# Exotic foods, are they "bad" or "racist" or are they sharing culture and enjoyable delicacies'?



## Jaredthefox92 (Jul 8, 2021)

I've stumbled onto this weird article that some people were talking about on Youtube today. Where this writer from Washington Post is claiming that "Exotic" foods are of lesser quality than normal foods and it's "racist" to enjoy them. This is rather bizarre for me, because to me exotic foods generally are of much higher quality and wanting to be consumed to myself rather than corndogs or fast food. 



			https://www.washingtonpost.com/food/2021/07/07/exotic-food-xenophobia-racism/
		


Which to me is very odd, as to me the term exotic in food can mean it is from places like Ireland, France, the UK, and even Canada where they have recipes and food that are not common to where I live. Also, I am a big fan of foods of Korean, Chinese, and Mexican cuisine. (These are often found in Atlanta or around Georgia.)

My takes are these:
1.What is exotic may not always be ethnic and vice versa, exotic foods to me can be European foods that are not common to where I live, such as French Baguettes or Dutch Stroopwaffles. Yet these people are Caucasian, (such as myself). The inverse is foods like Mexican cuisine, which are not very "exotic" to where I live, but have a different cultural background to myself.

2.People who share their food recipes and cuisines often have nice profiting businesses, and make a lot of money from dining. To me this would be like shaming Italian restaurants for having pizza. Honestly, people from other places like the UK and Germany love American southern cuisine as well. If someone from Frankfurt travelled to the USA and we gave them cornbread and hushpuppies, and they liked it I wouldn't be upset.

Please know, I don't want this to become political. To me food isn't about race, but culture. It's about sharing your traditions, flavors, recipes, and customs with one another. Oh and it's also just because I get bored of BBQ and chicken every single night. I see exotic foods in a positive light, and I am quite happy to spend my money to dine out with foods we normally don't eat.


----------



## The_biscuits_532 (Jul 8, 2021)

This reeks of outrage for the sake of getting attention and therefore money. I'd agree that "exotic" is totally subjective - buckwheat isn't that interesting of a food to be but it's almost never eaten here in the UK, I'm only used to it because my Stepmum is South Ossetian. 

Hell, I've read about weird shit they eat in other parts of the UK before. I move pretty often and every time I do I find out about some weird local food. In my current place it was Scouse, a type of vegetable stew. Before that Deep Fried Mars Bars (fuckin delicious btw), and before that, "Flugs" (They're like, giant bread buns for giant sandwiches).

I do think a lot of people are eager to share their food and recipes. I literally just showed my landlords how to make a steamed pudding in two minutes, as thanks for them making sunday roast the past couple weeks. I used to work at an Indian restaurant and my boss was always getting me to try new dishes.


----------



## Jaredthefox92 (Jul 8, 2021)

The_biscuits_532 said:


> This reeks of outrage for the sake of getting attention and therefore money. I'd agree that "exotic" is totally subjective - buckwheat isn't that interesting of a food to be but it's almost never eaten here in the UK, I'm only used to it because my Stepmum is South Ossetian.
> 
> Hell, I've read about weird shit they eat in other parts of the UK before. I move pretty often and every time I do I find out about some weird local food. In my current place it was Scouse, a type of vegetable stew. Before that Deep Fried Mars Bars (fuckin delicious btw), and before that, "Flugs" (They're like, giant bread buns for giant sandwiches).
> 
> I do think a lot of people are eager to share their food and recipes. I literally just showed my landlords how to make a steamed pudding in two minutes, as thanks for them making sunday roast the past couple weeks. I used to work at an Indian restaurant and my boss was always getting me to try new dishes.



Indeed, I've had my friend from the Netherlands tell me she had no idea what American flapjacks were and she wanted the recipe. You'd be amazed how much American foods are just unheard of in some places. I've had an former Austrian friend tell me "no wonder Americans are so fat, these foods are delicious". Honestly, it works both ways, a lot of foods I get so bored of would make a lot of money if I opened up an Southern Cuisine joint in say the middle of Munich. People like things they don't normally get. Rarity has value.

Yeah, even having some dishes from up north are a treat for me, for instance I love phily cheesteaks, but normally we have the average sandwich here. People generally like what they don't get around where they live, it's the same with any other amenity or luxury too. People up north love southern Dixie cooking, but I've had it for all my life that I get bored.

Yep, that's the thing, the author is implying the people who are from various backgrounds don't enjoy that people like their foods, we do. Reminds me of when I was in my campus a few years ago. The kitchen staff were Cubans and they had these guacamole tortillas. While everyone else was buying the usual fast-food type of stuff, I ordered those and they were delicious. One of the cafeteria people told me he was surprised that I wanted it, but I told him I get bored of corndogs that they also had on the menu that day.


----------



## Rimna (Jul 8, 2021)

Oh my god, I can't even enjoy food now without being racist? Do people in the developed world have any responsibilities that don't include being offended?

It's already bad enough that I'm persecuted for liking coffee more than tea. Jeez, I better not admit to loving mango and... *Gets cancelled*


----------



## Jaredthefox92 (Jul 8, 2021)

Rimna said:


> Oh my god, I can't even enjoy food now without being racist? Do people in the developed world have any responsibilities that don't include being offended?
> 
> It's already bad enough that I'm persecuted for liking coffee more than tea. Jeez, I better not admit to loving mango and... *Gets cancelled*



I know right, and what about the people who make these food? They going to go out of business? Oh right, they don't count because they don't live in big high rises or work for Disney. 

Honestly, I bet they just want everyone to eat at Red Lobster and steal my biscuits.


----------



## Troj (Jul 8, 2021)

Couldn't access the article due to a paywall. That said:

The word "exotic" is both subjective/culturally-dependent and, arguably, otherizing. It's not a huge deal, but it is something that warrants a bit of reflection. It can be useful and instructive to reflect on the connotations of a word like "exotic," and the assumptions and associations it conjures up (both for oneself, and in general).

That said, as long as the cultures in question and the people who belong to them are treated with respect, I think cultural exchange and cultural intermixing are absolutely wonderful, especially where food's concerned! I'm a big foodie, so having access to a diverse range of food options is very important to me!


----------



## Yakamaru (Jul 8, 2021)

Can't enjoy ANYTHING without some moron claiming it's "racist" or "sexist" or whatever nonsense they choose to be offensive that day. I just give them the middle finger and laugh at their moral busy-bodying.


----------



## Frank Gulotta (Jul 8, 2021)

Everything is racist if your worldview revolves around race!


----------



## Nexus Cabler (Jul 8, 2021)

I visited the link, it's not really scholarly research journal or study to me. It's more of an opinion piece...of one person. XD

I think it's safe to say the majority of the world doesn't mind their local/country foods being enjoyed by others elsewhere. I think one of the best ways to appreciate each others cultures is to eat their foods.

I will point out that throwing around the word "exotic" to describe anything outside your country is....odd. We aren't 19th century Safari explorers.


----------



## The_biscuits_532 (Jul 8, 2021)

Honestly, the only time I've ever seen a group get offended over others eating their traditional food is when I've seen braindead Americans on Facebook try to claim Italian Pizza isn't "authentic" like American Pizza, only for the Italians to go start losing their shit for obvious reasons.


----------



## Telnac (Jul 8, 2021)

The_biscuits_532 said:


> Honestly, the only time I've ever seen a group get offended over others eating their traditional food is when I've seen braindead Americans on Facebook try to claim Italian Pizza isn't "authentic" like American Pizza, only for the Italians to go start losing their shit for obvious reasons.


That's hilarious, given that pizza was invented in New York.

As for the OP, I eat what I like to eat. I don't care where it came from. If someone takes offense at that, that's their problem.


----------



## Ramjet (Jul 8, 2021)

Looks like a job for social justice warriors.


----------



## Jaredthefox92 (Jul 8, 2021)

I eat Calamari, so I am banned from entering the world of Mon Calamari.


----------



## Attaman (Jul 8, 2021)

The word 'exotic' has *hella* connotations. Something that @Nexus Cabler touches upon up above, and... seems to be the main thrust of the WaPo article.

I'm not really sure why people are surprised by this? Or find it controversial? Like, this is literally sociology 101 stuff. Or shit you can spend ten seconds Googling in relation to other uses of the word, such as clothing. Or fictional settings / prose. Music. Literature. Religion. Etcetera, etcetera. "If you have almost any substitute word you could use in place of exotic? Do so. We guarantee you the use of a thesaurus here won't make you sound like a prat, and it'll make a bunch of people less uncomfortable in return."

Seriously. This comes off a lot like "Babby first encounter with concept of history of language". Words can have baggage! Sometimes unintentional! Just as how you wouldn't say, for example, that hamburgers are food from a shithole country / region, or that fried icecream is a food of choice among swine, you shouldn't say stuff like "Pad Thai is a staple exotic food", or - for a more likely example - if in a foreign country and say "Give me something exotic!" when a dining establishment's waiter / cashier / whatever asks what you'd like.

It ain't that difficult. At least not unless actively making it so.


----------



## The_biscuits_532 (Jul 8, 2021)

Telnac said:


> That's hilarious, given that pizza was invented in New York.
> 
> As for the OP, I eat what I like to eat. I don't care where it came from. If someone takes offense at that, that's their problem.


Pizza dates back thousands of years and was even alluded to in the _Aeniad _

The Margarita is generally regarded as an invention of Raffaele Esposito in 1889

The first American Pizzeria didn't open until 1905 (Lombardi's - 32 Spring Street, Manhattan, NYC, NY), and it didn't explode in popularity until the conclusion of the Italian theatre of WW2, after which veterans provided a market.


----------



## Frank Gulotta (Jul 8, 2021)

Attaman said:


> this is literally sociology 101 stuff


That doesn't tell much, if society was a IKEA catalogue, sociology would be Jacques Carelman's _Catalogue of Unfindable Objects_


----------



## Telnac (Jul 8, 2021)

The_biscuits_532 said:


> Pizza dates back thousands of years and was even alluded to in the _Aeniad _
> 
> The Margarita is generally regarded as an invention of Raffaele Esposito in 1889
> 
> The first American Pizzeria didn't open until 1905 (Lombardi's - 32 Spring Street, Manhattan, NYC, NY), and it didn't explode in popularity until the conclusion of the Italian theatre of WW2, after which veterans provided a market.


I stand corrected. I read somewhere that pizza was invented in New York but after reading this reply and looking into it some more, I guess it's more correct to say the Americanized pizza was invented in New York. That's sort of like saying that Americanzed anything was invented in America; it doesn't really mean much.

Oh well. It's delicious, wherever it originally came from!


----------



## The_biscuits_532 (Jul 8, 2021)

Telnac said:


> I stand corrected. I read somewhere that pizza was invented in New York but after reading this reply and looking into it some more, I guess it's more correct to say the Americanized pizza was invented in New York. That's sort of like saying that Americanzed anything was invented in America; it doesn't really mean much.
> 
> Oh well. It's delicious, wherever it originally came from!


Oh definitely. 

Apparently pizza farms are a thing too. Those are American, and are farms dedicated purely to growing all the crops used to make pizzas. Which is pretty ingenious but also hilarious overspecialised. Like pizza is just _that good_


----------



## ben909 (Jul 8, 2021)

always found talking about or trying food thats noteable from different places is better for getting people together then it is for causing problems... although i guess if you look at it from the pov of everything you see as normal being labeled as exotic it could have a negative meaning
...
...
...
 especially if you are looking for negative things to push an agenda


----------



## ben909 (Jul 8, 2021)

The_biscuits_532 said:


> Oh definitely.
> 
> Apparently pizza farms are a thing too. Those are American, and are farms dedicated purely to growing all the crops used to make pizzas. Which is pretty ingenious but also hilarious overspecialised. Like pizza is just _that good_


um...
...

...




...
possibly


----------



## Nexus Cabler (Jul 8, 2021)

Telnac said:


> I stand corrected. I read somewhere that pizza was invented in New York but after reading this reply and looking into it some more, I guess it's more correct to say the Americanized pizza was invented in New York. That's sort of like saying that Americanzed anything was invented in America; it doesn't really mean much.
> 
> Oh well. It's delicious, wherever it originally came from!


Fun fact: "Hawaiian Pizza" came from Canada...and is currently most popular in Australia

Australians don't shame me for liking Pineapple.

Maybe I should move there, so I can finally be at peace.


----------



## Jaredthefox92 (Jul 8, 2021)

ben909 said:


> always found talking about or trying food thats noteable from different places is better for getting people together then it is for causing problems... although i guess if you look at it from the pov of everything you see as normal being labeled as exotic it could have a negative meaning
> ...
> ...
> ...
> especially if you are looking for negative things to push an agenda



Indeed, in ancient times banquets were held for "honored guests" of many different kingdoms and nobility, heck we still do this in political meetings with countries around the world. How about we get every politician to stop having dinner with people of other countries? (Immense sarcasm.)


----------



## Attaman (Jul 8, 2021)

Going back a couple posts, it's a valid point insofar that not everyone will have a base from which to understand what "It's literally [x] 101 stuff" could be referring to.

Thus, a more apt turn of phrase would probably have been sticking to "Babby's first encounter with concept of history of language". Since there's... not really anything there, that would be confusing outside the "Online usage of words like Babby to sarcastically refer to somebody", which ties back into "concept of history of language" anyhow.

Now, still being fair, people might find it _funny_ or _strange_ getting in a tissy over the use of the word 'exotic' for mundane things like food, clothing, or so-on: Almost everyone can understand why, for example, you wouldn't go on about 'exotic' modern religions or call somebody's ethnicity exotic (And if they don't, I'll save them the trouble here. Just don't tell somebody they're exotic, or 'oriental', or any of that stuff. That shit was kind of yikes even before it started falling out of use in the 90's / early 00's). But food? Clothing? Describing a generic fantasy setting as a short-hand to avoid having to instead go "This is a generic fantasy setting aesthetically aping after things that are considered by conventional pop culture in the region of writing as [foreign region]"? Isn't it a bit kneejerk to tell people off for using exotic here? Particularly since it's rarely used in this manner _derisively_, let alone purposefully offensive?

Well, to some degree yeah. Ask almost anyone who the term might be used _towards_, and I can bet you ten times out of ten that if you _had_ to use that term to describe anything related to their ethnicity, culture, family / regional history, or so-on, they'd readily prefer it for things like their food or a fantastical expy than they would their very existence. You'll probably find a fair few who don't even see much a problem with using it in this regard (to describe food) at all. Since, I mean, it _does_ tend to be a rather common short-hand. "I'm looking for something exotic for dinner tonight." "So, something down the foreign foods aisle in the grocery market / not a cheesesteak or pizza from carryout. Understood." The word is common enough language that it _can_ be easier sometimes than breaking out a thesaurus, or trying to needle into specificity, or even not be used in the manner being described right now / in the OP anyways (You know what another use for the word exotic is? "Something pretty damn different from what everyone else is wearing / using / doing". You could make an argument for somebody in a flowing, shimmering red dress at a rather casual party having an _exotic_ outfit, for example, and it wouldn't _particularly_ be a wrong use of phrase).

But it's one of those things that adds up, and for some it very much can and does "other" them. Particularly when the thing it's being used to differentiate it for ("From people who aren't from here, using ingredients / material that aren't from here, presented in a combination / fashion that isn't from around here")... is exactly what it is ("They're second generation immigrants. All the ingredients are stuff - if making from scratch - you'd find in a generic grocery / fabric shop. The combination in question was undeniably made in [current country of locale]"). Likewise, to go back to history of use of term, there are instances where "exotic" is used more as a sort of back-handed compliment, or to specifically draw an uncomfortable amount of attention to certain traits, or so-on.

Hence why the simplest solution is generally to just "Think of another word", since it can tell you pretty quickly if the way you're about to use it might be a bit yikes (and if so to what severity). If it isn't? Hey, more power to you, again word exists and is used because it has uses! And if it is, you can decide pretty quickly if the positive might theoretically outweigh the negative ("Yeah, I'm referring to ordering something exotic for dinner tonight... but the person I'm saying it to will know exactly that what I mean is not another fucking bunch of cheese steaks or carry-out but something of a different palate") or if you dodged a bullet ("Hm. Maybe this isn't the best way to advertise the D&D setting I'd like to run") .


----------



## Jaredthefox92 (Jul 8, 2021)

Nexus Cabler said:


> Fun fact: "Hawaiian Pizza" came from Canada...and is currently most popular in Australia
> 
> Australians don't shame me for liking Pineapple.
> 
> Maybe I should move there, so I can finally be at peace.



My Italian friend and I think it's heresy. Oddly enough he likes burgers and steak.


----------



## Telnac (Jul 8, 2021)

Attaman said:


> Going back a couple posts, it's a valid point insofar that not everyone will have a base from which to understand what "It's literally [x] 101 stuff" could be referring to.
> 
> Thus, a more apt turn of phrase would probably have been sticking to "Babby's first encounter with concept of history of language". Since there's... not really anything there, that would be confusing outside the "Online usage of words like Babby to sarcastically refer to somebody", which ties back into "concept of history of language" anyhow.
> 
> ...


Just think that someone somewhere looks at a McDonald's cheeseburger and calls it exotic food.  It's all relative.


----------



## Ramjet (Jul 8, 2021)

Nexus Cabler said:


> Fun fact: "Hawaiian Pizza" came from Canada...and is currently most popular in Australia
> 
> Australians don't shame me for liking Pineapple.
> 
> Maybe I should move there, so I can finally be at peace.



On behalf of all Canadian's, I apologize for the abomination that is pineapple on pizza


----------



## Jaredthefox92 (Jul 8, 2021)

Telnac said:


> Just think that someone somewhere looks at a McDonald's cheeseburger and calls it exotic food.  It's all relative.



North Korea, you could get killed by having them and they get shipped from South Korea straight to Kim all the time.


----------



## Jaredthefox92 (Jul 8, 2021)

Ramjet said:


> On behalf of all Canadian's, I apologize for the abomination that is pineapple on pizza
> 
> View attachment 115723


----------



## The_biscuits_532 (Jul 8, 2021)

Jaredthefox92 said:


> My Italian friend and I think it's heresy. Oddly enough he likes burgers and steak.


When I went to Naples (Pizza ground zero) I found some pretty interesting things

First - some heresy, on my half. 

I actually don't like cheese. But apparently pizza without cheese is just a thing that exists over there so I didn't get lynched. 

Secondly, I found a sign



https://imgur.com/a/5FsGJOn


(was too high res for the forums to handle)


----------



## The_biscuits_532 (Jul 8, 2021)

Telnac said:


> Just think that someone somewhere looks at a McDonald's cheeseburger and calls it exotic food.  It's all relative.


I mean, my stepmum always found it kinda weird and gross. As I said earlier, she's from South Ossetia


----------



## Jaredthefox92 (Jul 8, 2021)

The_biscuits_532 said:


> When I went to Naples (Pizza ground zero) I found some pretty interesting things
> 
> First - some heresy, on my half.
> 
> ...



I need to show this to my friend. He'll get a laugh. I really like "pizza agri spinachi", or spinach pizza. It's rare to find but I enjoy it.


----------



## Telnac (Jul 8, 2021)

The_biscuits_532 said:


> I mean, my stepmum always found it kinda weird and gross. As I said earlier, she's from South Ossetia


Don't worry, I find it kinda weird and gross too.


----------



## Jackpot Raccuki (Jul 8, 2021)

Jaredthefox92 said:


> I've stumbled onto this weird article that some people were talking about on Youtube today. Where this writer from Washington Post is claiming that "Exotic" foods are of lesser quality than normal foods and it's "racist" to enjoy them.


I only needed this first few lines to know it's another one of those "I'm offended on your behalf" articles.
Food is food, the idea of exotic food is that it's not from your culture, or even your own island.

At this point, the term "racist" is starting to sound meaningless and more like something people put at the end to make someone feel bad, y'know like swear words.
Someones always upset about something, and we've hit an all time low because now it's racist to like food. Am I going to be called a xenophobe because I breathed through my mouth due to blocked nose?


----------



## The_biscuits_532 (Jul 8, 2021)

Jackpot Raccuki said:


> I only needed this first few lines to know it's another one of those "I'm offended on your behalf" articles.
> Food is food, the idea of exotic food is that it's not from your culture, or even your own island.
> 
> At this point, the term "racist" is starting to sound meaningless and more like something people put at the end to make someone feel bad, y'know like swear words.
> Someones always upset about something, and we've hit an all time low because now it's racist to like food. Am I going to be called a xenophobe because I breathed through my mouth due to blocked nose?


It's definitely either

1) If we make an outrageous article that annoys everyone, we'll get tons of clicks. And therefore ad revenue 

Or

2) W H I T E S A V I O U R C O M P L E X


----------



## Attaman (Jul 8, 2021)

Telnac said:


> Just think that someone somewhere looks at a McDonald's cheeseburger and calls it exotic food.  It's all relative.


I mean, yes, but this ties back into the whole "history of words / language" bit and how different uses of a word can have varying amounts of acceptability / baggage. Calling an international tourist or first-generation immigrant 'foreigner' might be accurate in the basic sense of the term, for example, but might not be the best choice of words depending on context. Conversely, calling a similar looking, similarly dressed, 3rd+ generation resident 'foreigner' (with literally the only thing different in the equation being either where their parents' mother and / or father was born, _or _where *their* parent was) just isn't very cash money regardless of circumstance.

By the same token: Telling your spouse / SO that you'd like to get something exotic for dinner tonight? Probably not going to ruffle any feathers or rock any boats. Telling somebody at a potluck "Oh! I hope you brought something exotic! I'm a big fan of trying new things!" will probably not be met with a beaming smile, even with the same lack of negative intent and approximately identical scenario (describing what you'd like to eat for dinner). And turning down an invitation to get together with some friends for a lunch / dinner because "I don't agree with exotic foods, but you all have fun!" or excusing yourself for having trouble saying a name because "I never could get that exotic pronunciation down" is just backhanded at best.

Language. It be a thing. It's how I can and have been dinged on here for calling somebody a potato before during a vitriolic exchange. Even with literally _zero_ pre-existing baggage / negative implications, one can do a hell of a lot with language. IIRC this is even a basic principle of some literal languages, wherein what tone or syllable you emphasize can _entirely _changes a word from "Casual conversation" to "I'm pretty sure they just called your mother a whore".


