That's what I'm saying. It was once a tradition to have cock-fighting, why do they ban tradition?
Why do they ban older men from marrying women under 18? It's an old tradition?
Why do they ban polygamy? It's tradition.
Why do they say it's wrong to expect a woman to stay at home, rather than getting a career? Women have traditionally been housewives and nothing more.
Why do they ban public executions? It's tradition.
Why do they ban stoning a woman for infidelity? It's tradition.
Why do people say it's wrong for the Catholic church to be against gay marriage? It's Catholic tradition to be against homosexuality.
Why do they make it illegal for men to beat their wives? Men have traditionally beat their wives throughout history.
Seriously, we could learn something from these Brits: be subservient to tradition, rather than change. It would be much smarter to look into somebody else's culture and find out we might like it. Hey, they still have female circumcision in Africa, that's tradition, right? Why knock it before we try it---I'm sure all the women love it.
British people, "Traditions are good for you."
What does the running with the bulls have to do with beating on women, gay marriage or polygamy? And what does this have to do with the British?
Way to go on lumping together totally different things of which some aren't even considered tradition (you may look that word up) just to prove a point that doesn't exist.
Well before City Slickers ever hit the screen here in the US, I've always wanted to do this since I was a kid. I was an avid reader as a child, and enjoyed non-American culture, and this always intrigued me.
I plan on at least two (2) trips to Europe in my time, one will include Spain. I will definitely run with the bulls and take my chances, because it would be the ultimate adrenaline rush. I'm going to wear some equipment for "vital" areas, but that's about it.
I will only do it once because I'm an avid applicator of statistics.
Let those who want to be stupid, be stupid. People individually choose to do this to themselves, not to other individuals or animals. The bulls are hardly going to be getting hurt.
Can you imagine somewhere having a "Running of the tigers"? Oh, sweet joy... we could really clean up the gene pool.
My friend if you really do insist on coming to Europe and particularly Spain may I suggest a safer cultural event such as La Tomatina Tomato Fight in Bunyol:
http://www.spanish-fiestas.com/spanish-festivals/la-tomatina-tomato-battle-bunyol.htm
Probably far more fun and far less dangerous unless they plan on releasing the bulls that survived above here also.
How about coming to Britain, London the most visited city in Europe, much to see. We also have tradition called cheese rolling here where man literally hurl themselves down very steep hills in pursuit of a roll of cheese, probably just as dangerous as the running of bulls, with no cruelty to animals whatsoever.
http://www.cheese-rolling.co.uk/
Personally I'd choose Scandinavia, considering I'm half. :hatsoff: Not too sure what loony traditions they have there though. I know the Sami in the North do some odd stuff, but not running with the bulls.![]()
What does the running with the bulls have to do with beating on women, gay marriage or polygamy? And what does this have to do with the British?
Way to go on lumping together totally different things of which some aren't even considered tradition (you may look that word up) just to prove a point that doesn't exist.
All the British posters were saying because it is someone else's tradition we should respect that, and were taking a few stabs at the American posters. My point is that no, you should not respect other people's culture simply because it is their culture and tradition. Many cultures allow public stoning of women for "disgracing the family". Should we respect that? According to the British way of things we should respect it simply because it is their culture and tradition.
All the British posters were saying because it is someone else's tradition we should respect that, and were taking a few stabs at the American posters. My point is that no, you should not respect other people's culture simply because it is their culture and tradition. Many cultures allow public stoning of women for "disgracing the family". Should we respect that? According to the British way of things we should respect it simply because it is their culture and tradition.
Actually, you can. The problem is that people don't use an objective argument ...First of all, you cannot equate all traditions in all different cultures and countries.
Don't try to make the point with a subjective argument. Try an objective one ...Every sane person knows that there are differences between the running with the bulls and the stoning of women for "disgracing the family". Aside the fact that the stoning is in most cases a punishment by the law (questionable or not) whereas bull running is part of a cultural festivity. So stop lumping everything together.
Not all of us Americans are this way. I spend most of my teenage life reading about many cultures of the world, discovering many different viewpoints.Secondly, not every British poster was saying "because it is someone else's tradition we should respect that" and not every poster defending or at least rationalizing this particular tradition was British.
