|
Korean Job Discussion Forums
"The Internet's Meeting Place for ESL/EFL Teachers from Around the World!"
|
| View previous topic :: View next topic |
| Author |
Message |
komerican
Joined: 17 Dec 2006
|
 Posted: Thu Jun 14, 2012 6:05 pm Post subject: |
 |
|
| rchristo10 wrote: |
| komerican wrote: |
| All I'm saying is let's compare apples to apples. In the Korean context you have mostly transient foreigners who may speak some Korean but they are by and large not acculturated into Korean culture. When Westerners talk about "multiculturalism" they are talking about a lengthy process of acculturation which does not exist to any significant extent here on the peninsula. |
You keep using this word, "acculturated." ... |
| Quote: |
| Nevertheless, the history of Western civilization, and in particular the histories of Europe and the United States, are largely defined by patterns of acculturation. |
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Acculturation
| Leon wrote: |
| komerican wrote: |
| northway wrote: |
| Except quite often I'm not, as many of my friends are recent immigrants. |
Dont you think though that your case is unusual for the average Westerner? And of course Western media largely ignores this group of people. |
This is not really true. When I was growing up, many of my friends were first generation immigrants. I was friends with several hispanics, who were always great for teaching you spanish curse words, and also a few Asian/European immigrants. Of course there were a few immigrants who didn't really make any effort to talk to other people, but those that did, in my schools at least, didn't have much trouble making friends, even if their English wasn't perfect. |
Leon, I'm referring to foreigners who have not gone through the domestic school system, for example Western foreigners in Korea. |
|
| Back to top |
|
 |
rchristo10
Joined: 14 Jul 2009
|
| Posted: Thu Jun 14, 2012 8:31 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| komerican wrote: |
| rchristo10 wrote: |
| komerican wrote: |
| All I'm saying is let's compare apples to apples. In the Korean context you have mostly transient foreigners who may speak some Korean but they are by and large not acculturated into Korean culture. When Westerners talk about "multiculturalism" they are talking about a lengthy process of acculturation which does not exist to any significant extent here on the peninsula. |
You keep using this word, "acculturated." ... |
| Quote: |
| Nevertheless, the history of Western civilization, and in particular the histories of Europe and the United States, are largely defined by patterns of acculturation. |
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Acculturation |
If you look carefully at your own reference materials, you'll notice that "acculturation" is usually a systems-level explanation of the interloping of cultures. While on the individual level it initially referred to the "psychological changes induced by cross-cultural exchanges," a term coined and frequently employed in the 1880s. However, today (as detailed in your reference source materials) "acculturation" is only employed "...to address large-scale cultural transactions," which (by the very nature of the term) is difficult, if not impossible to define in an age where even national, ethnic, & racial boundaries are obscured by technological advances & social blending (e.g. the Internet, transportation, ethnicity and even the terms of citizenship).
In other words, without delving too far into a treatise on the necessity of semantic jargon to get your point across: what do you exactly mean by "acculturation?" Wikipedia does little to help in terms of how and why you're using the term.
The boundaries and significance of such outdated terminology are unclear and rather useless today.
Would, for example, Koreans be acculturated to the "West" because they wear Western clothing and no longer dawn their Goryeo Period Po? And even if they were--and we were to presuppose that this notion of "acculturation" would get us anywhere--what culture would this "West" represent as a country? The temporal & spacial boundaries simply don't exist with such a term; that is, to explain what would and would not be considered a component of "acculturation" is rather impossible.
My point being, it's difficult to understand exactly what you mean. My question is not one at the semantic jargon you employ, but rather the underlying meanings behind that jargon and how they are (if at all) tagged to your assumptions--assumptions on (apparently) what it means to be Korean.
Can a black woman from the Bronx, who spent most of her life in Korea, be acculturated to the Korean society? And at what point would her acculturation matter if the people living around her never recognized her existence as such? What makes us (you, or others) able to judge the level of acculturation a person has experienced--and even if we could--how much would our judgement matter in the end?
Isn't the whole point that people--regardless of creed, race, and ethnicity--deserve a level of respect that has nothing to do with whether they assimilate or "fit in?"
It's not even clear what you mean by "transient." Many (I honestly don't know the percentage) foreigners come as "transient" workers and end up staying for the rest of their lives. How do we differentiate between them and why would we need to? And, if we treat everyone with the same sense of dignity and give them the same respect, then why would their initial purpose or reason for being here matter at all? Do you seriously believe that "transient" foreigners as oppose to "long-timers" deserve different levels of respect when it comes to how they are treated by mainstream media?
