BK — Sat, 21 Nov 2009 16:20:04 +0000

Can they be attacked by a CGI wolf like in 300 too?

By: rhorho

rhorho — Fri, 23 Jan 2009 08:32:39 +0000

*shoots Anniee with an exploding harpoon*

By: FaileV

FaileV — Wed, 21 Jan 2009 06:07:15 +0000

Do you not see your own cultural bias? I will fully agree if a creature is endangered they should not be eaten, they should be protected, which would include many whales (after a 5 minute search i found some that are not on the endangered list). I do believe that killing off a species and ruining an ecosystem is wrong. However why is eating a cat or a dog wrong? can you really answer that besides saying “they’re special” i doubt it, there’s nothing in particular that makes them special. They are smart, well pigs are smarter, they are cute, well so are guinea pigs, there is nothing that makes them different from any farm animal, they are simply domesticated animals manipulated for a purpose and the only thing making them “wrong” to eat is your own cultural bias. The culture you belong to have been around for a long time and it happens to see the digestion of Mr. fluffy as wrong. Would i eat a dog? no probably not, hypocritical maybe, but i have too much emotional attachment, just like i dislike eating rabbit or duck at the same time i can’t look down on someone else for eating them, it’s meat and if they aren’t killing off the species, ruining the ecosystem or other detrimental permanent damage, then they can eat whatever they want.
“I bet if I was criticizing some human-on-human injustice that was “cultutrally based” you’d be singing a different tune, even if it didn’t result in killing.” You know what, you’re probably right, because generally injustice has detrimental effects on a species, typically ours, but my idea of it is the same, if it has no detrimental effect on a species or the ecosystem then I’m not one to say it is ‘wrong’. This is getting into moral theory, a topic which i love, but don’t feel would be properly put to use in discussing here.
Just, think for a moment over why you feel certain things are wrong. how is a dog or cat different from a chicken, cow, or pig other than it being what your culture has decided it wrong or good to eat.

By: Anniee451

Anniee451 — Wed, 21 Jan 2009 06:03:29 +0000

Finally, someone who gets it.

Now can I have a whale-fin steak with the blubber on the side? Preferably shot by an exploding harpoon.

By: Curly

Curly — Wed, 21 Jan 2009 05:53:19 +0000

So, what, the kid did it on purpose? What about the mother? Did she never stop to think to herself, “You know what? Sex makes babies. Maybe I should think a little bit before the next time I hop in the sack.” What we need is better sex ed and more self-control, not a “Get out of Motherhood Free” card.

I know that no form of birth control is 100% effective. See the “better sex ed and more self-control” segment of my post.

By: FaileV

FaileV — Wed, 21 Jan 2009 05:34:53 +0000

She wants those of Arab descent or culture to move forward, not be moved back 3 spaces while playing boardgames.

By: Isengrim

Isengrim — Wed, 21 Jan 2009 04:34:43 +0000

1. I agree with the residential schools criticism. It took away the real foundations of Native culture in Canada – their language and religion.

2. Whaling is just plain wrong – all the large cetaceans are endangered
and they should all be protected across the board – from all humans,
regardless of who they are and what their excuse is.

3. I’ll criticize whatever I think is wrong, regardless of who is doing it. I’ll criticize the eating of whales, just as I’ll criticize the eating of dogs and cats.
which I think is absolutely disgusting, and I don’t give a diddly damn about any cultural BS. It’s no different to me than someone criticizing Muslims for stoning their women over adultery. It’s their culture, but does it make it right?
I bet if I was criticizing some human-on-human injustice that was “cultutrally based” you’d be singing a different tune, even if it didn’t result in killing.

4. Also keep in mind that the excuse of hunting rights is also promoted by the WHITE government, to prop up industries that are unpopular with other countries – fur trapping and sealing, for instance. Some moron MP
from Manitoba once tried to push a bill through to make ANY public criticism of hunting illegal! It’s just a shame that so many tribes have indeed bought into that kind of thinking.

5. I’m fully aware of a Manitoba-based organization called The Native-Animal Alliance, which is quite anti-fur-trade. Unfortunately, I cannot find a web site for them, only references by others. I don’t know if they’re defunct or not, I hope not, because more power to them if they’re still around.

