Long Neck women - and other oppressive cultural traditions

[rexbobcat]

One important issue to note is that areas that practice this tradition have also had an influx of tourism over the past 50 years. While the practice of extending the length of the neck with metal rings was falling out of popularity at one point, the economic opportunities of tourism has cause it to become more common again.

At least that's what I read.

So basically, as much as we want to believe that it's solely because of an oppressive culture, I think often our first-world fascination with the exotic is also somewhat responsible for the continued practice of some dangerous traditions. (Thank god foot binding isn't making a comeback though)

 

[The_Traveler]

Several of the long-neck (altho it isn't long neck as much as low-collarbone) villages near Chiang Rai both charged admission and sold 'stuff.' They were also suspiciously grouped near other 'show' villages that normally inhabit different areas.

Show villages are cleaner and neater than typical villages and may even have a sign saying it is a 'cultural village' and directional or exit signs that real places wouldn't need.

They are essentially zoos for people.

 

[table1349]

^^Yep^^ The government should build roads, deliver mail and punish crimminals, not tell people what to wear.

Oh great, a whole country of nudist just to our frozen north. That's going to be fun.

 

[pgriz]

^^Yep^^ The government should build roads, deliver mail and punish crimminals, not tell people what to wear.

Oh great, a whole country of nudist just to our frozen north. That's going to be fun.

Well, underneath all those clothes, we're nude. All of us.

Oh, and you too. So that makes you an undercover Canadian.

 

[table1349]

^^Yep^^ The government should build roads, deliver mail and punish crimminals, not tell people what to wear.

Oh great, a whole country of nudist just to our frozen north. That's going to be fun.

Well, underneath all those clothes, we're nude. All of us.

Oh, and you too. So that makes you an undercover Canadian.

Not where I'm from it don't.

Just think a whole country of nudist to our north with a median temperature of 7 degrees Celsius. Gives a whole new meaning to "You'll poke your eye out kid!"

 

[AlanKlein]

Don't we have enough problems here that need correcting that people here don't think are bad? Why look at other cultures who are basically doing the same thing in their own context? Why don't we mind our own business for a change?

PS. Nice travel photos.

 

[The_Traveler]

I wasn't suggesting that we ,as a country or even as individuals, should try to change anything but that we, as a group of sentient beings, consider the issue of cultural habits that might be seen as detrimental to the minority that practices them or to the larger culture in which they exist.

 

[AlanKlein]

Well, one thing leads to another. Pretty soon you're going to war to change other people. Look at ISIS. They view everyone else as heathens so they chop your head off to straighten you out. Who decides which culture is correct?

 

[pixmedic]

Ya'll just bound and determined to get this thread locked aintcha?
if we cant stick to commentary on the picture, and not social commentary, i will be forced to delete every comment but Lews OP and it can start over.

 

[The_Traveler]

I don't understand Jason's interest in stopping a non-controversial, non-argumentative discussion.
We aren't discussing politics, we are discussing the roles of a society, any society.
It is off-topic and no one is angry.

Thinking about the complexities of a problem does not inevitably lead to implementing radical solutions.
I am concerned about a lot of issues and thinking about them, even discussing them, is a good way to organize how and why I have certain opinions.
Not thinking about things leads to worse places.

 

[pixmedic]

I don't understand Jason's interest in stopping a non-controversial, non-argumentative discussion.
We aren't discussing politics, we are discussing the roles of a society, any society.
It is off-topic and no one is angry.

Thinking about the complexities of a problem does not inevitably lead to implementing radical solutions.
I am concerned about a lot of issues and thinking about them, even discussing them, is a good way to organize how and why I have certain opinions.
Not thinking about things leads to worse places.

well, firstly...
political commentary is against forum rules. so...the fact that this thread has been allowed to go as far as it has, even civilly, is only because it hasn't gotten ugly, yet, and the mods are allowing a bit of leeway. I guess that's never appreciated around here. technically it should have been stopped on page 1.
there have been reported posts, and one has already been deleted, so at least a few posts have made a few people angry.
secondly...
we cant please everyone.
people want to be able to say whatever they want....until they are offended. then we are looking at multiple reported posts and inevitably having to refer back to the forum rules of no politics, no religion.
we have a forum section, the subscribers section, where you can pretty much say and discuss whatever you want with little to no moderation. the regular, open to everyone section, is more subject to the forum policies, and the owners/admins actually expect the mods to enforce the rules they have laid out for their forum.
is it so terrible to ask that people follow the forum rules?
Its not personal. Its not arbitrary. its just the rules.
I hope I have been successful in explaining why I am interested in stopping the discussion.

 

[pgriz]

And yet, Jason, almost every photograph taken of humans IS political because it reflects the viewpoint of the image maker, and if it is successful at eliciting emotion, does it because it touches the hot buttons that are largely there because of our culture(s).

 

[AlanKlein]

That's a good point. While a typical landscape photo won't elicit political comment, many other pictures do cover political, social, religious, psychological and other social commentary. How do you comment on the point and purpose of the photo, other than aesthetic, without getting into "restricted" areas of discussion?

 

[pixmedic]

And yet, Jason, almost every photograph taken of humans IS political because it reflects the viewpoint of the image maker, and if it is successful at eliciting emotion, does it because it touches the hot buttons that are largely there because of our culture(s).

That may in fact be true, but whatever feelings an image invokes, the discussion on the image has to stay within the context of the image from a photographic standpoint, not a socio-political one.

 

[pixmedic]

That's a good point. While a typical landscape photo won't elicit political comment, many other pictures do cover political, social, religious, psychological and other social commentary. How do you comment on the point and purpose of the photo, other than aesthetic, without getting into "restricted" areas of discussion?

by critiquing the photo the same way you would discuss anything else. from the photography end.
For instance, the ban on gun pictures here was recently lifted, as long as the discussion was strictly on the photo of the gun, and not on gun rights or gun laws.