----------



## aomagrat (Jul 8, 2021)

During my 20 years in the US Navy I had the opportunity to visit dozens of countries and enjoy their local cuisines. Never did I offend anyone by seeking out the local delicacies instead of the local McDonald's. Infact, the locals were happy to see me enjoying their cultural foods and many eagerly made suggestions as to what I should try. Anyone who says that enjoying another culture's food is racist is full of crap.


----------



## Jaredthefox92 (Jul 8, 2021)

aomagrat said:


> During my 20 years in the US Navy I had the opportunity to visit dozens of countries and enjoy their local cuisines. Never did I offend anyone by seeking out the local delicacies instead of the local McDonald's. Infact, the locals were happy to see me enjoying their cultural foods and many eagerly made suggestions as to what I should try. Anyone who says that enjoying another culture's food is racist is full of crap.



Yep, it's a sign that you care about their culture. Let's face it, people eat Mchdonalds in the USA because they have to have something "quick and easy" even in other countries in Europe Mchdonalds is expensive. When you eat local food, people in many cultures like to get to know you. The old saying "a man's heart is through his stomach" is universal. Plus, in countries where Americans are seen as "aggressive" having us sit down and talk over food is seen as assuring.


----------



## The_biscuits_532 (Jul 8, 2021)

Jaredthefox92 said:


> Yep, it's a sign that you care about their culture. Let's face it, people eat Mchdonalds in the USA because they have to have something "quick and easy" even in other countries in Europe Mchdonalds is expensive. When you eat local food, people in many cultures like to get to know you. The old saying "a man's heart is through his stomach" is universal. Plus, in countries where Americans are seen as "aggressive" having us sit down and talk over food is seen as assuring.


Definitely. McDonald's is the safe bet. If you're willing to be adventurous and try the local food, props to you.


----------



## Jaredthefox92 (Jul 8, 2021)

The_biscuits_532 said:


> Definitely. McDonald's is the safe bet. If you're willing to be adventurous and try the local food, props to you.



So long as it's not dog, bugs, or bats I'll try anything. Well, maybe not maggot cheese or wines someone stomped on. However, pretty much any basic food groups that are safe to eat I'll go for.


----------



## Attaman (Jul 8, 2021)

aomagrat said:


> During my 20 years in the US Navy I had the opportunity to visit dozens of countries and enjoy their local cuisines. Never did I offend anyone by seeking out the local delicacies instead of the local McDonald's. Infact, the locals were happy to see me enjoying their cultural foods and many eagerly made suggestions as to what I should try. Anyone who says that enjoying another culture's food is racist is full of crap.


As a FYI, this is why I generally suggest people read articles before commenting on them. Admittedly since WaPo is hidden behind a sort of pseudo-paywall that limits you to only [x] free articles a month unless you either subscribe or have some way to work around its built-in blocker, I can understand the difficulty here.

Because nobody either in the article or in the thread says "enjoying another culture's food is racist". The article says "Stop using the word exotic to describe food, consider maybe changing what word you use, but more importantly consider why you classify some food as exotic and what classifying it as exotic means to you". Also, unironically, as the fifth paragraph from it


			
				WaPo said:
			
		

> I had a few productive exchanges with these readers on the subject so I could better troubleshoot their issues. My conclusion? What’s “exotic” to you isn’t “exotic” to my neighbor, might not be “exotic” to my mom, probably wouldn’t be “exotic” to my best friend.


Were it _not_ WaPo, but something more readily accessible to the average person, I'd be curious as to _how_ this much talking past one-another is occurring.

But, well, again: WaPo. Considering some of the journalistic bomb shells (in a good way) they occasionally put out, I can understand why somebody wouldn't want to eat up one of their very limited number of free articles in the first week of a month on an opinion piece on the use of the word 'exotic', and instead just take others' word on what's described within.


----------



## Nexus Cabler (Jul 8, 2021)

Telnac said:


> Just think that someone somewhere looks at a McDonald's cheeseburger and calls it exotic food.  It's all relative.


People in my own family look at me weird for liking Arby's, like I'm from another world.

I showed them a picture of the 'Meat Mountain' sandwich. I think my mother is still scared of me.


----------



## Ramjet (Jul 8, 2021)

Nexus Cabler said:


> People in my own family look at me weird for liking Arby's, like I'm from another world.



Maybe if it wasn't for all the Arby's vore rp's your family would be ok with it.


----------



## Jaredthefox92 (Jul 8, 2021)

Nexus Cabler said:


> People in my own family look at me weird for liking Arby's, like I'm from another world.



I just had one of their Rubin's.


----------



## Attaman (Jul 8, 2021)

Nexus Cabler said:


> People in my own family look at me weird for liking Arby's, like I'm from another world.


Now, to be fair, Arby's is - arguably even more than Little Caesars - one of those fast food joints that _really_ depends on the specific franchise and staffing, as even having only gone a handful of times I can firmly say that their quality ranges from "Leaves one nostalgic and longing for the days of school cafeteria food" to "Actually sort of good for drive thru grub". McDonalds is McDonalds: You know what you're getting every time. Likewise Taco Bell, Popeyes, etcetera. Going to a random Arby's is playing roulette. For your taste buds, _and_ for your gastro-intestinal system.


----------



## Nexus Cabler (Jul 8, 2021)

Jaredthefox92 said:


> I just had one of their Rubin's.


Those are pretty good. I personally love the Brisket sandwich myself.



Ramjet said:


> Maybe if it wasn't for all the Arby's vore rp's your family would be ok with it.


It's been 3 years, and I can still smell the fresh roast beef

The low quality tables had never been sat in

The factory line made grill was never once used.

It was single handedly the most ridiculous and outlandish roleplay idea that took off successfully, and you could tell

You could really tell...


----------



## Punji (Jul 8, 2021)

Never again shall this racc be ever unsuspecting of the lengths a son of man's ideology may go.

A rare, unusual, and by all means foreign cultural food is by it's very nature exotic. Telnac took the words right out of my mouth; Somewhere in the world a cheap and low-quality cheeseburger from McDonald's is an exotic meal just as that culture's foods are innate to them and exotic to the Western world.

The logic of "exotic" being "racist" equates to starving children in Africa being racist for not getting the same niche Chinese delicacies they may never even dream of. An Oreo cookie would be exotic to someone in extreme poverty. It's just a word.


----------



## The_biscuits_532 (Jul 8, 2021)

Jaredthefox92 said:


> So long as it's not dog, bugs, or bats I'll try anything. Well, maybe not maggot cheese or wines someone stomped on. However, pretty much any basic food groups that are safe to eat I'll go for.


Apparently Maggot Cheese (Cazu Marzu) is actually illegal in it's homeland - Sardinia, due to how incredibly unhealthy it is. 

Bats I'm assuming is a similar reason because of uh, present circumstances. From what I've gathered they carry diseases so often because of how they live in huge colonies, so pathogens have to strengthen to do any damage - it's like how European diseases were far too potent for the Native Americans or Pacific Islanders. 

But yeah same mostly. Also no Molluscs. Cephalopods are too smart, and the other two groups look too nasty.


----------



## Nexus Cabler (Jul 8, 2021)

Attaman said:


> Now, to be fair, Arby's is - arguably even more than Little Caesars - one of those fast food joints that _really_ depends on the specific franchise and staffing, as even having only gone a handful of times I can firmly say that their quality ranges from "Leaves one nostalgic and longing for the days of school cafeteria food" to "Actually sort of good for drive thru grub". McDonalds is McDonalds: You know what you're getting every time. Likewise Taco Bell, Popeyes, etcetera. Going to a random Arby's is playing roulette. For your taste buds, _and_ for your gastro-intestinal system.


Yeah, I remember someone who had a talk show did a rant about Arby's almost every night and how it was killing his digestive system, only for the restaurant to send him free food. I can't remember the fellas name. It's getting to me.


----------



## Jaredthefox92 (Jul 8, 2021)

Punji said:


> Never again shall this racc be ever unsuspecting of the lengths a son of man's ideology may go.
> 
> A rare, unusual, and by all means foreign cultural food is by it's very nature exotic. Telnac took the words right out of my mouth; Somewhere in the world a cheap and low-quality cheeseburger from McDonald's is an exotic meal just as that cultures foods are innate to them and exotic to the Western world.
> 
> The logic of "exotic" being "racist" equates to starving children in Africa being racist for not getting the same niche Chinese delicacies they may never even dream of. An Oreo cookie would be exotic to someone is extreme poverty. It's just a word.



It's also confusing, since I presume the idea of appropriation is to indulge in other people's cultures, but now it's not? The chicken or the egg?  (I choose the first btw, since I have very bored tastebuds.)


----------



## The_biscuits_532 (Jul 8, 2021)

Jaredthefox92 said:


> It's also confusing, since I presume the idea of appropriation is to indulge in other people's cultures, but now it's not? The chicken or the egg?  (I choose the first btw, since I have very bored tastebuds.)


Usually cultural appropriation is used to refer to using symbolically important parts of another culture without consideration for their meaning. 

So like, how the Nazi party appropriated both the word Aryan and the Swastika from North Indians whilst retaining the meaning of either. Bonus negative points for appropriating them for usage in deplorable actions.


----------



## Jaredthefox92 (Jul 8, 2021)

The_biscuits_532 said:


> Usually cultural appropriation is used to refer to using symbolically important parts of another culture without consideration for their meaning.
> 
> So like, how the Nazi party appropriated both the word Aryan and the Swastika from North Indians whilst retaining the meaning of either. Bonus negative points for appropriating them for usage in deplorable actions.



Oh, so it's a bad thing. Odd that anyone would want that, I mean the first thing I'd try to do is understand where I am at first. Then again I believe it's important to get to know people first.


----------



## Kinguyakki (Jul 8, 2021)

I just like food.

When I'm going to eat, my thought isn't whether or not the thing I'm consuming might offend some blogger or social media influencer who calls it "appropriation" to eat food that isn't culturally authentic.  Especially in the USA, where so many cultures and traditions and cooking styles are all blended together, and now we have these weird bastardized American versions of everything.  Just eat what you want.


----------



## Kit H. Ruppell (Jul 8, 2021)

The circle is now complete. Now we must all stick to our own kind and customs; the alternative is racist.


----------



## Jaredthefox92 (Jul 8, 2021)

Kit H. Ruppell said:


> The circle is now complete. Now we must all stick to our own kind and customs; the alternative is racist.



Nah, rednecks and hillbillies get annoying.


----------



## FaroraSF (Jul 9, 2021)

Cultural appropriation is an inherently neutral term, it can be both a bad thing and a good thing.

As far as I'm concerned, trying foods from other cultures is a good thing. You aren't really taking anything from that culture (as in, by enjoying food from that culture it doesn't take away from the original peoples enjoyment of their food, recipes are always being adjusted to suit individuals tastes) and if anything the combining of different foods from different cultures can make even tastier food, ever try butter chicken pizza?

People who think sharing recipes across cultural boundaries is a bad thing are just being silly.


----------



## BigFuzzyBenji (Jul 9, 2021)

In my experience, of all things, food can bring people together. It can be a mender, and it can bridge the gap in communication and understanding. How someone does a thing matters...intent matters. But the general activity of enjoying foods you normally can't? That's _life _at it's best, and the furthest thing from something like racism. Sharing culture and cuisine should be celebrated.


----------



## Filter (Jul 9, 2021)

The_biscuits_532 said:


> Apparently pizza farms are a thing too.


I prefer free-range pizza. It's more humane.


----------



## quoting_mungo (Jul 9, 2021)

Attaman said:


> Because nobody either in the article or in the thread says "enjoying another culture's food is racist". The article says "Stop using the word exotic to describe food, consider maybe changing what word you use, but more importantly consider why you classify some food as exotic and what classifying it as exotic means to you".


This is a very good point/summary of the issue, and something I personally find a struggle for multiple reasons. I don’t do spicy or pickled food, so going to a place where I recognize nothing on the menu can be a crapshoot (asking waiters “is this thing hot?” doesn’t always work; my absolute maximum is pretty low). Talking about “ethnic food” feels… not great, especially since “ethnic” in some contexts seems to have find-and-replaced “exotic.”

And, like… I don’t know how to best communicate “I really don’t have it in me to figure out if there’s anything on the menu I can eat today” without othering a culture I’m just unfamiliar with.

(Another reason it’s difficult is because I frequently lose words, and “not Swedish” isn’t exactly better than “exotic” as a descriptor of a food. XD)


----------



## JacobFloofWoof (Jul 9, 2021)

Yakamaru said:


> Can't enjoy ANYTHING without some moron claiming it's "racist" or "sexist" or whatever nonsense they choose to be offensive that day. I just give them the middle finger and laugh at their moral busy-bodying.


I just don't care anymore, because after all the years of that shit, I just ask myself, "do these people ever go out of their way to make sure they're not offending anything pertaining to me?", or, "what have these people ever done for my well-being in return?". lmfao


----------



## JacobFloofWoof (Jul 9, 2021)

Jaredthefox92 said:


> Indeed, I've had my friend from the Netherlands tell me she had no idea what American flapjacks were and she wanted the recipe. You'd be amazed how much American foods are just unheard of in some places. I've had an former Austrian friend tell me "no wonder Americans are so fat, these foods are delicious". Honestly, it works both ways, a lot of foods I get so bored of would make a lot of money if I opened up an Southern Cuisine joint in say the middle of Munich. People like things they don't normally get. Rarity has value.


Honestly though, you should give her the heads up about the history behind Aunt Jemima.


----------



## Frank Gulotta (Jul 9, 2021)

"Exotic" means it's something you're unfamiliar with and find mysterious and attractive for that reason. I've NEVER heard it used with a negative connotation. I've heard it used to refer to extremely varied items including French couisine. Japanese and Chinese tourists enjoy it because it's guess what, exotic to them. I guess they're really just despising it then? welcome to the upside-down world of identitarian sociologist pricks.

The world doesn't need you to save them, at least not with your dismissive, spiteful, hateful ways.


----------



## Jaredthefox92 (Jul 9, 2021)

Hi-FiWolf95 said:


> Honestly though, you should give her the heads up about the history behind Aunt Jemima.



She doesn't even know what that is.


----------



## Lexiand (Jul 9, 2021)

I think I had lost briancells  when I got to this part.


----------



## Jaredthefox92 (Jul 9, 2021)

Lexiand said:


> View attachment 115806
> 
> I think I had lost briancells  when I got to this part.



I mean yeah, I would think people from kilometers away from other people would have one cultural difference or two, isn't that sort of the point? I feel she wants a Soviet Union government or to replace us all as androids or something. (Joking.) Is it xenophobia if I talk about grits to someone in London? Nope.


----------



## Lexiand (Jul 10, 2021)

There is a reason why. I just generally stay away from article sites.
They are usually full with garbage.


----------



## Jaredthefox92 (Jul 10, 2021)

Lexiand said:


> There is a reason why. I just generally stay away from article sites.
> They are usually full with garbage.



Everyone was ripping on this on Youtube.


----------



## Fallowfox (Jul 10, 2021)

People give too much attention to youtubers or bloggers etc who make them angry. 

Those of you doing this do not realise that you are sharing and promoting those folks' work, and therefore giving them more money.
I kinda suspect a lot of people enjoy feeling outraged about silly topics like this though. It's nice to feel like the smart one. 

Do remember though that 'outrage content' is just an entertainment industry. Somebody telling you that eating ramen noodles is racist or whatever probably doesn't actually care about the subject at all. They care about enticing you to read more of their content and share it with other people. 

side comment: I've always found it weird that Americans use the term 'ethnic food'. Like...everybody belongs to an ethnic group. Whatever though.


----------



## ConorHyena (Jul 10, 2021)

Fallowfox said:


> side comment: I've always found it weird that Americans use the term 'ethnic food'. Like...everybody belongs to an ethnic group. Whatever though.


The actual question is - how does this relate to ethic cleansing?


----------



## Fallowfox (Jul 10, 2021)

Hi-FiWolf95 said:


> I just don't care anymore, because after all the years of that shit, I just ask myself, "do these people ever go out of their way to make sure they're not offending anything pertaining to me?", or, "what have these people ever done for my well-being in return?". lmfao



Writing dumb stuff on the internet for viewers to get outraged at is an entertainment industry. 
And look, this author was successful in getting your attention. Their article has been shared and you're all engaging with it. 
Now imagine they just wrote an article about their favourite type of tomato soup. It wouldn't get any traffic at all so it wouldn't make any money. 

But hey, that's business for you.


----------



## Jaredthefox92 (Jul 10, 2021)

ConorHyena said:


> The actual question is - how does this relate to ethic cleansing?



For a long time in the USA certain foods from other cultures were eaten within certain demographics, from the 1800's all the way up to past the Cold War.


----------



## Jaredthefox92 (Jul 10, 2021)

Fallowfox said:


> Writing dumb stuff on the internet for viewers to get outraged at is an entertainment industry.
> And look, this author was successful in getting your attention. Their article has been shared and you're all engaging with it.
> Now imagine they just wrote an article about their favourite type of tomato soup. It wouldn't get any traffic at all so it wouldn't make any money.
> 
> But hey, that's business for you.



I think it's all an elaborate plot, tell people they shouldn't eat other people's food, while you horde it all and eat it yourself. Works for Kim Jung Un!


----------



## Yakamaru (Jul 10, 2021)

Fallowfox said:


> Writing dumb stuff on the internet for viewers to get outraged at is an entertainment industry.
> And look, this author was successful in getting your attention. Their article has been shared and you're all engaging with it.
> Now imagine they just wrote an article about their favourite type of tomato soup. It wouldn't get any traffic at all so it wouldn't make any money.
> 
> But hey, that's business for you.


Why does this article even exist? What are they trying to push?

It's food for crying out loud. How about we all laugh at the sheer stupidity and imbecility of these race grifters and go have a pint together instead? Or a cup of coffee/tea if you don't drink alcohol. 

Speaking of which... Rather off-topic, but if you're ever visiting Norway and are in the area, let me know. Know plenty of restaurants I can show you.


----------



## Frank Gulotta (Jul 10, 2021)

Fallowfox said:


> People give too much attention to youtubers or bloggers etc who make them angry.
> 
> Those of you doing this do not realise that you are sharing and promoting those folks' work, and therefore giving them more money.
> I kinda suspect a lot of people enjoy feeling outraged about silly topics like this though. It's nice to feel like the smart one.
> ...


It's not just random shit tho, it's shit that's coming out of universities' asshole (aka sociology), I don't care if some dipshits make ten cents per article because normal people are annoyed at them - these toxic ideas need to be exposed.

I mean you've got people defending these fools in this very thread, are they taking the bait too except they're agreeing with it...? or are they troling us luls as well?


----------



## Xitheon (Jul 10, 2021)

I'm British and I find Mexican food and Mexicans in general really exotic and cool. I think that Mexican people are not very well represented in Britain so everything to do with them excites me.

I hope that I'm not being racist. I think Mexican things are awesome.


----------



## Yakamaru (Jul 10, 2021)

Xitheon said:


> I'm British and I find Mexican food and Mexicans in general really exotic and cool. I think that Mexican people are not very well represented in Britain so everything to do with them excites me.
> 
> I hope that I'm not being racist. I think Mexican things are awesome.


Nah love, you're fine.


----------



## Jaredthefox92 (Jul 10, 2021)

Xitheon said:


> I'm British and I find Mexican food and Mexicans in general really exotic and cool. I think that Mexican people are not very well represented in Britain so everything to do with them excites me.
> 
> I hope that I'm not being racist. I think Mexican things are awesome.



Oddly enough, Mexican food is all over the USA, Cuban too. But yeah we're right next to Mexico and Cuba.


----------



## Telnac (Jul 10, 2021)

Xitheon said:


> I'm British and I find Mexican food and Mexicans in general really exotic and cool. I think that Mexican people are not very well represented in Britain so everything to do with them excites me.
> 
> I hope that I'm not being racist. I think Mexican things are awesome.


Nah. Mexican food is amazing. It's one of the only things I like about living in Southern California: real Mexican food is just about everywhere. Not just the Americanized version of it, either (although that's everywhere too.). If the menu's only in Spanish, you're in the right place.


----------



## The_biscuits_532 (Jul 10, 2021)

Xitheon said:


> I'm British and I find Mexican food and Mexicans in general really exotic and cool. I think that Mexican people are not very well represented in Britain so everything to do with them excites me.
> 
> I hope that I'm not being racist. I think Mexican things are awesome.


I didn't even know we had taco bell until I found one in Liverpool


----------



## Jaredthefox92 (Jul 10, 2021)

The_biscuits_532 said:


> I didn't even know we had taco bell until I found one in Liverpool





The_biscuits_532 said:


> I didn't even know we had taco bell until I found one in Liverpool



Be glad you didn't, that is murder on your stomach.


----------



## JacobFloofWoof (Jul 10, 2021)

Fallowfox said:


> Writing dumb stuff on the internet for viewers to get outraged at is an entertainment industry.
> And look, this author was successful in getting your attention. Their article has been shared and you're all engaging with it.
> Now imagine they just wrote an article about their favourite type of tomato soup. It wouldn't get any traffic at all so it wouldn't make any money.
> 
> But hey, that's business for you.


You probably think I care or something, more than I made it sound. As much as they found an opportunity to cook up an article, I found an opportunity myself.


----------



## O.D.D. (Jul 10, 2021)

Dwell not long on the opinions of anyone who tells you that enjoying food that originated in locales other than your own is some kind of moral or ethical faux pas.


----------



## Hogo (Jul 11, 2021)

Food is food. If I can consume and digest it properly it isn't exotic for me. 

Which means insects are an exotic food for me.


----------



## Fallowfox (Jul 11, 2021)

Frank Gulotta said:


> It's not just random shit tho, it's shit that's coming out of universities' asshole (aka sociology), I don't care if some dipshits make ten cents per article because normal people are annoyed at them - these toxic ideas need to be exposed.
> 
> I mean you've got people defending these fools in this very thread, are they taking the bait too except they're agreeing with it...? or are they troling us luls as well?



