I usually scan the photo galleries of our local papers, so seeing a link to our state’s entry in the Miss Teen USA pageant, I decided to take a look:

http://seattlepi.nwsource.com/ae/popup.asp?gtitle=Miss%20Washington%20Teen%20USA%202007&SubID=2809&page=0&css=/photos/gtitle.css

Being a fan of feminine pulchitrude and also a dirty old man had nothing to do with it, I swear. But on viewing the first few photos, I got the disquieting feeling that I had suddenly turned into a pedophile. I haven’t read all of the comments, but my own feeling is that these pageants are in the soft-core porn business.

You claim Andrew Burke has only a superficial knowledge of your country but the huge generalisations you lobbed back about Australia showed no difference on your behalf.

Genius, there is no way to discuss entire cultures without generalizing. Culture itself is a generalization of individual traits. Not all generalizations are equal.

Instead of "Casual Interest" I think "Limited Interest Due To Intellectual Laziness" might be a more descriptive moniker for you, generally.

Hey healthyskeptic, relax. You're being overly aggressive.

I'm fine thanks. I'm just responding to your aggressive assertions that are also factually lacking and uninformed. Such as:

In my view the USA's introspection has nothing to do with being a superpower.

Which is simply wrong and lacking an understanding of root causes of the US being a superpower, and the underlying psychology and Realpolitik, which are one and the same with US popular cultural isolationism. Centrally controlled superpowers throughout history tend to be thus. Egypt and China for other examples. Rome was more a decentralized multicultural Republic, as were Greek city state and other examples of multi-cultural civilizations dominant in their era.

If Australia was suddenly made the most powerful nation on earth, odds are it would become much more isolationistic culturally, and perhaps imperialistic otherwise, in short order. It's human nature. Avoiding that requires an enlightenment.

I actually agree with most of what you've said, and the rest is not very important.

Good. Then spare us the tedious unsubstantial assertions next time.

I have a very keen intellectual interest about a lot of things, but because I had no desire to get into a slanging match about our respective countries you call me lazy. Nice. Especially since I've been nothing but courteous in disagreeing with you.

All I asked is that you don't accuse others of what you are doing yourself. Don't tell Andrew Burke he is guilty of generalising and then proceed to do it yourself. That's all I will say. That's a lazy man's arguing and you are supposedly so much better than that.

I haven’t read all of the comments, but my own feeling is that these pageants are in the soft-core porn business.-- Mike Gies

Granted beauty pageants aren't the math club. They emphasize physical beauty primarily.

But, how does physical beauty equate "soft-core porn" in your feeble brain?

Can you point to any example of "soft-core porn" as distinguishable from a physical beauty pageants as they openly claim to be?

Do you see these pageants as erotic?

The greatest courtesy you could do me is to say something intelligent for a change. But that is apparently asking too much.

Don't tell Andrew Burke he is guilty of generalising and then proceed to do it yourself.

What I said was Burke was making a superficial generalization, both unintelligent and ignorant.

Obviously to discuss culture is to generalize by nature, and I wasn't disparaging all conversations on culture. Only misinformed ones such as what he argued.

Duh!

You wonder why I call people like you idiotic? Because you constantly prove it so.

Nobody else seems to have a problem with my posts or the fact that I am only asking you to discuss your points in a fair manner, only you.

As the saying goes: Better to say nothing and be thought a fool than to open your mouth and remove all doubt.

And one more thing, if you can refute any generalizations I made about Australia, feel free to.

Was Australia not a penal colony, put there for the harsh climate and the assumption it would always be dependent on Britian?

Is the USA not by far a larger and richer nation? Does Australia not lack resources by comparison to the USA and many European nations?

Does that not effect Australian psychology, trade, and internationalism as I put forth?

Do Australians not live almost entirely on coastal regions to be in proximity to trade, coastal waters, and temperate climate; unlike the USA or Europe which have large inland populations in green fertile lands?

Is that primarily that due to anything other than the arability of lands? Woundn't Australians cultivate the interior, and suffer increased provincialism, if they ccould?

Does Australia like America not have a culture which values individuality, and sometimes anti-intellectual coarseness, relative to other developed countries, in large part due to immigrant cultures and especially rebellion against British Aristocracy and caste based systems?

Is Australia historically any less militant than the USA, relative to size? Isn't Australia in fact historically the most staunch supporter of American militarism, and very much dependent on the American military to help secure Australia resources and trade deals?

Not trying to rub it in. Just saying these are realities that shape culture.

Nobody else seems to have a problem with my posts

That's an appeal to popularity, a logical fallacy. It's especially stupid in the context of BS which is filled with idiots.

And to answer your next obtuse question: charity, because somebody has to.

Better to say nothing and be thought a fool than to open your mouth and remove all doubt.

Yes, you prove it with every post.

It's a relief to see something intelligent written about Miss Teen South Carolina's gaffe. I've been spending a little too much time lately on Digg and Reddit and, if one also includes the comments on YouTube itself, to me it is obvious that this media/internet event is about people celebrating age old stereotypes. In this case the, infelicitous conjunction of stereotypes about "dumb blonds," women, and the South.

I think few people are laughing at Upton because she exemplifies American ignorance (as this article suggests might in part be the case). It is quite explicit in people's comments, on YouTube, Reddit, Digg, and the many news stories covering the video, that they enjoy the idea that Upton exemplifies their concept of a dumb blond, dumb woman, and dumb Southerner. Indeed, if this was about American ignorance more generally, I think there would be a lot more comments from people about being embarrassed to be American (as many people felt after the election of George W. Bush). But such a sentiment is not to be found in the thousands of comments out there. Americans aren't embarrassed. They just love laughing at Upton.

I find it very depressing. We live in a culture driven by what Nietzsche called "the morality of resentment." That is, we label others as bad (or in this case dumb) and therefore determine that in comparison we are good (or smart); but we therefore make this determination of our goodness as only an afterthought and only in contrast to the baseness we like to point out in others.

Similarly, with Senator Craig this week, despite appearances we are seeing a great American celebration of homophobia. Everyone pretends (on the left) that this is about hypocrisy and (on the right) about indecent public behavior. But in fact, everyone on both sides of the spectrum is enjoying the spectacle of seeing a gay man be knocked down and ridiculed.

I honestly don't believe that all the people who have come out of the woodwork to be shocked by the occurrence of sexual liaisons in public restrooms really spent any time worrying about public sex before this (let alone being outraged by putative the moral impropriety of it). The vehemence of the outrage does not stem from something people hardly thought about before this week, it stems from a fear of homosexual desire. A fear based on the assumption that all men who desire other men are sneaking, lying, and predatory.

At the same time, of all the thousands of things that politicians are hypocritical about on a daily basis (and it's easy to point such things out), few are able to garner the kind of scandalous tenor found in the story surrounding Senator Craig. Much of the pleasure the left finds in seeing Senator Craig caught in his hypocrisy, stems hence not from his actual hypocrisy but from a particular idea of a homosexual hypocrisy, emedded again in a stereotype of homosexual desire as sneaking, lying, and predatory.

So it's a big weak for Americans being mean, while pretending they're just having a good laugh at a gaffe or catching a politician in his hypocrisy.