By the way, Edward Said lost the battle after the invention of the television; "Westerners believe..." nearly aways shouts: "He's a hack." |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
ovid
Joined: 30 May 2007
|
| Posted: Thu Jun 14, 2012 9:58 pm Post subject: |
|
|
i'll start off by quoting one of my favorite comedians, louis ck.
"I'm not saying that white is better, I'm saying that being white is clearly better, who could even argue?"
it is very true that Asians have had dealt pretty huge blows with racism in the US and probably a lot of the western world (i can only speak for the US). Yes, asians have been around the US for a long time and only represent marginal parts of a very discriminating media. a media that prefers putting whites in roles that were meant or built for asians. I mean, c'mon.. goku being played by that douche from lost?
however, you've missed the point entirely by the op.... this isn't about racism in the western world, it's about the discrimination in korea. any minority who feels marginalized feels victory in the small triumphs of other minorities breaking ground.
this is true for blacks, muslims, asians, gays, and yes, even whites. it's a great thing to support because hopefully, that support will hit people who've never felt it and know how important that support is. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Andromeda
Joined: 09 Feb 2012
Location: Woodstock, GA
|
| Posted: Tue Jun 19, 2012 8:24 am Post subject: |
|
|
| Perhaps some cultures will become "cafeteria racists", so to speak. Different races/cultures decide exactly which other races/cultures they do or don't want assimilated into there societies. Just some conjecture. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
jfromtheway
Joined: 20 Nov 2010
|
| Posted: Tue Jun 19, 2012 9:12 am Post subject: |
|
|
| Andromeda wrote: |
| Perhaps some cultures will become "cafeteria racists", so to speak. Different races/cultures decide exactly which other races/cultures they do or don't want assimilated into there societies. Just some conjecture. |
And some poor conjecture, indeed. Korea is exclusive enough. Toughening up the already strict status quo regarding issues of multiculturalism, social/economic openness, and the assimilation of other "races/cultures" sets a bad precedent for any country that wants to progress socially and economically. Korea has been able to strive largely due to the military protection and trade opportunities that have been afforded to it by the US. Korea may look like a futuristic country from across the ocean, but socially, on the ground, it's pretty medieval. Few ever assimilate fully, because it's a small, kind of crappy country in a lot of ways. But, racially linked limitations on outsiders coming in, is the last thing Korea needs. Attempts to stop the inevitable globalization of any country is generally a step backwards. Ten fold for this one. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
NilesQ
Joined: 27 Nov 2006
|
| Posted: Tue Jun 19, 2012 9:20 am Post subject: |
|
|
I believe that racism is the action of treating people differently because of their race/ethnicity. This action is usually brought about by the belief in racial stereotypes; seeing a person as a part of a group with common, predetermined characteristics as oppossed to a unique individual.
So, I believe that racial stereotypes are the cause of racism.
We will never get rid of racial stereotypes because most cultures cling to the ones they view as positive so strongly. Any Korean will tell you how respectful and polite Koreans are quite proudly. However, if you bring up something about the stereotype that Korean men have smaller "tools" than other races, be prepared for a backlash. Both are equally racial stereotypes, but only the latter would usually be seen as inappropriate.
People seem not to be oppossed to stereotypes, but rather people saying negative things about them. So, if racial stereotypes are seen as acceptable in any format, we'll always have racism. We will group people together based on race and treat them according to sterotypical beliefs. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Andromeda
Joined: 09 Feb 2012
Location: Woodstock, GA
|
| Posted: Tue Jun 19, 2012 2:38 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| jfromtheway wrote: |
| Andromeda wrote: |
| Perhaps some cultures will become "cafeteria racists", so to speak. Different races/cultures decide exactly which other races/cultures they do or don't want assimilated into there societies. Just some conjecture. |
And some poor conjecture, indeed. Korea is exclusive enough. Toughening up the already strict status quo regarding issues of multiculturalism, social/economic openness, and the assimilation of other "races/cultures" sets a bad precedent for any country that wants to progress socially and economically. Korea has been able to strive largely due to the military protection and trade opportunities that have been afforded to it by the US. Korea may look like a futuristic country from across the ocean, but socially, on the ground, it's pretty medieval. Few ever assimilate fully, because it's a small, kind of crappy country in a lot of ways. But, racially linked limitations on outsiders coming in, is the last thing Korea needs. Attempts to stop the inevitable globalization of any country is generally a step backwards. Ten fold for this one. |
i can appreciate what your saying. what I'm trying to say here is that of course cultures will take in other cultures. But, they may do it differently, they might be selective. An example- Korean men who might be more likely to marry a Vietnamese woman than an Anglo woman. Your thoughts? |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Los Angeloser
Joined: 26 Aug 2010
Location: Korea
|
| Posted: Tue Jun 19, 2012 3:02 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| I don't see how it was a response to the MBC piece? The MBC show degraded foreign men. The SBS piece was about "a" foreign woman. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
rchristo10
Joined: 14 Jul 2009
|
| Posted: Tue Jun 19, 2012 7:21 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| Los Angeloser wrote: |
| I don't see how it was a response to the MBC piece? The MBC show degraded foreign men. The SBS piece was about "a" foreign woman. |
See NilesQ's first paragraph above. Nice name, btw.  |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
fermentation
Joined: 22 Jun 2009
|
| Posted: Tue Jun 19, 2012 7:31 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| NilesQ wrote: |
We will never get rid of racial stereotypes because most cultures cling to the ones they view as positive so strongly. Any Korean will tell you how respectful and polite Koreans are quite proudly. However, if you bring up something about the stereotype that Korean men have smaller "tools" than other races, be prepared for a backlash. Both are equally racial stereotypes, but only the latter would usually be seen as inappropriate.
