Best of the Week
of Oct. 10, 1999
Best of Week
Archives
Here are the most intriguing cross-cultural exchanges
either begun or advanced during the week of Oct. 10, 1999, as
selected by Y? These postings, as well as "Best of the
Week" entries from previous weeks, also can be found by accessing our
new database using our search form, or, in
the case of answers posted before April 24, 1999, in our
Original Archives (all questions
from the Original Archives have been entered into the new database as
well). In the Original Archives and the new database, you will find
questions that have received answers, as well as questions still
awaiting responses. We encourage you to answer any questions relevant
to your demographic background, as well as to ask any provocative
question you desire. Answers posted are not necessarily meant to
represent the views of an entire demographic group, but can provide a
window into the insights of an individual from that group.
First-time users should first make a quick stop at our
guidelines pages for asking and
answering questions.
Question:
I have a black friend who used to mock women who locked their car
doors as he walked by. Recently, I was walking home and was
approached by a black man, who, after being ignored, said, "You're
not ignoring me because I'm black, are you?" So I talked to him, and
five minutes later he put a gun to my neck and robbed me. By giving
him the benefit of the doubt, I put myself at risk. Another time, a
black man asked to use the phone, and then came in with three friends
and wouldn't leave until the police were called. I have only had
problems with black men. My questions are: 1) Doesn't it then make
sense for a woman to lock her car (better safe than sorry)? When
should you not be trusting? 2) Is it fair to blame solely white
thinking for racism when some of it is also based on some black
behavior - especially if the person cries racism in an attempt to
take advantage of you? Isn't that betraying your own race?
POSTED 10/15/1999
Craig, Minneapolis, MN, United States, <cmorris@loft.org>, 36,
Male, White/Caucasian, Computer support, 4 Years of College, Mesg ID
101499115130
To
respond
BACK TO TOP
Question:
I am a 24-year-old male and have a moderately hairy chest and legs. I
also have a little hair on my lower back right above my waist, as
well as on my buttocks. Is this a huge turnoff to women? How common
is it in men?
POSTED 10/15/99
Will, Charlotte, NC, United States, 24, Male, White/Caucasian,
Straight, Middle class, Mesg ID 10139911201
To
respond
BACK TO TOP
Question:
How does a male tell another male he's attracted to him when he
doesn't know his orientation without offending him or getting beat
up?
POSTED 10/13/99
Matt T., Olympia, WA, United States, 38, Male, Pagan,
White/Caucasian, Bisexual, Laborer, High School Diploma, Lower middle
class, Mesg ID 10111999110600
Responses:
I'll assume this exchange is taking place in a 'neutral'
environment such as a shopping mall or a museum, and not at a gay
bar. First, you must keep in mind that most men are straight and
would not welcome the attentions of other men who confess such
attractions. That having been said, however, there is the significant
possibility that the object of your attraction is indeed gay or
bisexual. Eye contact is important: If the man engages in
longer-than-usual eye contact with you and accompanies it with a
friendly smile, that's a good sign. Striking up some conversation is
the next step: Are you in a music store? Have you noticed that the
object of your affection is interested in a lot of the same recording
artists as you are? You might remark, 'Oh, that's a great CD.'
Different social environments call for breaking the ice in different
ways, but once the conversation has started, you can begin to gauge
how interested he might be in you depending on how much personal
information he chooses to disclose. If you already have a lot of gay
friends, your 'Gaydar' may be sufficiently well-honed for you to
figure out whether the man in question might welcome your attentions.
If you have not confessed your attraction to him, and yet he agrees
to join you later for a beer or a bite to eat, you may have at least
made a new friend. If anything, be discreet, and don't rush
things.
POSTED 10/14/1999
Chuck A., Spring Hill, WV, United States, 40, Male, Gay, Mesg ID
101399111246
To
respond
BACK TO TOP
Question:
Do men ever think their role as the sexual aggressor is something
they might do away with, in the same manner feminism did away with
the expectation that women should all be housewives?
POSTED 6/3/1999
Vanessa, West Palm Beach, FL, United States, <vmloy@yahoo.com>,
21, Female, Mesg ID 639952240
Responses:
Perhaps, although I distinguish between 'aggression,' which may
be innate, and 'aggressive behavior,' which I expect mature people to
control. I always hoped that the women's movement would spark an
equivalent, viable men's movement that would help to free men of the
gargantuan burden of expectation placed on us. What would it mean to
be free of chivalry, the 'code of the West' and other social
strictures? Free of the obligation (based on gender) to fight your
nation's wars? Free to emote in public? Free from other men's
judgment if you're not your family's chief breadwinner? Free of
abused women's assumptions about you? Free to parent in an
unreservedly loving manner?
