|
|
Post by Prometheus on Nov 28, 2020 4:43:30 GMT
Basics: Men are "better" than women and older is "better" than younger
The youngest daughter has lower status than the oldest brother even if he's younger than her.
However, a woman may gain status from her husband. For example, my older brother's wife is younger than me, but holds higher social standing because she's married to the eldest brother.
This delineation is carried over into the words for "aunt" and "uncle"
Father's brother is a different word from father's sister's husband. It's also different from the word from mother's brother and mother's sister's husband. Ditto for aunt.
All cousins are called "big brother", " younger brother", "elder sister", or "younger sister."
Even children will defer to the eldest student in class and call him "older brother." etc.
Wealth trumps everything, but for the sake of face, a rich younger brother would always publicly defer to his poorer elder brother.
Young women will stand up on a bus or subway to give an old man a seat but not always for an old woman. Women will make sure their husbands or boyfriends get to sit down on the bus or subway. Males - of all ages - expect to sit.
They are the current or future breadwinners and need to be taken care of by women.
Women, cook, clean, spread their legs, and (possibly) endure violence in order to ensure their continued access to a man's money.
I have seen grown women apologize for saying, "No" to their male children after the child begins to cry.
Whenever I get up for an old woman to sit, the rest of the men on the bus give me the dirtiest looks.
|
|
|
|
Post by Prometheus on Dec 1, 2020 3:20:18 GMT
Bump
|
|
|
|
Post by ant-mac on Dec 1, 2020 22:40:37 GMT
Basics: Men are "better" than women and older is "better" than younger
The youngest daughter has lower status than the oldest brother even if he's younger than her.
However, a woman may gain status from her husband. For example, my older brother's wife is younger than me, but holds higher social standing because she's married to the eldest brother.
This delineation is carried over into the words for "aunt" and "uncle"
Father's brother is a different word from father's sister's husband. It's also different from the word from mother's brother and mother's sister's husband. Ditto for aunt.
All cousins are called "big brother", " younger brother", "elder sister", or "younger sister."
Even children will defer to the eldest student in class and call him "older brother." etc.
Wealth trumps everything, but for the sake of face, a rich younger brother would always publicly defer to his poorer elder brother.
Young women will stand up on a bus or subway to give an old man a seat but not always for an old woman. Women will make sure their husbands or boyfriends get to sit down on the bus or subway. Males - of all ages - expect to sit.
They are the current or future breadwinners and need to be taken care of by women.
Women, cook, clean, spread their legs, and (possibly) endure violence in order to ensure their continued access to a man's money.
I have seen grown women apologize for saying, "No" to their male children after the child begins to cry.
Whenever I get up for an old woman to sit, the rest of the men on the bus give me the dirtiest looks.
I was about to say, "I'm on my way", but I think I'll pass. I'm currently listening to a report on the ABC morning news, regarding the steadily disintegrating relationship between Australia and China. It's focused upon that tweet with the doctored photograph on the Australian soldier attacking a child. I get the impression that now is not a good time to visit. |
|
|
|
Post by Prometheus on Dec 2, 2020 0:59:14 GMT
Basics: Men are "better" than women and older is "better" than younger
The youngest daughter has lower status than the oldest brother even if he's younger than her.
However, a woman may gain status from her husband. For example, my older brother's wife is younger than me, but holds higher social standing because she's married to the eldest brother.
This delineation is carried over into the words for "aunt" and "uncle"
Father's brother is a different word from father's sister's husband. It's also different from the word from mother's brother and mother's sister's husband. Ditto for aunt.
All cousins are called "big brother", " younger brother", "elder sister", or "younger sister."
Even children will defer to the eldest student in class and call him "older brother." etc.
Wealth trumps everything, but for the sake of face, a rich younger brother would always publicly defer to his poorer elder brother.
Young women will stand up on a bus or subway to give an old man a seat but not always for an old woman. Women will make sure their husbands or boyfriends get to sit down on the bus or subway. Males - of all ages - expect to sit.
They are the current or future breadwinners and need to be taken care of by women.
Women, cook, clean, spread their legs, and (possibly) endure violence in order to ensure their continued access to a man's money.
I have seen grown women apologize for saying, "No" to their male children after the child begins to cry.
Whenever I get up for an old woman to sit, the rest of the men on the bus give me the dirtiest looks.
I was about to say, "I'm on my way", but I think I'll pass. I'm currently listening to a report on the ABC morning news, regarding the steadily disintegrating relationship between Australia and China. It's focused upon that tweet with the doctored photograph on the Australian soldier attacking a child. I get the impression that now is not a good time to visit. World leaders doubling down rather than admit a mistake?
