I’m a Hugger

I’m a hugger, he says and leans in. I shudder, I can smell his breath. It’s not the freshest. I can smell his aftershave. It smells cheap. I can feel his stubble across my cheek. It hurts. I can feel his stomach flab. It is soft and almost engulfs me. He disgusts me. I do not know him. Why is he touching me like this?

I am not much for physical contact. But even if I were, I would not want to hug damn strangers. People I just met. Why the hell do some people think announcing “I am  a hugger” gives them the right to touch me in a way that we usually only touch close friends, partners and family. I am not a hugger. I do not hug strangers. I do not want you to hug me. Step the fuck back and get your clammy hands off of me. Who the hell gave you the right to lay your hands on me?

 

I get it. I see how these hugger types think they are jovial, warm, approachable, and quirky, fun, with it people. I am sure they believe proclaiming “I am a hugger” makes them somehow with it, cool, hipsterish, yogaish, trendyish, leftist, Burneriersih or something.

It does not. It is a cheap party trick. Without the party and booze. Whatever it is, I am not buying it. They think it makes them relatable. You know what, it does not. All it says is they are so needy and so uninteresting, they have so few words of wisdom in their vocabulary that they need to practically assault people to get to them. They are incapable of saying something worthwhile, instead they come too close, they leave all decorum behind, and they violate all sense of personal space and without remorse they breach my personal freedom.

Next time someone leans in with the “I am a hugger” I am gonna lean right back, with my strong runners leg up high and ready, and proudly proclaim, “I am a kicker”. Let’s see who wins that one.

Continue Reading

Cultural Appropriation and all that Jazz

If a group directly impacted by a phenomenon tells the world that please do not use a specific term, or artifact, or certain depiction, since it has historical implications that demean me and my family and my people, why, then of course I shall completely and unhesitatingly not use it.

I do not believe it is ever acceptable to make fun of or discriminate against people because of inherent traits such as skin color, sexuality, health status, socioeconomic status etc. I see no reason, nor do I find joy in making fun of people just because they adhere to any one religion. That said, I do find joy in pointing out logical flaws, lack of scientific thinking, bigotry and the overall uselessness and stupidity of religions. Criticizing religion is completely different from criticizing people.

Religion, and -isms of all kinds are more than fair game for commentary of any kind. -Isms and religions are sets of ideas, nothing more. Ideas are made to be criticized, even made fun of.  Especially silly ones, such as religious ones.

If a whiny person, especially a jacked up social warrior, high on some alkaline detox shot, tells me to stop eating, baking, printing, wearing, selling, or saying something because it is cultural appropriation, then it is most probably way off base. Making Mexican food is not cultural appropriation. Wearing braids or cornrows or what have you is a style choice, albeit a bad one, but it is not cultural appropriation.

Incorporating positive parts of another people and countries is not a bad thing. It is a good thing. Enjoying another culture’s food, baking it, even selling it is not a bad thing. It is praise – this food is so goddamn tasty I need to make it and sell it so the world can enjoy it too. Dreadlocks are disgusting, and should really be banned for that reason alone, but any hippie, regardless of color or culture, has the right to wear them. It is not cultural appropriation. If in doubt, do your research. Exactly whose cultural would dreadlocks be appropriation from? Listening to rap is something all people have the same right to enjoy (or tolerate) just as they have the right to listen to polka or bluegrass or blues or what have you. We can all wear what we want, Indian saris or tie dye, pants or ponchos, it is a matter of bad or good taste, not of stealing someone else’s culture.  Learning from other cultures, incorporating colors, art, food is a good thing! Appreciating and wanting to share what one has learned and seen abroad is a positive.