POSTED 10/14/1999
Jim, Denver, CO, United States, 40, Male, European-American,
Straight, Over 4 Years of College , Middle class, Mesg ID
689950257
To
respond
BACK TO TOP
Question:
Why are some white people so prejudiced and racist against people of
color, yet burn themselves all the time in an effort to get darker?
It doesn't make sense. What is the logic? Is it that this hatred is
really a result of jealousy?
POSTED 10/13/99
Karen, Chicago, IL, United States, 27, Female, Baptist, Black/African
American, Straight, Engineer, 4 Years of College , Middle class, Mesg
ID 10121999105724
Responses:
This is a really excellent observation. As a white person, it
made me think about the difference between skin color and skin
'color.' Skin color being the actual aesthetic qualities of one's
skin, and skin 'color' being the politics of one's race. To my eye,
people with that sort of milk chocolate brown, 'Oprah Winfrey' color
are really a pleasing skin color. There was a writer once who
offended people's sensibilities by referring to Martin Luther King as
being the color of a fine cigar. (The same writer once referred to
Herbert Hoover as the color of a puffed marshmallow.) People
chastised him for the 'cigar' reference, but he said he was just
trying to find a good descriptive adjective. My Northern European
genetics gave me a peach-colored skin, which is fine for absorbing
vitamin A from sunlight in low light latitudes but actually rather
dull from an artist's standpoint. I believe when Caucasians try to
tan they are risking skin cancer to simply locate a better looking
color. However, when people refer to black skin in the social
setting, they are hauling in all the history, politics and social
placement issues. So yes, we are probably jealous of the actual color
of black skin, but not jealous of the politics it brings.
POSTED 10/13/99
Steve, Houston, TX, United States, 39, Male, Atheist,
White/Caucasian, Straight, Executive, Over 4 Years of College , Upper
middle class, Mesg ID 10139985030
I agree with just about everything in Steve's response. To expand
somewhat, it is not just race that is a basis for these feelings.
Look at the hostile feelings between groups in Serbia, Ireland, etc.
I even saw a question on the Y? Forum regarding how Hispanics from
outside the United States can sometimes put American (U.S.) Hispanics
in the 'other' group and discriminate against them. Robert Wright
describes the basis for a lot of this in his book The Moral Animal.
It is a tendency that we all have to some degree, and that we have to
recognize and often struggle to overcome.
POSTED 10/14/99
Lazarus, Lawrenceville, GA, United States, 41, Male, Unitarian,
White/Caucasian, Straight, 4 Years of College , Middle class,Mesg ID
10139974650
I, too, have wondered why, and it goes much further than just
tanning of the skin. Blacks were made fun of in cartoons and comic
strips because of our full (big) lips. Now, whites are having
collagen injected in their lips for fullness. I have seen whites with
dreadlocks, corn rows and braids in their hair. Our urban culture,
i.e., style of dress, dance, and speech is being copied. Strange.
POSTED 10/15/99
Lisa, Detroit, MI, United States, 38, Female, Christian,
Black/African American, Straight, Clerical, 2 Years of College ,
Middle class, Mesg ID 10149932636
I don't think it is a result of jealousy. It is merely done for
cosmetic reasons. For instance, I could say the same thing about
racist blacks who straighten their hair. It seems to me that you are
over-analyzing and making something an issue that wasn't one in the
first place.
POSTED 10/15/99
L. James, Chester, SC, United States, 21, Female, Presbyterian,
White/Caucasian, Straight, Student, 2 Years of College , Middle
class, Mesg ID 10149923657
You pose a good question. As for the logic of tanning, it was
Hollywood that gave us that look. Up until this century, to have pale
skin was a sign of wealth. It meant that you didn't have to work in
the fields or outdoors in the markets; that you had enough money to
spend your time indoors. Some people were so pale that you could see
the blue veins under the skin of their wrists, and that's where the
term 'blue blood' came from. But then Hollywood stars started coming
back from their vacations tanned. And soon movies were scattered with
these tanned bodies and it became hip to be tanned. And this 'fad'
has yet to fall out of style. As for it being envy: Honestly, I don't
think so. I'm Puerto Rican but have Irish coloring, i.e. I'm pale,
and I've never felt jealous of some of my darker cousins. However,
this may be different for other people.