|
Is it a stereotype if it's the truth? Not exactly a secret that asian men in general have smaller equipment compared to white or black dudes. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Steelrails
Joined: 12 Mar 2009
Location: Earth, Solar System
|
| Posted: Tue Jun 19, 2012 8:28 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| rchristo10 wrote: |
| Los Angeloser wrote: |
| I don't see how it was a response to the MBC piece? The MBC show degraded foreign men. The SBS piece was about "a" foreign woman. |
See NilesQ's first paragraph above. Nice name, btw. |
Still nothing shows that it was in any way influenced by the MBC event. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
NilesQ
Joined: 27 Nov 2006
|
| Posted: Wed Jun 20, 2012 5:20 am Post subject: |
|
|
| fermentation wrote: |
| NilesQ wrote: |
We will never get rid of racial stereotypes because most cultures cling to the ones they view as positive so strongly. Any Korean will tell you how respectful and polite Koreans are quite proudly. However, if you bring up something about the stereotype that Korean men have smaller "tools" than other races, be prepared for a backlash. Both are equally racial stereotypes, but only the latter would usually be seen as inappropriate.
|
Is it a stereotype if it's the truth? Not exactly a secret that asian men in general have smaller equipment compared to white or black dudes. |
Still a stereotype because it's grouping them together and assuming it to be true for all. Ive seen some enviable schlongs at saunas here, so it isnt true for all. I have lost that belief due to personal experience. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
rchristo10
Joined: 14 Jul 2009
|
| Posted: Wed Jun 20, 2012 5:43 am Post subject: |
|
|
The cool thing about it is that SBS didn't attempt to stereotype the woman. They're starting to do that more often I've noticed. They're picking up random foreigners (who speak Korean) asking them their views, and there's less of that what-does-the-foreigner-who-looks-very-different-from-us approach to the interviews.
It's cool to see people being presented as people, regardless of their ethnicity or mother tongue. I'm pretty optimistic that this will become more of a trend that will help break some of the prejudices that our progenies take into.
Yeah, the next generations will still have their prejudices. But I think--even if just in media--try to avoid using stereotypes will give people more options in terms of which prejudices they choose to believe. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
12ax7
Joined: 07 Nov 2009
|
| Posted: Wed Jun 20, 2012 5:59 am Post subject: |
|
|
| dongjak wrote: |
| I love okra! Where can you buy it in Korea? Maybe I havent looked very hard, but I've never seen it before. |
It's not exactly common. We only bought some once. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
komerican
Joined: 17 Dec 2006
|
| Posted: Wed Jun 20, 2012 5:36 pm Post subject: |
|
|
I'm sure you can read the article rchristo10. You haven't made a convincing argument that acculturation is irrelevant to the modern world. You couldn't sound more patronizing in your "complimenting" SBS, lol. What interests me is how you're so unaware how patronizing you are! lol.
Clearly, there are different stages of assimilation which afford different levels of recognition by the dominant members of a society. Being educated through the public education system is the primary way to "become" a Korean. Eslers of course have never wanted to be acculturalized. But of course assimilation at work can happen but not cultural assimilation which is more important.