Where have I heard that before...?
I'd say, "kick out all the Chinese nationals is Oz" but that might be a huge blow to the economy of several cities, but you could always do what the Chinese would most likely do: freeze and seize their assets, THEN kick them out. There would still be a hit to the Australian economy, but the seized assets would mitigate quite a bit.
And I'm sure there are plenty of other emerging economies who would love to increase their trade share with Oz.
|
|
|
|
Post by ant-mac on Dec 2, 2020 1:35:00 GMT
I was about to say, "I'm on my way", but I think I'll pass. I'm currently listening to a report on the ABC morning news, regarding the steadily disintegrating relationship between Australia and China. It's focused upon that tweet with the doctored photograph on the Australian soldier attacking a child. I get the impression that now is not a good time to visit. World leaders doubling down rather than admit a mistake?
Where have I heard that before...?
I'd say, "kick out all the Chinese nationals is Oz" but that might be a huge blow to the economy of several cities, but you could always do what the Chinese would most likely do: freeze and seize their assets, THEN kick them out. There would still be a hit to the Australian economy, but the seized assets would mitigate quite a bit.
And I'm sure there are plenty of other emerging economies who would love to increase their trade share with Oz.
If Australia wants an impeccable international reputation, then it not only has to talk the talk, but also walk the walk. It hasn't done so and it needs to eat some humble pie whilst it tries and prosecutes those who've let the side down. Having said that, this latest development is just another sign of the continuing deterioration in the relationship between the two countries. I'm sure there are probably more than a few in the Australian community who would be quite prepared and ready to do exactly what you suggest. Fortunately, it appears that calmer heads are currently in charge and continue to pursue a peaceful resolution to this... problem. If China refuses to reconsider its recent behaviour, than it'll fall upon Australian authorities to act as "the adult in the room", for what little good I think it'll do them. From what I understand, these trade considerations are being considered and discussed more and more seriously as time goes by. In fact, this seems to be an important aspect of the CANZUK discussions - for all of the potential parties involved. Either way, there seems to be a determined intention to reduce Australia's dependency on trade relations with China. PS - This, of course, is my rational and reasonable response... Naturally, I have my darker moments where I don't feel like being quite so calm and composed.  |
|
|
|
Post by Prometheus on Dec 2, 2020 1:49:49 GMT
World leaders doubling down rather than admit a mistake?
Where have I heard that before...?
I'd say, "kick out all the Chinese nationals is Oz" but that might be a huge blow to the economy of several cities, but you could always do what the Chinese would most likely do: freeze and seize their assets, THEN kick them out. There would still be a hit to the Australian economy, but the seized assets would mitigate quite a bit.
And I'm sure there are plenty of other emerging economies who would love to increase their trade share with Oz.
If Australia wants an impeccable international reputation, then it not only has to talk the talk, but also walk the walk. It hasn't done so and it needs to eat some humble pie whilst it tries and prosecutes those who've let the side down. Having said that, this latest development is just another sign of the continuing deterioration in the relationship between the two countries. I'm sure there are probably more than a few in the Australian community who would be quite prepared and ready to do exactly what you suggest. Fortunately, it appears that calmer heads are currently in charge and continue to pursue a peaceful resolution to this... problem. If China refuses to reconsider its recent behaviour, than it'll fall upon Australian authorities to act as "the adult in the room", for what little good I think it'll do them. From what I understand, these trade considerations are being considered and discussed more and more seriously as time goes by. In fact, this seems to be an important aspect of the CANZUK discussions - for all of the potential parties involved. Either way, there seems to be a determined intention to reduce Australia's dependency on trade relations with China. PS - This, of course, is my rational and reasonable response... Naturally, I have my darker moments where I don't feel like being quite so calm and composed. Here's the thing: you're in a no-win situation with China.
If you act "calmly and reasonably," it will be viewed as weakness and China will take advantage - probably economically - prior to anything CANZUK could permanently alleviate. I wouldn't be surprised if CANZUK talks are exactly why this is happening.
If you act harshly, Australian nationals in China will be at risk for "detention" on whatever trumped up charges the Chinese can find. And with over 300,000 outrageously vague laws on the books, they can find a LOT.