POSTED 10/15/99
Mekki, Virginia Beach, VA, United States, 22, Female, Catholic,
Irish/Puerto Rican, Straight, Mesg ID 10141999124448
As a white male who tans on a regular basis, it really is just a
matter of looking better and healthier. I wouldn't assume that every
white person who tans has some kind of jealousy or prejudice against
black people. Using that kind of logic, maybe black people are
jealous of white people because they can tan. Sounds ridiculous,
doesn't it? I can see how black people might not understand tanning,
but in today's society, most whites and blacks work indoors, as
opposed to outdoors. As a result, we white people tend to not receive
any benefits from the sun that might not be apparent to blacks.
Remember, the sun spits out huge amounts of ultraviolet rays that can
be harmful to people who have not built up a healthy tan. Therefore,
if we are to spend ample amounts of time in the sun, we must prepare
as well. Besides, it looks good, too.
POSTED 10/15/99
Kevin, Birmingham, MI, United States, <kevin@3rddegree.com>,
26, Male, Christian, White/Caucasian, Straight, Graphic Designer,
High School Diploma , Middle class, Mesg ID 1014199995914
To
respond
BACK TO TOP
Question:
On a recent extended stay in Southern California, I was treated with
disrespect and utter hatred. I am from New York and was in California
for two years. To me, the people there are fake. They smile to your
face and talk behind your back. There is no such thing as "real." The
people there don't like New Yorkers or outsiders. They feel like we
don't belong in California. They say people in California are the
nicest, but I say people in New York are nicer and more willing to
help!
POSTED 10/11/99
Vincent A., New York, NY, United States, 26, Male, White/Caucasian, ,
Over 4 Years of College, Upper middle class class, Mesg ID
1010199935911
Responses:
Please don't judge all of California by Southern California.
People go to Los Angeles to 'make it big' in show business, so
consequently you are dealing with cutthroat ambition and inflated
egos. I am from Northern California and also find that a lot (by no
means all) of Southern Californians are superficial, rude and
hell-bent on being 'superstars.' If you want to see a better side of
California, come to Oakland instead! I can attest to the fact that we
are a much nicer, happier breed up here. We do hate to be painted
with the same brush as the people in the southern part of the state,
though!
POSTED 10/13/99
Crystal, Oakland, CA, United States,
<chrysantza@earthlink.net>, 30's, Female, Pagan, Straight,
Office Manager, 2 Years of College , Middle class, Mesg ID
10111999121923
People think a lot of things about California that aren't very
accurate. Such as everybody has blond hair, a nice tan and surfs.
California is a big place, and there are a lot of different types of
people here. I have lived in California all of my life, spending time
in several different places around the state. There are tremendous
differences between one part of the state and another. Every part is
different and has its strengths and weaknesses. I would hate for the
whole state to get a bad reputation just because people in a certain
area act badly.
POSTED 10/13/99
Lucy H., San Jose, CA, United States, 24, Female, Hispanic/Latino,
Engineer, 4 Years of College , Middle class, Mesg ID
1011199923850
Two responses: 1) Southern California is a very transient area.
Half the people here are from back East or the Midwest. My roots have
been here for three generations or so. I guess some of those who
think they have all the rights to this piece of real estate are a tad
resentful of outsiders. But they are a minority. Perhaps the area you
were in and the type of people you were around were factors. 2) Much
of Southern California is blue collar, casual and easygoing (as far
as attitude goes). L.A. itself has a Latino majority, and we are a
bit more hospitable than the majority culture, from what I've seen.
Perhaps you were surrounded by snobs or territorial types (euphemism
for certain 'rough' whites). Southern Cal is definitely not all about
jet-setting yuppies and movie stars.
POSTED 10/13/99
Dan, Los Angeles area, CA, United States, 20, Male, Pentecostal,
Hispanic/Latino, Student/dishwasher, Lower middle class, Mesg ID
1011199972049
I have visited California and New York on a number of occasions,
and I must say New Yorkers are much friendlier. I've had the
opportunity to travel around a lot, and I've met lots of great
people, and New Yorkers were the most surprising. It is a common
'understanding' that they are rude or abrasive or whatever, but I've
found the exact opposite. Californians seem to be pretentious for
some reason. I'm not saying individual Californians are this way.
It's just the feeling I got from the people in general. So no matter
what anyone says, I know the truth about New Yorkers and always look
forward to visiting the city.
