If something as simple as sitting with your legs crossed is an insult in your culture, then your culture is stupid.

meanmutton: Okay, I'm thinking -- what could possibly be similar in our culture? Accidentally using the N-word to refer to President Obama? Using the middle finger to point to the ceiling or something? Talking with food in his mouth? Slapping Secretary Clinton on the ass?

Giving a unrequested backrub to Angela Merkel.

Non-story
Tejler crossed his legs, by mistake, oops
Then Ahmadinejad crossed his legs too

This is a way of covering an impolite gesture, by copying it.
It's a way of saying, "No big deal."

I'm not crazy about Iran, but Ahmadinejad did the diplomatically correct thing.

/is Benghazi a scandal yet?

It seems like a good diplomat could look at a situation and say "Gee, that person didn't grow up in my culture. Maybe I can cut him some slack over him not knowing every stupid little local idiosyncrasy. You know, so we can actually get some work done and quit pretending we're deliberately insulting each other through body language."

whidbey: Yes, they're not people, they're "children" to you. How enlightened of you. This is why nationbuilding fails, BTW.

If you're insulted because you've seen the bottom of somebody's shoe, yes, you are an arrogant, petty child, and THAT mindset is "why nation-building fails." NOT because you choose to be insulted by a gesture with no more meaning than running your fingers through your hair, but because you look for any petty reason at all to literally explode with stupidity and hatred. Religion is the most lame excuse for bigotry there could ever be. It's like arguing to the point of crossing swords over who is the sexiest Disney Princess: Belle, Jasmine, or Ariel.

maybe you realize that the dude is from Sweden and didn't mean anything by it. Part of me respecting your culture is you respecting mine.

BigNumber12: The action goes against the custom of some Muslim countries, which considers shoes unclean because they are 'closer to the ground, closer to the devil and farther away from God'.


Grow the fark up, you children.

We're no better. As a matter of fact, we can get much, much more immature over the pettiest of things.

Someone calls someone else a bad name and we go all apeshiat. A nipple shows up and we lament the horrors of sex. My precious snowflake hurt herself on the playground, let's ban playground equipment!

I have better reasons to not like certain cultures...this is a funnier one.

stoning girls, lack of education, inequality, boys as sex toys (but it's not homosexual; it's the way it is), etc., etc.

"Exposing the soles of feet to public officials is a gesture that can land offenders in prison in the extremist Islamic state."

WTF is wrong with these people, seriously.

They should be more tolerant to Swedish culture and other foreign culture. Iran's cultural imperialism is disgusting.

The action goes against the custom of some Muslim countries, which considers shoes unclean because they are 'closer to the ground, closer to the devil and farther away from God'.

I never understood this, seeing as those same countries drop to the ground 6 times a day, putting their face right on the ground, to pray.

Raoul Eaton: give me doughnuts: If something as simple as sitting with your legs crossed is an insult in your culture, then your culture is stupid.

Well, no. I could just as well say that if showing someone your middle finger is an insult, then your culture is stupid. Or making an "O" shape with your forefinger and thumb (not a problem in the U.S., where it actually means "OK," but a big insult in some other places). The list is long. Every culture has behavior that is meaningful to members and seems completely arbitrary to outsiders. And the soles of the feet thing isn't that unusual. I first ran across it as an issue in Thai culture.

THIS.

Culture isn't stupid, it's COMPLETELY arbitrary. In some cultures, burping after a meal is a sign of respect for the chef, in others, it's considered vulgar. Is either interpretation empirically correct? No.

whidbey: BigNumber12: whidbey: Sorry, just don't care for your attitude.

Disengagement from the debate. Got it.

No, I still think you're a prime example of the Ugly American who wants to shove Americanism down everyone's throats.

You aren't even capable of seeing this incident from any other perspective.

Still, a valid point has been raised: Shouldn't Ahmadinejad, as a well seasoned world traveler, understand that in non-Muslim countries, revealing the bottom of your shoe means absolutely nothing, and NOT responded with an in-kind "insult"? Shouldn't he know that the returned insult also means absolutely nothing?