OTOH, China probably won't go much further than that. They can't afford to lose the benefits they currently enjoy with those four countries... and they know you currently can't afford to lose their money either.
|
|
|
|
Post by ant-mac on Dec 2, 2020 2:17:21 GMT
If Australia wants an impeccable international reputation, then it not only has to talk the talk, but also walk the walk. It hasn't done so and it needs to eat some humble pie whilst it tries and prosecutes those who've let the side down. Having said that, this latest development is just another sign of the continuing deterioration in the relationship between the two countries. I'm sure there are probably more than a few in the Australian community who would be quite prepared and ready to do exactly what you suggest. Fortunately, it appears that calmer heads are currently in charge and continue to pursue a peaceful resolution to this... problem. If China refuses to reconsider its recent behaviour, than it'll fall upon Australian authorities to act as "the adult in the room", for what little good I think it'll do them. From what I understand, these trade considerations are being considered and discussed more and more seriously as time goes by. In fact, this seems to be an important aspect of the CANZUK discussions - for all of the potential parties involved. Either way, there seems to be a determined intention to reduce Australia's dependency on trade relations with China. PS - This, of course, is my rational and reasonable response... Naturally, I have my darker moments where I don't feel like being quite so calm and composed. Here's the thing: you're in a no-win situation with China.
If you act "calmly and reasonably," it will be viewed as weakness and China will take advantage - probably economically - prior to anything CANZUK could permanently alleviate. I wouldn't be surprised if CANZUK talks are exactly why this is happening.
If you act harshly, Australian nationals in China will be at risk for "detention" on whatever trumped up charges the Chinese can find. And with over 300,000 outrageously vague laws on the books, they can find a LOT.
OTOH, China probably won't go much further than that. They can't afford to lose the benefits they currently enjoy with those four countries... and they know you currently can't afford to lose their money either.
Fucked if we do, fucked if we don't... a familiar set of circumstances. Of course, if we acted harshly towards them, it'd merely be for the sake of temporary "face"... Which is something the Chinese would probably understand, even while they were punishing us for it. |
|
|
|
Post by Prometheus on Dec 2, 2020 2:26:35 GMT
Here's the thing: you're in a no-win situation with China.
If you act "calmly and reasonably," it will be viewed as weakness and China will take advantage - probably economically - prior to anything CANZUK could permanently alleviate. I wouldn't be surprised if CANZUK talks are exactly why this is happening.
If you act harshly, Australian nationals in China will be at risk for "detention" on whatever trumped up charges the Chinese can find. And with over 300,000 outrageously vague laws on the books, they can find a LOT.
OTOH, China probably won't go much further than that. They can't afford to lose the benefits they currently enjoy with those four countries... and they know you currently can't afford to lose their money either.
Fucked if we do, fucked if we don't... a familiar set of circumstances. Of course, if we acted harshly towards them, it'd merely be for the sake of temporary "face"... Which is something the Chinese would probably understand, even while they were punishing us for it. Actually... no.
You can't save face without offering face in return.
Acting harshly would take face from the Chinese and they would have to take more face from you even though they initiated everything by trying to take your face.
They can take our face because - to them - we essentially have none... even though they can take it. ![[gonemad]](//storage.proboards.com/7182076/images/xpVFtlIQrYlpuyJciLzd.gif)
Face is an outrageously convoluted concept.
|
|
|
|
Post by ant-mac on Dec 2, 2020 2:36:59 GMT
Fucked if we do, fucked if we don't... a familiar set of circumstances. Of course, if we acted harshly towards them, it'd merely be for the sake of temporary "face"... Which is something the Chinese would probably understand, even while they were punishing us for it. Actually... no.
You can't save face without offering face in return.
Acting harshly would take face from the Chinese and they would have to take more face from you even though they initiated everything by trying to take your face.
They can take our face because - to them - we essentially have none... even though they can take it.
Face is an outrageously convoluted concept.
Yes, but I was talking about "face" from the Australian perspective. It's probably not quite the same thing as the Chinese concept of it. Aussies pride themselves on punching upwards against bigger enemies and a very important part of Australian culture and identity is based upon an historic and tragic military loss. So giving the Chinese a kick in the balls and then getting massively smacked down for it isn't necessarily a deterrent. |
|
|
|
Post by Prometheus on Dec 2, 2020 2:39:48 GMT
Actually... no.
You can't save face without offering face in return.
Acting harshly would take face from the Chinese and they would have to take more face from you even though they initiated everything by trying to take your face.
They can take our face because - to them - we essentially have none... even though they can take it.
Face is an outrageously convoluted concept.