By: Hell Hath No Fury

Hell Hath No Fury — Wed, 21 Jan 2009 04:17:11 +0000

WIN

By: Hell Hath No Fury

Hell Hath No Fury — Wed, 21 Jan 2009 04:14:55 +0000

I am NOT THAT BAD, people!!!!

By: Hell Hath No Fury

Hell Hath No Fury — Wed, 21 Jan 2009 04:12:26 +0000

If it’s not the facist, it’s the slowest

By: Hell Hath No Fury

Hell Hath No Fury — Wed, 21 Jan 2009 04:10:54 +0000

…yet

By: Hell Hath No Fury

Hell Hath No Fury — Wed, 21 Jan 2009 04:09:49 +0000

fixed that, kthx. Had a retarded disk, so it wasn’t from boobs, as my old chiro said. Because I knew they weren’t THAT heavy. Keep rubbbing it in though. First you burn me for thinking I’m ‘perfect’ and then you make fun of my admitted imperfections. Make up your damn mind! You’re worse than my mother-in-law! Nothing I can say is right!

By: Danbala

Danbala — Wed, 21 Jan 2009 03:56:50 +0000

Damnit. Missing out on writin “An expression like ‘pro-arab’ is a bit past…” is also a bit past just minutiae. I am sorry about that. :p

By: Danbala

Danbala — Wed, 21 Jan 2009 03:56:03 +0000

An expression is a bit past just minutiae, and you are the one refusing to explain wtf it means with it belonging some secret elsewhere. Don’t try to pretend to be able to claim any victim status on this. :p

By: Anniee451

Anniee451 — Wed, 21 Jan 2009 03:55:15 +0000

By the way, what were you going to try to “reason with me” about? I didn’t even make a declarative statement ffs.

By: Anniee451

Anniee451 — Wed, 21 Jan 2009 03:53:19 +0000

How odd – it seemed you were the one being deliberately obtuse. Also WAY preoccupied with minutiae.

You’re boring, too.

By: Danbala

Danbala — Wed, 21 Jan 2009 03:23:54 +0000

I am pro-banana!

By: charro

charro — Wed, 21 Jan 2009 03:22:56 +0000

*sigh*
You are still missing the point. Sure I can look those words up in the dictionary, but the dictionary doesn’t have the definition for your term.
*ahem*
“pro-life” means a belief that all babies should be born,
regardless of what the mother/father/family/doctor thinks may
be best for the woman etc. Look up those individual words in the dictionary and you’ll see nothing of the sort. I daresay someone not familiar with English would be very confused by the term “pro-life” and what it means in the
vernacular. It would need to be explained to them, and I bet you would even be rude to them for not speaking your crazy moon language.
Hell, even your supposed answer makes no sense. Maybe you should utilise the dictionary.
Thanks for being obtuse this whole time though, I can see that reasoning with you is like reasoning with a brick wall, only harder.
Brains- they help.

By: Anniee451

Anniee451 — Wed, 21 Jan 2009 01:55:09 +0000

Nesting fail – this format blows, though.

pro- means forward. Arab is those who identify as such on cultural or linguistic grounds. Dikshunary – it helps.

By: Anniee451

Anniee451 — Wed, 21 Jan 2009 01:54:25 +0000

pro- means forward. Arab is those who identify as such on cultural or linguistic grounds. Dikshunary – it helps.

By: charro

charro — Wed, 21 Jan 2009 00:38:36 +0000

I’d like for you to explain it to me since it is your term.

By: Anniee451

Anniee451 — Tue, 20 Jan 2009 21:34:30 +0000

Not as exciting either. Explosive harpoons FTW.

By: Anniee451

Anniee451 — Tue, 20 Jan 2009 21:29:55 +0000

I don’t see what there is to explain. The words are self-explanatory in and of themselves. Only the context was wrong.

By: FaileV

FaileV — Tue, 20 Jan 2009 18:52:11 +0000

yeah, that one pushed a few of my buttons.

By: charro

charro — Tue, 20 Jan 2009 16:01:39 +0000

I aim to please.