It seems to me that there are a couple of possible reasons:
1. He wasn't really insulted, but did what he did for "the folks back home" who WOULD take it as an insult (after all he would not be the first leader to think the common people are not that sophisticated)
2. He has what amounts to a "persecution complex" and is incapable of NOT taking it as an insult (which is what most people here are deriding him about, I think)

Understanding of cultures works BOTH ways - sorry, but you can't argue with that. He should have simply said "Mr. Ambassador, you may not know it, but showing the bottom of your shoe to someone from my country is considered an insult, could you please place you feet on the ground"

meanmutton: Germany didn't attack the US; we attacked them.

What about when they bombed pearl harbor?

whidbey: Abuse Liability: whidbey: meanmutton: whidbey: BigNumber12: The action goes against the custom of some Muslim countries, which considers shoes unclean because they are 'closer to the ground, closer to the devil and farther away from God'.


Grow the fark up, you children.


Yes, they're not people, they're "children" to you. How enlightened of you. This is why nationbuilding fails, BTW.

Worked just fine in Japan and Germany.

It wasn't "nationbuilildng." It was reconstruction of two conquered countries we went to war with.

"Nationbuilding" refers to farking around in a country that didn't attack us, and attempting to tinker with it until we can contain it.

Not even the same thing, though superficially similar.

Oh, I think both of those nations would disagree that there wasn't a substantial American impact on their culture Link

Also, your definition of nation building seems to be one I'm unfamiliar with as there doesn't appear to be a prerequisite for being attacked and/or attacking.

Whether it's my definition or not, I believe I explained the distinction, and Germany and Japan aren't ANYTHING like what attempted in Afghanistan/Iraq, etc.

Conquered the country, deposed a vile dictator, replaced it with a democratic form of government, stuck around and provided military support to the new democratic government? The only real difference I see is that our military still occupies Germany and Japan but we left Iraq.

BigNumber12: give me doughnuts: If something as simple as sitting with your legs crossed is an insult in your culture, then your culture is stupid.

Idiot. Every grown-up knows that all cultures are equal.

Nope. Some of them really suck.

I can almost get the left hand thing, but this is just dumb.


Plus if it is so rude and offensive then these crybabies have no room to complain when their leader (who knows it is an insult) does it back.

Primitive screw heads are primitive screw heads...who would have figured.

Sounds like some BS from the Iranian state news agency. Even if it's not... meh. If that's all it takes then no wonder your country is a theocratic shiathole. Their priorities are ridiculously out of whack. Not that we didn't already know that...

Yeah let's pretend that their culture is the only one that has old idiosyncrasies and a list perceived social insults that no one could anticipate unless raised within that culture. Let's pretend.

Part of diplomacy is understanding and getting past these unintentional errors.

whidbey: BigNumber12: whidbey: I don't see any ideas worth refuting.

Since your reading comprehension seems to be lacking, I'll repeat myself.

1) This guy is their chief diplomat. Why is it unreasonable to expect him to realize that the particular superstition that has upset him is held by a minority of the world's population, and the person he's speaking to is probably unaware of breaching it? Should we be thrilled that their chief diplomat is playing "insult swap" with someone who's completely unaware that they're even playing?

2) Give me an example of our Head of State doing the equivalent of this.


That's it. If you're so obviously justified, responding without namecalling should be simple for you.

Sorry, just don't care for your attitude. So you don't care for this particular insult.

Stop being a jackass about it. You sound like some Republican threatening to bomb Iran into being a democratic nation we can control.

Whidbey's debate tactics

Joe Blowme: sprawl15: CheekyMonkey: sprawl15: whidbey: We reconstructed Japan and Germany after a war.

This.

We didn't build the nation, we reconstructed it. HUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUGE difference.