POSTED 10/13/99
Kate, Columbus, OH, United States, 28, Female, 4 Years of College,
Mesg ID 10121999124935
I have lived in both places and have heard the same conversations
on both sides of the country. I would just like to offer that what
you expect to see, you will see. I have wonderful friends in
California, and the same here in New York. The two areas are
completely different with respect to energies, topographies and
people. But both have nice people and mean people. I would also like
to know why this question was allowed out there on Y? Forum. It is
not a question, but rather a prejudicially laden statement. I thought
the forum wasn't about that.
POSTED 10/13/99
Matthew C., New York, NY, United States, 41, Male, White/Caucasian,
Gay, Artist, Over 4 Years of College, Middle class,Mesg ID
1012199982608
To
respond
BACK TO TOP
Question:
Why is it that young people seem to think something is wrong with you
if you are a virgin? I'm 46 and proud that my wife is the only woman
I have ever slept with.
POSTED 1/18/1999
Jay K., Charleston, SC, United States, 46, Male, Straight, Mesg ID
189961135
Responses:
I am a 21-year-old virgin, but not for the expected reasons. I
had too many opportunities throughout my teen years to have sex, but
it wasn't the fact that they weren't the 'one' that stopped me. It
was me. The same is true for today. I am a college student, a mentor
and bill payer. One day, when I am able to juggle all of these things
and get everything paid for on time and organized, then maybe I will
have sex. When I do, it will be on my time and my terms. I am not
mature enough at this point to take on the risks that come along with
having sex. I guess what I am saying is that it is important that a
person knows where they are with themselves before they consider
having sex.
POSTED 10/11/1999
Christina, San Diego, CA, United States,
<delan008@coyote.csusm.edu>, 21, Female, Lutheran,
White/Caucasian, Straight, Student/ Mentor, 4 Years of College ,
Upper middle class, Mesg ID 1010199970856
To
respond
BACK TO TOP
Question:
I read a statistic that stated that blacks make up 14 percent of the
population but are responsible for 78 percent of violent crimes. Is
this accurate, and if so, what can we do to change this trend?
POSTED 10/11/1999
Martin, San Diego, CA, United States, 27, Male, Agnostic,
White/Caucasian, Straight, Adventurer, 2 Years of College, Middle
class, Mesg ID 1011199914900
Responses:
Those often-quoted statistics are not exactly a lie, but they do
give a distorted picture that often becomes misused as an excuse by
many for fear of blacks and other non-whites. Most of those
statistics come from the FBI's reports of who gets arrested. Blacks
make up a much higher proportion of that, and even a greater
percentage of the prison and jail population, but they do NOT make up
the majority of actual criminals. The Justice Department makes annual
surveys of crime victims that give a much more accurate picture. By
their figures, about 2/3 to 3/4 of the violent criminals in the
United States are white, not too different from the proportion in the
general population. What this says is that blacks and other
non-whites get the great majority of law enforcement attention, which
has some pretty disturbing implications for the amount of continuing
racism among cops.
POSTED 10/13/1999
A.C.C., W. Lafayette, IN, United States, Mexican and American Indian,
Grad student, Over 4 Years of College, Mesg ID 1011199985335
According to the Statistical Abstract of the United States (1998),
more blacks are victims of crimes, while more whites are offenders.
More whites were charged with serious crimes than blacks (62.2
percent vs. 35.1 percent). My thinking here is that blacks are
portrayed more in the media than whites. And, being minorities, they
are watched more closely.
POSTED 10/15/99
C. Thomas, Renton, WA, United States, 57, Male, White/Native
American, Straight, Photographer, 2 Years of College , Middle class,
Mesg ID 1014199924456
To
respond
BACK TO TOP
Question:
Why do even scientifically educated whites of scientifically advanced
nations believe the Bible, which by its records states that the world
is only 2,500 (approximately) years old? I'm not trying to be
offensive with this question.
POSTED 10/11/1999
S.T. Marban, Madras, , India, 29, Male, Hindu, Asian, Over 4 Years of
College , Upper middle class, Mesg ID 1011199942701
Responses:
We are told to find the comprehensive sense of the Bible. And the
sense is: To keep one's soul healthy. This is done by fulfillment of
the 'Ten Commandments' and the most important commandment 'Love your
Next (everyone) as Yourself.' This is the main message for real
Christians. It is not easy. And somehow we are all betrayers of Jesus
Christ's idea. But it can be rectified by rationalism as well. Most
Christians take the Bible as symbolic.
POSTED 10/12/99
Andreas L., Freising, NA, Germany, <Phil1@gmx.net>, 34, Male,
Catholic, White/Caucasian, High School Diploma , Middle class, Mesg
ID 1012199925219
I was wondering why you find it so significant that some
'scientifically educated whites' believe in the Bible. Does being
white automatically make your thinking more rational and
science-based than if you are non-white?