The quote below from the article pretty much outlines my point.
| Quote: |
The key to achieving perfect functional fit and communication, according to Gudykunst and Kim (2003) is for the immigrant to "unlearn" and "deculturize" (pp. 360, 379-382) themselves and avoid "ethnic communication activities" (p. 368). According to Gudykunst and Kim (2003), unfortunately some people have personalities that are inherently less amenable to such deculturization and training and they tend to be "unrealistic," "functionally unfit," and "aggressive" (pp. 368�372). Presumably, since Gudykunst and Kim (2003) define these negative traits as "personality predispositions" (p. 368) or "adaptive predisposition" (p. 370) ...Gudykunst and Kim (2003) go more for forced compliance via public education as they argue that the new kind of better person and world they promote can be created by "programming" peoples' minds (p. 358) through intense socialization so that the cultural patterns they (Gudykunst and Kim) evaluate as good are "etched into our nervous systems and become part of our personalities and behavior" (p |
This is the process of acculturation as it exists in the West but not in Korea obviously for historical reasons. And of course all your patronizing comments cannot circumvent this process. There is no new model of acculturation that you allude to. The interview of the foreign women is pretty meaningless and frankly I have never even seen that in all the years I lived in the West.
You�re comments also carry little weight since your are imposing an arbitrary standard on Koreans that you seem to be making up as you go along, lol. As a Westerner, instead of taking this haughty, hectoring tone with Koreans you should be extremely humble since the record on this so called multiculturalism in the West is terrible. Korea should not be the test bed for your voodoo, crackpot ideas on multiculturalism.
| rchristo10 wrote: |
| komerican wrote: |
| rchristo10 wrote: |
| komerican wrote: |
| All I'm saying is let's compare apples to apples. In the Korean context you have mostly transient foreigners who may speak some Korean but they are by and large not acculturated into Korean culture. When Westerners talk about "multiculturalism" they are talking about a lengthy process of acculturation which does not exist to any significant extent here on the peninsula. |
You keep using this word, "acculturated." ... |
| Quote: |
| Nevertheless, the history of Western civilization, and in particular the histories of Europe and the United States, are largely defined by patterns of acculturation. |
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Acculturation |
If you look carefully at your own reference materials, you'll notice that "acculturation" is usually a systems-level explanation of the interloping of cultures. While on the individual level it initially referred to the "psychological changes induced by cross-cultural exchanges," a term coined and frequently employed in the 1880s. However, today (as detailed in your reference source materials) "acculturation" is only employed "...to address large-scale cultural transactions," which (by the very nature of the term) is difficult, if not impossible to define in an age where even national, ethnic, & racial boundaries are obscured by technological advances & social blending (e.g. the Internet, transportation, ethnicity and even the terms of citizenship).
In other words, without delving too far into a treatise on the necessity of semantic jargon to get your point across: what do you exactly mean by "acculturation?" Wikipedia does little to help in terms of how and why you're using the term.
The boundaries and significance of such outdated terminology are unclear and rather useless today.
Would, for example, Koreans be acculturated to the "West" because they wear Western clothing and no longer dawn their Goryeo Period Po? And even if they were--and we were to presuppose that this notion of "acculturation" would get us anywhere--what culture would this "West" represent as a country? The temporal & spacial boundaries simply don't exist with such a term; that is, to explain what would and would not be considered a component of "acculturation" is rather impossible.
My point being, it's difficult to understand exactly what you mean. My question is not one at the semantic jargon you employ, but rather the underlying meanings behind that jargon and how they are (if at all) tagged to your assumptions--assumptions on (apparently) what it means to be Korean.
Can a black woman from the Bronx, who spent most of her life in Korea, be acculturated to the Korean society? And at what point would her acculturation matter if the people living around her never recognized her existence as such? What makes us (you, or others) able to judge the level of acculturation a person has experienced--and even if we could--how much would our judgement matter in the end?
Isn't the whole point that people--regardless of creed, race, and ethnicity--deserve a level of respect that has nothing to do with whether they assimilate or "fit in?"
It's not even clear what you mean by "transient." Many (I honestly don't know the percentage) foreigners come as "transient" workers and end up staying for the rest of their lives. How do we differentiate between them and why would we need to? And, if we treat everyone with the same sense of dignity and give them the same respect, then why would their initial purpose or reason for being here matter at all? Do you seriously believe that "transient" foreigners as oppose to "long-timers" deserve different levels of respect when it comes to how they are treated by mainstream media?
By the way, Edward Said lost the battle after the invention of the television; "Westerners believe..." nearly aways shouts: "He's a hack." |
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
|
|
You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You cannot vote in polls in this forum
|
|
FAQ
Search
Memberlist
Usergroups
Register
Profile
Log in to check your private messages
Log in
