- Forums
- Cross Site
- The Asylum
- Vestiges of barbarism
Vestiges of barbarismFollow
Kohonas, big ones, to stand there ready to fight some unknown flying noisy beast the size of a helicopter armed only with a bow and arrows.
Smasharoo wrote:
Some uncontacted groups have had isolated encounters with westerners, this particular group hasn't, only with a related tribe.
Oh for @#%^ sake. I've never had encounters with the Chinese. Only through Walmart. Someone give me money.
I wish the plane had just dropped measles infected blankets on them and saved time.
But that comparison isn't even meaningful.
Turin wrote:
Seriously, what the f*ck nature?
Until someone speaks to them and verifies that they have never been contacted by an "outside" will I believe they have truly been isolated. And at which point, the discussion will become moot. Or not moot depending on which definition you want to go with.
But they haven't. Where is your evidence that this specific tribe have had contact with the outside world, b/c before 2007, people had no documentation that they existed?
Oh, sorry, is it my job to show that they have had contact with the outside world when there's absolutely no evidence that they haven't? I wasn't aware. Do I have to show evidence that they can't fly around on palm tree leaves trailing red and white and blue smoke from their ********, too?
I do know what uncontacted means.
You mean now, after I told you? Sure.
What I am saying is that there is a variation amongst tribes themselves, including those with a low level of contact and those few that are really uncontacted.
There are virtually none who are *actually* "uncontacted". Ie: Have no idea that the modern world exists. INCLUDING this group.
You are the one saying that this organization was deliberately deceiving the public and I'm saying that they are raising money, but it doesn't necessarily discredit the organization.
No, first you said it wasn't a PR campaign. Then when it was demonstrated that it was you've changed your mind and decided that because it's a PR campaign that doesn't make it evil. Which no one ever argued it was. There is no moral highground to take here. You're in the wrong forum for that.
No, you are fantasizing about intentions and that by thinking it can only possibly be romanticizing, says alot about you and how you conceptualize the world.
Yeah, it says I conceptualize it accurately, instead of being suckered into pathetic "human interest" stories about the poor, poor, noble brutes who might die a terrible death if they're exposed to the flu. Oh, let us all gather up our wealth and donate a small portion to them so that they may continue to instead die from simple infections when they cut themselves on a tree.
Disclaimer:
To make a long story short, I don't take any responsibility for anything I post here. It's not news, it's not truth, it's not serious. It's parody. It's satire. It's bitter. It's angsty. Your mother's a *****. You like to jack off dogs. That's right, you heard me. You like to grab that dog by the bone and rub it like a ski pole. Your dad? Gay. Your priest? Straight. **** off and let me post. It's not true, it's all in good fun. Now go away.
To make a long story short, I don't take any responsibility for anything I post here. It's not news, it's not truth, it's not serious. It's parody. It's satire. It's bitter. It's angsty. Your mother's a *****. You like to jack off dogs. That's right, you heard me. You like to grab that dog by the bone and rub it like a ski pole. Your dad? Gay. Your priest? Straight. **** off and let me post. It's not true, it's all in good fun. Now go away.
Nexa wrote:
Commander Annabella wrote:
Nexa wrote:
I was just checking out Survival International's website. It seems like a decent organization, but even they don't go beyond defining "uncontacted tribes" as anything other than "Over 100 tribes around the world choose to reject contact with outsiders."
So, it's a choice to not have a *relationship* with the outside world, not the lack of *awareness* of it.
Nexa
So, it's a choice to not have a *relationship* with the outside world, not the lack of *awareness* of it.
Nexa
Saying they reject it is using language that suggests that they don't want contact, rather than been deprived of contact, with their attempt to be anti-colonialist. They used to be called isolated but that was considered pejorative. Some uncontacted groups have had isolated encounters with westerners, this particular group hasn't, only with a related tribe.