Yes, but I was talking about "face" from the Australian perspective. It's probably not quite the same thing as the Chinese concept of it. Aussies pride themselves on punching upwards against bigger enemies and a very important part of Australian culture and identity is based upon an historic and tragic military loss. So giving the Chinese a kick in the balls and then getting massively smacked down for it isn't necessarily a deterrent. Aaaah Suvla? |
|
|
|
Post by ant-mac on Dec 2, 2020 2:53:12 GMT
Yes, but I was talking about "face" from the Australian perspective. It's probably not quite the same thing as the Chinese concept of it. Aussies pride themselves on punching upwards against bigger enemies and a very important part of Australian culture and identity is based upon an historic and tragic military loss. So giving the Chinese a kick in the balls and then getting massively smacked down for it isn't necessarily a deterrent. Aaaah Suvla? Yeah, Gallipoli. Strangely, Aussies and Turks seem to have more respect for each other due to that conflict, than either of us have for the Brits. During the campaign, restrained fraternization took place between the two sides with ANZAC and Turkish soldiers exchanging token gifts of photographs and cigarettes. We both have war memorials and / or "sacred ground" in each others countries. |
|
|
|
Post by Prometheus on Dec 2, 2020 2:57:22 GMT
Yeah, Gallipoli. Strangely, Aussies and Turks seem to have more respect for each other due to that conflict, than either of us have for the Brits. During the campaign, restrained fraternization took place between the two sides with ANZAC and Turkish soldiers exchanging token gifts of photographs and cigarettes. We both have war memorials and / or "sacred ground" in each others countries. One of my best friends here is the nephew of Liam Clancy and he does a wonderful version of "And the Band Played Waltzing Matilda." It's not as good as his uncle's but still moving. |
|
|
|
Post by ant-mac on Dec 2, 2020 3:04:05 GMT
Yeah, Gallipoli. Strangely, Aussies and Turks seem to have more respect for each other due to that conflict, than either of us have for the Brits. During the campaign, restrained fraternization took place between the two sides with ANZAC and Turkish soldiers exchanging token gifts of photographs and cigarettes. We both have war memorials and / or "sacred ground" in each others countries. One of my best friends here is the nephew of Liam Clancy and he does a wonderful version of "And the Band Played Waltzing Matilda." It's not as good as his uncle's but still moving. It beats the shit out of ADVANCE AUSTRALIA FAIR.  That doesn't represent the Aussie spirit at all. I'll say one thing about you Yanks... you've got some great music for an anthem and for use on formal or official occasions. |
|
|
|
Post by Prometheus on Dec 2, 2020 3:08:10 GMT
One of my best friends here is the nephew of Liam Clancy and he does a wonderful version of "And the Band Played Waltzing Matilda." It's not as good as his uncle's but still moving. It beats the shit out of ADVANCE AUSTRALIA FAIR. That doesn't represent the Aussie spirit at all. I'll say one thing about you Yanks... you've got some great music for an anthem and for use on formal or official occasions. "Advance Australia Fair" sounds like it belongs on a soundtrack to a cheesy 1960's movie rather than as a national anthem. No offense. |
|
|
|
Post by ant-mac on Dec 2, 2020 3:12:12 GMT
It beats the shit out of ADVANCE AUSTRALIA FAIR. That doesn't represent the Aussie spirit at all. I'll say one thing about you Yanks... you've got some great music for an anthem and for use on formal or official occasions. "Advance Australia Fair" sounds like it belongs on a soundtrack to a cheesy 1960's movie rather than as a national anthem. No offense. There's no way you could offend me when it comes to that piece of shit. I reckon we should change our anthem to I STILL CALL AUSTRALIA HOME, by Peter Allen. |
|
|
|
Post by Prometheus on Dec 2, 2020 3:14:14 GMT
"Advance Australia Fair" sounds like it belongs on a soundtrack to a cheesy 1960's movie rather than as a national anthem. No offense. There's no way you could offend me when it comes to that piece of shit. I reckon we should change our anthem to I STILL CALL AUSTRALIA HOME, by Peter Allen. Sounds like a Billy Joel tune.... |
|
|
|
Post by ant-mac on Dec 2, 2020 3:17:12 GMT
There's no way you could offend me when it comes to that piece of shit. I reckon we should change our anthem to I STILL CALL AUSTRALIA HOME, by Peter Allen. Sounds like a Billy Joel tune.... I like his work too. Although PA was slightly ahead of him, but not by much. |
|
![[giveup]](http://storage.proboards.com/7182076/images/FSYefibmKqtatIXMgHZg.gif)
![[gonemad]](http://storage.proboards.com/7182076/images/xpVFtlIQrYlpuyJciLzd.gif)
![[cheers]](http://storage.proboards.com/7182076/images/engyBVslEdpmpmdnBwZQ.gif)