Now, if someone dresses up in an indigenous dress and makes fun of that culture, that is bad. If someone does blackface, it is derogatory and plain dumb. The same goes for sexually stereotyping someone. or for making fun of handicaps. Taking someone’s culture and passing it off as your own is not ok. Taking someone else’s work, minimizing or even removing its heritage claiming it is your, is going too far, it is completely lacking in respect and even theft. The line should be pretty clear, but is seems activists want it moved and that the new rules are both ambiguous and esoteric. What is really the purpose of enlarging the scope of cultural appropriation? What is the goal? I am not sure, but picking fights, where none are to be found, where there is no ill intent, is always a negative. Broadening cultural appropriation, making it mainstream, making it ubiquitous is not the way forward, it is derisive and illogical and most of all it is inflammatory. Stick to what is de facto bad, and make sure the line is not crossed, but keep a line. When the line is unclear just teach, enlighten, question with the purpose of making things better, don’t attack and name call and scream cultural appropriation and bigot at some confused baker/singer/writer/philosopher who simply expressed joy in whatever craft. Attacking never achieves a positive. And I am confident most cases of what activists call cultural appropriation, are simple lack of knowledge or insight, so what is the point of attack and arguing? Who will learn from that?

Continue Reading

Read this June 11, 2017

Interesting stuff that I’ve read and that I also think you should read (sifting through the Internets so you don’t have to).

Is the US education system producing a society of smart fools?

Is the hunt for self esteem just a big lie?

I found this dishonest and frankly full of self righteousness. This is not how it works.

Is calorie restriction the key to longevity?

Are they wrong and stupid?

The fight to integrate the national Spelling bee.

I do not understand this case, do not understand those who defend him.

 

 

 

Continue Reading

What’s in a Name?

In any given situation, we have a choice. We can plow ahead, as we always do, with preconceived notions, happily believing we are at right do do, think and say what we want. Which we certainly are, legally and even morally some may claim. The other choice, is to listen, learn, research and, god forbid, if we find out something we did not know, if someone enlightens us, we can change our opinion, we can actually take a minute and let that new information sink in, and lo and behold, we can become more engaged, better even, people for it. The choice is always there.

Yet, every single fucking day people disappoint me with their lack of interest, empathy and lack of human decency. It seems the simple way always wins, why change, why listen, why give a shit about anyone else besides oneself? Huh? It should be simple. In any given situation, just do the god damn right thing, no? But evidently, it is not easy. or people are just to ignorant to know what is the decent thing to do. The lack of interest in knowing more, in learning for the sake of learning, or to take another person’s or group’s feelings into consideration, seems to overwhelming, too much hard work for the majority of people. Or are they just plain stupid?

In an otherwise fun and informative FB group on sailing, a member asked, very nicely at that, about the name of her new sailboat: Gypsy. Apparently her husband and daughter liked the name but she was concerned the name could be offensive, given its history, so she cautiously and decently asked for advice before deciding to keep the name or not.

Most people offered their opinions as to whether the name was nice or not, if they personally liked it or not. A few, very few, offered background and facts, with links and short, but accurate recaps of what the word Gypsy means and a history of the Roma people. Rather than take the information in, question it rationally or give more facts people immediately became strangely, well ‘offended’. Not at the word Gypsy, not on behalf of the Roma, not at the information offered, but at the mere notion of someone asking if it was ok to use a certain term in a certain way. They had had enough of this PC world apparently, and no one, I mean no one, was to tell them what to do.

These people got offended that someone nicely suggested that maybe they should reconsider using words that, wait for it, may offend someone else because of a long tradition of bigotry and a history of violence and denigration. The women, yes all women, in this group were indignant that the PC police was out, that cultural appropriation (well they did not know the term, but several of them alluded to burritos and Mexicans and food and culture, so I believe that was their meaning, no matter how badly worded) was frowned upon on and that anyone dare questions someone else’s right to name their boat what they heck they want. By the way, that is completely missing the point, and that is not what I am proposing here, you see no one said, don’t use that name for your boat, all that was said was: maybe you learn what the word stands for before you decide. Yet, the indignation was rampant and tempers flared.

