EPTAmericans have no culture? - Page 24
| Forum Index > Closed |
|
Nothingtosay
United States875 Posts
| ||
|
allecto
328 Posts
On January 22 2012 03:26 Nothingtosay wrote: Somehow this thread developed in a completely predictable yet entirely unfortunate way. I wouldn't have bothered to make it if knew it would make people more angry when it's purpose was to exact opposite. Yep, unfortunately I can't tell the difference between this and the France bashing thread too much anymore...luckily you didn't mention Californian wine or there would be absolutely no difference by now... | ||
|
R!!
Brazil938 Posts
On January 22 2012 03:22 domovoi wrote: Such ignorance, but I will start a separate thread on the etymology and origins of football. You shouldn't waste your time, it's not even feasible to me that someone can come up with a reasonable argument to explain exactly what the guy above said and then there's the fact that americans say its football, but the entire world says otherwise and when it comes to disputes about designating names to things, numbers always win. | ||
|
Talin
Montenegro10532 Posts
On January 22 2012 03:05 domovoi wrote: At a macro, human species level, I pretty much agree with your attitude that "it is what it is." At an individual level, though, feelings of cultural superiority should be discouraged. But it is the same thing. Those individual flaws cause and reinforce social ones. For as long as there are different (even radically different) cultures, people will feel connected to them and, as a result, hostile towards opposing cultures. The degree of hostility might differ from person to person and be more or less pronounced depending on the differences, but there is just NO WAY you can make a human being truly accept the elements of a different culture that strongly oppose his own. The whole Europe vs America thing doesn't even scratch the surface of the problem. Europe and North America are culturally incredibly close and have the same origin, despite the mutual bickering (which is mostly over social and economic issues anyway, and the exact same problems exist on both sides of the Atlantic). What happens when you put western cultures side-by-side with modern-day Islamic culture, various Asian cultures, Indian? History has shown that non-aggressive cultures are also the most easily suppressed and assimilated, even though they are in no way inferior (Tibetan, Native American, Gaelic). Either you try to strip the people of the bond with their tradition and history (which may or may not be possible), or it simply is what it is. There's no middle ground there. | ||
|
zalz
Netherlands3704 Posts
On January 22 2012 03:26 R!! wrote: Calling americans cultureless is an extremely common thing here in Brasil, one usual thing we often hear is that americans are so inane that they can't spot the region they live in on their own country's map and that we most likely know more about their history than they do, again, that's what he hear around here, and then there are the jokes regarding fat people, e.g most americans eat so much that they get to places by rolling, etc. A miracle that Brazilian comedies aren't shown on every channel around the world. | ||
|
False_Peace
United States13 Posts
On January 22 2012 02:43 HoldenR wrote: Not only is it not a prerequisite to have been to a country to understand it's affairs considering the internet puts us in touch with people around the globe on a daily basis, but I have been to the U.S. in fact. I've been to Washington D.C., Miami, New York City and Los Angeles. Also, this isn't "defending yourself", it's scrambling to put down an argument and then just insulting your opponent. That's not self defense, that's portruding the exact stereotype that people claim they dislike about your attitude toward the rest of them. Why on earth would you prove them right? How about saying "Hey guys, I know America isn't really the best place in the world. It is for some and it isn't for others. In fact, lots of countries are great to live. I know I wouldn't mind living somewhere else, because I appreciate a great amount of cultures!" Because you know what? You'll be hard pressed to find a EU inhabitant that wouldn't be willing to say this. We don't hate eachother's countries, and we aren't as disgustingly nationalistic in every aspect. All we're asking is "tone down the goddamn nationalism by about 20 levels because it's getting ridiculous", and your response is to tone it up some more. To prove us wrong, do the opposite of what we expect you to, and we will respect you for it. What American here said "America is the best"? Ive read almost every post and nowhere did anyone make a blanket statement saying we are better than everyone else/ Once again you love to add generalizations that you have heard or read to frame your arguement. Please stick to the topic. Because you know what? You'll be hard pressed to find a EU inhabitant that wouldn't be willing to say this. We don't hate eachother's countries, and we aren't as disgustingly nationalistic in every aspect. Oh this one was real good! This actually gave me such a good laugh!! No buddy, Europe isn't nationalistic at all...., Europeans were only responsible for the 2 largest wars in the previous century that were practically a direct result of nationalism!! Oh and don't even get me started on eastern Europe and the virtual merry-go-around of countries it has produced in the last 50 years! Oh noooo! you Europeans could careless about your own countries, you are all about the greater good of mankind! Gimmie a break.. | ||
|
jj33
802 Posts
On January 22 2012 03:14 RetroAspect wrote: Edit: wrong form, heh. the quote is only till "blablabla ... anthropological view" you digest something I did not say. in anthropology, they classify by hunter-gatherer, farmers, horiculturalists etc etc. belgium and USA i'm pretty sure would be classified the same way. we both get our food from the supermarket. that's all i said. seems alot of people on TL have really bad reading comprehension | ||
|
R!!