I would just caution against throwing the 'baby out with the bathwater' and thinking all sociology is nonsense because you read something on the internet that made you angry. 
Many of the statistical approaches used in modern science and medicine were originally developed in sociology, because of the difficult challenge of uncovering patterns in highly multi-variate data that the social sciences present. 

If people had been persuaded that doing social science wasn't worth anybody's time, then obviously that wouldn't have been good for the progress of science at large. So I'm cautious about ideology-driven people trying to imply that university or social study is a waste of time.


----------



## O.D.D. (Jul 11, 2021)

Fallowfox said:


> I would just caution against throwing the 'baby out with the bathwater' and thinking all sociology is nonsense because you read something on the internet that made you angry.
> Many of the statistical approaches used in modern science and medicine were originally developed in sociology, because of the difficult challenge of uncovering patterns in highly multi-variate data that the social sciences present.
> 
> If people had been persuaded that doing social science wasn't worth anybody's time, then obviously that wouldn't have been good for the progress of science at large. So I'm cautious about ideology-driven people trying to imply that university or social study is a waste of time.


Sociology and a number of other similar disciplines suffer from not only a poor ability to create theories that accurately predict behaviors, but also working backwards from conclusions informed by personal bias and a generalized issue with things like sample sizes, self-selection for sampling and extremely fluid terminology in my experience.


----------



## Frank Gulotta (Jul 11, 2021)

Fallowfox said:


> I would just caution against throwing the 'baby out with the bathwater' and thinking all sociology is nonsense because you read something on the internet that made you angry.
> Many of the statistical approaches used in modern science and medicine were originally developed in sociology, because of the difficult challenge of uncovering patterns in highly multi-variate data that the social sciences present.
> 
> If people had been persuaded that doing social science wasn't worth anybody's time, then obviously that wouldn't have been good for the progress of science at large. So I'm cautious about ideology-driven people trying to imply that university or social study is a waste of time.


And most of the best universities were founded by theologians and bishops, that obviously means creationism is just as valid as hard sciences right

Speaking of ideology-driven people, I'm not speaking of dismissing social "sciences" altogether, just perhaps purging the ideologically-driven dipshits who infest them, right now they're a downright mental health hazard


----------



## Nexus Cabler (Jul 11, 2021)

All science, theories, and beliefs deserve to be questioned and debated. It's essential. Our current paradigm is not an exception.

Why suddenly stop and give the side eye to people who ask "Are you sure this is accurate or just a biased conclusion?"


----------



## O.D.D. (Jul 11, 2021)

Nexus Cabler said:


> All science, theories, and beliefs deserve to be questioned and debated. It's essential. Our current paradigm is not an exception.
> 
> Why suddenly stop at sociology and give the side eye to people who ask "Are you sure this is accurate or just a biased conclusion?"


The "hard" sciences are undergoing a lot of tumult right now over flawed studies and papers getting published for decidedly less-than-scientific reasons, I can't imagine someone trying to seriously tell me that the "soft" sciences are somehow beyond question or reproach.  The fields in the "soft" sciences are going to attract people prone to seeking confirmation of personal bias and ideology and rigor within those fields is a shambles.  The "soft" sciences as taught and practiced seem to do their best to cite in circles, use shibboleth-tier terminology at times and otherwise actively defy understanding from any slightly-external standpoint.

There is value in understanding people and groups thereof but the "soft" sciences have some work to do.


----------



## Yakamaru (Jul 11, 2021)

No idea, concept, statement, dogma, belief, study, paper, etc, is above scrutiny, having questions asked from various perspectives and angles, nor are they above being picked apart and analyzed.

Word of the day: Metacognition.


----------



## O.D.D. (Jul 11, 2021)

Anyway just to kind of flip the metaphorical bird to WaPo here, I can cook decent Thai/SE Asian despite not hailing from that area and never having been there, and consider them reasonably "exotic" insofar as they're cuisines you're less likely to see many ingredients for outside of small, specialized stores - it's near impossible to find kaffir lime leaves, galangal, and fish sauce in your average American grocery.  Whether that will change or not remains to be seen, I've started seeing things pop up in mainstream grocery stores I distinctly remember occupying that realm of "exotic" not too long ago (gochujang has become much easier to find, it's no longer difficult to find delicacies like mochi and ramune, and I can reliably get rice sticks now but not cellophane noodles).  There's also the matter of locality within the States to be considered here - things that were very easy to find out West are variably difficult to procure elsewhere (lengua and Mexican-style chorizo are impossible to find outside of small _carnicerias_ here).

I don't know who put it in their heads that "exotic" is used as a slur or is otherwise demeaning, it sounds a lot like someone decided to assume that the word is uttered in some kind of bad faith or with ill intent.  Anyone who assumes you act or engage in bad faith as a default is not someone you can or should spend too much time talking to.


----------



## Attaman (Jul 11, 2021)

Nexus Cabler said:


> All science, theories, and beliefs deserve to be questioned and debated. It's essential. Our current paradigm is not an exception.
> 
> Why suddenly stop and give the side eye to people who ask "Are you sure this is accurate or just a biased conclusion?"


Being utterly fair, while this is true (it's kind of baked into the scientific method, the whole "Peer review" and "Replicable results" bits), after a certain (often nebulous) point the questioning / debating makes a hard shift from "Good faith" to "Bad faith".

Anti-Vaccine, for a good and fairly objective example (also one that, conveniently, nobody on FAF can particularly gainsay since ToS: That's one way to avoid a Hot Take debate!). The science / theory behind "Vaccines good" is one of those things that has (broadly, versus on an individual vaccine - which is often handled at the research stage - basis) is _pretty firmly resolved_, yet to this day there's the "Vaccines are a conspiracy by the UN and cause [the thing being vaccinated against] in the first place!" crowd. There's not really any point (healthy, at least) in letting that debate be made, allowing it to drag out / have a platform, etcetera.

Sociology's another good example, if only because a surprising number of people lack object permanence and so can't quite seem to understand that what they directly observe and the sum experiences of their life are not the be-all end-all. To say nothing of aforementioned "acting in bad faith crowd" who will actively rile said persons up out of everything from malice (ex: "If I had to suffer you have to suffer / If people pay attention [x] group might suffer less") to relatively benign convenience (ex: "If it's accepted that premise [a] is true then behavior [c] isn't optimal, and it'd be a lot of work for me to stop engaging in , so let's just pretend [c]  is still optimal"). 



O.D.D. said:


> Anyway just to kind of flip the metaphorical bird to WaPo here,


Did you read the article? Because it never said eating / making food that isn't native to you is racist. That was an extrapolation via telephone.


O.D.D. said:


> I don't know who put it in their heads that "exotic" is used as a slur or is otherwise demeaning,


I know this is going to sound crazy, but hear me out here: If you're the sort who's into social soiree's, and the opportunity presents itself to use the word "exotic" as a (perceived) compliment for somebody... pick another word.

Trust me. You'll thank me for this later.


----------



## Frank Gulotta (Jul 11, 2021)

Yakamaru said:


> No idea, concept, statement, dogma, belief, study, paper, etc, is above scrutiny, having questions asked from various perspectives and angles, nor are they above being picked apart and analyzed.
> 
> Word of the day: Metacognition.


There clearly is a big problem when big journals can be tricked into publishing Lord Voldermort's Galactic Empire manifesto!  https://www.timesofisrael.com/duped...-rewrite-of-mein-kampf-as-feminist-manifesto/ I wonder if the people who okayed this did some soul-searching after learning of their mistake

A shame that so many people just want to pretend the problem doesn't exist, or try to gaslight everyone else into believing they're the ones with a problem. You could even say it might be bad faith.


----------



## O.D.D. (Jul 11, 2021)

Attaman said:


> I know this is going to sound crazy, but hear me out here: If you're the sort who's into social soiree's, and the opportunity presents itself to use the word "exotic" as a (perceived) compliment for somebody... pick another word.


Food = people is a weird association to make, but you do you.  That said, words not spoken with malicious intent shouldn't be regarded as such.  Clumsy? Sure.  Better words out there? There always is, but not everyone has a post-grad vocabulary or a thesaurus handy.


Attaman said:


> Did you read the article? Because it never said eating / making food that isn't native to you is racist. That was an extrapolation via telephone.


Paywalled, but given the WaPo's history I may have been primed for the finger-wagging I've seen in the past.  Policing language that doesn't carry plainly malicious intent is neither particularly useful nor is it typically worth the effort spent.


----------



## Attaman (Jul 11, 2021)

O.D.D. said:


> Food = people is a weird association to make, but you do you.





O.D.D. said:


> I don't know who put it in their heads that "exotic" is used as a slur or is otherwise demeaning,


If you mean to say "I don't know who put it in their heads that "exotic" is used as a slur or otherwise demeaning _in regards to food_", that's a different matter...

That is also, conveniently, directly touched in the article! Both in a broader sociological sense and the more basic "Words are relative and not everyone will find the same food exotic so keep some more accurate synonyms on the backburner in your mind" sense.

Though since this is being quite a bit unfair, I will reiterate from before: I can't exactly blame people for taking others' words on a WaPo article's content since most of us (self-included) don't have paid subscriptions and it can be a bit unfortunate to waste one of your free articles on "Exotic Food And You" when there's more interesting things going on like "Global Pandemic", or "Hurricane season starting early".



O.D.D. said:


> That said, words not spoken with malicious intent shouldn't be regarded as such.


Well, this thread is going to go places quickly. Whether intended or not. I guess to get some context out of the way early, since you're new to FAF: "It's a joke, you should smile more" is a defense that's been used a bit here before, and there's people who stand on practically every side of that discussion (self included), so this is basically dropping a match in a petrol spill and waiting for the chaos.


O.D.D. said:


> Clumsy? Sure.  Better words out there? There always is, but not everyone has a post-grad vocabulary or a thesaurus handy.


I mean, in many cases the words necessary for "exotic" foods _aren't_ post-grad vocabulary. Things like "spicy", or "made with [insert ingredient here]." "Cooked via [method]." Another thing explicitly covered in the article: Even disregarding any potential connotations, exotic is used as such a _broad_ word that outside its most basic level of "Something unusual" it almost _always_ needs further context clues to specify what somebody really means. For my mother, for example, wanting "exotic food" could mean anything from "sushi" to "just something authentic mexican cuisine in general" to "Samosas! My weight in samosas!" Which was why it was another point in why they suggest to stop using exotic and to try picking slightly more targeted words.


O.D.D. said:


> Paywalled, but given the WaPo's history I may have been primed for the finger-wagging I've seen in the past.  Policing language that doesn't carry plainly malicious intent is neither particularly useful nor is it typically worth the effort spent.


This depends a lot on where one stands on the concept of micro-aggressions, systematic / societal inertia, and so-on, but _that_ is a subject that is an even bigger match-to-accelerant.

E: Also, Tycho, that you? I swear I recognize that avatar  as art from Ratte in the old FAF days.


----------



## O.D.D. (Jul 11, 2021)

Attaman said:


> Well, this thread is going to go places quickly. Whether intended or not. I guess to get some context out of the way early, since you're new to FAF: "It's a joke, you should smile more" is a defense that's been used a bit here before, and there's people who stand on practically every side of that discussion (self included), so this is basically dropping a match in a petrol spill and waiting for the chaos.


This is a non sequitur, and a leading one at that.  I'm saying that reading malicious intent and subtext into particular word usage as a default state will make one miserable and isolated as they feel attacked when there was no such intent on the speaker's behalf.  You will spend more time agonizing over whether someone backhandedly insulted you and what you should do about it than you will actually communicating towards a constructive end.


Attaman said:


> This depends a lot on where one stands on the concept of micro-aggressions, systematic / societal inertia, and so-on, but _that_ is a subject that is an even bigger match-to-accelerant.


If the worst thing you ever have to deal with in your life is someone else not having tip-top verbal tact in your presence, you're certainly not me.  I'll leave it at that.


----------



## Jackpot Raccuki (Jul 11, 2021)

Fallowfox said:


> I would just caution against throwing the 'baby out with the bathwater' and thinking all sociology is nonsense because you read something on the internet that made you angry.
> Many of the statistical approaches used in modern science and medicine were originally developed in sociology, because of the difficult challenge of uncovering patterns in highly multi-variate data that the social sciences present.
> 
> If people had been persuaded that doing social science wasn't worth anybody's time, then obviously that wouldn't have been good for the progress of science at large. So I'm cautious about ideology-driven people trying to imply that university or social study is a waste of time.


I just wanna say that part of me feels glad to of skipped sociology because of what it gets represented as today... A bunch of people saying the stupidest things like exotic food is racist; but not something like how babies can develop traits from their parents and how feral children adepted along with their animal parents or something.

Don't get me wrong, I loved Sociology and the idea of knowing how people can develop and or change/be changed by social norms and the like.
But I'm still sad it fell down the rabbit hole of now saying exotic food is racist and such. To say it's a waste of time is a lie, you can learn a lot of interesting things, it's reputation however has been made shameful and practically spat on in every form I cannot even attempt mention here.


----------



## Nexus Cabler (Jul 11, 2021)

Just to clarify to everyone who hasn't read due to a paywall (I didn't pay myself, I just zoomed out so I could read past the pop ups) the article isn't saying it's racist to eat any kind of food.

The person is saying their take on using the word "exotic" to describe foods not local to you.

Hope this eliminates the confusion.


----------



## Attaman (Jul 11, 2021)

Jackpot Raccuki said:


> I just wanna say that part of me feels glad to of skipped sociology because of what it gets represented as today... A bunch of people saying the stupidest things like exotic food is racist;


I'll reiterate that so far nobody's actually said this. Like, I get that it takes about two seconds of Twitter browsing _to_ find somebody unironically saying this, but it also takes all of two seconds of Twitter browsing to find somebody arguing that graverobbing is a victimless crime so it might not be the best medium of "What does the general population / academia / [broad group here] really think".


Jackpot Raccuki said:


> But I'm still sad it fell down the rabbit hole of now saying exotic food is racist and such.


See above. So far it's only been said by people as a strawman to justify _why_ sociology is bad.



O.D.D. said:


> This is a non sequitur, and a leading one at that.  I'm saying that reading malicious intent and subtext into particular word usage as a default state will make one miserable and isolated as they feel attacked when there was no such intent on the speaker's behalf.


Unfortunately, see again "Words are relative" / "The whole object permanence thing". Words - particularly broad, open-ended words - tend to have different meanings to different people, are used in different ways around them, and that leads to different receptions.

For an example: I'm a cis white dude who's still relatively young (at the very least, post-shave I have a horrible case of baby-face). If I'm called "boy", it triggers _entirely different_ response from me (see: An utter lack thereof) than it may in other people, because how the term is often used in relation to me is _entirely different_ than it may be used for others. Likewise how somebody might compliment / critique some of my work (I don't have to worry, for example, about hidden subtext usually if somebody says I'm "confrontational").


----------



## O.D.D. (Jul 11, 2021)

Nexus Cabler said:


> Just to clarify to everyone who hasn't read due to a paywall (I didn't pay myself, I just zoomed out so I could read past the pop ups) the article isn't saying it's racist to eat any kind of food.
> 
> The person is saying their take on using the word "exotic" to describe foods not local to you.
> 
> Hope this eliminates the confusion.


Fair enough, and they're entitled to their opinion of the word's use in that context.  I'm unlikely to get up in arms about someone calling my cooking exotic, however.


----------



## Nexus Cabler (Jul 11, 2021)

O.D.D. said:


> Fair enough, and they're entitled to their opinion of the word's use in that context.  I'm unlikely to get up in arms about someone calling my cooking exotic, however.


All good

I just noticed there may have been some miscommunication. Sometimes titles don't reflect the content. Other times it get's interpreted the wrong way at face value.

Once in a while our minds are going so fast paced that we misread the front page and our brain goes jumping head first into the debate hole without looking.


----------



## Jackpot Raccuki (Jul 11, 2021)

Attaman said:


> I'll reiterate that so far nobody's actually said this. Like, I get that it takes about two seconds of Twitter browsing _to_ find somebody unironically saying this, but it also takes all of two seconds of Twitter browsing to find somebody arguing that graverobbing is a victimless crime so it might not be the best medium of "What does the general population / academia / [broad group here] really think".
> 
> See above. So far it's only been said by people as a strawman to justify _why_ sociology is bad.


I don't actually use Twitter for similar to reasons you mention, you can find anything and everything in terms of someone accusing someone else or something.
It's like how people say furries are zoophiles, it's not true and at most are only because of a few select idiots. But it only takes a few if not one idiot to ruin it for everyone.
Like I'll say, Sociology isn't bad. People just give it a bad rep.


----------



## O.D.D. (Jul 11, 2021)

Jackpot Raccuki said:


> I don't actually use Twitter for similar to reasons you mention, you can find anything and everything in terms of someone accusing someone else or something.
> It's like how people say furries are zoophiles, it's not true and at most are only because of a few select idiots. But it only takes a few if not one idiot to ruin it for everyone.
> Like I'll say, Sociology isn't bad. People just give it a bad rep.


Boiling people and how they function in groups down to a science is a herculean task at best.  It's also a kind of "holy grail" for anyone who wants to engage in shaping society, for better or worse.  The implications of turning people and societal function into something that can be predicted with reasonable degrees of accuracy range from promises of unchanging dystopian hellscapes to rosier prospects.  The disciplines in that sphere are ultimately tools, and just as a hammer can help build a house or break a bone, so can academic disciplines be used for betterment or for more nefarious ends - and what constitutes what can be contentious.


----------



## Fallowfox (Jul 13, 2021)

O.D.D. said:


> Sociology and a number of other similar disciplines suffer from not only a poor ability to create theories that accurately predict behaviors, but also working backwards from conclusions informed by personal bias and a generalized issue with things like sample sizes, self-selection for sampling and extremely fluid terminology in my experience.



I think it is important not to generalise. 

Sociological studies might include, for example, ascertaining the effects of pre-natal alcohol exposure on intellectual performance later in life, 
or the effects of a history of smoking on a person's likelihood of developing lung cancer. 

If you want to talk about personal bias, perhaps reflect on your own preconceptions about other people's work; are you being fair to scientists by assuming that they have a 'poor ability to create theories and predict behaviours'

is all social research even about predicting people's behaviour anyway? No. Obviously not.



Frank Gulotta said:


> And most of the best universities were founded by theologians and bishops, that obviously means creationism is just as valid as hard sciences right
> 
> Speaking of ideology-driven people, I'm not speaking of dismissing social "sciences" altogether, just perhaps purging the ideologically-driven dipshits who infest them, right now they're a downright mental health hazard



As it happens the science of Geology (which is surprisingly young, being only a couple of centuries old) matured in the 1830's, when geologists were trying to prove that biblical creation myths were true. 
There was a lot of commotion as they came to the realisation that biblical creation mythology wasn't supported by the geological record. 

Anyway. I want you to reflect on your suggestion that sciences should be 'purged'. 
Who do we trust to 'purge' science, and could this ever be a good thing? Highly politically motivated people may well try to drive out researchers who make discoveries that they are not comfortable with, or who write new and independent ideas. 

Science is not something that should be ideologically cleansed by anybody. It's an ongoing

 process and discussion among equal peers- and respecting other scientists' capacity to hold different opinions to oneself is part of the maturity that the job requires.



Nexus Cabler said:


> All science, theories, and beliefs deserve to be questioned and debated. It's essential. Our current paradigm is not an exception.
> 
> Why suddenly stop and give the side eye to people who ask "Are you sure this is accurate or just a biased conclusion?"



I think some nuance here is necessary. 
Let's say American Tobacco begins demanding that medical scientists who suggest smoking is harmful should be thrown out of their jobs.
They inundate television news with 'experts' dressed in white coats, telling the public that the scientists are ideologues who just want to spoil people's fun by telling them that yet another pleasure in life is giving them cancer. 

Tobacco companies really did this; https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tobacco_industry_playbook

so we should be mindful that, when people suggest that they want Sociology to stop being taught in Universities, or when they make wide-ranging accusations that cannot possibly be supported, that they may well have their own biases that they're seeking to perpetuate.

In this case Frank appears to believe that there is a conspiracy of ideologues in Universities who are using sociology lectures to convince students that they're not allowed to use the word 'exotic' to describe food. Frank has voiced his opinion that he wishes Universities' academic departments could be 'purged' so that they better align with his opinions. 

This is patently absurd, since there is no consensus in sociology that the word 'exotic' is bad in the first place.


----------



## Fallowfox (Jul 13, 2021)

Jackpot Raccuki said:


> I just wanna say that part of me feels glad to of skipped sociology because of what it gets represented as today... A bunch of people saying the stupidest things like exotic food is racist; but not something like how babies can develop traits from their parents and how feral children adepted along with their animal parents or something.
> 
> Don't get me wrong, I loved Sociology and the idea of knowing how people can develop and or change/be changed by social norms and the like.
> But I'm still sad it fell down the rabbit hole of now saying exotic food is racist and such. To say it's a waste of time is a lie, you can learn a lot of interesting things, it's reputation however has been made shameful and practically spat on in every form I cannot even attempt mention here.



My basic response is that this isn't what sociology is about. Frank says so, but why should you believe some stranger on the internet?

Have you been presented with any evidence to suggest sociologists want you to believe that you're not allowed to use the word 'exotic'?

No. Because it's not true.


----------



## O.D.D. (Jul 13, 2021)

Fallowfox said:


> If you want to talk about personal bias, perhaps reflect on your own preconceptions about other people's work; are you being fair to scientists by assuming that they have a 'poor ability to create theories and predict behaviours'


It has nothing to do with my assumptions, it's a documented phenomenon and has been so for a while.  Sokal says hi.  If you want sociology to be a respected field of academia, I have two words: Do better.


----------



## Nexus Cabler (Jul 13, 2021)

Fallowfox said:


> I think some nuance here is necessary.
> Let's say American Tobacco begins demanding that medical scientists who suggest smoking is harmful should be thrown out of their jobs.
> They inundate television news with 'experts' dressed in white coats, telling the public that the scientists are ideologues who just want to spoil people's fun by telling them that yet another pleasure in life is giving them cancer.
> 
> ...