Yes, exactly. We have no idea if this group hasn't had contact...since we haven't asked, haha, which would kind of defeat the purpose. Since there are evidently some 25ish tribes in the area, and other have had contact, and since I'm sure you and I can agree that this one wasn't dropped off by aliens in the middle of the forest, that the most likely scenario by far is that this group split off from another tribe...
Even the press is making sure to put quotes around "uncontacted" since it's deceptive and even Survival International defines it as those groups who "choose to reject contact". I'm unsure as to why you're so adamant that this group, who we can't research by virtue of it being uncontacted...is truly uncontacted when we know that that's almost entirely impossible.
Nexa
It's not a deceptive term though and they are using it correctly to describe this particular tribe. There are just rumors and encounters by a neighboring tribe. It's not just "wary of outsiders."
I'm adamant because Smash is dismissing this out of hand as being deliberately deceptive terminology, which it isn't, regardless how this press release is written.
Turin wrote:
Seriously, what the f*ck nature?
NephthysWanderer wrote:
Until someone speaks to them and verifies that they have never been contacted by an "outside" will I believe they have truly been isolated. And at which point, the discussion will become moot. Or not moot depending on which definition you want to go with.
Eh, you could get a member of another tribe to approach them. Maybe slip them a note in taro-grinding class or something.
In a time of universal deceit, telling the truth is a revolutionary act.
fhrugby the Wise wrote:
Kohonas, big ones,
Alma wrote:
I lost my post
But that comparison isn't even meaningful.
What's that, it's dead accurate, but you have no response? Right, gotcha.
Disclaimer:
To make a long story short, I don't take any responsibility for anything I post here. It's not news, it's not truth, it's not serious. It's parody. It's satire. It's bitter. It's angsty. Your mother's a *****. You like to jack off dogs. That's right, you heard me. You like to grab that dog by the bone and rub it like a ski pole. Your dad? Gay. Your priest? Straight. **** off and let me post. It's not true, it's all in good fun. Now go away.
To make a long story short, I don't take any responsibility for anything I post here. It's not news, it's not truth, it's not serious. It's parody. It's satire. It's bitter. It's angsty. Your mother's a *****. You like to jack off dogs. That's right, you heard me. You like to grab that dog by the bone and rub it like a ski pole. Your dad? Gay. Your priest? Straight. **** off and let me post. It's not true, it's all in good fun. Now go away.
Samira wrote:
NephthysWanderer wrote:
Until someone speaks to them and verifies that they have never been contacted by an "outside" will I believe they have truly been isolated. And at which point, the discussion will become moot. Or not moot depending on which definition you want to go with.
Eh, you could get a member of another tribe to approach them. Maybe slip them a note in taro-grinding class or something.
Only if the note is on the skin of a dead monkey or a banana leaf or something from the locale...
It's not a deceptive term though and they are using it correctly to describe this particular tribe. There are just rumors and encounters by a neighboring tribe. It's not just "wary of outsiders."
I'm adamant because Smash is dismissing this out of hand as being deliberately deceptive terminology, which it isn't, regardless how this press release is written.
Of course it's deliberately deceptive. Are you really this ******* soft? One doesn't accidentally choose a term like "uncontacted" to describe groups of people who are choosing to be isolated arbitrarily. It was chosen because it conveys the romantic idea of these groups of people being unaware of modern society. I guess "No Child Left Behind" isn't deceptive, either, by your ludicrous standards.
I had no idea you were so supportive of manipulating people through word usage. It's surprising, frankly.
Disclaimer:
To make a long story short, I don't take any responsibility for anything I post here. It's not news, it's not truth, it's not serious. It's parody. It's satire. It's bitter. It's angsty. Your mother's a *****. You like to jack off dogs. That's right, you heard me. You like to grab that dog by the bone and rub it like a ski pole. Your dad? Gay. Your priest? Straight. **** off and let me post. It's not true, it's all in good fun. Now go away.