By: OhMyGoodness

OhMyGoodness — Tue, 20 Jan 2009 14:05:01 +0000

With a sore back…

By: charro

charro — Tue, 20 Jan 2009 12:15:59 +0000

You’re completely missing the point.
I can understand you made a mistake, I’m not daft woman.
What I don’t understand is what “pro arab” means.
You obviously intended to write that as a comment SOMEWHERE, so you must know what it means.
The statement that is, not the context the statement is supposed to fit in with. Please explain yourself and stop trying to hide behind your “mistake”.
Or perhaps you could link where the statement “pro arab” is supposed to go and we can continue this over there where you feel more comfortable explaining your terms that make no sense?

By: rhorho

rhorho — Tue, 20 Jan 2009 12:13:03 +0000

Thanks for warming your hands first.

By: rhorho

rhorho — Tue, 20 Jan 2009 12:10:50 +0000

Seconded, and: Wow.

By: charro

charro — Tue, 20 Jan 2009 12:10:47 +0000

I’ll take it!! *snort*

By: charro

charro — Tue, 20 Jan 2009 12:08:36 +0000

Me too!

By: charro

charro — Tue, 20 Jan 2009 12:07:53 +0000

Hahaha I’m too lazy to impose my view. But not too lazy to type it out and sigh contentedly.
I was just saying even if I’m not being fascist, some people will see it that way. It’s the nature of humanity.

By: charro

charro — Tue, 20 Jan 2009 12:05:51 +0000

ist menschen fleisch!

By: rhorho

rhorho — Tue, 20 Jan 2009 12:03:37 +0000

…and the Balcones Fault Line!

By: Uncle Fester

Uncle Fester — Tue, 20 Jan 2009 11:52:54 +0000

Have a nasty effeminate hug of old Fester for that one…

By: Uncle Fester

Uncle Fester — Tue, 20 Jan 2009 11:51:36 +0000

ah, the ‘I’m sure they could…’ argument… how cute… they could live off that govt surplus filth maybe? Nothing like late dated Cheez-Whizz on slightly stale Wonder Bread… Just take a dose of STFU…

By: Uncle Fester

Uncle Fester — Tue, 20 Jan 2009 11:48:29 +0000

killing one a year for food isn’t exactly factory fishing with explosive harpoon though, now, is it?

By: Uncle Fester

Uncle Fester — Tue, 20 Jan 2009 11:44:33 +0000

just off the Slave’s burial ground and on Indian sacred lands…

By: Uncle Fester

Uncle Fester — Tue, 20 Jan 2009 11:38:08 +0000

you can be Fascist without being eugenicist… and I’m a eugenicist without being overly Fascist… I don’t think I’m fit to breed, so I’ve not done. I’d hate to impose my view of the pinnacle of human development on anyone but me… but I’m really not ‘it’…

By: Uncle Fester

Uncle Fester — Tue, 20 Jan 2009 11:35:15 +0000

Exposition WIN!!!

By: FaileV

FaileV — Tue, 20 Jan 2009 07:45:18 +0000

Okay your first problem is that you are assuming every single native american tribe is like one another, when it couldn’t possibly be farther from the truth. You are also using the fallacy of generalization, because there are some that do something wrong, they are all greedy bastards.
1. the boarding schools were an atrocity that did far more harm than good and completely screwed up that generation causing horrible vibrations through the culture causing a huge amount of distrust for the government (and frankly i don’t see why they shouldn’t be distrustful after the abuse and Sh!t they were subjected to).
2. I honestly don’t think you understand anything about the culture at all if you keep going on about how they cling to hunting BS. The fact of the matter is many natives can’t just go out and get jobs, it is a completely different culture with different taboos and different ideas and sometimes they just can’t cut it in the ‘white world’ because it’s just too alien. On top of that there is the white privilege, a bias that most don’t acknowledge, but the standards are really white standards and the education on reservations is deplorable in many cases, the bottom of the barrel and many of the teachers are white middle class women, people the students can not relate to at all, to the point that some grow up believing higher education is not for natives, but a white person thing. So there is the problem to lose part of yourself, or to remain in an educational dead end.
3. There are cases where tribes are still very spiritual in their use of animal parts. I know that every single native I have met considers it a travesty that an eagle feather should be befouled by touching the ground or something else. They are incredibly serious about that sort of thing, as well as the animals that they use during the Sun Dance, a sacred dance that is practiced and primarily associated with the buffalo, I’d go into it more but i’m hoping to tempt you into actually researching a bit into the tribes.
Again some does not equal all
4. slippery slopes are a fallacy for a reason. I fully agree with you that the Japanese whaling industry for “science” is disgusting and should be stopped however there is a difference in numbers, if the Japanese could reduce numbers so that they no longer kill more whales in the area than are born then fine. If the Inuit are killing more whales than can be born i do think they should stop or reduce their hunting, but in the same light, if there are enough numbers to support a given amount of hunting, how is it then different from our own traditions of thanksgiving turkey, or just our own animal consumption because of our own dietary traditions. We eat what we eat out of tradition, and it happens to have a large amount of animals involved. Had we decided long ago that guinea pigs should be a staple we would now have a large amount them bred to be much bigger. It really isn’t that different, it’s simply a matter of what is accepted in the dominant culture. If we were to use those rules (it’s okay as long as there’s enough” then the tribe in rho’s article would be in the clear, they agreed not to hunt when the animals were endangered and dealt with an impact assessment. The Japanese are obviously hunting far too many animals for the area to support.
Now it seems that your rules are “It’s not okay with this animal at all ever” in which case that would lead either to bias “well we like to eat cow, who cares if it’s sacred or special to you” or it’s own slippery slope where even if there are plenty of numbers, if an animal is deemed special it isn’t allowed to be eaten.