Sociology and anthropology in _particular _carry a larger amount of politically based elements and personal experiences and perceptions than most other fields such medical health and biology that resulted in the surgeon generals warning. This isn't a bad thing necessarily, but it's the main reason we should discuss and criticize it's findings, so that we can sort out accurate data from personal biases.


----------



## Yakamaru (Jul 13, 2021)

O.D.D. said:


> It has nothing to do with my assumptions, it's a documented phenomenon and has been so for a while.  Sokal says hi.  If you want sociology to be a respected field of academia, I have two words: Do better.


Been a while since I've heard Sokal mentioned.


----------



## O.D.D. (Jul 13, 2021)

Yakamaru said:


> Been a while since I've heard Sokal mentioned.


It's not even the only case, it's just the most famous.


----------



## Troj (Jul 13, 2021)

I didn't recall details offhand, so this seems to supply some context and additional critiques or notes about that incident and ones like it: 
	

	







						The controversy around hoax studies in critical theory, explained
					

The "Grievance Studies" or "Sokal Squared" hoax aimed to discredit gender and critical race studies. Did it work?




					www.vox.com


----------



## O.D.D. (Jul 13, 2021)

Troj said:


> The controversy around hoax studies in critical theory, explained
> 
> 
> The "Grievance Studies" or "Sokal Squared" hoax aimed to discredit gender and critical race studies. Did it work?
> ...





> The hoaxers are right that there are problems in identity studies, and that one of those problems is political bias. But their experiment is not convincing evidence that these problems are necessarily worse or more fundamental than those that affect other fields, including ones that seem more “scientific” like psychology or economics.


_Tu quoque _aimed at the other soft sciences? Bold move. These papers were embarrassingly silly.  The fact that they passed muster for publication is ludicrous.  They were bereft of anything interesting, they looked like something a satire site would cook up as a tongue-in-cheek parody of those fields.  The rigor is absent in these fields, and I say that as someone that has had to sit through them.  As long as you knew which side of the bread the professor liked buttered, could use Microsoft Word and could remember which style the professor told you to cite in, you had an A.  That alone is ABSURD.


----------



## Frank Gulotta (Jul 13, 2021)

Fallowfox said:


> Anyway. I want you to reflect on your suggestion that sciences should be 'purged'


No, I think that's fine. There's racial theory rhetoric straight from the 1930s coming out of these departments, perhaps we should know better than to let that happen instead of burying our heads in the sand because muh peer to peer review. If your peers are the same sort of freaks peddling the same sort of karl marx-tier 19th century pseudo-science, peer to peer review doesn't do much to weed the crazies out.

By the way I can't help but notice that we moved from you basically calling this "author" a click-baiting troll not worth acknowledging, to now defending this infestation of bad faith "science". Why did the goalpost move?


----------



## Attaman (Jul 13, 2021)

O.D.D. said:


> _Tu quoque _aimed at the other soft sciences? Bold move. These papers were embarrassingly silly.  The fact that they passed muster for publication is ludicrous.


7 out of 20 did. With two of them being in non-academic journals in the first place. Furthermore, the article in question specifies just how much time ("90 hours a week") was put by them at times into working on the articles, that they actively made efforts to doctor the information / results they acquired as looking legitimate, etcetera.

While 5/20 is better accuracy than, say, the average bullet in the average warzone, it doesn't exactly demonstrate much. Particularly since, as mentioned in the article, there was no comparative effort made with other disciplines to show how such would have fared in other fields with the same approximate effort made to shotgun false papers.

It's egg on faces, but not the "SOCIAL SCIENCES AND POLITICAL CORRECTNESS ARE SCAMS!" that people have tried to make it out to mean. Hell, prominent _Libertarians_ have commented "This don't mean much", and I think our resident FAF Libertarians can comment how there isn't exactly a vested interest among them in the honor of Liberal / "Left" journals.


O.D.D. said:


> The rigor is absent in these fields,


15 out of 20 failed to get published within academic journals after, again, spending 90 hours a week specifically _tailoring_ the documents (with the aid of financial donations to make this a full-time effort, no less!).

Comparative discussions of rigor can be had (or, well, could if aforementioned comparative studies were made), or people can argue that it wasn't rigor _enough_ (Which is very much a discussion that can be had on scientific journals in general: Social sciences are _far_ from alone in jumping the gun in publishing to journals before peer review has been made or results have been visibly replicated, something @Nexus Cabler was presumably alluding to in the need for scrutiny), but to outright say "rigor is absent" is to already have your conclusion and be looking for approximately right-shaped pegs that might fit in the hole.


----------



## O.D.D. (Jul 13, 2021)

Attaman said:


> 15 out of 20 failed to get published within academic journals after, again, spending 90 hours a week specifically _tailoring_ the documents (with the aid of financial donations to make this a full-time effort, no less!).
> 
> Comparative discussions of rigor can be had (or, well, could if aforementioned comparative studies were made), or people can argue that it wasn't rigor _enough_ (Which is very much a discussion that can be had on scientific journals in general: Social sciences are _far_ from alone in jumping the gun in publishing to journals before peer review has been made or results have been visibly replicated, something @Nexus Cabler was presumably alluding to in the need for scrutiny), but to outright say "rigor is absent" is to already have your conclusion and be looking for approximately right-shaped pegs that might fit in the hole.


None of them should have passed review, that's the thing.  The fact that rarely dumb stuff flies through in the hard sciences is already a black mark on their record, and it's one they're rightfully starting to receive increasing scrutiny for as it's centered around securing funding and the novelty of publishing itself.  The fact that I sleepwalked through some of my courses in these fields was disheartening - I wasn't even Sokal-ing, I just had a very good idea of what would be accepted and graded well so I could move on to the rest of my degree and call the diversity reqs done.  This is going to turn academia into a laughingstock.  A diploma is cheapened immeasurably by these black marks.  Why would a paper about rape culture in DOG PARKS ever be entertained as anything but an exercise in wasting time? The applicability within the gender studies field is nil, if this subject were even to be approached in the first place it would fall under some esoteric branch of animal psychology.


----------



## Attaman (Jul 13, 2021)

O.D.D. said:


> None of them should have passed review, that's the thing.





Attaman said:


> Comparative discussions of rigor can be had (or, well, could if aforementioned comparative studies were made), or people can argue that it wasn't rigor _enough_ (Which is very much a discussion that can be had on scientific journals in general: Social sciences are _far_ from alone in jumping the gun in publishing to journals before peer review has been made or results have been visibly replicated, something @Nexus Cabler was presumably alluding to in the need for scrutiny), but to outright say "rigor is absent" is to already have your conclusion and be looking for approximately right-shaped pegs that might fit in the hole.


Let me put this another way: You outright said earlier in the thread that all it takes to get the ear of these sorts of people (social science professors, academics, et al)


> As long as you knew which side of the bread the professor liked buttered, could use Microsoft Word and could remember which style the professor told you to cite in, you had an A. That alone is ABSURD.


This was a group of people, financed by a larger group, spending ninety hours weekly actively creating reports _tailor made_ to target the publisher's "buttered" side, replicate their favored methods of citation, etcetera.

Three quarters of them failed. Spending ninety hours a week with half their homework already _done_, they failed in 75% of their efforts. Not to get an A, but to even get acknowledged.

The conclusion to be drawn here is:
1) There is _some_ level of rigor. How much? Up for debate! Both in this specific case and academia as a whole. But there is _some_ level of rigor, or else 75% would not have been punted back and / or only published in non-academic (though, in two cases, academia-adjacent) journals.
2) That the "As long as you knew" isn't being _entirely accurate_ and that even with this "absent" rigor and Crunch Time level dedication, the three chucklefucks responsible for the 'study' _still_ couldn't get three quarters of their papers published where they wanted.


----------



## O.D.D. (Jul 13, 2021)

Attaman said:


> Let me put this another way: You outright said earlier in the thread that all it takes to get the ear of these sorts of people (social science professors, academics, et al)
> 
> This was a group of people, financed by a larger group, spending ninety hours weekly actively creating reports _tailor made_ to target the publisher's "buttered" side, replicate their favored methods of citation, etcetera.
> 
> ...


The ones that passed were silly enough.  I remember seeing the titles of some of the rejects and noting that they didn't sound significantly more bizarre than the accepted ones.  The fact that Sokal already happened so the fields in question MUST realize there is a distinct possibility that they would see this happen again, and then it happens again 5 more times, and the best defense proffered thus far is "well, we caught MOST of them! The other fields are doing it too!" is ludicrous.  It should be plain as day to experts in these fields when a charlatan is pushing through a nonsense-paper, or something else that adds no enrichment to the field.

If I had written a paper with premises and wording like their own in my classes and passed I would be aghast.  Someone rubber-stamped what can only be described as pollution of an academic field - how many other papers full of similar nonsense submitted in all sincerity get through? How much "junk information" is cluttering the field, how likely is it this field will ever be audited to bring it closer to respectability? If this is 3 "chucklefucks" derping about with a rudimentary understanding of the field they're submitting papers for and they succeed even 25 percent of the time, what light does that cast the sincere papers in? You shoot messengers instead of asking how the hell junk papers even get through.  You can argue for days about what faith these were submitted in, but the fact still stands - they got 5 junk papers past purported experts in the fields and the field's collective response has been the academic equivalent of a dril tweet.

I'll ask again, how does a paper about rape culture in dog parks benefit ANY FIELD? What did this reviewer see in that to green-light it for publication? This was basically an academic pen test they failed 25 percent of the time and they've the audacity to bemoan the state of other soft science fields as a flimsy defense and attack the pen testers? They've been handed a golden opportunity to figure out how to drastically improve their field by winnowing chaff and asking how vulnerable the field is to chicanery and outright cargo-cult bunk and they're hopping mad about it.


----------



## Attaman (Jul 13, 2021)

O.D.D. said:


> The ones that passed were silly enough.


That was not your argument coming into this, and why I have consistently lingered on that point and emphasized (then re-emphasized) other - more sure-footed - arguments.


O.D.D. said:


> The fact that Sokal already happened


Is not a be-all end-all against bad actors. Like, I get what you're _trying_ to get at (that the base level of rigor had twenty years to improve), but the argument you're _presenting_ is "Hrm. Laws. Laws not perfect. Ergo laws bad" level reduction. Not helped since, again, _there is no comparative studies_. I feel like this absence cannot be understated enough as to make a comparative judgement you need _something with which to compare it_. And right now all we have to compare is within the same data set, specifically how many passed versus how many failed.

You want to know what this proved? It's not that Social Sciences are shit. That there's no integrity or rigor to their scientific / academic journals and other assorted works. What it proved is that _sufficiently dedicated and funded bad actors could accomplish at least a 25% success rate in active efforts to be bad actors within the field._

Again, you're starting from a conclusion and grasping for anything vaguely similar enough looking to prop it up. "You just need to know what side their toast is buttered on" is _quite literally mutually exclusive_ with a 75% failure rate... but what they _do_ both share in common is they sound good for "social sciences bad". 


O.D.D. said:


> Someone rubber-stamped what can only be described as pollution of an academic field - how many other papers full of similar nonsense submitted in all sincerity get through?


This is, humorously enough, the right sort of question to ask... because of that whole aforementioned "Peer review" and "Replicable results" thing. Not because "social sciences bad". Because both of those could give approximate answers on the nonsense... specifically as it stands within social sciences.

Repeat with statistics of the same for other fields, ideally multiple fields each including multiple sub-divisions within the same umbrella (so as to account for outlier categories such as - hypothetically - "Well gender and critical race studies are fine, but application of economics to sociology is utterly bonkers and eats eleven thousand spiders every night"), and we can even dig deeper into whether social sciences are particularly bad in comparison to other - harder - sciences, about the same, or even better off!



O.D.D. said:


> How much "junk information" is cluttering the field, how likely is it this field will ever be audited to bring it closer to respectability? If this is 3 "chucklefucks" derping about with a rudimentary understanding of the field they're submitting papers for and they succeed even 25 percent of the time,


I find it fascinating that "Three people funded by a larger group of individuals with the active and explicit purpose of discrediting social sciences, spending 90+ hour weeks, with a firm understanding of exactly what sort of data they need to present to try to get through the editors and reviewers" has turned into "derping about with a rudimentary understanding". It's almost as if, again, the starting premise of this is "Social sciences suck. What can I find that proves it?"


O.D.D. said:


> what light does that cast the sincere papers in? You shoot messengers instead of asking how the hell junk papers even get through.  You can argue for days about what faith these were submitted in, but the fact still stands - they got 5 junk papers past purported experts in the fields and the field's collective response has been the academic equivalent of a dril tweet.


I'm going to be real: "We should disregard the methodology, motivations, and credentials used and focus exclusively on the end result" sounds _humorously_ anti-scientific for somebody going on about scientific integrity. And not in the "Ah, but you participate in society. I am very intelligent" sort, "I'm getting mixed signals here and have to wonder if there's something more at work here".


----------



## O.D.D. (Jul 13, 2021)

Attaman said:


> I find it fascinating that "Three people funded by a larger group of individuals with the active and explicit purpose of discrediting social sciences, spending 90+ hour weeks, with a firm understanding of exactly what sort of data they need to present to try to get through the editors and reviewers" has turned into "derping about with a rudimentary understanding". It's almost as if, again, the starting premise of this is "Social sciences suck. What can I find that proves it?"


They went through a crash course in an extremely jargon-dense field with no actual enthusiasm for the field itself and fooled people who have likely been at this for years if not decades (either that or they had some tired underpaid postgrad/intern sift through them which isn't much better), they did the equivalent of studying for the SATs rather than sit through the classes.  Regarding funding, imagine how much funding goes into the institutions that educate people who produce the sincere junk-papers.  Imagine how many loans are taken out, imagine how much grant money and imagine defending that embarrassing breach of academic security with a _tu quoque, _leveled at other fields in the same sphere undergoing scrutiny for this as well currently.  There's been debate for a hot minute about what a degree gets you PERIOD, never mind a degree in a field like these.  Are they starting some sort of academic suicide pact now? Maybe that's it, maybe they WANT us to pay the problem more mind and they just can't do it via internal pressures.


Attaman said:


> I'm going to be real: "We should disregard the methodology, motivations, and credentials used and focus exclusively on the end result" sounds _humorously_ anti-scientific for somebody going on about scientific integrity. And not in the "Ah, but you participate in society. I am very intelligent" sort, "I'm getting mixed signals here and have to wonder if there's something more at work here".


If someone breaks into your home, rifles through your drawers and leaves the house a mess and your first thought is "I hope they did it for the right reasons! Did they case my house properly? Did they have some kind of warrant or ID proving they were allowed to do this?" and not "How did they get in? What did I lose?" I question your sanity.


----------



## rekcerW (Jul 14, 2021)

it's funny how fucked up the world actually is, and there are actually people wasting their time actually giving a fuck about if it's acceptable to call food 'exotic' or not.
that's insane to me. the amount of thought and effort she put into that... WHO FUCKING CARES in the grand scheme of things? there are way bigger fish to fry than that. let's focus on not slowly killing ourselves and everything else that exists on this planet first.
>.<


----------



## Ramjet (Jul 14, 2021)




----------



## Yakamaru (Jul 14, 2021)

Ramjet said:


> View attachment 116170


I see your post and raise with my own..


----------



## Attaman (Jul 14, 2021)

O.D.D. said:


> They went through a crash course in an extremely jargon-dense field with no actual enthusiasm for the field itself





> One such example, per Lindsay, is James Damore, the Google engineer fired in 2017 after writing a memo defending the notion that men are intrinsically better suited to the technology field than women.





> Lindsay and Boghossian’s first attempt didn’t go so well. In 2017,





> For these reasons, Lindsay told me, the experiment “mostly failed.” The grievance studies hoax was designed explicitly in an effort to address the shortcomings of the conceptual penis stunt. They brought on Helen Pluckrose, editor of the magazine Areo, as a contributor; they also improved their methodology.





> At first, their papers were rejected. The content was too obviously silly, too much of a joke. But then they committed to studying the kinds of papers that had been written on the topic in the past, and improved their ability to mimic the arguments in them. This was a full-time job for Lindsay: He secured funding from a group of donors whose names he would not reveal to spend, in his words, “90 hours a week” on this project.


I can quote more from Vox, if you would like?

The idea that there was 'no enthusiasm', motivation / personal drive to do this for anything more than shits n' giggles, and so-on is a farce. This was no drive-by shitposting on a Furry forum to rile up users. This was people outright spending multiple years, prodding via a mix of study and trial and error and securing independent funding to specifically find a methodology that might discredit what they believed to be a fake science.



O.D.D. said:


> Are they starting some sort of academic suicide pact now? Maybe that's it, maybe they WANT us to pay the problem more mind and they just can't do it via internal pressures.


I'm going to be blunt: The article specifically mentions the motivations as to what the three wanted. Now, I get that it involves some level of contextual reading, so that might have been a bit rough on you, but when they talk about "Best buds and active corroborator with Stefan Molyneux", "Actually women need to get out of programming so the _real_ programmers can excel", and "Western Feminism is over and stupid and irrelevant" while all the while bemoaning Political Correctness and who the _real_ racists are, we can make some _pretty firm guesses_ as to what their motivations were in making this study.

Lax publishing standards among certain academic / scientific journals weren't the goal. They were a _means to an end_.


O.D.D. said:


> If someone breaks into your home, rifles through your drawers and leaves the house a mess and your first thought is "I hope they did it for the right reasons! Did they case my house properly? Did they have some kind of warrant or ID proving they were allowed to do this?" and not "How did they get in? What did I lose?" I question your sanity.


Protip: "How did they get in" and "What did I lose" *actively involves their methodology and motivation*. Likewise credentials can generally help determine why they might have broke in (as well as potentially the prior two as well: If you know you're dealing with a petty jewel thief, for example, Law Enforcement can know where to look for tips even without a full catalogue of what was stolen).

I get that you're trying to deflect, because "Actually I don't care about any of those things" isn't a good look when presenting oneself as a banner-bearer for the march of academic integrity and purity, but at least pick a better fucking example. There's a reason the three were able to get at least a 25% success rate. At least put in some effort like them.

EDIT: Part of the humor in this is that, like, there’s very real critiques one can make from this “experiment”. That at the end of the day, a sufficiently dedicated and funded group of people with at least some understanding of how to write academic papers and an ability to pick up on publisher biases were able achieve a 25% success rate in getting their fake studies published in 1+ academic works. 

Or how some journals they gunned for didn’t publish anything presented to them, meaning that there are those who on the high end filtered the dreck out (and, by extension, there being gaps in the other journals that need / needed filling).

These are not minor things. But you’re obsessed with some sort of sweeping victory. A banner around which to rally to prove that Social Sciences are a farce in general that need to be purged not only out of academic / scientific purity but fiscal responsibility as well.

Take the bloody knee and run out the clock.


----------



## O.D.D. (Jul 14, 2021)

This is going nowhere like every other argument on the internet but I'll just say that if someone in a pickup covered in Dixie flags and jingoistic bumper stickers points out that my car is making a horrid noise I'm not likely to spend long wondering about his credentials as an auto mechanic, exactly HOW he heard the horrid noise or his motivations for telling me about it, you've yet to even offer a reasonable explanation for what these reviewers even saw in the passing papers that made them decide they merited publication, and you've played the "they took THIS LONG and took THIS MUCH MONEY" card while evading the question of how people who have been in this field for much longer as well as had access to grant money and been both direct and indirect beneficiaries of student loan money got hoodwinked.  Either they have a poor enough understanding of their own field to be hoodwinked, or 3 "chucklefucks" accidentally created papers that someone felt expanded/enriched the field in some fashion and thus merited publication.

If we've reached a point with this field where even a single nonsense-paper looks like something relevant and merits publication the field is running out of things to talk about and work on.  The infamous "vaccines=autism" study was ONE incredibly flawed study, did enormous amounts of damage before it was caught and struck (and heads ROLLED for that entire farce), and we're still dealing with the aftermath of that and likely will be for years.


Attaman said:


> These are not minor things. But you’re obsessed with some sort of sweeping victory. A banner around which to rally to prove that Social Sciences are a farce in general that need to be purged not only out of academic / scientific purity but fiscal responsibility as well.


You're the one here implying that asking these fields how they got hoodwinked and asking them how they can improve is tantamount to a purge, so I'll just go ahead and infer that you've already sailed right on past me and you're talking to the chucklefucks instead of me.  The overarching message of "it could have been worse, only 25 percent passed through" just blows past the "it could be better, it SHOULD be better, this field CAN be more useful and applicable and CAN attain greater respect in academic circles" that comes from academic introspection about how a nonsense-paper that was the equivalent of a carefully-giftwrapped dog turd was treated as an important package in the first place.  Your extremely defensive stance that has turned into attempts to impugn the motivations of not these "chucklefucks" but my own and those of others does not speak to someone who understands the gravity of the problem.  There are entire departments of humanities/social sciences/etc. being shuttered in some universities and colleges, this field is in DANGER and the entirety of academia might be sitting atop a ticking time bomb as even the hard sciences start showing signs of failure and degree-holders languish in unemployment or are forced to take up careers that their degree offers them no real leg up in.


----------



## Troj (Jul 14, 2021)

In every field, there are low-tier journals that'll publish articles that wouldn't pass muster with higher-tier journals, and predatory, for-profit journals that will literally publish your angry letter to them to fuck off. "I published my intentionally-crap article in a known-to-be-crap journal" really doesn't prove anything. I reckon if you actually want to prove that a discipline lacks rigor, you need to get your crap article published in what _that_ field considers to be a "gold standard" journal.


----------



## O.D.D. (Jul 14, 2021)

Troj said:


> In every field, there are low-tier journals that'll publish articles that wouldn't pass muster with higher-tier journals, and predatory, for-profit journals that will literally publish your angry letter to them to fuck off. "I published my intentionally-crap article in a known-to-be-crap journal" really doesn't prove anything. If you actually want to prove something, you need to get your crap article published in what _that_ field considers to be the "gold standard" journal.


7 published, 5 in journals deemed to be respected ones.  Again.  This has already been covered.