To make a long story short, I don't take any responsibility for anything I post here. It's not news, it's not truth, it's not serious. It's parody. It's satire. It's bitter. It's angsty. Your mother's a *****. You like to jack off dogs. That's right, you heard me. You like to grab that dog by the bone and rub it like a ski pole. Your dad? Gay. Your priest? Straight. **** off and let me post. It's not true, it's all in good fun. Now go away.
Quote:
Smasharoo wrote:
But they haven't. Where is your evidence that this specific tribe have had contact with the outside world, b/c before 2007, people had no documentation that they existed?
Oh, sorry, is it my job to show that they have had contact with the outside world when there's absolutely no evidence that they haven't? I wasn't aware. Do I have to show evidence that they can't fly around on palm tree leaves trailing red and white and blue smoke from their @#%^s, too?
So, you have no evidence contradicting what Survival International or the description of them being called Uncontacted but I'm supposed to give you credence because why? Really? Why? Because of what you figure?
Quote:
I do know what uncontacted means.
You mean now, after I told you? Sure.
Ha, ha. No, I already knew what it meant.
Quote:
What I am saying is that there is a variation amongst tribes themselves, including those with a low level of contact and those few that are really uncontacted.
There are virtually none who are *actually* "uncontacted". Ie: Have no idea that the modern world exists. INCLUDING this group.
So, you do have information about this group that anthropologists and tribes in the area don't have? And you do have a brand-new definition of what "uncontacted " means? Wow, you are quite the psychic.
Quote:
You are the one saying that this organization was deliberately deceiving the public and I'm saying that they are raising money, but it doesn't necessarily discredit the organization.
No, first you said it wasn't a PR campaign. Then when it was demonstrated that it was you've changed your mind and decided that because it's a PR campaign that doesn't make it evil. Which no one ever argued it was. There is no moral highground to take here. You're in the wrong forum for that.
Where did I not say it was a PR campaign? I said they are still uncontacted people.
Quote:
No, you are fantasizing about intentions and that by thinking it can only possibly be romanticizing, says alot about you and how you conceptualize the world.
Yeah, it says I conceptualize it accurately, instead of being suckered into pathetic "human interest" stories about the poor, poor, noble brutes who might die a terrible death if they're exposed to the flu. Oh, let us all gather up our wealth and donate a small portion to them so that they may continue to instead die from simple infections when they cut themselves on a tree.
You conceptualize it accurately? You can only see it as people who deserve to die b/c they are weak or being poor noble brutes? Still, Smash, that says alot about you.
Edited, Jun 2nd 2008 11:31am by Annabella
Turin wrote:
Seriously, what the f*ck nature?
You conceptualize it accurately? You can only see it as people who deserve to die b/c they are weak or being poor noble brutes?
I'm afraid your limited capacity for understanding language is showing again :
Nothing I've posted would indicate such. Personalizing this to our own experiences with attitudes about those we work with, are we?
Hmm?
Disclaimer:
To make a long story short, I don't take any responsibility for anything I post here. It's not news, it's not truth, it's not serious. It's parody. It's satire. It's bitter. It's angsty. Your mother's a *****. You like to jack off dogs. That's right, you heard me. You like to grab that dog by the bone and rub it like a ski pole. Your dad? Gay. Your priest? Straight. **** off and let me post. It's not true, it's all in good fun. Now go away.
To make a long story short, I don't take any responsibility for anything I post here. It's not news, it's not truth, it's not serious. It's parody. It's satire. It's bitter. It's angsty. Your mother's a *****. You like to jack off dogs. That's right, you heard me. You like to grab that dog by the bone and rub it like a ski pole. Your dad? Gay. Your priest? Straight. **** off and let me post. It's not true, it's all in good fun. Now go away.
NephthysWanderer wrote:
Samira wrote:
NephthysWanderer wrote:
Until someone speaks to them and verifies that they have never been contacted by an "outside" will I believe they have truly been isolated. And at which point, the discussion will become moot. Or not moot depending on which definition you want to go with.
Eh, you could get a member of another tribe to approach them. Maybe slip them a note in taro-grinding class or something.
