|
Grex > Agora46 > #135: What you always wanted to know about the USA and its citizens <-- For Non-US grexers | |
|
| Author |
Message |
| 25 new of 79 responses total. |
tod
|
|
response 25 of 79:
| 
Jul 31 16:41 UTC 2003 |
This response has been erased.
|
mynxcat
|
|
response 26 of 79:
|
Jul 31 17:42 UTC 2003 |
when referring to someone from the continent, you would prefix it
with "North" or "South". Anyone from Mexico, Canada or the US is
a "North American". Any one from Brazil, Argentina, or the like is
a "South American". There is not continent "America". There is
a "North America" and a "South America" (and even "Central America",
though that's not recognised as a separate continent). So it's
perfectly acceptable to call some one from the USA to call themselves
American, there's nothing to be confused about.
|
albaugh
|
|
response 27 of 79:
|
Jul 31 17:43 UTC 2003 |
Re: #2: If the president is a bigot based on the remarks he made, then please
add me to the rolls of that bigotry. In fact, add the overwhelming number
of US citizens to that roll while you're at it.
|
cmcgee
|
|
response 28 of 79:
|
Jul 31 17:44 UTC 2003 |
the 50% is a statistic about marriages, not people who get married.
If there were only 20 people in the world, and they all married each other
, there would be 10 marriages.
If four of those people divorced and remarried, 20% of the marriages would
have ended in divorce. And 20% of the people would have gotten divorces.
The, those four people proceed to marry and divorce until they have all been
married and divorced in all possible combinations.
The percentage of _people_ who divorced would not change. 80% remain married,
20% got divorced.
The percentage of _marriages_ that ended in divorce would change dramatically.
67% of the marriages were stable, 33% ended in divorce.
|
dcat
|
|
response 29 of 79:
|
Jul 31 18:05 UTC 2003 |
Unless I misread something (else), the numbers in that last line were
reversed, and should've been 33 and 67, respectively.
|
mynxcat
|
|
response 30 of 79:
|
Jul 31 18:18 UTC 2003 |
Re 28> Agreed. I think what Joe was trying to say was that while 50%
of all marriages end in divorce, one needs to keep in mind that that
percentage is skewed to some degree by a relatively small number of
people who have a tendency to repeatedly get into marriages that will
end in divorce.
Did I get that right, Joe?
|
rcurl
|
|
response 31 of 79:
|
Jul 31 19:03 UTC 2003 |
Re #25: uhhh....the English drive on the left.
|
tod
|
|
response 32 of 79:
|
Jul 31 19:36 UTC 2003 |
This response has been erased.
|
keesan
|
|
response 33 of 79:
|
Jul 31 20:03 UTC 2003 |
In most of the divorces I know about one partner left because they fell in
love with someone else, or wanted to 'find themselves'. No abuse, no alcohol.
My cousin was amicably divorced twice. My uncle decided to marry someone 20
years younger. His first wife invited us all to her second wedding.
|
jep
|
|
response 34 of 79:
|
Jul 31 20:43 UTC 2003 |
We can all agree divorce is pretty common, whatever the statistics
actually are. As a divorcee myself, I think it's very unfortunate it
happens so often.
|
jmsaul
|
|
response 35 of 79:
|
Aug 1 04:00 UTC 2003 |
Re #30: Yep.
Re #34: Yes, but in many cases it's better than the alternative. I'm not
speaking for your case specifically.
|
russ
|
|
response 36 of 79:
|
Aug 1 04:07 UTC 2003 |
Re #5: What's WRONG is defining the public face of the office of
POTUS as an explicitly Christian one. Government officials should
not act in any sectarian capacity while exercising their office.
Re #21: Sounds like the way officially Catholic countries handle it.
|
jaklumen
|
|
response 37 of 79:
|
Aug 1 07:11 UTC 2003 |
resp:14 Well, basically why the *English* drove on the left was to
have your weapon on the ready for that pesky highwayman. We just
started driving on the right to spite them and be different, really.
We embraced Santa Claus because he wasn't that English Father
Christmas-- if I remember right, there was all sorts of things during
the 19th century that we did to distance ourselves from Britain.
|
jep
|
|
response 38 of 79:
|
Aug 1 13:52 UTC 2003 |
re resp:35: I wasn't speaking of my divorce, in particular, either,
though of course it has affected my perceptions of divorce. As a
general case, though, I bet we all know someone who has had 4 or more
marriages. I knew a guy in college who had had 5 stepdads before he
graduated from high school. He was fortunate in that his maternal
grandfather was a stable influence in his life. He certainly didn't
have any other male role models he could count on. I'm sure his mother
was unhappy with all of her various husbands, once she married them...
but at some point, this guy and his two sisters, the children, ought to
have received some consideration as well.
The American characteristic of driving on the right instead of the left
originated in the 18th century.