It's not easy for anyone to admit they have a problem like this and need to remedy it, never mind educated professionals that have staked their careers on understanding their field.  Not everything worth doing is EASY.


----------



## Troj (Jul 14, 2021)

Well, and I have to defer to experts in _that_ area about what constitutes a "respected journal," because I've heard one faction of people claim they submitted to rinky-dink low-tier journals, and another faction claiming the opposite.

From my perspective, I do think the peer review process _itself_ is broken in various aspects and in need of reform, and that the media muddies the waters by regularly misreporting or badly-describing theories and findings, and trumpeting about the latest "hot" study regardless of its quality--but, that's more than a bit off-topic.


----------



## Frank Gulotta (Jul 14, 2021)

Troj said:


> Well, and I have to defer to experts in _that_ area about what constitutes a "respected journal," because I've heard one faction of people claim they submitted to rinky-dink low-tier journals, and another faction claiming the opposite.
> 
> From my perspective, I do think the peer review process _itself_ is broken in various aspects and in need of reform, and that the media muddies the waters by regularly misreporting or badly-describing theories and findings, and trumpeting about the latest "hot" study regardless of its quality--but, that's more than a bit off-topic.


So funny to watch what it takes for some people to throw the press under the bus. In this episode, "protect pseudo-science at all cost"


----------



## O.D.D. (Jul 14, 2021)

Frank Gulotta said:


> So funny to watch what it takes for some people to throw the press under the bus. In this episode, "protect pseudo-science at all cost"


I think there are serious questions to be asked about this circular firing squad behavior as a number of journalists are people who have been through these fields to varying extents.


----------



## Frank Gulotta (Jul 14, 2021)

O.D.D. said:


> I think there are serious questions to be asked about this circular firing squad behavior as a number of journalists are people who have been through these fields to varying extents.


Well, I don't really have a dog in this fight, I know quite a bit about media bias. I'm just sitting back with a bag of popcorn. It's amusing at this point to see even quasi intellectual supremacy not being enough to prevent a worldview from crumbling because it's so shit.


----------



## DieselPowered (Jul 14, 2021)

I skimmed the article, this about sums things up:




Nexus Cabler said:


> .
> I will point out that throwing around the word "exotic" to describe anything outside your country is....odd. We aren't 19th century Safari explorers.


Exotic foods don't exist, there are simply ingredients that modern global trade networks allow us to use more readily than we could in the past.

The ties to racist ideas come from the othering of dishes, they're not local so they're "exotic". In reality there's just food, and the exotic division only serves to seperate what you know from what you don't. Bring culture into things and you're actually talking about something completely separate to food.

Fairly simple, cue the arguments.

EDIT: Oh, i see we're massively off topic already. Good job FAF!


----------



## LameFox (Jul 14, 2021)

I didn't even know people still called food exotic. I wouldn't know what that meant if I saw it. That said, it's entirely possible it's just ad bait.


----------



## O.D.D. (Jul 14, 2021)

How can an inanimate object be othered? It cannot feel alienated or excluded or discriminated against! This is patently ABSURD and I am tired of getting into mud wrestling contests with warthogs.


----------



## Attaman (Jul 14, 2021)

Troj said:


> Well, and I have to defer to experts in _that_ area about what constitutes a "respected journal," because I've heard one faction of people claim they submitted to rinky-dink low-tier journals, and another faction claiming the opposite.
> 
> From my perspective, I do think the peer review process _itself_ is broken in various aspects and in need of reform, and that the media muddies the waters by regularly misreporting or badly-describing theories and findings, and trumpeting about the latest "hot" study regardless of its quality--but, that's more than a bit off-topic.


Humorously enough, more detailed information into the "study" very much could shine a light on this. For example, how many journals total were submitted to? Did any turn away everything outright? Or, alternatively, publish every story they were given (or express an intent to over time before they realized they'd been had)? What were the commonalities in the ones that did receive multiple articles that they either published all or some of? Is there evidence pointing towards that proposed bias, or towards quality control problems in general (ex: If two mutually exclusive 'buttered sides', to borrow an earlier phrase in the thread, were _both_ approved by the same team, one can presume that it wasn't an appeal to bias that got the works within that journal but some other - potentially even larger - issue). An examination of the methodology and whatnot could break hypothetically break out some _heavy_ guns, and invite relatively constructive discourse either way.

This being humorous because it just goes to show:
1) A lack of understanding of the basic premises / concepts that people are rushing to defend the sanctity of. Like, these would be _actually decent, fairly watertight_ ways to make jabs while not contradicting one-self. 
2) An identical (if not greater) disinterest in the very thing the journals in question are being accused of being morally / academically bankrupt over failure to invest due effort into. "The entire field is terribad because it just lets anything go without investigation or critique!" "Mind if we look into the methodology and whatnot of the things you're using to make this argument?" "FUCK OFF THAT"S BESIDES THE POINT!"
3) That, with this 'scandal' being three years old now, there's _probably a reason_ the above angles haven't been particularly delved into. Specifically that they're probably nothingburgers / dead ends (alternatively, the interest was only ever in exactly what the conductors said it was: An active effort to discredit various social sciences with everything unrelated to evidence supporting that conclusion being damned). And while people could say "You can't prove that Attaman!", my counter to that is "(Royal) You all can't even be arsed to read the OP or the relevant article in question. I am not going to waste time doing your homework just to make your arguments in the first place when I've already been throwing you bone after bone."

So instead of some cutting investigative work into social science journals and their inadequacies in relation to other academic fields, or an investigation of which social science publishers aren't worth giving the time of day and which practice good information literacy, or even a discussion of the viability of bad actors to actively construct and shotgun false information with the intent of using it to discredit ideological / academic opponents, we're stuck with... "Social science bad! Trust me on this!" "Why?" "Trust me!" "Why?" "Trust me!" "Why?" "Trust me!" Which is about as intellectually productive on either end as a game of Bop It.


----------



## O.D.D. (Jul 14, 2021)

Attaman said:


> Humorously enough, more detailed information into the "study" very much could shine a light on this. For example, how many journals total were submitted to? Did any turn away everything outright? Or, alternatively, publish every story they were given (or express an intent to over time before they realized they'd been had)? What were the commonalities in the ones that did receive multiple articles that they either published all or some of? Is there evidence pointing towards that proposed bias, or towards quality control problems in general (ex: If two mutually exclusive 'buttered sides', to borrow an earlier phrase in the thread, were _both_ approved by the same team, one can presume that it wasn't an appeal to bias that got the works within that journal but some other - potentially even larger - issue). An examination of the methodology and whatnot could break hypothetically break out some _heavy_ guns, and invite relatively constructive discourse either way.
> 
> This being humorous because it just goes to show:
> 1) A lack of understanding of the basic premises / concepts that people are rushing to defend the sanctity of. Like, these would be _actually decent, fairly watertight_ ways to make jabs while not contradicting one-self.
> ...


"Social science flawed != Social science bad" and I have had enough of your willful misrepresentation.  Good day.


----------



## Deleted member 127940 (Jul 14, 2021)

O.D.D. said:


> "Social science flawed != Social science bad" and I have had enough of your willful misrepresentation.  Good day.



You get used to it after the 50th long-winded rant.


----------



## Troj (Jul 14, 2021)

Attaman said:


> So instead of some cutting investigative work into social science journals and their inadequacies in relation to other academic fields, or an investigation of which social science publishers aren't worth giving the time of day and which practice good information literacy, or even a discussion of the viability of bad actors to actively construct and shotgun false information with the intent of using it to discredit ideological / academic opponents, we're stuck with... "Social science bad! Trust me on this!" "Why?" "Trust me!" "Why?" "Trust me!" "Why?" "Trust me!" Which is about as intellectually productive on either end as a game of Bop It.



Or, people blaming the social sciences when laypeople or the popular lay press misuse, abuse, misinterpret, oversimplify, or misunderstand their theories or findings.

The social sciences _are _flawed, but the contributions they've made to human understanding and betterment have been significant even so. One of the sticky wickets here is that human beings aren't like corn plants, rocks, or atoms, so you can't treat the social sciences _quite_ like the hard sciences--but, then, if that's true, what constitutes "best practices" or "rigor?" I don't know if I have the answer myself, but I don't see this as a reason to throw the baby out with the bathwater.


----------



## DieselPowered (Jul 14, 2021)

O.D.D. said:


> How can an inanimate object be othered?


Inanimate objects, especially food, can be associated with certain groups of people. The potential in/out group dynamics at play there should be fairly obvious.

Where does pasta come from, or curry?


----------



## O.D.D. (Jul 14, 2021)

DieselPowered said:


> Inanimate objects, especially food, can be associated with certain groups of people. The potential in/out group dynamics at play there should be fairly obvious.
> 
> Where does pasta come from, or curry?


It comes from durum semolina wheat and water and is produced and sold in enough countries to make this statement a clear demonstration of YOUR OWN BIASES YOU INTELLECTUALLY BANKRUPT POSEUR, do NOT talk to me EVER again about my preconceptions or biases because I will not be dragged down to your miserably low level.


----------



## DieselPowered (Jul 14, 2021)

O.D.D. said:


> It comes from durum semolina wheat and water and is produced and sold in enough countries to make this statement a clear demonstration of YOUR OWN BIASES YOU INTELLECTUALLY BANKRUPT POSEUR, do NOT talk to me EVER again about my preconceptions or biases because I will not be dragged down to your miserably low level.


Correct.

Discourse goes a lot smoother without needless insults, tovarish.
I chose my words to illustrate the point.


----------



## DieselPowered (Jul 14, 2021)

Double post:



Troj said:


> --but, then, if that's true, what constitutes "best practices" or "rigor?" I don't know if I have the answer myself, but I don't see this as a reason to throw the baby out with the bathwater.


In this instance "best practices" are informed by ideological foundation. There's no right answer there, but some are a lot better than others.


----------



## Fallowfox (Jul 14, 2021)

O.D.D. said:


> It has nothing to do with my assumptions, it's a documented phenomenon and has been so for a while.  Sokal says hi.  If you want sociology to be a respected field of academia, I have two words: Do better.



(I'm a mathematical biologist by the way. I'm aware of social sciences because when I am applying a mathematical method I read about its development and limitations from the original sources.)

Sokal showing that nonsense could be published in one journal in 1996. It is _not _a definitive comment on the quality of every other piece of research related to studying society that has happened before or since, any more than Stephen Hawking's comments on women's intellectual challenges with physics are an indication that all astrophysics is influenced by misogyny.



Nexus Cabler said:


> Sociology and anthropology in _particular _carry a larger amount of politically based elements and personal experiences and perceptions than most other fields such medical health and biology that resulted in the surgeon generals warning. This isn't a bad thing necessarily, but it's the main reason we should discuss and criticize it's findings, so that we can sort out accurate data from personal biases.



I'm going to point out here medicine and human biology are inescapably convolved with sociology. If you want to find out whether use of a medical drug increases life expectancy, for example, you will need to *separate* any effect the drug has from a milieu of social factors that could influence your test subjects' life expectancy, such as how rich they are and the kind of lifestyle they lead.
Otherwise you may think a drug works, but it turns out that it's just because people who are using the drug happen to exercise regularly, or have better access to other medical treatments.

Another good example is epidemiology. If you want to understand how a disease spreads, and how to stop it, you are going to end up performing a medical study that includes social data. Think of the variables that could affect the disease spread; age-structure, social interaction, the size of families, sexual habits, the style of house people live in, whether they use public transport and so on.

The HIV pandemic would be a good example, because significant social variables that play a role in spread are sexual orientation, drug use and ethnic background.

So like...let's not trash sociology just because Frank thinks it has something to do with a silly newspaper article. _Do we even know the news article has anything to do with social sciences?  _



Troj said:


> Or, people blaming the social sciences when laypeople or the popular lay press misuse, abuse, misinterpret, oversimplify, or misunderstand their theories or findings.
> 
> The social sciences _are _flawed, but the contributions they've made to human understanding and betterment have been significant even so. One of the sticky wickets here is that human beings aren't like corn plants, rocks, or atoms, so you can't treat the social sciences _quite_ like the hard sciences--but, then, if that's true, what constitutes "best practices" or "rigor?" I don't know if I have the answer myself, but I don't see this as a reason to throw the baby out with the bathwater.



It's not like 'an embarrassing nonsense result was reported' is a unique problem to social science either. 
Consider the widely-reported discussion of 'faster than light' neutrinos at CERN, which turned out to be attributable to a cable being loose. 








						Faster-than-light neutrino anomaly - Wikipedia
					






					en.wikipedia.org


----------



## Fallowfox (Jul 14, 2021)

Yakamaru said:


> I see your post and raise with my own..



My response is actually that children should be taught matrix algebra and statistics in schools (this is only taught to over 16s in the UK), so that your average adult is capable of understanding multivariate mathematical problems, and teach them skills like historiography (an optional class for British students rather than a mandatory one) so that they can interpret literature well.

Without teaching children well, we end up living in societies where idiots burn down 5G phone-masts because they think they cause coronavirus (this really happened in the UK. *Repeatedly*).

Teach children properly (these skills are not hard and children's minds are brilliant) and then we won't have to deal with Karens telling their doctor they don't want to vaccinate their kids because they read an article on Google. Karen will have studied well in school and she'll make a smarter decision than that.


----------



## Jaredthefox92 (Jul 14, 2021)

Fallowfox said:


> My response is actually that children should be taught matrix algebra and statistics in schools (this is only taught to over 16s in the UK), so that your average adult is capable of understanding multivariate mathematical problems, and teach them skills like historiography (an optional class for British students rather than a mandatory one) so that they can interpret literature well.
> 
> Without teaching children well, we end up living in societies where idiots burn down 5G phone-masts because they think they cause coronavirus (this really happened in the UK. *Repeatedly*).
> 
> Teach children properly (these skills are not hard and children's minds are brilliant) and then we won't have to deal with Karens telling their doctor they don't want to vaccinate their kids because they read an article on Google. Karen will have studied well in school and she'll make a smarter decision than that.



People with the vaccines are showing health problems now, while I'm all for vaccination I'm for safe and stable one that won't kill you three years down the line. I'm not an anti-vaxxier, I'm up to date with all my regular shots but just because people don't want to be lab rats for pharmaceutical industries and want a stable vaccine, doesn't mean they're all "Karens". Not wanting to die of "rare" respiratory problems, (in which many people have done after getting the vaccines) doesn't make you an anti-vaxxer. Being forced to take a premature vaccine that isn't fully ready isn't being anti-vax. The government doesn't care for your safety, if the vaccine causes some long life term issue that was unforeseen, oh well. I am for covid vaccines and treatments, but we must make sure they're stable and safe to give out to the public.


----------



## Fallowfox (Jul 14, 2021)

Jaredthefox92 said:


> People with the vaccines are showing health problems now, while I'm all for vaccination I'm for safe and stable one that won't kill you three years down the line. I'm not an anti-vaxxier, I'm up to date with all my regular shots but just because people don't want to be lab rats for pharmaceutical industries and want a stable vaccine, doesn't mean they're all "Karens".



My parents refused to get me fully vaccinated when I was a child and I had to organise independently with my GP to finish getting the vaccines myself when I reached adulthood. 

I wouldn't consider my own parents 'Karens'- a very specific set of circumstances resulted in them becoming paranoid about vaccines. 

I'm just using this as an apt example of the dangers of internet 'research', which we all understand has a harmful effect on society, and voicing my opinion that the long term solution is improved education in maths and independent critical thinking.


----------



## TrishaCat (Jul 14, 2021)

Indian, Thai, Japanese, and Chinese food are divine
Gimme some curry


----------



## Jaredthefox92 (Jul 14, 2021)

Fallowfox said:


> My parents refused to get me fully vaccinated when I was a child and I had to organise independently with my GP to finish getting the vaccines myself when I reached adulthood.
> 
> I wouldn't consider my own parents 'Karens'- a very specific set of circumstances resulted in them becoming paranoid about vaccines.
> 
> I'm just using this as an apt example of the dangers of internet 'research', which we all understand has a harmful effect on society, and voicing my opinion that the long term solution is improved education in maths and independent critical thinking.



Oh, okay. I've had vaccines all my life, I'm not against them. I just don't like Big Pharma roleplaying as Vault Tec in the middle of a global epidemic. Vaccines should be used to help those who need it and prevent the virus, not to experiment on people and decrease the population. Sometimes the government isn't as ethical about science as they let you believe, we took many Japanese scientists who we've pardon who were in Unit 731 because we liked their research findings.  I'm for vaccines, safe and stable ones.


----------



## Jaredthefox92 (Jul 14, 2021)

TrishaCat said:


> Indian, Thai, Japanese, and Chinese food are divine
> Gimme some curry



Not a big fan of curry, but I like Calamari. I love Chinese food.


----------



## Yakamaru (Jul 14, 2021)

Fallowfox said:


> My response is actually that children should be taught matrix algebra and statistics in schools (this is only taught to over 16s in the UK), so that your average adult is capable of understanding multivariate mathematical problems, and teach them skills like historiography (an optional class for British students rather than a mandatory one) so that they can interpret literature well.
> 
> Without teaching children well, we end up living in societies where idiots burn down 5G phone-masts because they think they cause coronavirus (this really happened in the UK. *Repeatedly*).
> 
> Teach children properly (these skills are not hard and children's minds are brilliant) and then we won't have to deal with Karens telling their doctor they don't want to vaccinate their kids because they read an article on Google. Karen will have studied well in school and she'll make a smarter decision than that.


There is something even more important you can teach children. Do you know what that is`?


----------



## Fallowfox (Jul 15, 2021)

Jaredthefox92 said:


> Oh, okay. I've had vaccines all my life, I'm not against them. I just don't like Big Pharma roleplaying as Vault Tec in the middle of a global epidemic. Vaccines should be used to help those who need it and prevent the virus, not to experiment on people and decrease the population. Sometimes the government isn't as ethical about science as they let you believe, we took many Japanese scientists who we've pardon who were in Unit 731 because we liked their research findings.  I'm for vaccines, safe and stable ones.



Jared, vaccines are not being used to 'decrease the population'. .-. 

I'm aware this is a conspiracy theory circulating in the black community in Britain.
I looked it up and apparently this idea also spread around in the South-Eastern US. 

It's not true; there's no evidence to support it. 

Pregnant women are at especially high risk of COVID-19 because being pregnant weakens the immune system. 
So please don't spread conspiracies like this that will make that group feel fearful. 

It's worth checking before repeating this kind of thing.


----------



## JuniperW (Jul 15, 2021)

…how did this thread go from being about food to vaccines?


----------



## TyraWadman (Jul 15, 2021)

JuniperW said:


> …how did this thread go from being about food to vaccines?


Nazi's were also mentioned on page 2! They've almost covered _everything!_


----------



## perkele (Jul 19, 2021)

TrishaCat said:


> Indian, Thai, Japanese, and Chinese food are divine
> Gimme some curry


Which race are you? I'm not sure whether to be offended or not.


----------



## Kit H. Ruppell (Jul 19, 2021)

rekcerW said:


> it's funny how fucked up the world actually is, and there are actually people wasting their time actually giving a fuck about if it's acceptable to call food 'exotic' or not.
> that's insane to me. the amount of thought and effort she put into that... WHO FUCKING CARES in the grand scheme of things? there are way bigger fish to fry than that. let's focus on not slowly killing ourselves and everything else that exists on this planet first.
> >.<


This. A million times, this. Tumblresque outrage-mongers are fine with that, though. As long as they don't have to put up with language they don't like, they're unfazed.
Also, "other" is not a verb.


----------



## TrishaCat (Jul 20, 2021)

perkele said:


> Which race are you? I'm not sure whether to be offended or not.


I am white
If this is offensive genuinely let me know, I realize it's probably not great I mostly used the topic to mention food I like. I always wanna be better


----------



## Yakamaru (Jul 20, 2021)

TrishaCat said:


> Indian, Thai, Japanese, and Chinese food are divine
> Gimme some curry


Throw in some Mexican and Italian too, and boom, you have yourself a hella lot of good dishes and food.


----------



## O.D.D. (Jul 20, 2021)

Yakamaru said:


> Throw in some Mexican and Italian too, and boom, you have yourself a hella lot of good dishes and food.


Honestly within the US the term "Mexican food" is a bit nebulous as even a lot of folks of Mexican heritage have changed their OWN cooking to bring in ingredients readily available within the region of the US they currently reside in, and the cuisine itself has metamorphosed into a number of "sub-cuisines" over the years like Tex-Mex which is distinct from something you would get in your average household in, say, Oaxaca.  Even within Mexico and Central America itself you see a fair degree of variability, you shouldn't expect to see the exact same kind of tamale in Northern Mexico that you'd see in the farther south regions as a number of Central American folks have brought different forms of it further north (swapping corn husks for banana leaves and other changes).  Cuisine is a very mutable thing.


----------



## perkele (Jul 20, 2021)

TrishaCat said:


> I am white
> If this is offensive genuinely let me know, I realize it's probably not great I mostly used the topic to mention food I like. I always wanna be better


I'm, of course, being facetious.

Anyone from these countries would be happy to hear someone likes their food. For some reason, American/English people worry they're upsetting people who don't even know they're supposed to be upset at all.

I used to teach English to east-Asian students—this question came up a lot. They couldn't wrap their heads around the idea that someone wouldn't want someone to like something that they also like. Go ahead and enjoy what you enjoy. They'll be very happy for the compliment!


----------



## O.D.D. (Jul 20, 2021)

perkele said:


> I'm, of course, being facetious.
> 
> Anyone from these countries would be happy to hear someone likes their food. For some reason, American/English people worry they're upsetting people who don't even know they're supposed to be upset at all.
> 
> I used to teach English to east-Asian students—this question came up a lot. They couldn't wrap their heads around the idea that someone wouldn't want someone to like something that they also like. Go ahead and enjoy what you enjoy. They'll be very happy for the compliment!


Some of us have been roundly scolded for it enough times to become wary and weary just saying


----------



## perkele (Jul 20, 2021)

O.D.D. said:


> Some of us have been roundly scolded for it enough times to become wary and weary just saying


Well, those people are doodle butts, and they should quit being the food police.


----------



## O.D.D. (Jul 20, 2021)

perkele said:


> Well, those people are doodle butts, and they should quit being the food police.