POSTED 10/13/99
K.R., Atlanta, GA, United States, Mesg ID 1011199982327
I'm as embarrassed as anyone to have to explain to my incredulous
foreign friends that many Americans are still indoctrinated to take
the Bible seriously as a scientific document. I think it arises from
the fact that the first English-speaking Americans were largely
immigrants who, even in the 16th Century, were so religiously
obnoxious that they were kicked out of a series of European countries
before sailing to the New World, where they could worship, oppress,
accuse, excommunicate and burn each other in peace. So, even four
centuries later, we still have, underneath all the layers of
sex-obsessed pop culture, these bizarre Puritan fundamentalist
attitudes - for example, that the Genesis version of creation could
possibly have any relevance to scientific fact. But to get back to
your question: Scientifically educated people, whatever their color
or nation, don't take the Bible as a literal history of creation.
Faith and theology have one aspect and purpose, science has another;
and there's no reason to try to force the two things to fit with the
same set of facts.
POSTED 10/13/99
Erik, Detroit, MI, United States, 35, Male, Christian,
White/Caucasian, Straight, Over 4 Years of College, Mesg ID
10111999101407
I'm a college freshman, so I'm not by any means an expert in the
field, but from what little research I have done, I've found some
emerging ideas (supported by scientific evidence) of a young earth as
described in the Bible. Remember, for years we believed that the sun
revolved around the earth, and people were beaten and imprisoned for
believing otherwise. Just because the majority of people accept
something doesn't prove it is true. Test everything (that's what the
Bible says).
POSTED 10/13/99
Brandon, Winter Park, FL, United States, 18, Male, Christian, Eskimo,
Straight, Student/web designer, High School Diploma, Upper middle
class, Mesg ID 1012199990933
Sincere Bible believers vary. I believe that the Bible is our best
source for information about God and our relationship with God but
was never intended by God or Bible authors to provide information
about geology or even, aside from specific chronicles, history. Thus
it does not bother me that its information about the age of the
planet disagrees with scientific estimates. Speculations about the
age of the earth, by the way, are not even made in the Bible itself
(not in the 'canon' ... you might find an article about this within
the covers of a book that includes the Bible, but the article is not
part of the Bible.) Estimates of 4,000-5,000 years have been
calculated based on events that are described in the Bible and
guesses about the length of time each event represented. I believe
the Bible is true about God because I have been taught that it is by
people I trust and because its truths match my personal experience of
God and observation of the world. By the way, I am white, with a math
degree and an art degree, born a U.S. citizen, and a practicing
Christian. I understand that education, citizenship and beliefs are
important to your question. I am entirely puzzled why you specified
'white.'
POSTED 10/13/99
Chris G., Dallas, TX, United States, Mesg ID 1012199993849
The Bible does not specifically state the age of the earth. People
quoting 2,500 years are simply voicing their interpretation. The fact
is that nobody knows how old the earth is; not even scientists. All
anyone can do is offer their best guess.
POSTED 10/13/99
T.R., San Jose, CA, United States, 17, Female, Mormon,
White/Caucasian, Straight, Student, Less than High School
Diploma,Mesg ID 10129952023
My understanding was that the Bible does not explicitly state that
the world is approximately 2,500 years old, but that James Ussher, a
16-17th Century bishop, calculated the creation of the earth to have
been in 4004 B.C. The number was based on the long 'begat' sections
of the Bible. James Ussher lived in a time when people generally
believed the earth to be relatively young.
POSTED 10/13/99
S.R., Austin, TX, United States, 21, Female, Agnostic,
White/Caucasian, Student, Mesg ID 10129954901
I'm a PhD geologist. The scientific view of the age of the earth
(approximately 4.5 billion years) is based on a vast number of
independent observations interpreted by many different techniques,
such as radioisotope decay, erosion rates of mountains, the fossil
record, comparison with meteorites and moon rock, deposition rates
and thicknesses of sediments, etc. I am astounded by the degree to
which these techniques corroborate each other and, scientifically, I
have confidence in the estimated age. Personally, like most people, I
find it difficult to grasp such an immense span of time, and I am
humbled by it. Although an atheist, I have a profound respect for the
scale and beauty of our world.
POSTED 10/15/99
Sean H., London, NA, United Kingdom, 35, Male, Atheist,
White/Caucasian, Straight, Geologist, Over 4 Years of College , Lower
middle class, Mesg ID 10149995025
To
respond
BACK TO TOP
Copyright
and disclaimer