Third, there were "stabs" being taken against American posters, because many Americans judge every other culture's or nation's traditions and values constantly and often not in a very kind way and without the proper background knowledge, while they are adamant in their own traditions and values and nobody is allowed to talk about these traditions/values, judge them or probably even interfere with them. That can be very tiresome and unnerving.
See, an ideal example of an objective argument, instead of a subjective one. It's not hard to do.I don't have anything with somebody running with the bulls. The difference between that and a lot of other things people do is that nobody else is negatively affected or hurt by what they do to themselves. That's different than stoning people to death for example. You can't stone another person to death without affecting them.
Whoa! I completely agreed with your view there, until you said "detriment of our European/American culture?" I was not remotely under the impression that the US had a European culture, not in the least bit. Yes, some values are shared with European views, but many are not. American culture has always been built on that of its citizens and new immigrants, and that includes even the multi-lingual reality of our current nation (of and by legal immigrants of the last 2-3 generations).You don't believe in "cultural relativism." I used to feel the same way, but not anymore - as long as they don't bring that shit in my house, America. The problem with America right now - not to digress too much - is we let oodles of foreigners come here only to dictate our way of life, many times to the detriment of our European/American culture.
No, you can't equate traditions. You can compare them and argue or reason them on the basis of a made comparison. After comparing them, you can come to the conclusion, that some traditions are so similar to each other, that you can almost equate them, but that is as far as it goes. We're not talking about basic mathematics here. By equating two traditions you ignore their whole histories and respective genesis. That's the opposite of objective argumentation.Actually, you can. The problem is that people don't use an objective argument ...
Well, where exactly was I being subjective. Because I said that every sane person can see the difference between a cultural festivity and a punishment according to the law?Don't try to make the point with a subjective argument. Try an objective one ...
In the running with the bulls, people are individually choosing to allow possible harm to come to themselves.
In the stoning of other people, people are choosing to harm others, not themselves.
It's that simple. One doesn't have to get involved in the subjective "value" arguments, and just focus -- objectively -- on whether it is of free will or not.
Well, I didn't say that all Americans are that way because I'm well aware that not all Americans are this way. Problem is, that the ones that annoy half the world (and half of the US, too, for that matter) are often those you can hear loudest.Not all of us Americans are this way. I spend most of my teenage life reading about many cultures of the world, discovering many different viewpoints.
I'm not gonna start with this one or I'll be sitting here for the next two days straight.Nothing reminds me more of Rome than this.
Whoa! I completely agreed with your view there, until you said "detriment of our European/American culture?" I was not remotely under the impression that the US had a European culture, not in the least bit. Yes, some values are shared with European views, but many are not. American culture has always been built on that of its citizens and new immigrants, and that includes even the multi-lingual reality of our current nation (of and by legal immigrants of the last 2-3 generations).
But I also agree that we have started to move in a direction where we are valuing illegal residents over not just citizens, but legal immigrants. Some of the loudest are first generation Americans, as they see the entire difference in attitude from their parents and their upbringing. It used to be that people came to the US and wants to further their lives, become educated if they had not had opportunities prior, and work for the betterment of themselves and the country. That's no longer the case and we American citizens have let a minority of American citizens, with their own, selfish interests (cheap/free labor, leaving benefits to the burden of the state or private services force by the state, etc..., do it to the rest of us (and the immigrants). That's the problem.
There is absolutely little drive and opportunities for illegal residents to become part of the greater, American experiment. Instead, they end up living a life that is little different than before, except for available services. If we're lucky, their children become educated and it changes within 1-2 generations. However, the sheer number that have come in one generation has made that a very, very, difficult balance. Especially when the few, minority of Americans are using them for cheap labor and not paying them proper for their services, do not contribute to their welfare (e.g., via withholdings), etc... Nothing reminds me more of Rome than this.
You make very good points and I read them thoroughly. On the other hand, my point is that times change. And when times change, traditions many times change. Human beings are the only living creatures on this planet who follow tradition and culture blindly and religiously. All the other creatures act out of instinct. Our traditions and cultures were implanted on us by the older generation and we can always get new ones. Why worry? Times change.No, you can't equate traditions. You can compare them and argue or reason them on the basis of a made comparison. After comparing them, you can come to the conclusion, that some traditions are so similar to each other, that you can almost equate them, but that is as far as it goes. We're not talking about basic mathematics here. By equating two traditions you ignore their whole histories and respective genesis. That's the opposite of objective argumentation.
