(no subject)
this is so frustrating:
so i have to write about how the magazine National Geographic is racist, but i disagree. from watching the lectures given by wade davis (Photographer and anthropologist for national geographic) i'm certain that its not the magazine thats racist, quite the oppisite actually. the magazine celebrates diversity in the human race and aims to show the readers of the magazine how interesting and extraordinary the many cultures of the world are. people say that the fact that they are showing them at all makes them racist, and that they must be picking their subjects and deciding what to talk about. that the fact they sell their magazines to people of the western world means that the cultures talked about within the magazines should be then interpreted through comparison to western culture.
i believe that the viewers that compare the subjects of the magazine so directly to western believe structure is an ignorant way of interpreting the outside world. they don't seem to understand that these cultures believe different things than us and that they are NOT noble savages, they are in tune with nature in a beautiful way. such as the way therou speaks of nature.
the intention of these articles is to show the wonderful diversity in our species.
we as a society dont grasp that while we dont agree with the way of their lives, they at the same time dont agree with ours. williams did an injustice to all other cultures by speaking of them as savages with nobility. for a majority of the people we would think of as savage, would think of US as savage as well for doing the things that we do to the world and to natural resources.
the fact that the person who wrote the essay introduces with human evolutionary theory that suggests western thinking people are the most intelligent, should be grounds to discredit everything that comes after. the author compares everything to the "western way" witch is totally ignorant to the fact that people all over the world believe different things and because of this, there is a difference in the morals of each culture. just because we see a photograph of tribes people dressed in colorful clothing in an undeveloped land, doesn't mean they are praying for buildings to come.
doesn;t anyone consider the quolity of life when they talk about these people? our quality of life is horrible compared to many places thought of as undeveloped (3rd world) cultures.
in our age, we can look at anything and pick it apart to the enth degree. seeing everything they didn't show as "the real story". everyone thinks everyone else is racist and its not getting anywhere. do they want us to live in a PC world where everyone is the same and there is capitalism and the american dream in the minds of every human? when does national geographic praise the western culture? if anything, i'd say they praise every culture but western.
so in closing, people who compare other cultures (like those in national geographic) directly to western culture are racist for assuming they share the same belief structure and moral standard as the west.
the topless woman are objectified in the magazine because YOU objectify them. when this issue started, it was a time where pornography wasn't close to the level it is now and when a guy wanted to buy a boob book, their ignorant selves picked up a national geographic. that doesn't make THEM the problem, it makes the douches who buy the magazine to jack off the problem. its not the responsibility of the magazine to take into account the people who miss interpret the message it presents (diversity is great and important to the continuation of the human species)
people in the scientific world are considering our advancements as almost a new species classification because of the way western medicine is able to cure disease and all that. they think that western thinking people are literally more evolved than the people who don't use western medicine. who the fuck is racist now bitches! how could you think you are more evolved that someone who can tell the difference between the way animals smell and can tell if their is one in a 40 yard radius of them??? thats amazing!!! super human even! sounds like some sci-fy super hero stuff to me.
the funny part about this post is that i should be writing about the opposite idea towards this topic and instead, i've written more about how i dont want to/ disagree than is going to be asked of me to write on the other side.
so i have to write about how the magazine National Geographic is racist, but i disagree. from watching the lectures given by wade davis (Photographer and anthropologist for national geographic) i'm certain that its not the magazine thats racist, quite the oppisite actually. the magazine celebrates diversity in the human race and aims to show the readers of the magazine how interesting and extraordinary the many cultures of the world are. people say that the fact that they are showing them at all makes them racist, and that they must be picking their subjects and deciding what to talk about. that the fact they sell their magazines to people of the western world means that the cultures talked about within the magazines should be then interpreted through comparison to western culture.
i believe that the viewers that compare the subjects of the magazine so directly to western believe structure is an ignorant way of interpreting the outside world. they don't seem to understand that these cultures believe different things than us and that they are NOT noble savages, they are in tune with nature in a beautiful way. such as the way therou speaks of nature.
the intention of these articles is to show the wonderful diversity in our species.
we as a society dont grasp that while we dont agree with the way of their lives, they at the same time dont agree with ours. williams did an injustice to all other cultures by speaking of them as savages with nobility. for a majority of the people we would think of as savage, would think of US as savage as well for doing the things that we do to the world and to natural resources.
the fact that the person who wrote the essay introduces with human evolutionary theory that suggests western thinking people are the most intelligent, should be grounds to discredit everything that comes after. the author compares everything to the "western way" witch is totally ignorant to the fact that people all over the world believe different things and because of this, there is a difference in the morals of each culture. just because we see a photograph of tribes people dressed in colorful clothing in an undeveloped land, doesn't mean they are praying for buildings to come.
doesn;t anyone consider the quolity of life when they talk about these people? our quality of life is horrible compared to many places thought of as undeveloped (3rd world) cultures.
in our age, we can look at anything and pick it apart to the enth degree. seeing everything they didn't show as "the real story". everyone thinks everyone else is racist and its not getting anywhere. do they want us to live in a PC world where everyone is the same and there is capitalism and the american dream in the minds of every human? when does national geographic praise the western culture? if anything, i'd say they praise every culture but western.
so in closing, people who compare other cultures (like those in national geographic) directly to western culture are racist for assuming they share the same belief structure and moral standard as the west.
the topless woman are objectified in the magazine because YOU objectify them. when this issue started, it was a time where pornography wasn't close to the level it is now and when a guy wanted to buy a boob book, their ignorant selves picked up a national geographic. that doesn't make THEM the problem, it makes the douches who buy the magazine to jack off the problem. its not the responsibility of the magazine to take into account the people who miss interpret the message it presents (diversity is great and important to the continuation of the human species)
people in the scientific world are considering our advancements as almost a new species classification because of the way western medicine is able to cure disease and all that. they think that western thinking people are literally more evolved than the people who don't use western medicine. who the fuck is racist now bitches! how could you think you are more evolved that someone who can tell the difference between the way animals smell and can tell if their is one in a 40 yard radius of them??? thats amazing!!! super human even! sounds like some sci-fy super hero stuff to me.
the funny part about this post is that i should be writing about the opposite idea towards this topic and instead, i've written more about how i dont want to/ disagree than is going to be asked of me to write on the other side.