So What's A White Boy To Do?

[Mesozoic Mister Nigel]

How in the fuck is that a put-down?  Most people who haven't taken sociology or psychology aren't particularly familiar with it in the context I used it in, and your reply indicates that you aren't, either.

No. My reply indicates that I have different views about it to you. The first question is... well, you know. 

I'm talking about the sociological concept, not something I made up, though.
http://www.sociologyguide.com/basic-concepts/Socialization.php

[Dildo Argentino]

How in the fuck is that a put-down?  Most people who haven't taken sociology or psychology aren't particularly familiar with it in the context I used it in, and your reply indicates that you aren't, either.

No. My reply indicates that I have different views about it to you. The first question is... well, you know. 

I'm talking about the sociological concept, not something I made up, though.
http://www.sociologyguide.com/basic-concepts/Socialization.php

So you are talking about something that someone else made up. Someone else who didn't only make it up, they decided it should be part of the canon. And you went and believed them.

Despite the fact that most people today grow up in a fragmented, broken, fractal-natured soup of cultural components and end up having to make lots of choices about adopting some and rejecting others quite early on.

But hell, who cares about reality when the textbook says otherwise, hey?

[Mesozoic Mister Nigel]

How in the fuck is that a put-down?  Most people who haven't taken sociology or psychology aren't particularly familiar with it in the context I used it in, and your reply indicates that you aren't, either.

No. My reply indicates that I have different views about it to you. The first question is... well, you know. 

I'm talking about the sociological concept, not something I made up, though.
http://www.sociologyguide.com/basic-concepts/Socialization.php

So you are talking about something that someone else made up. Someone else who didn't only make it up, they decided it should be part of the canon. And you went and believed them.

Despite the fact that most people today grow up in a fragmented, broken, fractal-natured soup of cultural components and end up having to make lots of choices about adopting some and rejecting others quite early on.

But hell, who cares about reality when the textbook says otherwise, hey?

I'm talking about a shared concept that has been researched quite a bit and has a fairly firm basis and definition.

But hey man, fight the system or something.

[Dildo Argentino]

How in the fuck is that a put-down?  Most people who haven't taken sociology or psychology aren't particularly familiar with it in the context I used it in, and your reply indicates that you aren't, either.

No. My reply indicates that I have different views about it to you. The first question is... well, you know. 

I'm talking about the sociological concept, not something I made up, though.
http://www.sociologyguide.com/basic-concepts/Socialization.php

So you are talking about something that someone else made up. Someone else who didn't only make it up, they decided it should be part of the canon. And you went and believed them.

Despite the fact that most people today grow up in a fragmented, broken, fractal-natured soup of cultural components and end up having to make lots of choices about adopting some and rejecting others quite early on.

But hell, who cares about reality when the textbook says otherwise, hey?

I'm talking about a shared concept that has been researched quite a bit and has a fairly firm basis and definition.

But hey man, fight the system or something.

It's not about fighting the system, I've been through with that for a while. I intend to pick it up again as a hobby but that's still in preparation.

It's simply that I think you are wrong. I would be very surprised to find that there are not competing takes on the concept, process, origins, causal role, etc. of socialisation, both within psychology, experimental psychology, sociology, anthropology, philosophy of mind, philosophy of psychology... to name only a few fields in which hundreds, nay, possibly thousands of committed, rigorous thinkers, empiricists and rationalists to the last woman/man are toiling away as we idly chat.

[Freeky]

SGitR.  'Nuff said.

[East Coast Hustle]

Yeah, I guess the two things he said that weren't retarded really WERE an anomaly. More's the pity.

[Aucoq]

Exhibit A: Cherokee, North Carolina. Cherokee is a Native American reservation which was inhabited by the Cherokees that hightailed it into the dense Smokey Mountain forests rather than walking the trail of tears. I was 13 when my parents took us on vacation to the Smokies and we spent a couple days in Cherokee. The inhabitants basically run a giant tourist attraction. There's a Native guy in full costume, including a headdress, he will happily have his picture taken with you for $5 (maybe more now given inflation). There were many shops where you could buy little fake headdresses and tomahawks for your kids. There were high end "art" shops where you could drop several hundred dollars and get a authentic headdress (including war bonnets). You bought them right from a Native American, they were made by Native Americans and they even stick the things on your head so you can look in the mirror and pick the one you want.

You can also pay some money to watch their sacred dances (four shows daily).

Are they guilty of destroying the sacredness of their own culture? Or, are they making a buck, because its a crappy place to live and alcoholism  is far more prevalent than employment?

If a white person goes there and buys some authentic something or other and wears it, are they guilty of something bad... since they bought it from the culture that owned it?

I don't mean to be a pedantic asshole, but I think (if I'm wrong please feel free to correct me) that the Cherokee historically didn't wear war bonnets and therefore didn't/don't consider them sacred.  I think they were really only used by a handful of Plains Indians.  The Plains Indians are where we get a lot of our Native American stereotypes from like the tipi and war bonnets.  So I don't think they have a problem with selling war bonnets because it's not their culture.  They're not sacred to the Cherokee.  They're just playing up the Indian stereotype to make some money.  The tribes I grew up around in southern Oklahoma (Choctaw, Chickasaw, etc) do the same thing.

