Whoops, I thought I proofread my post well enough before, but I just realized I used the wrong spelling for "discrete." To satisfy the grammar and spelling tyrants (which I normally am), I meant "discrete" as in "separate," not "discreet" as in "prudence or modesty." My English teacher would have strung me up for that one. Sorry, Mr. Devita!
Inappropriate, probably. My tact is still a work in progress. Ignorant, I'd like to differ. Morality and culture, while often intertwined as well as often synergistic, are technically discreet. I was addressing morals, which often transcends culture in the form of basic rights and wrong. The abhorrence of murder would be the most basic example, but even that seems to be mutable nowadays.
My point wasn't to presume that western morality is superior to others. I threw the comment on moral imposition to defuse the attempt to use moral relativism as an excuse by saying that the cosummation was acceptable since Yemeni morals, or more accurately, laws would allow the union. The rest of my comments were on the individual himself. My thought? Regardless of whether or not the law permitted it, it was wrong.
As for my own "non-western culture," I tend to embrace both the ways of the (non-western) country of my birth and those my my adopted nation, many times taking the best of both and finding a balance between the two. However, I still believe that there are some basic rules of morality, in this case protecting children, that are important, but may not carry as much importance in the morals of my birth country in some interpretations. The proliferation of child prostitution in some parts of East Asia comes to mind and continues to anger me.
Don't mistake upholding a moral that I hold in importance and evaluating an individual based on that as arrogance - I just call it a judgemental observation. It's also called an opinion. Arrogance would be me saying that the whole culture is broken and needs to be "fixed."
By the way, lumping "power-hungry" to "western culture" is much too generalized and borders on ignorant and inflammatory in itself. I think that adjective can describe pretty much any political or social aggregation of human beings, and isn't reserved for the west.
Long reply, but I just wanted to clarify. I'd like to say we agree to disagree. I'd also like to avoid drawing out this thread much further. Thanks for the discussion, though!
Am I the only one that shuddered at the phrasing of
"he acknowledged that the 'marriage was consummated, but I did not beat her.'"
Well, you get a pat on the back for that little bit of self-restraint, buddy!
I know some people out there are all about not imposing our western sense of moralities on other cultures, but poor or not, there has to be some line drawn between decency and depravity. I guess the difference in molesting an 8 year old girl and beating her is where this guy's line is drawn... ugh.
Agreed. Those who actually watched this episode would know that the MB team took trees that had already been felled and dug the logs in the ground for the purposes of this busting. In general, the team usually does their best at being economically and environmentally responsible for all their "pointless experiments" (e.g., scavaging scrap yards, re-using equipment and materials). As for why? Well, they're not called Mythbusters (not to mention this website isn't Neatorama) for nothing.
Oh, I forgot to mention that Uijongbu has (or at least had until 2000 when I was there) a significant American population since the headquarters of the 2nd Infantry Division is/was located there. Therefore it's safe to assume SOMEBODY in town knew what "morning wood" meant. Either someone decided to mess with the store owner in the event that he/she asked an English-speaking friend what to name the store, or he/she knew exactly what they was doing. Pretty crafty either way, and the store probably gets a fair amount of attention. :P
Actually, the name of the company in Korean (the four symbols to the lower right) is pronounced "mo ning woo de." Ahh, thank you Engrish, you've made my day! The nice thing about Korean is that the written language is phoenetic, so a lot of Engrish makes it's way in. :P
The OP should send this to www.Engrish.com, post-haste! Tons of examples of these, which I think are hilarious. Most of them are a result of either mistranslations/mispronunciations (e.g. r's and l's are often exchanged since the equivalent sound in many Asian languages is a hybrid of both), or someone with less than perfect understanding of English put together words which either sound cool/evocative or are from a really bad translation.
Engineer by education, military by occupation, geek for life. I've been a Neatorama addict for almost 2 years now, just so I can get my daily fix of quasi-useful factoids to amaze (not really) my friends. Thanks so much for everything and here's to the next anniversary of having posts of numerically sequential ordering!
One of the reasons why I like this website is because it gives perspective and gives a reason for people to think. Given that, I’d like to make a few points:
1. The Iraqi people have been subject to, and for the most part are accustomed to, the presence of both foreign and military presence in their urban areas over the last few years. These military forces are both highly visible and heavily targeted by the enemy. It’s hard to miss them when they’re driving through the streets.
2. These highly visible and heavily targeted military personnel and vehicles are targeted daily by planted explosive devices that can take any form – from the parked and/or moving vehicles, plastic bottles, piles of trash, etc. – as well as sniper fire, especially the gunner (a brave soul who exposes the upper half of his/her body on top of the vehicle). Because both these threats often depend on timing by the trigger-man, speed and momentum are key factors in subverting the enemy’s attack. Compound this with the enemy tactic of purposely slowing down military vehicles in order to make their attacks more effective, or in other words, so they can kill more people when they bunch up.
3. These military forces also consciously avoid heavily populated areas unless necessary, exceptions being areas requiring a security presence. Finding safe (i.e., minimally populated either by location or time) avenues of movement is a key part of route planning, and includes minimizing exposure of locals to threats, and inversely, exposing military personnel to potential enemies, who also tend to hide within civilian populations.
While I don’t expect the average civilian to understand why Soldiers or Marines may drive like they have a case of road rage on steroids, or to look past that the fact they’re not driving their Honda Civic in the middle of the O.C., I would ask they would appreciate the point others have made in the comments in that these people are driving with the knowledge that they are sitting ducks, unflinchingly and sorely wanting to protect themselves and their comrades, all the while driving through an environment filled with an unseen, extremely deadly enemy, and surrounded by people who they also have to protect, but at the same time have to be be wary of. Makes your head spin, doesn’t it?