Tell them, not me. They aren't having any of that from my mouth.


----------



## DieselPowered (Jul 20, 2021)

O.D.D. said:


> Some of us have been roundly scolded for it enough times to become wary and weary just saying


I highly doubt you've ever been scolded for liking a certain type of food.

Honestly, the reactions to this article are fairly ridiculous. 
How a fairly simple point about cultural relativism can annoy so many people idk.


----------



## perkele (Jul 20, 2021)

O.D.D. said:


> Tell them, not me. They aren't having any of that from my mouth.


Acclimate them to it like a mother bird feeding her chicks in the nest.


----------



## O.D.D. (Jul 20, 2021)

perkele said:


> Acclimate them to it like a mother bird feeding her chicks in the nest.


After the first dozen times or so bore little fruit I kind of lost my patience for it, there's clearly more appeal to them in being a scold than there is in being better self-appointed deputies of the food world.  I'm only going to bang my head against that wall so many times.


----------



## DieselPowered (Jul 20, 2021)

O.D.D. said:


> After the first dozen times or so bore little fruit I kind of lost my patience for it, there's clearly more appeal to them in being a scold than there is in being better self-appointed deputies of the food world.  I'm only going to bang my head against that wall so many times.


Here's the thing, no one's talking about being self appointed deputies of the food world. That's niether related to the article or anything anyone here has actually said.
You brought up bias in a previous reply to me, i realized later that in doing so you revealed your own. There is no "them", there are only individuals with different opinions regarding this utterly trivial issue.

Not scolding, just saying. Listen to the people in front of you instead of blindly lumping them in with that nebulous "other" you have a bone to pick with.


----------



## O.D.D. (Jul 20, 2021)

DieselPowered said:


> Here's the thing, no one's talking about being self appointed deputies of the food world. That's niether related to the article or anything anyone here has actually said.
> You brought up bias in a previous reply to me, i realized later that in doing so you revealed your own. There is no "them", there are only individuals with different opinions regarding this utterly trivial issue.
> 
> Not scolding, just saying. Listen to the people in front of you instead of blindly lumping them in with that nebulous "other" you have a bone to pick with.


Bull fucking shit.  I was scolded by a coworker for having the audacity to talk about cooking pad Thai.  Just because you don't trip over them doesn't mean they aren't out there.  Fucking shameless gaslighter.


----------



## perkele (Jul 20, 2021)

DieselPowered said:


> Here's the thing, no one's talking about being self appointed deputies of the food world. That's niether related to the article or anything anyone here has actually said.
> 
> Not scolding, just saying. Listen to the people in front of you instead of blindly lumping them in with that nebulous "other" you have a bone to pick with.



I just said it. It's me. We are allies in the battle against encroaching Foodlaw. The love of exotic foods will overcome the boundaries of gastronomic hegemony.


----------



## DieselPowered (Jul 20, 2021)

O.D.D. said:


> Bull fucking shit.  I was scolded by a coworker for having the audacity to talk about cooking pad Thai.  Just because you don't trip over them doesn't mean they aren't out there.  Fucking shameless gaslighter.


There we go again, needless hostility because of what you think i represent. Trust me m8, you'll be doing yourself a favour if you can drop that.

You have this cultist's word that your co worker was probably a fool. What you cook doesn't matter.


----------



## perkele (Jul 20, 2021)

Why can't you two just finally admit that you love each other? This isn't Luke and Laura here, we don't have two more seasons to get to the will-they-or-won't-they.


----------



## DieselPowered (Jul 20, 2021)

perkele said:


> Why can't you two just finally admit that you love each other? This isn't Luke and Laura here, we don't have two more seasons to get to the will-they-or-won't-they.


Ikr, here's hoping those insults come with a collar.


----------



## perkele (Jul 20, 2021)

DieselPowered said:


> Ikr, here's hoping those insults come with a collar.



Some people pay good money for this, and here you could be getting it for free this whole time.


----------



## O.D.D. (Jul 20, 2021)

I'm sick of being chased from corner to corner in my own alleged political camp, I'm sick of being told what I am experiencing isn't happening and I am bloody well ready to do something about it.  I didn't put up with the religious Right auditing my bedroom and I sure as hell have no intention of indulging anyone's Spanish Inquisition into my kitchen.  Fuck RIGHT off.


----------



## perkele (Jul 20, 2021)

O.D.D. said:


> I sure as hell have no intention of indulging anyone's Spanish Inquisition into my kitchen.



Well, if you knew when and where to expect it, it wouldn't be the Spanish Inquisition in the first place.


----------



## Deleted member 127940 (Jul 20, 2021)

O.D.D. said:


> I'm sick of being chased from corner to corner in my own alleged political camp, I'm sick of being told what I am experiencing isn't happening and I am bloody well ready to do something about it.  I didn't put up with the religious Right auditing my bedroom and I sure as hell have no intention of indulging anyone's Spanish Inquisition into my kitchen.  Fuck RIGHT off.



Normie stuff that you may or may not have heard already before incoming. Take it; leave it. Doesn't matter. I'll try and keep it concise.

I wouldn't get too bent out of shape over political discussions on FAF. This forum hosts a lot of "broken people". You'll notice it if you pay close enough attention.

Look at the complaints and discussion topics. Pay attention to the ages of the users. I saw one person (who by their own admission has a smorgasbord of psychiatric disorders) fly into a minute emotional rage out of nowhere over the fact that there actually exists men _somewhere _who aren't entirely down with modern feminism. Another seemingly has all of their needs met by their immediate family and two male significant others which gives them plenty of time to discuss the nuances of gender and sexuality as well as to act as the middle-aged "mom" of the forum. Another one (who lives in a certain Western European country that I'm not going to name) didn't do anything with their life between 2016 and today except watch TV and be a social recluse yet had the gall to tell me that I was somehow "wrong" on how people "worked" during a heated shitshow that's not too dissimilar from the one that's currently underway in this thread.

Point I'm trying to illustrate is that these folks aren't exactly put together well. FAF and the furry fandom is the Island of Misfit Toys. It's a social retreat where the broken and "unwanted" things of greater society can gather under for shelter. Instead of immediately doing something productive about their fucked up situation, they'd rather pat each other's head and tell one another that it's going to be OK, scheme and bleat about how they're going to strongarm the world into complying with their woefully unrealistic and terribly warped worldview, engage in political slacktivism, pop pills, and wear out the ears of therapists. You have socially-stunted and mentally-disturbed people pontificating over utterly nonsensical sociology concepts that they were introduced to by their grossly overpaid professors and subsequently getting royally booty-blasted whenever someone like me comes along and kindly reminds them that a) the vast majority of normal people don't give a shit about any of what they're talking about or b) a few decades of weirdo social movements and bad academic takes like fat acceptance or toxic masculinity isn't going to miraculously undo thousands of years worth of human evolution. The most maladjusted ones are those who go from ages 0 to about 22/24 (birth to completion of a bachelors/masters program) because they've lived a third of their projected lifespan being shielded from any real hardship or contrarian opinions (first by their parents and then by academia).

This is FAF in 2021 and it's not going to change.

Turbo right-leaning furries aren't any better but their weedy numbers and inability to influence the macro furry culture at large effectively renders them irrelevant for the most part. Furry Youtuber Achilles Argyle got absolutely bodied after he released his beautiful "Why we need racism" magnum opus and hasn't been seen around the furry sector of YT since.

This probably explains why most furs "age out" of the fandom by about 30. By then, you've gained more wisdom, you're making respectable amounts of money in a career that you've made some headway in, there's a high chance you're married or close to getting married, you've had a kid or two (becoming a mother or father *really* reorients your priorities), and you've learned how to better deal with the trials and tribulations of everyday life. Stereotypical twitter "activists" start to annoy you because they don't know what they're talking about at all. You're an actual well-adjusted adult now. Life really kicks off at 30. The personal anecdotes say so and the data on this age milestone only supports them.

You're 38. You're going to have an increasingly difficult time here because there's an enormous life experience gap between you and the median-aged furry.

Not telling you to just sit back and watch them say blatantly ignorant things but you should really know what you're dealing with here.

EDIT: Bombed at keeping it concise. That's typical.


----------



## Fallowfox (Jul 20, 2021)

I am confused why, if somebody thought that a random stranger disapproved of them eating foreign food, that they would actually care what that random stranger thinks. 

It's just...not really getting into a big bother about is it? I personally can't believe it's not just bait to try to get people riled up to generate clicks on websites.


----------



## Deleted member 127940 (Jul 20, 2021)

Fallowfox said:


> I am confused why, if somebody thought that a random stranger disapproved of them eating foreign food, that they would actually care what that random stranger thinks.
> 
> It's just...not really getting into a big bother about is it? I personally can't believe it's not just bait to try to get people riled up to generate clicks on websites.



Follow the money!


----------



## TyraWadman (Jul 20, 2021)

Fallowfox said:


> I am confused why, if somebody thought that a random stranger disapproved of them eating foreign food, that they would actually care what that random stranger thinks.
> 
> It's just...not really getting into a big bother about is it? I personally can't believe it's not just bait to try to get people riled up to generate clicks on websites.



Honestly though. Clickbait stuff like this has been around for decades. Instead of putting in cliffhanger titles, they're adapting to this stuff that triggers people. 

Same game people!


----------



## Fallowfox (Jul 20, 2021)

ASTA said:


> Normie stuff that you may or may not have heard already before incoming. Take it; leave it. Doesn't matter. I'll try and keep it concise.
> 
> I wouldn't get too bent out of shape over political discussions on FAF. This forum hosts a lot of "broken people". You'll notice it if you pay close enough attention.
> 
> ...




Asta ...I was going to make fun of the phrase 'furry macro culture', 

but actually.


...who is this guy who has two male significant others and gets to be a middle aged mom? I want a piece of that.


----------



## Fallowfox (Jul 20, 2021)

TyraWadman said:


> Honestly though. Clickbait stuff like this has been around for decades. Instead of putting in cliffhanger titles, they're adapting to this stuff that triggers people.
> 
> Same game people!



I kinda feel anyway, that even if somebody wrote an article which was just a milktoast 'this is why I don't like to describe food as 'pedestrian'' (for example), that there would be a tsunami of angry internet commentors complaining that the article's writer is insulting them.

There are just people on the internet who _enjoy_ getting all hot and bothered, and not in a sexy way. :{


----------



## O.D.D. (Jul 20, 2021)

Fallowfox said:


> I am confused why, if somebody thought that a random stranger disapproved of them eating foreign food, that they would actually care what that random stranger thinks.
> 
> It's just...not really getting into a big bother about is it? I personally can't believe it's not just bait to try to get people riled up to generate clicks on websites.


I make the assumption that someone is trying to communicate something in as good a faith as can be mustered right until they have the nerve to accuse others of bad faith in the very same thread where they engage in argumentum ad hominem which is the DEFINITION of a bad faith argument.  I will not crutch on "BAD FAITH" screeching to abort a thought process simply because the process is uncomfortable but once the Rubicon of clear, actual bad faith is crossed you are dead to me.  I'll not tolerate your pseudo-intellectual pontification and posturing nor your psychological horseshit any longer than it pleases me to do so and that time is LONG past.


----------



## O.D.D. (Jul 20, 2021)

ASTA said:


> Normie stuff that you may or may not have heard already before incoming. Take it; leave it. Doesn't matter. I'll try and keep it concise.
> 
> I wouldn't get too bent out of shape over political discussions on FAF. This forum hosts a lot of "broken people". You'll notice it if you pay close enough attention.
> 
> ...


Duly noted, and sounds more or less on point (could be more broadly applicable than just FAF from what I have seen elsewhere)


----------



## DieselPowered (Jul 20, 2021)

Call the fire department, the thread's burning down.



O.D.D. said:


> I make the assumption that someone is trying to communicate something in as good a faith as can be mustered right until they have the nerve to accuse others of bad faith in the very same thread where they engage in argumentum ad hominem which is the DEFINITION of a bad faith argument.  I will not crutch on "BAD FAITH" screeching to abort a thought process simply because the process is uncomfortable but once the Rubicon of clear, actual bad faith is crossed you are dead to me.  I'll not tolerate your pseudo-intellectual pontification and posturing nor your psychological horseshit any longer than it pleases me to do so and that time is LONG past.


The statement at the start of that post seems to contradict your own actions in this thread.


O.D.D. said:


> It comes from durum semolina wheat and water and is produced and sold in enough countries to make this statement a clear demonstration of YOUR OWN BIASES YOU INTELLECTUALLY BANKRUPT POSEUR, do NOT talk to me EVER again about my preconceptions or biases because I will not be dragged down to your miserably low level.


That was your first reply to me here, by your own stated definition you've been acting in bad faith from the start. 
Idc, you're a stranger to me. But this is as funny as it is, well...odd.


----------



## O.D.D. (Jul 20, 2021)

DieselPowered said:


> Call the fire department, the thread's burning down.
> 
> 
> The statement at the start of that post seems to contradict your own actions in this thread.
> ...


I've seen the trap that post replies to a hundred times before.  I know exactly what response you're looking for (and it was not the one I gave), I recognize the nature of your exercise - it's a purity test to catch me framing it in a cultural context from a deliberately vague question.  Your smug dishonesty throughout this thread is something I am through giving the time of day.  Do not play games with me.  I give people who consider verbal sleight-of-hand to be a mark of higher intellect the exact amount of respect they deserve for their antics - none.  Parlor tricks like that are unbecoming of a debater.  As good as you think you are with words I assure you I AM BETTER.


----------



## Attaman (Jul 20, 2021)

"Where do curry and pasta come from?" being a verbal sleight-of-hand intellectual parlor trick is a new one.

Guess that's also a "No" for keeping up with / tabs on the old Skype group, too. Though in all honesty Fay, Deo, and so-on are the lucky ones for getting away and staying away from this place.


----------



## O.D.D. (Jul 20, 2021)

Attaman said:


> Guess that's also a "No" for keeping up with / tabs on the old Skype group, too. Though in all honesty Fay, Deo, and so-on are the lucky ones for getting away and staying away from this place.


Feel free to go be a miserable scold with them.  Nothing shackles you here.


----------



## Attaman (Jul 20, 2021)

O.D.D. said:


> Feel free to go be a miserable scold with them.  Nothing shackles you here.


The old blood, T. It calls to us. We've all drunk too deeply in the past.


----------



## O.D.D. (Jul 20, 2021)

Attaman said:


> The old blood, T. It calls to us. We've all drunk too deeply in the past.


I had to ask Ratte about you to remember a single thing about you.  I think I would have been happier forgetting you existed, but such as it is, I'll settle for pretending you don't.


----------



## perkele (Jul 20, 2021)

Is there a German word for delight one can take when preparing to feel righteous indignation? It sounds like a word that should be.


----------



## Attaman (Jul 20, 2021)

O.D.D. said:


> I had to ask Ratte about you to remember a single thing about you.  I think I would have been happier forgetting you existed, but such as it is, I'll settle for pretending you don't.


I mean, entirely valid: Ask several people here and they'll say I've only become worse with time. And I myself will readily admit to having been something of a shit on here up until I temporarily tapped out at 2013. 



perkele said:


> Is there a German word for delight one can take when preparing to feel righteous indignation? It sounds like a word that should be.


I mean, most of those words are a butchery of just adding two (or more) words on top of each other. And language is rather fluid. So if there isn't, try your hand at it today! You're among good company in the history of language.


----------



## perkele (Jul 20, 2021)

O.D.D. said:


> As good as you think you are with words I assure you I AM BETTER.



Fixed



O.D.D. said:


> I've seen the trap that post replies to a hundred times before.  I know exactly what *which* response you're looking for*:* (and it was not the one I gave),. *(new paragraph)*
> 
> I recognize the nature of your exercise -*—*it's a purity *litmus* test to catch me framing it in a cultural context from *with* a deliberately vague question.  Your smug dishonesty throughout this thread is something I am through giving *your smug dishonesty throughout this thread * the time of day.  Do not play games with me.  I give people who *whom* consider verbal sleight-of-hand to be a mark of higher intellect the exact amount of respect they deserve for their antics - *:* none.  Parlor tricks like that are unbecoming of a debater.  As good as you think you are with words*,* I assure you I AM BETTER *am better*.


----------



## Deleted member 127940 (Jul 20, 2021)

You know an internet scuffle has run its course when folks start combing through other people's posts with a red marker. 

Didn't think channeling your inner English teacher was still popular in 2021, honestly.


----------



## DieselPowered (Jul 20, 2021)

O.D.D. said:


> I assure you I AM BETTER.


I'm tired, so i'm just going to be blunt with you.

What i've left of your message is all you really care about here. That's a childish game that i don't play.
You asked a question, i answered it, and then you got shitty.
Yes, the obvious answers were Italy and India. The question was leading to illustrate the point of how food can be seen as "other" from a certain standpoint.

The rest is your own paranoia. I'm not trying to "trap" you into anything, i don't care about you and i don't care about stirring shit.

Now get your head out of your ass and realize i'm not a damn enemy.


----------



## TyraWadman (Jul 20, 2021)

DieselPowered said:


> Now get your head out of your ass and realize i'm not a damn enemy.


This resonates with me. I've had to say stuff like this way more than I would like to since rejoining back in 2020. It's like some people locked themselves into a toxic box (surrounding themselves with only bad news and negativity, getting worked up over every trending twitter debate) and then get worked up when I mention the key to their own freedom is peeking out from their own pocket.


----------



## Frank Gulotta (Jul 21, 2021)

TyraWadman said:


> Honestly though. Clickbait stuff like this has been around for decades. Instead of putting in cliffhanger titles, they're adapting to this stuff that triggers people.
> 
> Same game people!


Are you accusing the washington post of publishing garbage?

I mean that would be absolutely true but still, I wasn't really expecting to see people throw the noble, trustworthy® press under the bus for the sake of pretending like academia is not infested with toxic identitarian creeps


----------



## TyraWadman (Jul 21, 2021)

Frank Gulotta said:


> Are you accusing the washington post of publishing garbage?
> 
> I mean that would be absolutely true but still, I wasn't really expecting to see people throw the noble, trustworthy® press under the bus for the sake of pretending like academia is not infested with toxic identitarian creeps



I'm not here to stroke your political ego dude. If you can't sell an honest title, it's scummy in my books. I don't care what news outlet its on.


----------



## Frank Gulotta (Jul 21, 2021)

TyraWadman said:


> I'm not here to stroke your political ego dude. If you can't sell an honest title, it's scummy in my books. I don't care what news outlet its on.


But I'm merely cheering on the fact that you think so-called trustworthy sources are spreading garbage and disinformation, generally people don't seem to get that yet


----------



## Fallowfox (Jul 21, 2021)

O.D.D. said:


> I make the assumption that someone is trying to communicate something in as good a faith as can be mustered right until they have the nerve to accuse others of bad faith in the very same thread where they engage in argumentum ad hominem which is the DEFINITION of a bad faith argument.  I will not crutch on "BAD FAITH" screeching to abort a thought process simply because the process is uncomfortable but once the Rubicon of clear, actual bad faith is crossed you are dead to me.  I'll not tolerate your pseudo-intellectual pontification and posturing nor your psychological horseshit any longer than it pleases me to do so and that time is LONG past.



You've lost me. I can tell you're very angry about something but I can't really work out what it is. 

I don't really see why anybody would let a random internet article that is probably going to have no effect on their life cause too much upset. 
If it was an article in a major news outlet spreading vaccine misinformation, then like- sure, I'd get upset about that because it might affect my life.



Frank Gulotta said:


> But I'm merely cheering on the fact that you think so-called trustworthy sources are spreading garbage and disinformation, generally people don't seem to get that yet



No single newspaper is factually correct all of the time, and 'opinion' columns contain claims that are silly or simply wrong in many cases. 
I mean, I guess that is why they are called opinion sections. 

As an example, I broadly trust BBC news to report neutral reliable information. But they still make errors, especially when describing technical subjects that few people understand very well. 

e.g. 








						New equation ‘could predict earthquakes better’ say Edinburgh experts
					

Researchers in Edinburgh produce a new mathematical model aimed at improving how earthquakes are predicted.



					www.bbc.co.uk
				



This news story gives you the impression that scientists use equations to 'predict' earthquakes. 

and here is a bbc interview with a geophysicist, stating that prediction of earthquakes is 'impossible'.








						How to predict an earthquake (clue, you can't)
					

Experts tell Newsbeat which areas in the world are being watched for tremors.



					www.bbc.co.uk
				




The second article is the correct one. The journalist who wrote the first article misunderstood that the scientists' work was about trying to work out the mechanical properties of rocks inside fault-lines, and not about predicting when or where earthquakes will occur.


----------



## O.D.D. (Jul 21, 2021)

Fallowfox said:


> You've lost me. I can tell you're very angry about something but I can't really work out what it is.
> 
> I don't really see why anybody would let a random internet article that is probably going to have no effect on their life cause too much upset.
> If it was an article in a major news outlet spreading vaccine misinformation, then like- sure, I'd get upset about that because it might affect my life.


There was a time when I wanted to become an investigative journalist.  I take the amorality and corruption of the field a mite personal, and I take accusations of being a liar, delusional or deliberately arguing from a bad faith standpoint based on nothing but what some chucklefuck on the Internet has decided I am in his head even more personal.


----------



## Fallowfox (Jul 21, 2021)

O.D.D. said:


> There was a time when I wanted to become an investigative journalist.  I take the amorality and corruption of the field a mite personal, and I take accusations of being a liar, delusional or deliberately arguing from a bad faith standpoint based on nothing but what some chucklefuck on the Internet has decided I am in his head even more personal.



I don't understand what this thread has to do with investigative journalists, unless you consider food-critics for the washington post to be investigative journalists.

I've seen loads of really broad attacks on 'smarty pants people' in general in this thread. Sociologists, professors, you name it. 
But what do these people have to do with this opinion article written by a food critic? 

Help me out here. I can see a bunch of emotive words like 'corrupt' 'amoral' 'bad faith' and 'liar', but how does any of this relate to G. Daniel Galarza being opinionated about how food is described?
And why should any of us care if she has a wrong or silly opinion about food?