By: Danbala

Danbala — Tue, 20 Jan 2009 07:00:21 +0000

Yeah. Bloody waste of good blubber!

By: Danbala

Danbala — Tue, 20 Jan 2009 06:46:53 +0000

Yes… I, at least, only imagine “pro-abortion” would mean someone picketing for an increase in abortions. Start doing forced ones, perchance? So yeah, I do agree totally with the loathing of the term.
I am still more baffled by the “pro-arab” bit.

By: rhorho

rhorho — Tue, 20 Jan 2009 05:07:01 +0000

Hey! Watch it with the cold hands!!

By: Froofrou

Froofrou — Tue, 20 Jan 2009 05:04:43 +0000

I’m sorry, but listening to you two is making me crave cigarettes, beer, and pot. I’ll be back in a minute. Does anyone want the rest of this coke on this hooker’s @ss?

By: Isengrim

Isengrim — Tue, 20 Jan 2009 05:03:25 +0000

They are parallels, and you’re repeatedly missing the point. But OK, let’s stick strictly to whales. Many nations with whaling pasts gave up whaling for the good of the whale populations. Japan, Norway and the Makah
refuse to give it up because they all cite cultural reasons.
The Japanese DO eat the whale meat they get, they just do their business at a larger scale. But do they need it? No. Do the Makah need it? No. So, except for matters of scale, WTF is the difference? The Japanese, quite rightly, point to the Makah and say that if anti-whaling types will put up with them doing for food and cultural reasons, why can’t they, the Japanese, do it, why
should THEY stop? How will ANYONE convince the Japanese
to stop doing what they do, if others are permitted to do
the same thing? The Makah do it on a smaller scale because there
are quite simply fewer of them. Guaranteed, if they had the
numbers. the money and the power that the Japanese do,
they would do it on the same scale as the Japanese – and they
would _both be using the exact same excuse to do it._

By: rhorho

rhorho — Tue, 20 Jan 2009 04:48:15 +0000

It? THEY are straw men because you have
propped them up to remove yourself five
ways to Sunday from the Makah/Gray Whale
topic. The key to a good straw man is that
it is much easier to knock down than the
topic at hand, and, on the surface, appears
to draw a parallel.

You’re bordering on Red Herring Fallacy with
your newly drawn-in “wishy-washy Green-
peace” business. How many asides do you
plan to try?

By: Isengrim

Isengrim — Tue, 20 Jan 2009 04:26:05 +0000

Why is it a straw man? I’m talking about attitude, and whether or not the shell of a bad cultural practice should be continued just because it can be, at the expense of another’s life. Just because I don’t see “white man bad, everyone else good, no matter what they do” … a rotten, useless outdated practice is a rotten, useless outdated cultural practice no matter who does it. I’m not one
of those wishy-washy Greenpeace types who thinks, say, bashing in the heads of seals is OK if done by the Innu, but bad if done whites – it’s
wrong if done by EITHER of them. And insisting on killing whales just because the ancestors did it is just as wrong as setting old people out
on ice floes just because the ancestors did it.