Finally, going back to the point about perspective, anyone who’s been to Egypt, Italy, Spain, or South Korea has seen much worse driving than this. In fact, the “guy picking his nose†would’ve been run over twice by Vespas if he was doing the same thing in Rome.
PS – not the right type of website to talk about it, but the Iraqis don’t hate Americans because of they way they drive. A lot of them congenially tolerate (God forbid, even like) the military there, as they realize they wouldn’t be as safe without them. A lot of the angst and resentment (aside from the west's history in the Israeli/Palestinian conflict... yeah, it's a hot issue in Iraq) comes from not being able to do enough to make their lives safer from terrorists, sooner... although it’s not for the lack of trying…
My point wasn't to presume that western morality is superior to others. I threw the comment on moral imposition to defuse the attempt to use moral relativism as an excuse by saying that the cosummation was acceptable since Yemeni morals, or more accurately, laws would allow the union. The rest of my comments were on the individual himself. My thought? Regardless of whether or not the law permitted it, it was wrong.
As for my own "non-western culture," I tend to embrace both the ways of the (non-western) country of my birth and those my my adopted nation, many times taking the best of both and finding a balance between the two. However, I still believe that there are some basic rules of morality, in this case protecting children, that are important, but may not carry as much importance in the morals of my birth country in some interpretations. The proliferation of child prostitution in some parts of East Asia comes to mind and continues to anger me.
Don't mistake upholding a moral that I hold in importance and evaluating an individual based on that as arrogance - I just call it a judgemental observation. It's also called an opinion. Arrogance would be me saying that the whole culture is broken and needs to be "fixed."
By the way, lumping "power-hungry" to "western culture" is much too generalized and borders on ignorant and inflammatory in itself. I think that adjective can describe pretty much any political or social aggregation of human beings, and isn't reserved for the west.
Long reply, but I just wanted to clarify. I'd like to say we agree to disagree. I'd also like to avoid drawing out this thread much further. Thanks for the discussion, though!
"he acknowledged that the 'marriage was consummated, but I did not beat her.'"
Well, you get a pat on the back for that little bit of self-restraint, buddy!
I know some people out there are all about not imposing our western sense of moralities on other cultures, but poor or not, there has to be some line drawn between decency and depravity. I guess the difference in molesting an 8 year old girl and beating her is where this guy's line is drawn... ugh.
Actually, the name of the company in Korean (the four symbols to the lower right) is pronounced "mo ning woo de." Ahh, thank you Engrish, you've made my day! The nice thing about Korean is that the written language is phoenetic, so a lot of Engrish makes it's way in. :P
The OP should send this to www.Engrish.com, post-haste! Tons of examples of these, which I think are hilarious. Most of them are a result of either mistranslations/mispronunciations (e.g. r's and l's are often exchanged since the equivalent sound in many Asian languages is a hybrid of both), or someone with less than perfect understanding of English put together words which either sound cool/evocative or are from a really bad translation.
1. The Iraqi people have been subject to, and for the most part are accustomed to, the presence of both foreign and military presence in their urban areas over the last few years. These military forces are both highly visible and heavily targeted by the enemy. It’s hard to miss them when they’re driving through the streets.
2. These highly visible and heavily targeted military personnel and vehicles are targeted daily by planted explosive devices that can take any form – from the parked and/or moving vehicles, plastic bottles, piles of trash, etc. – as well as sniper fire, especially the gunner (a brave soul who exposes the upper half of his/her body on top of the vehicle). Because both these threats often depend on timing by the trigger-man, speed and momentum are key factors in subverting the enemy’s attack. Compound this with the enemy tactic of purposely slowing down military vehicles in order to make their attacks more effective, or in other words, so they can kill more people when they bunch up.
3. These military forces also consciously avoid heavily populated areas unless necessary, exceptions being areas requiring a security presence. Finding safe (i.e., minimally populated either by location or time) avenues of movement is a key part of route planning, and includes minimizing exposure of locals to threats, and inversely, exposing military personnel to potential enemies, who also tend to hide within civilian populations.
While I don’t expect the average civilian to understand why Soldiers or Marines may drive like they have a case of road rage on steroids, or to look past that the fact they’re not driving their Honda Civic in the middle of the O.C., I would ask they would appreciate the point others have made in the comments in that these people are driving with the knowledge that they are sitting ducks, unflinchingly and sorely wanting to protect themselves and their comrades, all the while driving through an environment filled with an unseen, extremely deadly enemy, and surrounded by people who they also have to protect, but at the same time have to be be wary of. Makes your head spin, doesn’t it?
Finally, going back to the point about perspective, anyone who’s been to Egypt, Italy, Spain, or South Korea has seen much worse driving than this. In fact, the “guy picking his nose†would’ve been run over twice by Vespas if he was doing the same thing in Rome.
PS – not the right type of website to talk about it, but the Iraqis don’t hate Americans because of they way they drive. A lot of them congenially tolerate (God forbid, even like) the military there, as they realize they wouldn’t be as safe without them. A lot of the angst and resentment (aside from the west's history in the Israeli/Palestinian conflict... yeah, it's a hot issue in Iraq) comes from not being able to do enough to make their lives safer from terrorists, sooner... although it’s not for the lack of trying…