Santa Claus wasn't a big deal anywhere until the late 1800's in
America. I don't belive our mass giving of presents occurred until
after the Great Depression.
|
janc
|
|
response 39 of 79:
|
Aug 1 14:38 UTC 2003 |
I think the modern image of Santa Claus (jolly fat guy with reindeer) was
created first from nearly whole cloth by the author of "The Night Before
Christmas" and popularized via a series of ads for Coca Cola. Web
searching...yup...http://www.the-north-pole.com/history/ says Thomas Nast
did a lot to develop the character too, and Rudolf was invented for Montgomery
Ward advertisements. The night before Christmas was 1823, and the Coca Cola
ads were 1931. Santa is a pretty modern creation though bits of the legend
have ancient roots.
|
sj2
|
|
response 40 of 79:
|
Aug 1 20:26 UTC 2003 |
Thanks!!
What myths/images/impressions created by Hollywood movies, usually,
would you like to dispel about the US?
|
cross
|
|
response 41 of 79:
|
Aug 2 03:48 UTC 2003 |
This response has been erased.
|
janc
|
|
response 42 of 79:
|
Aug 2 03:51 UTC 2003 |
In real life America, there are toddlers.
As a parent of a toddler, I'm struck by the fact that the only movie that
contains a toddler in a significant roles is "Monsters, Inc" where they
computer generated the toddler. Apparantly getting a toddler into a movie
is harder than an alien, a talking pig, or a dinosaur.
|
jaklumen
|
|
response 43 of 79:
|
Aug 2 04:10 UTC 2003 |
indubitably.
|
jaklumen
|
|
response 44 of 79:
|
Aug 2 04:11 UTC 2003 |
resp:41 Indeed, many of us have traveled to other countries: and many
of us even appreciate the mix of culture here in our own backyard.
|
sj2
|
|
response 45 of 79:
|
Aug 2 05:26 UTC 2003 |
Regarding the divorce thing. Do you think that the relative ease of
getting out of a marriage makes people less adjusting to each other?
Or tend to hit the eject button sooner than required?
Why do porn stars never take off their footwear in movies (if you ever
noticed)? ;-)
Do people regularly leave their parents after teenage and see them
after 5-10 years? Are parents usually left in old-age homes?
How important are relatives to a US family?
How common is sex at say, 13 or 14 years of age? Is it acceptable to
parents there usually?
Can you really tell whether a kid is a gay when he/she is 13-14?
|
gelinas
|
|
response 46 of 79:
|
Aug 2 06:43 UTC 2003 |
I'd guess dissertations have been written on the first question, and
every one comes to a different conclusion.
I'd say that relatives are important, but a significant portion of the
population is sufficiently mobile that relaties aren't around.
Moving out as a teenager, after high school, is not unusual, but not seeing
parents for several years _is_ unusual. Well, not maintaining contact
is unusual; the aforementioned mobility can interfere with physical visits.
|
scg
|
|
response 47 of 79:
|
Aug 2 07:00 UTC 2003 |
There's very little I could tell you about porn, but even if I knew a lot more
about porn than I do, I imagine it wouldn't be the footwear that I would have
been paying attention to. ;)
I'm not sure what you mean about seeing parents "after 5-10 years." A lot
of people move out of their parents' houses when done with high school, or
soon thereafter, in order to go to college or otherwise live their own lives
once they're old enough to not need to be taken care of on a daily basis.
On the other hand, a lot of Americans make it well into their 20s (or
occasionally longer) living with their parents, either out of being happy with
the arrangement, or inertia, or inability to afford housing of their own.
As for the "see them after 5-10 years" part, when I lived in the same city
as my parents I used to see them at least once a week, and often more. Now
that I live a few thousand miles away from them, I still see them several
times a year and talk to them on the phone at least once a week. I don't
think that's atypical.
A lot of people attempt to care for their elderly relatives themselves, and
a lot of people put their elderly relatives into facilities where they can
be cared for by professionals. I suspect both have their advantages and
disadvantages for those being cared for and their younger, healthier,
relatives. I don't know which is more common.
I don't think kids having sex at age 13 or 14 is all that common. At least
among kids I knew at that age, I think people were still trying to figure out
steps less than that. Among 15 and 16 year olds, my impression is it's a lot
less common than most 15 and 16 year olds tend to think it is. But maybe I'm
way off.
|
twenex
|
|
response 48 of 79:
|
Aug 2 10:01 UTC 2003 |
Re: 41.9: We (or rather, y'all) can take jokes and laugh at [y]ourselves when
[you] need to ? Define, "when we need to".
|
md
|
|
response 49 of 79:
|
Aug 2 14:06 UTC 2003 |
Re truth vs. movie myths:
New York City is neither a bright bustling joyful metropolis nor a
filthy greedy violent hell-hole. Also, the main thing that even the
most accurate movie depiction of midtown Manhattan can't tell you is:
what it smells like.
Most US drug-dealers, murderers, pimps and prostitutes are white.
Most Italian-Americans are not in the Mafia.
Most Jewish Americans are indistinguishable from most other Americans.
Rachael Leigh Cook wearing glasses wouldn't actually be considered
unattractive in the US, as she was in the movie "She's All That."
|