----------



## DieselPowered (Jul 21, 2021)

O.D.D. said:


> There was a time when I wanted to become an investigative journalist.  I take the amorality and corruption of the field a mite personal, and I take accusations of being a liar, delusional or deliberately arguing from a bad faith standpoint based on nothing but what some chucklefuck on the Internet has decided I am in his head even more personal.


Same here, except i'm pretty much incapable of taking the negative opinions of strangers personally.

Look, dude. As far as i can tell you came at me looking for a fight and nothing more. I'm not going to hold that against you, it's probably a way to vent frustration. Something about one of your shitty coworkers fell into the mix after all.

I'm not gonna be a dick to you, but i am letting you know i'll be happy to shake your hand and brush whatever this nonsense is off if you decide you can be a bit more friendly.

Don't think i want to waste any more time in this thread, now try to have a good day.


----------



## Kit H. Ruppell (Jul 21, 2021)

ASTA said:


> Normie stuff that you may or may not have heard already before incoming. Take it; leave it. Doesn't matter. I'll try and keep it concise.
> 
> I wouldn't get too bent out of shape over political discussions on FAF. This forum hosts a lot of "broken people". You'll notice it if you pay close enough attention.
> 
> ...


Damn. Now I want a psychological breakdown of every well-established user on this forum, as epic as this post.


----------



## Yakamaru (Jul 21, 2021)

Kit H. Ruppell said:


> Damn. Now I want a psychological breakdown of every well-established user on this forum, as epic as this post.


I would love one, and would rate on how accurate it is too. xD

Would be a fun exercise.


----------



## O.D.D. (Jul 21, 2021)

Fallowfox said:


> I don't understand what this thread has to do with investigative journalists, unless you consider food-critics for the washington post to be investigative journalists.
> 
> I've seen loads of really broad attacks on 'smarty pants people' in general in this thread. Sociologists, professors, you name it.
> But what do these people have to do with this opinion article written by a food critic?
> ...


I don't expect you to give a shit and I'm not asking you to.  Ragebait bullshit pervades every damn corner of the field and it's apparently what people want.


----------



## TheCynicalViet (Jul 23, 2021)

When you ask, what I'm assuming should be phrased, "is consuming "exotic" food racist/bad?" then the answer is based relative to the intent of the party.

It's certainly common to see foreign cuisine improperly appropriated, or even bastardized, for a myriad of reasons. Maybe some restaurant or party wants to use foreign cuisine as some sort of marketing gimmick. Maybe a restaurant or party simply labels themselves as "exotic" by making foreign cuisine simply to differentiate themselves from their competition. These two examples can be seen as improper use of exotic foods simply for superficial or selfish reasons. But then can you blame them if the human mind naturally demands attention by any means necessary. It's not their fault. It's the market pushing them. It's not their fault. This culture is more exciting than their culture. Can you really blame them?

But then you see people who just want to try something new. That's where the "exotic" comes from. It's just something new and exciting to experience. I've rarely ever seen someone in real life (which is the area that matters the most. Internet life can almost be treated completely solipsisticly.) use the term "exotic" specifically in relation to race or culture. It's often used a generally term when used colloquially. But is this bad? It's certainly not good. They gained nothing if they choose not explore whatever foreign cuisine they took interested in aside from assuaging their boredom. But the culture lost nothing in turn. Maybe it cheapens the experience to learn that your cuisine was made just because someone else was bored with their own cuisine but it's asinine to get hung up on that.

And finally you see those who take genuinely interest in a culture and wants to experience it sincerely through their culinary arts. Is this bad? Someone is willing to take the time to learn about a culture and move past arbitrary boundaries like race, color, creed, etc and open up bonds. But, at the same time, engaging in another culture may potentially harm it by the person interested becoming too zealous. They'll then preach it to their own people where one of two things may happen: 1) they get annoyed by the person and thus end up viewing the culture in a negative light due to association or 2) people are converted into participating in a culture only to ironically push people away and impose their own culture as the other person's culture.

TL;DR: Look at things on a case by case basis and make your own judgement. Personally for me, I'd rather someone try my country's food and either hate or love it rather than never to have tasted it but still make judgements about it.

EDIT: There are legit arguments to be made about how it's more beneficial to police consumption of foreign culture but it's too late and I need to sleep.


----------



## Fallowfox (Jul 23, 2021)

O.D.D. said:


> I don't expect you to give a shit and I'm not asking you to.  Ragebait bullshit pervades every damn corner of the field and it's apparently what people want.



I'm trying to understand.

So far in this thread, an opinion of a food critic has driven people so insane that they have attacked the legitimacy of sociology as a field, decried the corruption of investigative journalists, criticised the pay of university professors, questioned the value of a free press and the OP even returned to try to convince us _that the coronavirus vaccine is part of a 'big pharma' conspiracy to decrease the population_.

This is fucking nonsense mate. None of it has _anything to do_ with the opening post. It's just a bunch of random brain diarrhoea.


----------



## TheCynicalViet (Jul 23, 2021)

Fallowfox said:


> This is fucking nonsense mate. None of it has _anything to do_ with the opening post. It's just a bunch of random brain diarrhoea.


Is this supposed to be directed at my post? Cause, if so, then you forgot to quote me.


----------



## Fallowfox (Jul 23, 2021)

TheCynicalViet said:


> Is this supposed to be directed at my post? Cause, if so, then you forgot to quote me.


No; your post was actually about food and people's opinions on food.

My comment is directed at posts like this:



O.D.D. said:


> There was a time when I wanted to become an investigative journalist.  I take the amorality and corruption of the field a mite personal, and I take accusations of being a liar, delusional or deliberately arguing from a bad faith standpoint based on nothing but what some chucklefuck on the Internet has decided I am in his head even more personal.





Jaredthefox92 said:


> Oh, okay. I've had vaccines all my life, I'm not against them. I just don't like Big Pharma roleplaying as Vault Tec in the middle of a global epidemic. Vaccines should be used to help those who need it and prevent the virus, not to experiment on people and decrease the population. Sometimes the government isn't as ethical about science as they let you believe, we took many Japanese scientists who we've pardon who were in Unit 731 because we liked their research findings.  I'm for vaccines, safe and stable ones.



These comments are insane gibberish which has nothing to do with food, as far as I can see.


----------



## Jaredthefox92 (Jul 23, 2021)

Fallowfox said:


> No; your post was actually about food and people's opinions on food.
> 
> My comment is directed at posts like this:
> 
> ...



I'm more autistic than insane, but okay.


----------



## TheCynicalViet (Jul 23, 2021)

Fallowfox said:


> No; your post was actually about food and people's opinions on food.
> 
> My comment is directed at posts like this:


Oh, sorry then! My mistake.


----------



## O.D.D. (Jul 23, 2021)

Fallowfox said:


> No; your post was actually about food and people's opinions on food.
> 
> My comment is directed at posts like this:
> 
> ...


The problem the article itself isn't even about food, it's about the language and attitudes surrounding food that the author is quibbling over to incite responses from audiences and get them to fight amongst each other so they can then say they "started a conversation" and proceed to continue writing more articles.  It's another symptom of the mind rot that pervades journalistic and quasi-journalistic fields (read: glorified blogs) that itself is reflective of the strange cannibalistic malaise running rampant throughout a good part of society.  People have resigned themselves to attacking their peers rather than risk missing on a swing at the "kings" as it were.  They've embraced "hate thy neighbor" because it's easier and safer than going after the people at the top, and as a result we're staring down the barrel of things like the end of upward mobility, piss poor wage to productivity ratios, the list goes on.  We keep getting told to pay attention to every little difference and we keep being encouraged to raise holy hell over every perceived slight along those lines and suddenly the idea of common cause might as well not exist.  This is why OWS choked to death on its own tail and it's likely why there will never be another OWS.

Also, fuck you and the horse you rode in on.


----------



## Attaman (Jul 23, 2021)

I'm going to be dropping a sick secret of the universe here: Journalism "incite(s) responses from the audience and get(s) them to fight amongst each other" is almost _entirely_ the point of journalism.

Now, no: In an ideal world this isn't _exactly_ true. In an ideal world journalism's chief role is to present information (be it political or social, scientific or economic, etcetera), with the sub-set of _investigative_ journalism being information that takes some degree of more digging than just "Grab a couple sources and have a chit-chat."

But this isn't an ideal world by any stretch. People have varying - often times competing - interests, and as such journalism will _invariably_ cause some degree of conflict, elicit some degree of emotion, etcetera. If somebody interviews a person in downtown Baltimore about how they feel about some road work there's going to be some people who nod their heads in agreement, some who disagree, and many in between.  

And the choice to use road-work - an utterly mundane subject matter - is very intentional, as often times we'll see strong emotional responses and debates / shouting matches over the most _luke-warm_ of takes. Takes such as "Police brutality is bad" (not even "Police are bad", "Police brutality is bad"), "The rich historically use to pay higher taxes" (again, not even "And so should pay more now", "There was a time the upper income brackets paid more proportionally than they do now"), "COVID is real", et al. None of these are exaggerations, nor relying on drama on Twitter or Tumblr or whatnot: These can and have had people break out into rhetorical knife-fights here on FAF about just these subject matters. To say nothing of _actually_ hard hitting matters of journalism / academia (such as the National Center for Transgender Equality's 2015 survey and the journalistic follow-up among places like Reuters, or pursuit of COVID statistics within the United States' penal system) which have elicited even _stronger_ responses on here.

If we're supposed to sneer down on journalism because it provokes people in the general population, then what is being suggested is either _reducing_ journalism to something wherein anything stronger than "[writer] wrote this" is immediately scrapped (thus rendering both the work redundant _and_ the field useless for actual presentation of information) _or_ promoting to people that they should avoid information, new sources, et al that do not agree with their own pre-conceptions, biases, et al (which is how you get things like aforementioned "COVID is real" debates cranked up to 11).

Now, this is all just a tangent from the OP. As emphasized by @Fallowfox above, there... doesn't really seem to be any sort of connect between "Opinion piece on usage of the word 'exotic' in relation to food" and any hypothetical "cannibalistic malaise"s running though society. Outside either very - _very_ - loose ones (see: Both involve people writing things), or _implicit common ground_ that everyone has already either long picked up on or insists totally isn't there. But seriously: The day the field of journalism fails to elicit any sort of strong reactions from anybody is the day that journalism has died.


----------



## The_biscuits_532 (Jul 23, 2021)

Attaman said:


> I'm going to be dropping a sick secret of the universe here: Journalism "incite(s) responses from the audience and get(s) them to fight amongst each other" is almost _entirely_ the point of journalism.
> 
> Now, no: In an ideal world this isn't _exactly_ true. In an ideal world journalism's chief role is to present information (be it political or social, scientific or economic, etcetera), with the sub-set of _investigative_ journalism being information that takes some degree of more digging than just "Grab a couple sources and have a chit-chat."
> 
> ...


I like how I made the first point in _the first reply to this thread_ and it's still having to be made. 

Controversial statement = views from outraged people = M O N E E E E E E Y


----------



## O.D.D. (Jul 23, 2021)

The_biscuits_532 said:


> I like how I made the first point in _the first reply to this thread_ and it's still having to be made.
> 
> Controversial statement = views from outraged people = M O N E E E E E E Y


Money, security for their paymasters and they get to pretend they're good people doing good things instead of morons playing with matches.


----------



## Attaman (Jul 23, 2021)

The_biscuits_532 said:


> I like how I made the first point in _the first reply to this thread_ and it's still having to be made.
> 
> Controversial statement = views from outraged people = M O N E E E E E E Y


The irony of _that_ is that the vast majority of the outrage in here is from people who explicitly have _gone out of their way_ to no less explicitly say they never read the opinion piece, have no intention of ever reading it, and don't care what was actually said (see: People who are looking to find / create their own outrage, and thus in _this_ particular case not the WaPo's fault).

Like, that pretty much seems to be the firm divide here. People who have read it (whether they paid WaPo for it or not: I didn't because the Private Tab option in Mozilla seems to get around the WaPo's monthly article filter still) have generally walked away with no stronger a response than "Wait, people still use exotic that way?" or "Huh, I was kind of expecting something from different based on how the telephone game described it." When somebody (Nexus) condensed the WaPo article's contents on page four (and wasn't promptly disregarded as several efforts to summarize the article before were) many of the people who _were_ outraged went "Really, that's it?", liked that condensed post / directly responded to it with "Oh, that's fine then", and promptly dropped _from this thread outright_.

The only reason the thread's currently live right now after several days of inactivity is a 50:50 mix of:
1) A user joining on Monday, making their one and only post in here less than ten minutes after joining going "I'm going to start over the entire 'Eating exotic food is racist' telephone game all over again", logging out _immediately _afterwards, and then never logging in again. Something I would have _hoped_ was low enough quality bait for nobody to take, and yet...
2) A lot of discussions only tangentially related to OP (SoKal, Toxic Masculinity, previously discussed / hashed out / dropped topics from pre-revival, Attaman's 2013 forum days, etcetera).

If one wants to apply the controversy-money pipeline to this particular article, it failed because I'm pretty sure the Vox article on SoKal got more clicks than the OP link despite the former not having any sort of subscription involved as well as not showing up until half-way through the thread. Hell, again: Everyone who's actually seen (or accurately been described) the article's contents went "Huh, that's it?" and just buggered off. It took people actively misrepresenting the contents of the article (multiple times, no less!) in posts actively designed, timed, et al to whip up a furor to get people to actually care about it in the first place.


----------



## Troj (Jul 23, 2021)

Really, this thread is a microcosm of the current state of the whole anti-SJW schtick.

Step one: A person makes a relatively mundane observation or offers a reminder to be more self-reflective, courteous, accurate, or sensitive around some topic.

Step two: People utterly flip out and clutch pearls after blowing the original statement or argument way out of proportion.

Step three: People furiously debate the straw argument.

Step four: ?????

Step five: Profit!

Mind you, insufferable and irrational wokescolds do exist in the world--but most of the time, it honestly seems like a lot of people don't have enough to worry about in their lives, need somewhere to channel their preexisting angst about who-knows-what, and/or are trying to wiggle out of having to 'get woke' (e.g., learn, grow, become better people, account for previous mistakes, and become more aware of their potential impact on others).


----------



## GentleButter (Jul 23, 2021)

My dad is Filipino but I'm white. Am I racist for eating his lumpia? lol


----------



## Nexus Cabler (Jul 23, 2021)

GentleButter said:


> My dad is Filipino but I'm white. Am I racist for eating his lumpia? lol


My brother made Lumpias last week, naturally he adds his peppers to them, so I always expect a spicy kick. They were great with rice.


----------



## O.D.D. (Jul 23, 2021)

Troj said:


> Really, this thread is a microcosm of the current state of the whole anti-SJW schtick.
> 
> Step one: A person makes a relatively mundane observation or offers a reminder to be more self-reflective, courteous, accurate, or sensitive around some topic.
> 
> ...


If you're whining about someone calling food "exotic" because it's something they've never had or seen before, you either have no bigger issues in your life than other people not sharing your pearl-clutching over descriptive terms for inanimate objects used with no ill intent, or you prioritize things very weirdly.  We have plenty of shit to worry about that doesn't center around this.  This is rightfully offputting in that "if I continue conversing with this person I will eventually inadvertently hurt their feelings so I'm just gonna not talk to them" way.


----------



## GentleButter (Jul 23, 2021)

Nexus Cabler said:


> My brother made Lumpias last week, naturally he adds his peppers to them, so I always expect a spicy kick. They were great with rice.


*reports him to the Tagalog police for altering the recipe*

jk i hear people get mad about altering lumpia a lot, which is funny because sometimes you're broke and just use what you got in the house. (And yes, Filipino families run into the problem of not wanting to go to the grocery store and making due with what they have too, for anyone whos wondering. )*fingerguns*


----------



## Nexus Cabler (Jul 23, 2021)

GentleButter said:


> *reports him to the Tagalog police for altering the recipe*
> 
> jk i hear people get mad about altering lumpia a lot, which is funny because sometimes you're broke and just use what you got in the house. (And yes, Filipino families run into the problem of not wanting to go to the grocery store and making due with what they have too, for anyone whos wondering. )*fingerguns*


I see it this way, It's good to stay true to the recipe for the cultural element, but it's also good to explore new ways of making it, and some alterations here and there such as spices, sauces, and ingredients, which history has shown has made many of the oldest foods still very popular today worldwide.

I could word this butter but I'm half awake at the moment. =w=


----------



## O.D.D. (Jul 23, 2021)

Nexus Cabler said:


> I could word this butter


Unintentional food pun get


----------



## Nexus Cabler (Jul 23, 2021)

O.D.D. said:


> Unintentional food pun get


Wow, just.....wow XD


----------



## O.D.D. (Jul 23, 2021)

I just realized I haven't had Hoppin' John in... nearly 2 decades.

I should make that.  Will have to cut down the amount of cayenne I usually use, roommate isn't much for heat.


----------



## Fcomega121 (Jul 23, 2021)

Nexus Cabler said:


> I visited the link, it's not really scholarly research journal or study to me. It's more of an opinion piece...of one person. XD
> 
> I think it's safe to say the majority of the world doesn't mind their local/country foods being enjoyed by others elsewhere. I think one of the best ways to appreciate each others cultures is to eat their foods.
> 
> I will point out that throwing around the word "exotic" to describe anything outside your country is....odd. We aren't 19th century Safari explorers.


Absolutely agree!

I did find this thing Super weeeird since the start
It doesn't makes sense to consider eating other places foods as racist when things as Speaking another language or studying another culture isn't racist

It wouldn't make any sense to say that a person speaking Inuktitut is something racist for example. That article is just an opinion post as nexus said, the page itself isn't even a good place to read anything reliable actually:




For example for me it doesn't bothers me to see people eat spanish or mexican dishes all around the world! It flatters me actually as a creole ^w^


----------



## Jaredthefox92 (Jul 23, 2021)

GentleButter said:


> My dad is Filipino but I'm white. Am I racist for eating his lumpia? lol



To anyone with a brain? No, to someone who has nothing better to spend their free time on? Yeah.


----------



## Fallowfox (Jul 24, 2021)

O.D.D. said:


> The problem the article itself isn't even about food, it's about the language and attitudes surrounding food that the author is quibbling over to incite responses from audiences and get them to fight amongst each other so they can then say they "started a conversation" and proceed to continue writing more articles.  It's another symptom of the mind rot that pervades journalistic and quasi-journalistic fields (read: glorified blogs) that itself is reflective of the strange cannibalistic malaise running rampant throughout a good part of society.  People have resigned themselves to attacking their peers rather than risk missing on a swing at the "kings" as it were.  They've embraced "hate thy neighbor" because it's easier and safer than going after the people at the top, and as a result we're staring down the barrel of things like the end of upward mobility, piss poor wage to productivity ratios, the list goes on.  We keep getting told to pay attention to every little difference and we keep being encouraged to raise holy hell over every perceived slight along those lines and suddenly the idea of common cause might as well not exist.  This is why OWS choked to death on its own tail and it's likely why there will never be another OWS.
> 
> Also, fuck you and the horse you rode in on.



This is a very emotional reaction to somebody having a snooty view you don't like.

and that's all it is. You can't reach huge broad-brush conclusions about_ investigative journalists_, for example, because a _food critic_ upset your feelings.
Nor does one snooty food critic's opinion have much at all to do with your belief that your wage is too small.

Read your_ own_ advice about the futility of over-reacting to tiny perceived slights.



O.D.D. said:


> Money, security for their paymasters and they get to pretend they're good people doing good things instead of morons playing with matches.



That's how revolutions start though I guess. With the food critics. They know not the power in their hands.


----------



## Muttmutt (Jul 24, 2021)

People really hate the idea of the terms we commonly use changing, huh? Doesn’t surprise me. All throughout history we see that “change” of any kind was met by people digging their heels in.

What does surprise me is how much that attitude infiltrates even the most innocuous of discussions! Anyway, I love eating a variety of foods from a variety of cultures. I think Mediterranean and Asian dishes are probably my favorites, though.


----------



## O.D.D. (Jul 24, 2021)

Muttmutt said:


> People really hate the idea of the terms we commonly use changing, huh? Doesn’t surprise me. All throughout history we see that “change” of any kind was met by people digging their heels in.
> 
> What does surprise me is how much that attitude infiltrates even the most innocuous of discussions! Anyway, I love eating a variety of foods from a variety of cultures. I think Mediterranean and Asian dishes are probably my favorites, though.


When people decide that a simple descriptor is now offensive because it's not the _best possible_ descriptor and then whine at people to choose different words, yeah, you're gonna get some pushback because it's inane.  If you live on the North American continent, there's going to be a number of foods that are rightly defined as exotic - try getting fresh durian, mangosteen, lychee, longan or rambutan in most stores.  Try getting horsemeat or chevon at your average store.  Try finding galangal, fenugreek, etc. readily at your average store.  At some point it looks (rightly so) like fucking snobbery from people who live in ivory towers and have the dosh lying around to travel abroad and become more personally familiar with various foodstuffs and cuisines that aren't readily available in Smalltown, USA, or have ready access to specialty grocers who carry things that are not typically part of your average American's cooking repertoire.  It's an inability to see the forest for the trees in communication, and it looks pretty deliberately fostered to me, all so some people can huff their own farts about how worldly and intelligent they are.  The fact that I raised meat goats and had access to things like chevon is not exactly fucking typical, and most people have no idea what I'm talking about when I talk about offbeat foodstuffs like rambutans.


----------



## Jaredthefox92 (Jul 24, 2021)

In North Korea, they view hamburgers as contraband, mostly from South Korea. That doesn't mean they don't eat them themselves in the higher up, I am pretty sure the journalist would consume whatever they can get their hands on while crying about it in the article. "rules for thee, not for me." is their bread and butter, pun intended.