I'm sure you fancy yourself quite a witty chap, but to the rest of the world, the fact that you can't even be bothered to learn the terminology of world history & politics makes you sound like a dunce. You are akin to a Creationist who doesn't even understand what a scientific theory or the Scientific Sethod is, but insists that Intelligent Design is science.

ID is far more scientific than that idolatrous worship of Darwin's corpse. It tries to find out how and why God did a bunch of interesting and beautiful things while neo-Darwinists just say CHANCE DID IT LOL.

As opposed to the big bang theory where you have to just accept on faith something came from nothing and not question how, like the scientific method dictates

The entire point of science is FINDING OUT HOW, dipshiat. I have never, EVER, heard a scientist say "DON'T QUESTION HOW, JUST BELIEVE AND FOLLOW ME!".

tinyarena: [i2.wp.com image 408x258]

Non-story
Tejler crossed his legs, by mistake, oops
Then Ahmadinejad crossed his legs too

This is a way of covering an impolite gesture, by copying it.
It's a way of saying, "No big deal."

I'm not crazy about Iran, but Ahmadinejad did the diplomatically correct thing.



No. Ahmahdinnerjacket crossed his legs because he would be viewed as weak by Iran's answer to the Jerry Springer audience if he didn't.

PsiChick: Erm, no. The ambassador accidentally flipped him off, which is actually an insult because it's like saying 'yeah, I didn't read my briefing on you guys and thus don't know something that children in your country know, even though that's my job'. So the guy flipped him off back. Which I find totally appropriate.

Do people "accidently" extend their arm towards someone raise their middle finger and hold it?

Casually crossing your legs is a normal and comfortable thing in western countries (and not uncommon in Egypt).

You may think it is appropriate to take offense to an action you know is natural to the person you are talking to, but most grown ups expect a little more out of their leaders.

BigNumber12: A furious Mr Ahmadinejad returned the gesture and also crossed his legs 'in response to the impoliteness of his interlocutor', as the Iranian news agency Asiran put it.


Dear Sweden,

This is the sort of "tolerance" that you're falling all over yourself to tolerate. Enjoy.

Love,

Realistic People

Erm, no. The ambassador accidentally flipped him off, which is actually an insult because it's like saying 'yeah, I didn't read my briefing on you guys and thus don't know something that children in your country know, even though that's my job'. So the guy flipped him off back. Which I find totally appropriate.

If this were an average citizen, I'd get the laughter, but this guy's job is to know this shiat. That makes this offensive. Imagine if your IT guy didn't know what a keyboard was, or your plumber didn't have a wrench.

whidbey: BigNumber12: whidbey: I don't see any ideas worth refuting.

Since your reading comprehension seems to be lacking, I'll repeat myself.

1) This guy is their chief diplomat. Why is it unreasonable to expect him to realize that the particular superstition that has upset him is held by a minority of the world's population, and the person he's speaking to is probably unaware of breaching it? Should we be thrilled that their chief diplomat is playing "insult swap" with someone who's completely unaware that they're even playing?

2) Give me an example of our Head of State doing the equivalent of this.


That's it. If you're so obviously justified, responding without namecalling should be simple for you.

Sorry, just don't care for your attitude. So you don't care for this particular insult.

Stop being a jackass about it. You sound like some Republican threatening to bomb Iran into being a democratic nation we can control.

You are a bigot

Abuse Liability: Its called cultural relativism and this guy is drowning in it.

The whole point of cultural relativism was to examine past societies throughout history. Unfortunately, the politically correct crowd of morons decided we should also use it when examinining other cultures that currently exist in today's world. "You can't denounce another society's differences because you don't understand it." Like hell. Stoning women because they were raped is evil. Period. No wiggle room here.

My sister tried using cultural relativism on me once. I responded with, "then why are you active in stopping female circumcision in other countries? Why don't you respect their culture?" Shut her the hell up.

big farkin deal. lots of asian cultures have that practice. you wouldnt sit with your soles of your feet pointing at martial arts instructor either.


Diplomat should have known better, given his position, yet it is likely an innocent mistake.


