I am extremely offended by this. I cannot believe that they would violate the beliefs of Islam in such a war. Holy war on the Infidels! KaffUURRRS
The funny thing about this is oh so often Europeans, with their far more lenient social mores and inhibitions concerning sex and nudity, decry American "violence" They call us prudes and we see them as coddled sheep that have to be protected by our military and ballistic nuclear shields.
This came up when I was arguing with a Canadian guy in 2002 concerning the justifications for invading Iraq. The whole America vs Europe thing came up. And it came up again in a more general case when Chirac stabbed Bush in the back after promising to support Bush at the Un. *Chirac instead lobbied everybody he knew to block us*
We get it. I mean, we know why they are so lacking in inhibitions. These inhibitions are there for a reason and I know why, but they don't. A nice example would be nudist colonies or those going about society clad in their birthday suit. Now many people, or even most, would say that this is public indecency and that it should be outlawed. At least here in America. I, on the other hand, say that you should wear clothes, not because it hides your stuff from me, but because a citizen and a gentleman needs to be armed and armored to do battle in order to defend one's society, one's loved ones, and one's own dignity and rights. You can't do that naked. Or rather, you can, but it'd be real hard with the absence of pockets to put tools, clothes to keep you warm, slots to put armor in, and harnesses to put guns in. I don't think I've ever seen a guy who wants to get naked in front of the world and who also wants to pack the greatest concentration of firepower. The two desires seem mutually exclusive for some reason.
But here's the reason. When one is thinking about survival, being naked is pretty much last on the list of "Things to Do". However, if you are safe, having sex, at home, or without a need to worry about survival or enemies, then what do you need clothes for? When greater society monitors the temperature for you, when you don't have to worry about being sick, or too cold, or too hot, or too hungry, you don't need to think about survival or defense or attacking others.
Sex is just part of the same equation, where we have issues of intimacy and relationships of trust. Europe, because they are protected by America and have a society generally that no longer has to worry about basic survival, of course will be far more decadent than we are, with far looser taboos on nudity and sex.
Still, Europe looks at America's fascination with violence (although to be honest, what they see from Hollywood is fake violence, not real violence) and they just don't comprehend us. And perhaps many Americans don't comprehend the European original cause either. But Jacksonians, at least, should understand.
In an armed society, not being seen as weak has major benefits. In an European society, being seen as weak has no major detriments.
Clothes and personal space are there to give people who are armed and can kill each other no excuse to pull the trigger on "accident" because they feared some kind of attack.
Clothes provide a status symbol and shield, a sort of ego boost, that allows people to see each other as equals, to fit themselves into a social hierarchy, and to get access to a bare minimum of self-respect concerning issues of survival and resistance to exposure. It means that even if they beat you or kill you, it won't be the same as being striped naked, tarred, and then rode out of town on a rail. And that, for quirks of human psychology, means a lot to people.
Personal space is obvious. Don't get too close, like with the damn French two cheek kissing, cause I don't trust you and I ain't going to get myself so near you that you can pull a knife on me and I can't see it.
Americans, who have never participated in French two cheek kissing, will find it a major culture shock. They will instinctually back away, and it ain't cause of homophobia, which is what the Left will tell you. The behavior is wired into our brains that if anyone gets into our personal space, we should expect an attack. At least, this is wired for people that have customs designed for survival rather than decadence and pleasure.
For a society like America, that was born from the fires of war and death, we have specific social behaviors that are designed to inhibit our ability to destroy. Europeans can't understand this. They can't understand why anyone would want to own a gun or need to own a gun. They don't get it. They can't get it. Their society does not provide them the context to get it.
The first Muslim "youth" riots in France? Shocking. Completely stunning to the sheep. Couldn't be processed. We got it though. Hell, even fracking Leftists got it, given the numerous race riots they helped instigate.
Our society has hard built in controls on this kind of stuff. Europe doesn't. Not any longer. Their society has been re-engineered and not for the better.
I am, of course, ignoring Columbine, gun "free" zones, Virginia Tech, and the numerous other Leftist enclaves in America (like DC's handgun ban). They aren't the real America, although the VT students died like any real Americans in the end due to the policies of the Left. That's real enough, I suppose.
But they aren't the real America. If you want to see the real America, Flight 93 is a good example. The destroyer captains in Leyte Gulf, that was the real America.
The torpedo squadron commander from the carriers off Midway who disobeyed a direct order to find and sink the Japanese carriers, giving America her first taste of real strategic victory, was the real America.
All this crap the Europeans see is called Hollywood. But even if the Euros could see the real America, they still wouldn't get it. It would be too alien. Just like French kissing is not something Americans would either understand or willingly get, without a lot of in culture research and anthropology.