Only if the note is on the skin of a dead monkey or a banana leaf or something from the locale...
It matters little, just like the yam farmers, their days are numbered. They will just have to learn to love You Tube like the rest of us.
Alma wrote:
I lost my post
Smasharoo wrote:
It's not a deceptive term though and they are using it correctly to describe this particular tribe. There are just rumors and encounters by a neighboring tribe. It's not just "wary of outsiders."
I'm adamant because Smash is dismissing this out of hand as being deliberately deceptive terminology, which it isn't, regardless how this press release is written.
Of course it's deliberately deceptive. Are you really this @#%^ing soft? One doesn't accidentally choose a term like "uncontacted" to describe groups of people who are choosing to be isolated arbitrarily. It was chosen because it conveys the romantic idea of these groups of people being unaware of modern society. I guess "No Child Left Behind" isn't deceptive, either, by your ludicrous standards.
I had no idea you were so supportive of manipulating people through word usage. It's surprising, frankly.
And I disagree with you. I also disagree with people who think it is romantic. It just is what it is. Some people believe in self-determination for uncontacted people, for people who live in more isolated areas. I don't think it is better or worse. You are assuming they must be manipulative because based on no actual facts, you've decided they must be deceptive. No fact based arguments for you, I suppose.
Turin wrote:
Seriously, what the f*ck nature?
Where did I not say it was a PR campaign?
When you posted this in your first post, genius:
It's not a PR campaign
Discussion over. Go rescue some kittens or whatever it is you do. I'm done being Republic Serial Villan in your little fantasy world.
Edited, Jun 2nd 2008 11:35am by Smasharoo
Disclaimer:
To make a long story short, I don't take any responsibility for anything I post here. It's not news, it's not truth, it's not serious. It's parody. It's satire. It's bitter. It's angsty. Your mother's a *****. You like to jack off dogs. That's right, you heard me. You like to grab that dog by the bone and rub it like a ski pole. Your dad? Gay. Your priest? Straight. **** off and let me post. It's not true, it's all in good fun. Now go away.
To make a long story short, I don't take any responsibility for anything I post here. It's not news, it's not truth, it's not serious. It's parody. It's satire. It's bitter. It's angsty. Your mother's a *****. You like to jack off dogs. That's right, you heard me. You like to grab that dog by the bone and rub it like a ski pole. Your dad? Gay. Your priest? Straight. **** off and let me post. It's not true, it's all in good fun. Now go away.
Smasharoo wrote:
You conceptualize it accurately? You can only see it as people who deserve to die b/c they are weak or being poor noble brutes?
I'm afraid your limited capacity for understanding language is showing again :
Nothing I've posted would indicate such. Personalizing this to our own experiences with attitudes about those we work with, are we?
Hmm?
No, you are using the terminology and you are constructing an argument saying there can only be one of two options. You take responsibility for your own arguments.
Turin wrote:
Seriously, what the f*ck nature?
NephthysWanderer wrote:
Samira wrote:
NephthysWanderer wrote:
Until someone speaks to them and verifies that they have never been contacted by an "outside" will I believe they have truly been isolated. And at which point, the discussion will become moot. Or not moot depending on which definition you want to go with.
Eh, you could get a member of another tribe to approach them. Maybe slip them a note in taro-grinding class or something.
Only if the note is on the skin of a dead monkey or a banana leaf or something from the locale...
Well, obviously. Otherwise they'd take it and say something like, "What's this? A note asking whether I've ever had unprotected contact with the outside world with Yes/No/Maybe check boxes? And what's this material it's written on? Paper, you say? Dried pressed plant pulp? Dude... you just blew my... hang on, I need to think up a word for this concept."
In a time of universal deceit, telling the truth is a revolutionary act.
No, you are using the terminology and you are constructing an argument saying there can only be one of two options.
No. You're assuming this because you aren't taking the time to read my posts.
Not my problem.