I have a feeling we're being trolled by this article.

all we have is this article to say that buddywhatshisname was even angry to begin with.

Abuse Liability: sprawl15: whidbey: We reconstructed Japan and Germany after a war.

This.

We didn't build the nation, we reconstructed it. HUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUGE difference.

No, if anybody had read the link, they would be aware we didn't merely reconstuct Japan. We replaced the government and placed a multitude of military (and other) sanctions ensuring our safety and producing a more cohesive, united population in the aftermath of a terrible war. The very definition of nation building. why... do... I... continue... arguing...

thatsthejoke.jpg

whidbey: Abuse Liability: whidbey: Abuse Liability: I should take one last parting shot though. It seems that while there is an adequate time between my posts for thought, reflection and a response. Your replies fly out faster than i can refresh my browser indicating either
1.) you're incredibly quick-witted and informed or 2.) you're firing out replies because your mindset won't be changed and you're already making your next argument before you even see someone's comment.

I know number 2 is pretty common for Fark in general. Should we entertain the possibility of number 1?

lrn2quotebutton

Dodging the issue again. suprising. See how fast I hammered out that response?

OK. So find me the document showing that Iraq surrendered to the US and we'll talk.

Otherwise, there is a distinct difference in what we're talking about. And stop being so condescending.

You mean because of a single document? A thousand parallels and because there is no "surrender" there is no "comparison." Once again, I will repeat that attacking/conquering/surrendering have very little to do with the act of nation-building. (below pulled from wikipedia)

Nation-building refers to the process of constructing or structuring a national identity using the power of the state. This process aims at the unification of the people within the state so that it remains politically stable and viable in the long run. Nation-building can involve the use of propaganda or major infrastructure development to foster social harmony and economic growth.
Definition: The development of behaviors, values, language, institutions, and physical structures that elucidate history and culture, concretize and protect the present, and insure the future identity and independence of the nation. -wiki

give me doughnuts: If something as simple as sitting with your legs crossed is an insult in your culture, then your culture is stupid.

Well, no. I could just as well say that if showing someone your middle finger is an insult, then your culture is stupid. Or making an "O" shape with your forefinger and thumb (not a problem in the U.S., where it actually means "OK," but a big insult in some other places). The list is long. Every culture has behavior that is meaningful to members and seems completely arbitrary to outsiders. And the soles of the feet thing isn't that unusual. I first ran across it as an issue in Thai culture.

sprawl15: whidbey: We reconstructed Japan and Germany after a war.

This.

We didn't build the nation, we reconstructed it. HUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUGE difference.

No, if anybody had read the link, they would be aware we didn't merely reconstuct Japan. We replaced the government and placed a multitude of military (and other) sanctions ensuring our safety and producing a more cohesive, united population in the aftermath of a terrible war. The very definition of nation building. why... do... I... continue... arguing...

bobbette: Cultural customs are cultural customs, people. It would be rude if someone came to America and picked their nose or scratched their ass while meeting with Obama.

Yes it would, but you wouldn't expect the prsident to furiously pick their nose back, do you?

bobbette: The Swedish ambassador did insult his hosts in the meeting. Given that he is a professional diplomat, he farked up

Nobody is doubting that, but it is still fair to point out this is a stupid insult that makes sitting in a circle comfotably (as well as many other interactions in any modern city) impossible, and that the presidents response was very childish.

H31N0US: Who doesn't know that exposing the soles of your feet is considered an insult in most of the Muslim world?

Yeah, I learned that in '97-ish in a tiny southern Indiana elementary school. Thought it was one of those bits of trivia everybody picked up on at some point.

Cultural customs are cultural customs, people. It would be rude if someone came to America and picked their nose or scratched their ass while meeting with Obama.

The Swedish ambassador did insult his hosts in the meeting. Given that he is a professional diplomat, he farked up.

probesport: meanmutton: Germany didn't attack the US; we attacked them.

