Post #56036 by aquarj on Mon, Oct 20, 2003 7:18 PM

Although I think this is an interesting subject, I actually don't know what the question really is. When we ask whether something is "considered" ok or not, and why, there's always the relative issue of who you're trying to be sensitive to. Many polynesians have a sense of humor about tikis and their pop counterparts, some polynesians don't know anything about tiki at all, and probably there are a few (though I've never met any) who are sober and indignant about the whole thing. But are we supposed to be concerned about the indignant ones when we decorate our homes? Probably a few men on TC (and women), have an image or two of bare-breasted women on their walls, either of the pinup variety or the exotic polynesian. There are obviously very large groups who find this kind of thing offensive, so does that make it bad? I'd say it doesn't matter. If someone finds any of the decor in my house offensive, they are welcome to not visit. Otherwise, their right to tell me what is ok or not extends about as far as my right to tell them similarly.

A long time ago in a sort of similar thread here, Trader Woody (where is that uber-poster these days?) drew a good comparison to "noggins" - basically dumbed down cartoony viking figures. Hey, those are great, and they originate from viking country! The thing is, a sense of whimsy about the different features and histories of different cultures, including one's own, is a very charming quality. It even shows a certain level of sophistication. This is why I sometimes think it's sad when people are so vociferous about eliminating all "cartoony" or whimsical representations of various cultures - because it reveals a pretty bleak world view where they assume everyone's humorless and no one has enough sophistication of their own to see things for what they are. Even when somebody does something intentionally offensive, it seems better if we all see it for what it is - a product of a primitive or bigoted mind - and laugh it off for what it reveals about the source rather than getting all worked up about the thing itself. Anything more than that is devoting undeserved attention.

Take any group defined by racial lines, gender lines, religious lines, political lines, or whatever, and consider the person who presumes that this group needs some kind of paternal filter to shield them from certain things on the chance that they might find them offensive. To me, this kind of person seems to be presuming that he/she possesses a higher level of sophistication than the group that "needs" shielding, which is a pretty condescending pretense in itself. Personally, I'd rather be around someone who can laugh and make fun of everyone, including himself, over someone who doesn't want anyone to laugh at anyone. Unfortunately there are humorless people like that, and unfortunately they're often the squeaky wheels, but that still doesn't mean anyone has to actually pay attention to them.

Long-winded, but that's my take on this kind of issue.

-Randy