Disclaimer:
To make a long story short, I don't take any responsibility for anything I post here. It's not news, it's not truth, it's not serious. It's parody. It's satire. It's bitter. It's angsty. Your mother's a *****. You like to jack off dogs. That's right, you heard me. You like to grab that dog by the bone and rub it like a ski pole. Your dad? Gay. Your priest? Straight. **** off and let me post. It's not true, it's all in good fun. Now go away.
To make a long story short, I don't take any responsibility for anything I post here. It's not news, it's not truth, it's not serious. It's parody. It's satire. It's bitter. It's angsty. Your mother's a *****. You like to jack off dogs. That's right, you heard me. You like to grab that dog by the bone and rub it like a ski pole. Your dad? Gay. Your priest? Straight. **** off and let me post. It's not true, it's all in good fun. Now go away.
Smasharoo wrote:
Where did I not say it was a PR campaign?
When you posted this in your first post, genius:
It's not a PR campaign
Discussion over. Go rescue some kittens or whatever it is you do. I'm done being Republic Serial Villon in your little fantasy world.
Oh, lulz. Well, you got me there. But still my actual point stands in the original, that calling them an uncontacted people is not a PR move. The pictures were a PR move. They are actually uncontacted. I'm not sure where you victory is considering that is the prevailing term used to describe this specific tribe and only you, in you imagingings have retermed them.
Edited, Jun 2nd 2008 11:38am by Annabella
Turin wrote:
Seriously, what the f*ck nature?
Smasharoo wrote:
No, you are using the terminology and you are constructing an argument saying there can only be one of two options.
No. You're assuming this because you aren't taking the time to read my posts.
Not my problem.
I've read your posts. You assume alot about the intentions of the group in using the terms and what they are conveying to the audience. And it makes me wonder about you.
Turin wrote:
Seriously, what the f*ck nature?
I'm not sure where you victory is considering that is the prevailing term used to describe this specific tribe and only you, in you imagingings have retermed them.
I haven't "retermed" them.
Let's review the thread, shall we?
Me: "Uncontacted" is a BS term, it seems like it means this, but actually means this. This is a PR campaign.
You: It's not a PR campaign, "Uncontacted means not contacted"
Me: No.
You: You're mean.
Me: No.
You: I'm not saying it's not a PR campaign, and I know "Uncontacted" doesn't mean not contacted. You're mean.
Me: ....
You: Why do you hate the noble savage?
Me: Yeah, I gotta go play with my balls. Nice talking to you.
Disclaimer:
To make a long story short, I don't take any responsibility for anything I post here. It's not news, it's not truth, it's not serious. It's parody. It's satire. It's bitter. It's angsty. Your mother's a *****. You like to jack off dogs. That's right, you heard me. You like to grab that dog by the bone and rub it like a ski pole. Your dad? Gay. Your priest? Straight. **** off and let me post. It's not true, it's all in good fun. Now go away.
To make a long story short, I don't take any responsibility for anything I post here. It's not news, it's not truth, it's not serious. It's parody. It's satire. It's bitter. It's angsty. Your mother's a *****. You like to jack off dogs. That's right, you heard me. You like to grab that dog by the bone and rub it like a ski pole. Your dad? Gay. Your priest? Straight. **** off and let me post. It's not true, it's all in good fun. Now go away.
You assume alot about the intentions of the group in using the terms and what they are conveying to the audience.
Yeah, I assume they're advocating for them. I made that wild assumption when I researched the group and they defined themselves as "advocating for uncontacted peoples". Then I crazily leapt to the wild conclusion this was a press release when their spokesman stated "This is a press release".
I'm such a cold cynical *******. I'm dead inside.
Disclaimer:
To make a long story short, I don't take any responsibility for anything I post here. It's not news, it's not truth, it's not serious. It's parody. It's satire. It's bitter. It's angsty. Your mother's a *****. You like to jack off dogs. That's right, you heard me. You like to grab that dog by the bone and rub it like a ski pole. Your dad? Gay. Your priest? Straight. **** off and let me post. It's not true, it's all in good fun. Now go away.