I am extremely offended by this. I cannot believe that they would violate the beliefs of Islam in such a war. Holy war on the Infidels! KaffUURRRS
ReplyDeleteThe funny thing about this is oh so often Europeans, with their far more lenient social mores and inhibitions concerning sex and nudity, decry American "violence" They call us prudes and we see them as coddled sheep that have to be protected by our military and ballistic nuclear shields.
This came up when I was arguing with a Canadian guy in 2002 concerning the justifications for invading Iraq. The whole America vs Europe thing came up. And it came up again in a more general case when Chirac stabbed Bush in the back after promising to support Bush at the Un. *Chirac instead lobbied everybody he knew to block us*
We get it. I mean, we know why they are so lacking in inhibitions. These inhibitions are there for a reason and I know why, but they don't. A nice example would be nudist colonies or those going about society clad in their birthday suit. Now many people, or even most, would say that this is public indecency and that it should be outlawed. At least here in America. I, on the other hand, say that you should wear clothes, not because it hides your stuff from me, but because a citizen and a gentleman needs to be armed and armored to do battle in order to defend one's society, one's loved ones, and one's own dignity and rights. You can't do that naked. Or rather, you can, but it'd be real hard with the absence of pockets to put tools, clothes to keep you warm, slots to put armor in, and harnesses to put guns in. I don't think I've ever seen a guy who wants to get naked in front of the world and who also wants to pack the greatest concentration of firepower. The two desires seem mutually exclusive for some reason.
But here's the reason. When one is thinking about survival, being naked is pretty much last on the list of "Things to Do". However, if you are safe, having sex, at home, or without a need to worry about survival or enemies, then what do you need clothes for? When greater society monitors the temperature for you, when you don't have to worry about being sick, or too cold, or too hot, or too hungry, you don't need to think about survival or defense or attacking others.
Sex is just part of the same equation, where we have issues of intimacy and relationships of trust. Europe, because they are protected by America and have a society generally that no longer has to worry about basic survival, of course will be far more decadent than we are, with far looser taboos on nudity and sex.
Still, Europe looks at America's fascination with violence (although to be honest, what they see from Hollywood is fake violence, not real violence) and they just don't comprehend us. And perhaps many Americans don't comprehend the European original cause either. But Jacksonians, at least, should understand.
In an armed society, not being seen as weak has major benefits. In an European society, being seen as weak has no major detriments.
Clothes and personal space are there to give people who are armed and can kill each other no excuse to pull the trigger on "accident" because they feared some kind of attack.
Clothes provide a status symbol and shield, a sort of ego boost, that allows people to see each other as equals, to fit themselves into a social hierarchy, and to get access to a bare minimum of self-respect concerning issues of survival and resistance to exposure. It means that even if they beat you or kill you, it won't be the same as being striped naked, tarred, and then rode out of town on a rail. And that, for quirks of human psychology, means a lot to people.
Personal space is obvious. Don't get too close, like with the damn French two cheek kissing, cause I don't trust you and I ain't going to get myself so near you that you can pull a knife on me and I can't see it.
Americans, who have never participated in French two cheek kissing, will find it a major culture shock. They will instinctually back away, and it ain't cause of homophobia, which is what the Left will tell you. The behavior is wired into our brains that if anyone gets into our personal space, we should expect an attack. At least, this is wired for people that have customs designed for survival rather than decadence and pleasure.
For a society like America, that was born from the fires of war and death, we have specific social behaviors that are designed to inhibit our ability to destroy. Europeans can't understand this. They can't understand why anyone would want to own a gun or need to own a gun. They don't get it. They can't get it. Their society does not provide them the context to get it.
The first Muslim "youth" riots in France? Shocking. Completely stunning to the sheep. Couldn't be processed. We got it though. Hell, even fracking Leftists got it, given the numerous race riots they helped instigate.
Our society has hard built in controls on this kind of stuff. Europe doesn't. Not any longer. Their society has been re-engineered and not for the better.
I am, of course, ignoring Columbine, gun "free" zones, Virginia Tech, and the numerous other Leftist enclaves in America (like DC's handgun ban). They aren't the real America, although the VT students died like any real Americans in the end due to the policies of the Left. That's real enough, I suppose.
But they aren't the real America. If you want to see the real America, Flight 93 is a good example. The destroyer captains in Leyte Gulf, that was the real America.
The torpedo squadron commander from the carriers off Midway who disobeyed a direct order to find and sink the Japanese carriers, giving America her first taste of real strategic victory, was the real America.
All this crap the Europeans see is called Hollywood. But even if the Euros could see the real America, they still wouldn't get it. It would be too alien. Just like French kissing is not something Americans would either understand or willingly get, without a lot of in culture research and anthropology.
I think if you showed this to Islamic terrorists and strapped them down so they couldn't move their heads or arms, they would go insane.
ReplyDelete