They were stupid enough to declare war on the USA after Pearl Harbor, opening themselves to that problem.

meanmutton: whidbey: meanmutton: whidbey: BigNumber12: The action goes against the custom of some Muslim countries, which considers shoes unclean because they are 'closer to the ground, closer to the devil and farther away from God'.


Grow the fark up, you children.


Yes, they're not people, they're "children" to you. How enlightened of you. This is why nationbuilding fails, BTW.

Worked just fine in Japan and Germany.

It wasn't "nationbuilildng." It was reconstruction of two conquered countries we went to war with.

"Nationbuilding" refers to farking around in a country that didn't attack us, and attempting to tinker with it until we can contain it.

Not even the same thing, though superficially similar.

Germany didn't attack the US; we attacked them.

not technically true. They were at war US allies, the US was duty bound to declare war.

WhoGAS: Yes. I can find examples.

No, I will not post them here to placate your desire to argue for argument's sake. We all know that no matter what I post, the argument will change and you already know the data you've requested.

That sounds legit.

whidbey: meanmutton: Oh come on, it's this or more of the racism...

What people say "nation building doesn't work", they generally are talking about Serbia, Iraq, and Afghanistan -- all countries which we conquered and then "nation-built".

Sure we did. Now run along.

Do you have a different definition that only you are privy to than conquor? We destroyed their military, deployed occupying military forces, destroyed their government, built a new government in our liking, and then left the countries. In Serbia, they elected a new government without Milosovic in charge but the others, we eliminated their entire governments and started from scratch.

whidbey: meanmutton: whidbey: BigNumber12: The action goes against the custom of some Muslim countries, which considers shoes unclean because they are 'closer to the ground, closer to the devil and farther away from God'.


Grow the fark up, you children.


Yes, they're not people, they're "children" to you. How enlightened of you. This is why nationbuilding fails, BTW.

Worked just fine in Japan and Germany.

It wasn't "nationbuilildng." It was reconstruction of two conquered countries we went to war with.

"Nationbuilding" refers to farking around in a country that didn't attack us, and attempting to tinker with it until we can contain it.

Not even the same thing, though superficially similar.

Germany didn't attack the US; we attacked them.

She must really give them a fat-wa...

NEXT TIME go with this.....

 
  

whidbey: BigNumber12: The action goes against the custom of some Muslim countries, which considers shoes unclean because they are 'closer to the ground, closer to the devil and farther away from God'.


Grow the fark up, you children.


Yes, they're not people, they're "children" to you. How enlightened of you. This is why nationbuilding fails, BTW.

Worked just fine in Japan and Germany.

When you visit an islamic shiathole you better learn the proper tribal moronic customs. He should have leaned to Ahmadinejad and whisper "you know i'm gay, right ? and how is your good wife doing ?" to really piss him off.

Oh for fark's sake. Grow up and clean the sand out of your vaginas.

Odd, a pakistani gentleman assured me that the gesture was only insulting to country rubes that might have tracked poop in on their shoes.

Protesters threw their shoes at leaders, or used the heels to smash images of them, during the wave of Arab spring revolutions over the past two years.

I wonder if they keep old shoes for the purpose of throwing those shoes at protests. It would be pretty stupid to throw your new Air Jordans into a crowd every time you get enraged about something.

Who doesn't know that exposing the soles of your feet is considered an insult in most of the Muslim world?

BigNumber12: The action goes against the custom of some Muslim countries, which considers shoes unclean because they are 'closer to the ground, closer to the devil and farther away from God'.


Grow the fark up, you children.

Honestly, I always thought it was because shoes are, you know, dirty from walking in the filth all day.

jaylectricity: Maybe he MEANT to do it!

We can only hope.

ITGreen: Hey, Ahmadinejad!

[www.girlwithnoname.com image 350x400] 

COME AT ME MO!!!!!!

Wouldn't want to be impolite to Iran. They are so nice to everybody.

REALLY? How else to hide his boner for Mr Ahmadinejad?