To make a long story short, I don't take any responsibility for anything I post here. It's not news, it's not truth, it's not serious. It's parody. It's satire. It's bitter. It's angsty. Your mother's a *****. You like to jack off dogs. That's right, you heard me. You like to grab that dog by the bone and rub it like a ski pole. Your dad? Gay. Your priest? Straight. **** off and let me post. It's not true, it's all in good fun. Now go away.
Commander Annabella wrote:
It's not a deceptive term though and they are using it correctly to describe this particular tribe. There are just rumors and encounters by a neighboring tribe. It's not just "wary of outsiders."
I'm adamant because Smash is dismissing this out of hand as being deliberately deceptive terminology, which it isn't, regardless how this press release is written.
Yes, yes, Smash is a **** head, disregard that and your "on the defense" reaction for a second though.
*You* seem to be the only one that is adamant that this tribe has not had any outside contact. This is what is confusing me. The organizations involved are even willing to say "uncontacted" and allow that obviously, the tribes are *somewhat* aware of the western world due to the appearance of airplanes, discussing it with tribes that have had contact, trading for western items with other tribes, meeting up with random loggers, poachers, tree tappers, etc...
I'm unclear as to why it's evidently so important to you that we think that this tribe has existed in a bubble. Isn't their current state "good enough" or do you think it would be somehow "better" if they were almost magically unaware of the world beyond their tree line? We clearly can't truly know without contacting them, so can't you at least admit that much? We don't know if they've actually sat down and had a big mac and a Camel Light with Joe Shmoe tree logger? Your insistance that this is not the case seems, honestly, and I'm truly not trying to sound insulting here, like you're being stubborn to counter Smash's asshattery rather than just shrugging and saying, "well, as far as we know, we don't know of anyone who has contacted them"...which would be fine! I don't think that their definition of "uncontacted" is bad, or wrong, or mean, or dishonest...I just think it should be pointed out since people will take it literally.
Nexa
“It has always been the prerogative of children and half-wits to point out that the emperor has no clothes. But a half-wit remains a half-wit, and the emperor remains an emperor.â€
― Neil Gaiman, The Sandman, Vol. 9: The Kindly Ones
― Neil Gaiman, The Sandman, Vol. 9: The Kindly Ones
Smasharoo wrote:
I'm not sure where you victory is considering that is the prevailing term used to describe this specific tribe and only you, in you imagingings have retermed them.
I haven't "retermed" them.
Let's review the thread, shall we?
Me: "Uncontacted" is a BS term, it seems like it means this, but actually means this. This is a PR campaign.
You: It's not a PR campaign, "Uncontacted means not contacted"
Me: No.
You: You're mean.
Me: No.
You: I'm not saying it's not a PR campaign, and I know "Uncontacted" doesn't mean not contacted. You're mean.
Me: ....
You: Why do you hate the noble savage?
Me: Yeah, I gotta go play with my balls. Nice talking to you.
Yes, you have retermed them. You say they aren't uncontacted. No, they are uncontacted. The term is accurately used to describe them--it's not my fault that you don't know what it means or when it is applied. You've decided that it is inaccurate and ******** based on a PR campaign, rather than looking at the history and application of the terminology. All I read is that you don't know anything about the terminology and are dismissing something out of hand based on having no information. Just what you figure.
And I don't think you are mean in this case, I think you are ascribing alot of motivations to various players without any actual proof that you know anything about this particular issue at all.
But I do have to work now. Have fun with your balls.
Turin wrote:
Seriously, what the f*ck nature?
Nexa wrote:
We clearly can't truly know without contacting them
Oh, Neph and I solved that one. /airy wave
In a time of universal deceit, telling the truth is a revolutionary act.
Recent Visitors: 114
All times are in CST
Anonymous Guests (114)
- Forums
- Cross Site
- The Asylum
- Vestiges of barbarism
© 2024 Fanbyte LLC