[The Good Reverend Roger]

It would be kind of cool if our culture provided a place for dropouts that allowed one the space to not participate but also benefited the society in some way.  I'm sort of thinking about the India Sannyasa in the sense that they're 'spritiual dropouts' yet still hold a place in the culture.  I'd like to draw the line between the rebel and the dropout in that the rebel is a reaction the cultural norm but the dropout allows a sort space one can stand to look back at the culture as a whole without necessarily being A PART OF the culture. 

In our culture I don't think we have anything like that and if we do it's considered all 'rebel.'  Our culture doesn't seem to allow someone to drop out...it's like the game is YOU MUST PARTICIPATE!  And because there's no alternative, there's a sort of expectation that you will WANT to participate and there you have a double-bind.

Governments don't like a bunch of unregulated primates running around.  Just saying.

[Mesozoic Mister Nigel]

SGitR.  'Nuff said.

Yep. It's unfortunate.

[Mesozoic Mister Nigel]

Exhibit A: Cherokee, North Carolina. Cherokee is a Native American reservation which was inhabited by the Cherokees that hightailed it into the dense Smokey Mountain forests rather than walking the trail of tears. I was 13 when my parents took us on vacation to the Smokies and we spent a couple days in Cherokee. The inhabitants basically run a giant tourist attraction. There's a Native guy in full costume, including a headdress, he will happily have his picture taken with you for $5 (maybe more now given inflation). There were many shops where you could buy little fake headdresses and tomahawks for your kids. There were high end "art" shops where you could drop several hundred dollars and get a authentic headdress (including war bonnets). You bought them right from a Native American, they were made by Native Americans and they even stick the things on your head so you can look in the mirror and pick the one you want.

You can also pay some money to watch their sacred dances (four shows daily).

Are they guilty of destroying the sacredness of their own culture? Or, are they making a buck, because its a crappy place to live and alcoholism  is far more prevalent than employment?

If a white person goes there and buys some authentic something or other and wears it, are they guilty of something bad... since they bought it from the culture that owned it?

I don't mean to be a pedantic asshole, but I think (if I'm wrong please feel free to correct me) that the Cherokee historically didn't wear war bonnets and therefore didn't/don't consider them sacred.  I think they were really only used by a handful of Plains Indians.  The Plains Indians are where we get a lot of our Native American stereotypes from like the tipi and war bonnets.  So I don't think they have a problem with selling war bonnets because it's not their culture.  They're not sacred to the Cherokee.  They're just playing up the Indian stereotype to make some money.  The tribes I grew up around in southern Oklahoma (Choctaw, Chickasaw, etc) do the same thing.

Yep. And those "sacred" dances are just some shit their theatrical department came up with.

Also, I believe that Rat totally missed the point of the transfer of money removing the sacredness from the object. It's all about intention. The ramifications are that commerce is not sacred, and that holiness is not for sale. That doesn't mean that arts and crafts and gewgaws can't be for sale. It's not that people can't HAVE sacred indian objects, it's that they can't BUY them.

[Mesozoic Mister Nigel]

It would be kind of cool if our culture provided a place for dropouts that allowed one the space to not participate but also benefited the society in some way.  I'm sort of thinking about the India Sannyasa in the sense that they're 'spritiual dropouts' yet still hold a place in the culture.  I'd like to draw the line between the rebel and the dropout in that the rebel is a reaction the cultural norm but the dropout allows a sort space one can stand to look back at the culture as a whole without necessarily being A PART OF the culture. 

In our culture I don't think we have anything like that and if we do it's considered all 'rebel.'  Our culture doesn't seem to allow someone to drop out...it's like the game is YOU MUST PARTICIPATE!  And because there's no alternative, there's a sort of expectation that you will WANT to participate and there you have a double-bind.

Governments don't like a bunch of unregulated primates running around.  Just saying.

This is rather true.

[Freeky]

SGitR.  'Nuff said.

Yep. It's unfortunate.

It is!  When he isn't being a douche SGitR, he can be insightful.

[Dildo Argentino]

SGitR.  'Nuff said.

Yep. It's unfortunate.

It is!  When he isn't being a douche SGitR, he can be insightful.

What's SGitR?

[Dildo Argentino]

Yeah, I guess the two things he said that weren't retarded really WERE an anomaly. More's the pity.

There's a pattern here, have you noticed?   

"holist agrees with me" - hey-ho, he may be a biped after all!

"holist doesn't agree with me and does not shut up about it no matter how rude I get" - hey, he is an asshole after all, what a pity!

Boring.

[Don Coyote]

SGitR.  'Nuff said.

Yep. It's unfortunate.

It is!  When he isn't being a douche SGitR, he can be insightful.

What's SGitR?

The jackass that is so used to being the Smartest Guy in the Room that he assumes he will continue to be smarter or more educated over a wide variety things regardless of the truth.

Yeah, I guess the two things he said that weren't retarded really WERE an anomaly. More's the pity.

There's a pattern here, have you noticed?   

"holist agrees with me" - hey-ho, he may be a biped after all!

"holist doesn't agree with me and does not shut up about it no matter how rude I get" - hey, he is an asshole after all, what a pity!

Boring.

Nope.

You are a jackass.

It is completely possible to disagree with people here and still be considered a biped, but you would know that if you pulled your blinders off and stopped looking for ways to be offended and insulted.