Brazil938 Posts
On January 22 2012 03:32 zalz wrote: A miracle that Brazilian comedies aren't shown on every channel around the world. Oh, we don't have such jokes in comedy shows, then again I hardly ever watch TV, but I doubt it, this is just commonplace talk we have regarding americans. | ||
|
allecto
328 Posts
On January 22 2012 03:31 R!! wrote: You shouldn't waste your time, it's not even feasible to me that someone can come up with a reasonable argument to explain exactly what the guy above said and then there's the fact that americans say its football, but the entire world says otherwise and when it comes to disputes about designating names to things, numbers always win. I think he was probably arguing it's ignorant to not look at the history of American football and why it is called football--the sport changed ya know? It's kind of like calling French fries, French. They were made in Belgium first, but who cares. | ||
|
domovoi
United States1478 Posts
On January 22 2012 03:36 allecto wrote: I think he was probably arguing it's ignorant to not look at the history of American football and why it is called football--the sport changed ya know? It's kind of like calling French fries, French. They were made in Belgium first, but who cares. I have another thread already, but short version: both American football and association football are offshoots of an old British game. It's hard to say which version football is closer to that original game given centuries of rule changes, but suffice to say, it's incredibly ignorant to suggest American football has no claim to the word "football." As for French fries (and thank god for Belgium for inventing them), I recall it has something to do with the fact they are "French cut." Not sure if the term "French cut fries" originates from Belgium or not. | ||
|
SilentchiLL
Germany1405 Posts
On January 22 2012 03:15 Hikko wrote: Trying to think of something that Romania is known for... .. ... .... ....still trying Gypsies, cheap whores(use a condom), bear dancers That's what I thought of in the first 3 seconds and except the beardancing thing I don't see anything negative about it | ||
|
TheAntZ
Israel6248 Posts
On January 22 2012 03:36 allecto wrote: I think he was probably arguing it's ignorant to not look at the history of American football and why it is called football--the sport changed ya know? It's kind of like calling French fries, French. They were made in Belgium first, but who cares. Oh i know the history of it, that it was called football (among other sports) because it was played on feet rather than horseback or somesuch rubbish. Doesnt change the fact that its absurd to call handegg the 'real' football in this day and age :D | ||
|
domovoi
United States1478 Posts
On January 22 2012 03:40 TheAntZ wrote: Oh i know the history of it, that it was called football (among other sports) because it was played on feet rather than horseback or somesuch rubbish. Doesnt change the fact that its absurd to call handegg the 'real' football in this day and age :D They're both separate versions of football. Dumb to think there is even such a thing as a "real" version; pretty sure they're both quite real. | ||
|
allecto
328 Posts
On January 22 2012 03:38 domovoi wrote: I have another thread already, but short version: both American football and association football are offshoots of an old British game. It's hard to say which version football is closer to that original game given centuries of rule changes, but suffice to say, it's incredibly ignorant to suggest American football has no claim to the word "football." As for French fries (and thank god for Belgium for inventing them), I recall it has something to do with the fact they are "French cut." Not sure if the term "French cut fries" originates from Belgium or not. Exactly what I was trying to get at. I'll move the discussion over to the other thread. | ||
|
nalgene
Canada2153 Posts
Anyone know what he's saying? | ||
|
TheAntZ
Israel6248 Posts
On January 22 2012 03:42 domovoi wrote: They're both separate versions of football. Dumb to think there is even such a thing as a "real" version; pretty sure they're both quite real. Alright, you have your points. I still believe its absurd to call the sport football, and regardless of the origins of the word that wont change, but I respect you going out of your way to educate me on the history of it | ||
|
AirbladeOrange
United States2571 Posts
| ||
|
DDie
Brazil2369 Posts
Just think about, we all watch american movies, series, we eat american food, we play american games, etc, etc... all of these have been globalized, so to speak. | ||
|
SilentchiLL
Germany1405 Posts
On January 22 2012 03:34 False_Peace wrote: What American here said "America is the best"? Ive read almost every post and nowhere did anyone make a blanket statement saying we are better than everyone else/ Once again you love to add generalizations that you have heard or read to frame your arguement. Please stick to the topic. Oh this one was real good! This actually gave me such a good laugh!! No buddy, Europe isn't nationalistic at all...., Europeans were only responsible for the 2 largest wars in the previous century that were practically a direct result of nationalism!! Oh and don't even get me started on eastern Europe and the virtual merry-go-around of countries it has produced in the last 50 years! Oh noooo! you Europeans could careless about your own countries, you are all about the greater good of mankind! Gimmie a break.. If you haven't seen the america is the #1 post then you clearly haven't read all of the posts here | ||
|
domovoi
United States1478 Posts
On January 22 2012 03:42 allecto wrote: Exactly what I was trying to get at. I'll move the discussion over to the other thread. Apparently my thread was so non-controversial, it was closed. Anyway, here's what I wrote. For some reason, certain soccer fans find it necessary to criticize American football on the grounds that it doesn't involve much kicking or a spheroid. This is a thread to point out how ignorant they sound. Football can be split it up into two categories: association football and gridiron football. Both of these games are derived from the British sport of football (to be sure, plenty of other cultures had games involving running, kicking and ball carrying). That British sport generally moved the ball around through carrying the ball, but scoring involved kicking the ball into some target. Centuries later, the two offshoots of that game became popularized. Association football got rid of the carrying aspect while gridiron football downplayed the kicking aspect. American football went one step further and allowed forward passes. American football is not the only gridiron football that is played. There is Rugby and its various versions. Canada and Australia also have their own version of gridiron football. All of those countries also call the game "football." Even in Britain, it is common to refer to gridiron football rather than association football as "football." Needless to say, there is no "one true way" to referring to these types of games; American football has as much claim to the term "football" as association football does. The more you know. | ||
| ||