----------



## Muttmutt (Jul 25, 2021)

O.D.D. said:


> When people decide that a simple descriptor is now offensive because it's not the _best possible_ descriptor and then whine at people to choose different words, yeah, you're gonna get some pushback because it's inane.  If you live on the North American continent, there's going to be a number of foods that are rightly defined as exotic - try getting fresh durian, mangosteen, lychee, longan or rambutan in most stores.  Try getting horsemeat or chevon at your average store.  Try finding galangal, fenugreek, etc. readily at your average store.  At some point it looks (rightly so) like fucking snobbery from people who live in ivory towers and have the dosh lying around to travel abroad and become more personally familiar with various foodstuffs and cuisines that aren't readily available in Smalltown, USA, or have ready access to specialty grocers who carry things that are not typically part of your average American's cooking repertoire.  It's an inability to see the forest for the trees in communication, and it looks pretty deliberately fostered to me, all so some people can huff their own farts about how worldly and intelligent they are.  The fact that I raised meat goats and had access to things like chevon is not exactly fucking typical, and most people have no idea what I'm talking about when I talk about offbeat foodstuffs like rambutans.


Not necessarily saying this post in particular. I just find it amusing that the group of people constantly calling others “over-sensitive” or “snowflakes” seem to actually be the most thin-skinned people. I don’t see a problem with terms that are socially accepted changing over time. In the past, there have been many terms that eventually got changed or dropped because people realized they were insensitive. Again, I am NOT directly referring to the term “exotic” just saying that as a whole, people should chill out and not flip out over any little bit of progress that occurs. That’s all.


----------



## O.D.D. (Jul 25, 2021)

Muttmutt said:


> Not necessarily saying this post in particular. I just find it amusing that the group of people constantly calling others “over-sensitive” or “snowflakes” seem to actually be the most thin-skinned people. I don’t see a problem with terms that are socially accepted changing over time. In the past, there have been many terms that eventually got changed or dropped because people realized they were insensitive. Again, I am NOT directly referring to the term “exotic” just saying that as a whole, people should chill out and not flip out over any little bit of progress that occurs. That’s all.


Yeah I've noticed how you types dance between "feelings are important and should be protected" and "lol snowflakes amirite" as it's convenient for you


----------



## TyraWadman (Jul 25, 2021)

Muttmutt said:


> Not necessarily saying this post in particular. I just find it amusing that the group of people constantly calling others “over-sensitive” or “snowflakes” seem to actually be the most thin-skinned people. I don’t see a problem with terms that are socially accepted changing over time. In the past, there have been many terms that eventually got changed or dropped because people realized they were insensitive. Again, I am NOT directly referring to the term “exotic” just saying that as a whole, people should chill out and not flip out over any little bit of progress that occurs. That’s all.



People fear change. Even in hypothetical scenarios.


----------



## Muttmutt (Jul 25, 2021)

O.D.D. said:


> Yeah I've noticed how you types dance between "feelings are important and should be protected" and "lol snowflakes amirite" as it's convenient for you


Sorry, who’s “my type”?

I’m actually saying it’s just hypocritical for a person to call others sensitive but then flip shit over people suggesting change. That’s all. Don’t know what you’re attempting to categorize me as but I don’t appreciate you jumping to random assumptions in an attempt to invalidate what I’ve said


----------



## O.D.D. (Jul 25, 2021)

Muttmutt said:


> Sorry, who’s “my type”?
> 
> I’m actually saying it’s just hypocritical for a person to call others sensitive but then flip shit over people suggesting change. That’s all. Don’t know what you’re attempting to categorize me as but I don’t appreciate you jumping to random assumptions in an attempt to invalidate what I’ve said


You kind of bared your arse back there with the whole "reframing inane language-police scolding as 'change'" bit.  If you're offended by someone calling food "exotic", your offense is rather cheaply bought.  I'll not give you a single fucking solitary INCH on this subject, it's idiotic and you and all the others throwing yourselves in front of it is twice more so.  Pick better hills to die on.  If you seek struggle and conflict in your life I can assure you that there are still worthy causes in the world, your lack of perspective possibly being a good one to focus on.


----------



## Muttmutt (Jul 25, 2021)

O.D.D. said:


> You kind of bared your arse back there with the whole "reframing inane language-police scolding as 'change'" bit.  If you're offended by someone calling food "exotic", your offense is rather cheaply bought.  I'll not give you a single fucking solitary INCH on this subject, it's idiotic and you and all the others throwing yourselves in front of it is twice more so.  Pick better hills to die on.  If you seek struggle and conflict in your life I can assure you that there are still worthy causes in the world, your lack of perspective possibly being a good one to focus on.


I am not offended and never said I was. I was making a *generic* comment about a *generic* topic that this one reminded me of - you know, as message boards such as these are for. I don’t care about this particular instance of word semantics. I care about these topics as a whole. 

Trust me, someone like myself does not need to be lectured on “struggle” and “conflict” by a random internet stranger who almost certainly doesn’t deal with half the shit I am required to on a daily basis. Keep on firing at me, though!

You are being incredibly aggressive toward me when I was never once disrespectful nor impatient with you. I asked for the same courtesy in return and you continuously become extremely aggressive and rude. I don’t appreciate you acting immature toward me when I’m trying to have an adult conversation about a related topic. So I suggest you speak to me as an adult or I will no longer be listening to your angry ranting at me. Alright?


----------



## O.D.D. (Jul 25, 2021)

Muttmutt said:


> I am not offended and never said I was. I was making a *generic* comment about a *generic* topic that this one reminded me of - you know, as message boards such as these are for. I don’t care about this particular instance of word semantics. I care about these topics as a whole.
> 
> Trust me, someone like myself does not need to be lectured on “struggle” and “conflict” by a random internet stranger who almost certainly doesn’t deal with half the shit I am required to on a daily basis. Keep on firing at me, though!
> 
> You are being incredibly aggressive toward me when I was never once disrespectful nor impatient with you. I asked for the same courtesy in return and you continuously become extremely aggressive and rude. I don’t appreciate you acting immature toward me when I’m trying to have an adult conversation about a related topic. So I suggest you speak to me as an adult or I will no longer be listening to your angry ranting at me. Alright?


Quit defending the indefensible and I'll put you on the sheet as an "adult".  Giving people who would chase other people from corner to corner waving the stick of "I'M OFFENDED BY THAT" in their direction any credit at all is puerile.


----------



## Muttmutt (Jul 25, 2021)

O.D.D. said:


> Quit defending the indefensible and I'll put you on the sheet as an "adult".


That’s not really how this works. You don’t get to disagree with my opinions and decide that means I don’t deserve basic respect. You’re the only person here not acting as an adult. Maybe you ought to find a new hobby because being an asshole to strangers on the internet doesn’t look great for you.


----------



## O.D.D. (Jul 25, 2021)

Muttmutt said:


> That’s not really how this works. You don’t get to disagree with my opinions and decide that means I don’t deserve basic respect. You’re the only person here not acting as an adult. Maybe you ought to find a new hobby because being an asshole to strangers on the internet doesn’t look great for you.


You EARN respect, and you've done nothing to earn mine thus far as a debater.  Entertaining the idea that someone who is offended by this word being used for foods is someone we should hearken unto for further advice on how to speak better is utterly detached from any sort of understanding of people or language.  Do you listen solemnly and nod your head thoughtfully at people screaming "YOU ARE ALL GOING TO HELL" at passersby through a bullhorn as well?


----------



## Muttmutt (Jul 25, 2021)

O.D.D. said:


> You EARN respect, and you've done nothing to earn mine thus far as a debater.  Entertaining the idea that someone who is offended by this word being used for foods is someone we should hearken unto for further advice on how to speak better is utterly detached from any sort of understanding of people or language.  Do you listen solemnly and nod your head thoughtfully at people screaming "YOU ARE ALL GOING TO HELL" at passersby through a bullhorn as well?


I stated a single thing:

“I think it’s ironic that people who call others sensitive are usually the most sensitive ones… getting offended over people changing the terms they use to be more inclusive.”

You were the one who started spewing a bunch of bullshit and putting words in my mouth. No, I am unwilling to change my stance; too many people dig their heels in and throw a fit when old and outdated terms are rightfully discarded and replaced. Like I’ve said for the fifth time now, I don’t give a shit about the word exotic being used. I am taking about the evolution of language and terms as a whole. I did NOT say whether this case was or was not justified. I made a comment only partially related. You need to learn to read properly. The only person I see on this page acting detached and outraged is actually you.


----------



## O.D.D. (Jul 25, 2021)

Muttmutt said:


> I stated a single thing:
> 
> “I think it’s ironic that people who call others sensitive are usually the most sensitive ones… getting offended over people changing the terms they use to be more inclusive.”
> 
> You were the one who started spewing a bunch of bullshit and putting words in my mouth. No, I am unwilling to change my stance; too many people dig their heels in and throw a fit when old and outdated terms are rightfully discarded and replaced. Like I’ve said for the fifth time now, I don’t give a shit about the word exotic being used. I am taking about the evolution of language and terms as a whole. I did NOT say whether this case was or was not justified. I made a comment only partially related. You need to learn to read properly. The only person I see on this page acting detached and outraged is actually you.


"Change makes people upset" in a thread about trying to change people's behavior (STOP SAYING MY FOOD IS EXOTIC) and you're indignant that I decided you were dying on that hill.  Wow, I wonder where I could have gotten the idea that you're on board with it.  Or did you just decide to derail it into your personal soapbox about change? Don't piss about with "well I didn't SAYYYYY it was or wasn't justified, tee hee!" You are not HALF as clever as you think you are, operating in the mendacious realm of technicalities.  If you have no stance on the use of the word "exotic" to describe foods, then why opine in a thread about it? I'll not waste a second more on someone who can't be arsed to ascertain the point of grievance here.  Framing an objection to the policing of a term that carries no innate malice or harm as "YOU JUST HATE CHANGE" is breathtakingly dishonest.


----------



## Muttmutt (Jul 25, 2021)

O.D.D. said:


> "Change makes people upset" in a thread about trying to change people's behavior (STOP SAYING MY FOOD IS EXOTIC) and you're indignant that I decided you were dying on that hill.  Wow, I wonder where I could have gotten the idea that you're on board with it.  Or did you just decide to derail it into your personal soapbox about change? Don't piss about with "well I didn't SAYYYYY it was or wasn't justified, tee hee!" You are not HALF as clever as you think you are.


Lol fuck off. I don’t know what your problem is man. I was making a comment because I see the usual morons screaming SJW at any little thing they dislike on this thread, so I made a comment. I’m not trying to be “clever” or whatever the fuck else you want to believe. I don’t care if I’m on some “dying hill” because I stick to my morals and beliefs regardless of the bullshit people spew at me, unlike a lot of posters in this thread. You continuously put words in my mouth. You’re an indignant man-child and I refuse to speak to someone who can’t learn to differentiate their ass from their mouth.

And oh boy can’t wait for you to reply to this about how you are the total victim and the mean ol’ LIBERAL got triggered XD lmao fuck off and fuck your shitty beliefs too. I respected you until you showed what an actual cunt you are


----------



## O.D.D. (Jul 25, 2021)

Muttmutt said:


> Lol fuck off. I don’t know what your problem is man. I was making a comment because I see the usual morons screaming SJW at any little thing they dislike on this thread, so I made a comment. I’m not trying to be “clever” or whatever the fuck else you want to believe. I don’t care if I’m on some “dying hill” because I stick to my morals and beliefs regardless of the bullshit people spew at me, unlike a lot of posters in this thread. You continuously put words in my mouth. You’re an indignant man-child and I refuse to speak to someone who can’t learn to differentiate their ass from their mouth.
> 
> And oh boy can’t wait for you to reply to this about how you are the total victim and the mean ol’ LIBERAL got triggered XD lmao fuck off and fuck your shitty beliefs too. I respected you until you showed what an actual cunt you are


Having your respect would be insulting.  You place no value on it.  It's a token you oh-so-graciously bestow like a trainer tossing a dog a morsel.


----------



## Hydro_ (Jul 25, 2021)

Wow another edgy conservative that's shocking


----------



## Crimcyan (Jul 25, 2021)

It hurts when i shit after eating Mexican food


----------



## O.D.D. (Jul 25, 2021)

Hydro_ said:


> Wow another edgy conservative that's shocking


Another snarky child who considers anyone not in lockstep with their neo-Puritan horseshit a (insert thing I don't like here).

That's not shocking at all.


----------



## Muttmutt (Jul 25, 2021)

Hydro_ said:


> Wow another edgy conservative that's shocking


Careful dude you might offend the totally-not-snowflakes! Double careful, if the conservatives don’t like what you’ve said they’ll call you a child and treat you like shit like the damn LIBERAL you are


----------



## Hydro_ (Jul 25, 2021)

Child  but anyways aren't you commenting on this thread because you don't like what was said.


----------



## Deleted member 127940 (Jul 25, 2021)

Surprised Flamingo let this one go on for ten pages tbh.


----------



## O.D.D. (Jul 25, 2021)

ASTA said:


> Surprised Flamingo let this one go on for ten pages tbh.


I have no idea what their criteria typically are for that, the last time I remember coming here was immediately after the split between Carenath and Dragoneer led to the creation of the Phoenix Forums and the new FAF and I can't remember a single staff member's name from that period.  I consider the removal of the Black Hole subsection to have been the death knell for old FAF.  Kind of wonder where a lot of the Holegans ended up.


----------



## Deleted member 127940 (Jul 25, 2021)

Hydro_ said:


> Wow another edgy conservative that's shocking



Definitely not conservative. Socially conservative *maybe* (and that's a _*big *_maybe) but economically left-leaning by US standards if any of his previous comments are anything to go by. Possibly more "old school" left (think stronger unionization, matching wages with worker productivity, lower housing costs for middle and working-class peoples etc). Praises action; hates slacktivism. Dislikes ivory tower liberals. It's hilarious to watch wealthy people preach about the woes endemic to homeless people in the US but you'll see some of the _worst _NIMBY'ism this side of the pond the moment you even suggest constructing low income housing or homeless shelters near their grossly-inflated six-bedroom micro estates. San Francisco is full of these people lol.

He's gruff and not polite at all but I do see where he's coming from.



O.D.D. said:


> I have no idea what their criteria typically are for that, the last time I remember coming here was immediately after the split between Carenath and Dragoneer led to the creation of the Phoenix Forums and the new FAF and I can't remember a single staff member's name from that period.  I consider the removal of the Black Hole subsection to have been the death knell for old FAF.



There's actually a zero-tolerance policy on political discussions on FAF. Prior to its untimely demise, the old Political Discussion forum always paid host to the same abject shit show threads with the same usual posters initiating and perpetuating those same shit shows (and it's a shame it was removed too because that forum was honestly a good containment unit for these sorts of rows). This policy was more strictly enforced when Luffy was still around for the most part but ever since they mysteriously fucked off to who-knows-where Flamingo has functioned as the only active mod for this joint. Luffy probably got caught up with meat space happenings. Who knows.

...and honestly, I think Flamingo _has _looked at this piece of work and _probably _has their moderator inbox full of reports at this very moment.

It's just the amount of fucks that they need to muster up to comb through ten pages of yet _more _of the usual bile that gets flung around this wonderful e-community on the regular by the same tired group of people (me included) just aren't available right now.

It's also the weekend. Pretty sure they'd rather slam a bottle of whisky than play babysitter to a bunch of anonymous internet people.


----------



## Eremurus (Jul 25, 2021)

How is this a 10 page thread? What is wrong with everyone?

Food is something universally loved and understood by all cultures and people across the globe. Enjoying other types of cuisine, is simply appreciation. It is not appropriation. You are not profiting off these foods being made.

That little Vietnamese pho restaurant? That Trinidadian jerk take-out place? That Polish bakery? They want you to spend your money there, rather than generic corporate chains. Support them. You won't find better food.


----------



## Deleted member 127940 (Jul 25, 2021)

Eremurus said:


> How is this a 10 page thread? What is wrong with everyone?



It's a low-level spat between members of a dysfunctional-yet-strangely-functional furry internet family. 

This conflict? It binds us to one another. Makes us stronger. Makes us love one another. 

 Shitposting aside I honestly don't know. I'm just here for the general snark/ Fallowfox-ODD posting.


----------



## Eremurus (Jul 25, 2021)

ASTA said:


> It's a low-level spat between members of a dysfunctional-yet-strangely-functional furry internet family.
> 
> This conflict? It binds us to one another. Makes us stronger. Makes us love one another.
> 
> Shitposting aside I honestly don't know. I'm just here for the general snark/ Fallowfox-ODD posting.



I read the last three pages and have zero idea what the fuck anyone is talking about.


----------



## The_biscuits_532 (Jul 25, 2021)

ASTA said:


> It's a low-level spat between members of a dysfunctional-yet-strangely-functional furry internet family.
> 
> This conflict? It binds us to one another. Makes us stronger. Makes us love one another.
> 
> Shitposting aside I honestly don't know. I'm just here for the general snark/ Fallowfox-ODD posting.


ngl

I'm astounded it's as civil as it is

This thread kinda feels like that one point in my politics seminars where people just get tired of each other and wanna move on to a new topic

Like I appreciate what's already been argued but we've got to the point people are pretty much just repeating previous points and it's getting stale real fast.


----------



## Attaman (Jul 25, 2021)

The_biscuits_532 said:


> ngl
> 
> I'm astounded it's as civil as it is
> 
> ...


Being fair, part of the reason it's a broken record is nobody reading past the OP _or _reading the article in the OP.

"What? Food isn't racist! It's not racist enjoying exotic food!"
"Nobody's actually said it is."
"Then how did this thread reach [current page number] with so much debate?!"
"‍:shrug:"


> 1-3 Days Later


"What? Food isn't racist! It's not racist enjoying exotic food!"
"Nobody's actually said it is."
"Then how did this thread reach [current page number] with so much debate?!"
"‍:shrug:"

Sometimes it's intentional (see: Bottom of Page 6), sometimes it's glossing over the OP / thread, and sometimes it's just assuming "If we're at 11 pages that must be what the subject is and has always been in there" (One of the classic blunders of FAF, most famous of which being "Never get involved in a a thread war in Announcements" but only slightly less well known is "Never go in a multi-page thread and assume it's anywhere on topic").


----------



## KimberVaile (Jul 25, 2021)

Christ almighty, this thread is still getting replies. I can't say I'm even shocked about it, it's just kind of sad.


----------



## Eremurus (Jul 25, 2021)

Attaman said:


> Being fair, part of the reason it's a broken record is nobody reading past the OP _or _reading the article in the OP.
> 
> "What? Food isn't racist! It's not racist enjoying exotic food!"
> "Nobody's actually said it is."
> ...



Yes- we are going to read 11 pages about such an asinine topic.


----------



## Punji (Jul 25, 2021)

Ah yes, a thread about food turned into explicit politics is allowed to continue on unhindered for double-digit pages but I try to create a thread about the issues disabled people face in society and it gets locked without a word in less than one page.

The FAF is a real Wild West sometimes.


----------



## The_biscuits_532 (Jul 25, 2021)

Punji said:


> Ah yes, a thread about food turned into explicit politics is allowed to continue on unhindered for double-digit pages but I try to create a thread about the issues disabled people face in society and it gets locked without a word in less than one page.
> 
> The FAF is a real Wild West sometimes.


Was that the disability pride month one? I think I remember that.


----------



## Yakamaru (Jul 25, 2021)

The_biscuits_532 said:


> Was that the disability pride month one? I think I remember that.


Bit of a shame. I wanted to talk about the topic as I have a disability too.


----------



## Attaman (Jul 25, 2021)

Yakamaru said:


> Bit of a shame. I wanted to talk about the topic as I have a disability too.


Best advice I can give there - if you don’t want to bring it up elsewhere / in another thread - is, come next year when it’s time for a new Disability Pride month thread, promptly and immediately shoo out any people saying “There shouldn’t be a Pride month. Also fuck disability accommodations.” Can practically guarantee the thread will last longer if half the posts aren’t spent debating the reason for the thread’s existence!

Alternatively find a random WaPo article and include it in the OP. That might work too.


----------



## TyraWadman (Jul 25, 2021)

Remember the spam bots that like to flood fa/f? They're probably taking a break after dealing with those.


----------



## Ramjet (Jul 25, 2021)

Crimcyan said:


> It hurts when i shit after eating Mexican food


Do u get the blood stains in your underwear too?

Heard there's a product for that.


----------



## Troj (Jul 25, 2021)

Anywho, back to the thread, my sense is that energy would've been much better spent on fuming about a_ real _(as opposed to imagined, inflated, projected, or strawmanned) "wokescoldy" hot take on this topic, _especially _one that potentially had a real audience. "Consider the potential implications and connotations of a word you're using, please, and your own underlying assumptions when you use that prooooooooblematic word" is pretty mild gazpacho all things considered, and getting upset about _that_ is honestly pretty snowflakey. It'd make more sense and actually be more fun to get legitimately angry or annoyed with any number of kids with picrew avatars who are _actually _screeching at people for eating international foods et cetera.

"This author didn't say that, but they COULD'VE," "This author's opinion is offensive because it lives three houses down from a really offensive and proooooooblematic opinion," and "This person expressed a preference, opinion, observation, or concern that I disagree with, and that in itself constitutes an attempt to _oppress _me" is all stuff that we normally associate with SJWs, just sayin'.


----------



## DieselPowered (Jul 26, 2021)

KimberVaile said:


> Christ almighty, this thread is still getting replies. I can't say I'm even shocked about it, it's just kind of sad.


But, but...it's really important to treat each other like trash over a WaPo article about food terminology. I mean this is a furry forum, what else are we supposed to be doing?

The word exotic is really damn important guys! I have to give people shit for all the issues i've projected onto the conversation!!!


----------



## CJohn15 (Jul 28, 2021)

Jaredthefox92 said:


> I've stumbled onto this weird article that some people were talking about on Youtube today. Where this writer from Washington Post is claiming that "Exotic" foods are of lesser quality than normal foods and it's "racist" to enjoy them. This is rather bizarre for me, because to me exotic foods generally are of much higher quality and wanting to be consumed to myself rather than corndogs or fast food.
> 
> 
> 
> ...


I'm of the opinion that culture is meant to be shared.  It gives us a richer view of the world as a whole!  It's only racist if you're trying to take credit for it when it's not yours.  I grew up in small town Wisconsin, moving to a big city like Dallas has afforded me the chance to interact with and learn about many different cultures, and I absolutely love it.


----------