Well, where exactly was I being subjective. Because I said that every sane person can see the difference between a cultural festivity and a punishment according to the law?
You are making the difference on the basis of positive and negative choice (meaning to be able to choose between a and b or being impacted by a third party choice) and positive and negative freedom. I was stating the difference on the basis of the quality of the event itself (free cultural activity and implemented legal action). Those are two completely different levels of argumentation.
Of course the person being stoned doesn't get to choose whether he/she gets stoned or not. He/she forfeit that choice the moment he/she broke the law of which stoning is the punishement for its violation.
Either we're missing each other's point here and are talking past each other, or I really don't see where I made a subjective "value" argument. Because I think I know where you're getting at, but just because I wasn't making a highly theoretical argumentation from the beginning, I wasn't being less objective.
Well, I didn't say that all Americans are that way because I'm well aware that not all Americans are this way. Problem is, that the ones that annoy half the world (and half of the US, too, for that matter) are often those you can hear loudest.
I'm not gonna start with this one or I'll be sitting here for the next two days straight.Because this (alleged) similarity between the Roman and the US-American society is already being discussed by some scholars. Some see a similarity, others dismiss this theory. In my opinion, there are slight similarities, but they are so theoretical that a prognosis is sheer impossible without making Mr. T very angry (because he pities fools!).
We don't follow all traditions blindly and religiously. Many traditions are followed because they have become part of our respective way of life, some are followed because of a certain ritualistic lifestyle (which even human beings need, ask any physician, a live without any routines at all, no matter which ones, is not healthy), some are part of the process of growing up and becoming part of society etc. Of course some traditions are outlived and some traditions change. Nonetheless there are those (even amongst the outlived ones) that are worth preserving. Thanksgiving for example is a tradition hardly celebrated in Germany any more. But you don't see us mock the US for keeping up that tradition.You make very good points and I read them thoroughly. On the other hand, my point is that times change. And when times change, traditions many times change. Human beings are the only living creatures on this planet who follow tradition and culture blindly and religiously. All the other creatures act out of instinct. Our traditions and cultures were implanted on us by the older generation and we can always get new ones. Why worry? Times change.
Well, I'm aware of the animal cruelty here, but that is not what this tradition is about, contrary to cock- or dog-fighting. Fighting bulls in the arena like a matador is different again. And I wouldn't even compare that to cock- or dog-fighting, because I don't see dog-fighting where a guy get's into the cage with two dogs.Anyway, I'm assuming you've watched the video. If you look closely you'll see spikes in the bulls body and watching them taunting the bull with sticks and rocks. Maybe you're looking at it from the Spanish point-of-view, but I'm looking at it from the bull's point-of-view. From the looks of it, that bull isn't happy, and that behavior is pretty damn cruel. But, according to lovers of tradition, this is okay since the bull is an animal and we shouldn't disrespect Spanish culture. In that case, why do we ban cock-fighting or dog-fighting. The cocks and dogs might be hurting like the bull in that video but who cares? They're animals. What matters is the tradition, right?
This is a completely different level. You are talking about cruelty among human beings, that has hardly anything to do with tradition, but is a legal practice that stems from an obsolete mindset. This is a prime example for legal practices that seem archaic and immoral to us, not of cultural traditions.And this goes back to my stoning argument: from the viewpoint of the men who stone women for "dishonor" the woman is an animal, and property. She has as much rights as that bull and she so it doesn't matter. (My army buddy was in Iraq and he heard about a woman being stoned for dating a Kurdish boy. When he asked some Iraqis about this and they replied, "Women are for procreation, and nothing more.").
What is offensive lies in the eyes of the beholder, what is inhumane is defined by the observers mindset. There is no objective rationalisation here, only the search for the lowest common denominator.You're point is that we shouldn't disrespect other people's tradition. My point is that yes, we should, especially if they are offensive or inhumane traditions. Just because it is their culture, doesn't mean I gotta respect it. And apparently your countrymen agree with me:
http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/uk_news/2137729.stm
http://travel.uk.msn.com/TravelResources/article.aspx?cp-documentid=4997322