Most simple did not take a second to reflect but indignantly cried ‘Why care what others think?”, “You do what you please, if you like it, it is your boat, it is a lovely name”. Despite the links to history, the vain efforts of some members of the group to explain that Gypsies, or Roma, are still, and have historically been persecuted, that half the Roma population were killed in Hitler’s death camps and that Gypsy is, by most Roma, deemed a derogatory term. Some claimed that “well since the Gypsies use the name themselves it is ok for us to use as we see fit”. That allegory is like saying the N word is perfectly fine for all to use, to name their goddamn boats even, because some African Americans use it amongst themselves in certain situations. But that argument fell on deaf ears. Others claimed, that by being Romanian or Eastern European by origin, they were most suited to judge and since they were definitely not offended, it is perfectly ok to call a boat or people Gypsies. The little fact that being Romanian and Roma are completely different, just blew straight over their heads and that Romania is one of the worst offenders towards the Roma yet today kind of, you know, invalidates that point even further. In the end the argument that it was tiring and unnecessary and idiotic even with all this word policing was the prevailing sentiment. Not that anyone had emphatically said “do not use the word Gypsy”, but the simple notion that anyone would ask or care what someone might think, seemed too hard a concept to grasp.

A handful of people, no more, expressed sympathy with the group of people in question and their right to decide the connotations the word Gypsy holds to them. Their comments were either ignored or disagreed. A couple of women dared suggest that the decent thing to do was to just refrain when in doubt. Others simply said to respect a people and not use a word that is 1) listed as an ethnic slur 2) is not a word that the Roma people approve of themselves and that 3) has historically been used to denigrate travelers in general and Roma in particular. That fell on completely deaf ears. You see, according to most of the women, that was completely beside the point, because you know, someone’s right to do what they want always trumps being informed and acting in a decent, emphatic and fucking knowledgeable way.

It should be so simple: if a group of people, who have systematically been persecuted and mistreated throughout history, ask that the term Gypsy not be used as they consider it an ethnic slur, then why would any decent person want to use it? Even if the group of people in question have not explicitly said so, when in doubt refrain. And at least, know what the fuck you are talking about. Not one single person who was against not using the name, because it was “oohhh so pretty” had a single fact right.

You see, I am not in favor of tone policing. What is happening around campuses in the US is abhorrent. Free speech is invaluable and necessary and I will always protect it. However free speech, does not mean say any damn thing that pops into your head. Free speech does not mean say or do anything what you want, others be damned. Free speech comes with responsibility; responsibility to know what you are talking about, to have your facts and history straight and a little bit of reflection. There is a huge difference between tone policing and shutting down free speech and simply being empathetic and refraining from an unnecessary hurt. I will not have some SJW telling me what to think or say. I will however listen to information and facts before deciding on an opinion of my own. Big difference.

Now, I had a basic idea of the Roma and the term Gypsy prior to stumbling onto this thread (basically because of Sweden’s history with mistreatment of the Roma). I know even more now having done some research, however I have no interest in telling this woman what to name her boat or not. I can share some information with her, some links I found that were helpful in learning more myself, so she can then decide herself, but that is the extent of my advice.

What I have is an interest in the complete lack of inquisitiveness, the complete lack of interest in finding out whether the name is or is not a good choice from all these women. It scares me. Why would all these women assume that their responses along the line of “I like it so go with it” is any way a useful, or for that matter valid, response. Scarier even is the response “Who cares what anyone else thinks”. How low can we go when that is the overwhelmingly most frequent response to a benign question regarding whether a name would be offensive to a group of people is “Who cares”. Well, someone does care. Would it kill these women to listen, to read, to try to learn before they speak? Apparently it would. Their anger and indignation at anyone trying to inform them or question them was sad to behold. Their self righteousness and selfishness was appalling. Yet, they did not get it. At all.

Continue Reading
1 2 3 8