8 Apr 2010
Clues on how to Interact with Hikikomories
[…]I do have to disagree with the view that these rites are “abuse”. Rites of passage are exactly that. An event or experience that the community has accepted as a norm. Nay more than that. Oftentimes they are the yardstick by which future leaders in these small societies are measured.I’m a resident of a rural area of Arizona. I have spoken with members of the Child Protective Services agencies of my area. Even agencies like these recognize that in some cases the “civilized” norm is not actually valid in all situations.
Case in point, part of the AZ State strictures regarding the provision of adequate and hygienic housing for children precluded dirt floors in a home. Strict adherence to these strictures were REQUIRING that children in traditional Native American housing be removed from their family because of nothing more than the fact that these homes had hard pack floors. No physical or mental abuse, proper clothing, schooling etc. Just the fact that the floor was dirt. As it had been for generations. It took quite a lot time and effort, not to mention the emotional damage to the children and their families from the forced separation before state statutes were modified to allow for Native American tradition.
Although my example does not involve anything as extreme as the rites from this list, it does convey the concept that not ALL situations can be properly governed by a blanket set of laws/rules.
As a citizen of a Western culture I could never condone these actions against children of My society. But I also cannot in good conscience demand that a foreign society go through the horror and awkwardness of culture-shock because I choose to judge their ways through my eyes.
@deeeziner (93):
I´d say Amen to that! save for the fear of starting yet another religious argument. In any case, I agree 100% with your comments. You cannot judge (or pretend to outlaw) a society´s traditions unless you are prepared to have them do the same to your own traditions. Who knows which traditions you hold dear wold be absolutely revolting / shocking / incomprehensible to some of these peoples…
Silly example… Kids in the US move out of their parents´ homes when they graduate high school and go off to college. Sounds normal, right? It´s not necessarily that normal (or common) to people in South America. Most college kids here actually live at home with their parents until they graduate… and quite a few remain there until they get married. So which is “normal and civilized”?
deezinger:
[…]I don’t agree with the old imperialistic habit of storming into a foreign country and telling a society that all their traditions and rites are “wrong”.But I do believe that your example of British interference in the affairs of India is an excellent example of why my point of view has validity.
To storm into a culture and try to inject your values, (especially forcibly) leads to a questioning of that culture’s validity by it’s own members. It leads to an ugly form of undermined confidence in the youth in their own culture’s traditional values.
And in the example of British colonization of India, they subjected the population to their idea of civility, but did not give the people even a modicum of equality to those who invaded. The British did not even try recognize the religion or cultural standards which made sati acceptable to the people who practiced it.
And look what that eventually got the British.
It cannot be denied that India ultimately DID profit from Western culture and it’s influence to their society, but it was only achieved AFTER India gained it’s freedom from British oppression, and took it’s destiny into it’s own hands. And it’s true that the practice of sati has been left behind, to history, but isn’t that also because India chose to embrace the legacy of Western culture and “come into the light” of modern society.
But they also choose to embrace many. many of the rites and practices of their traditional culture. Often still frowned upon by other cultures. Often times still gawked at as unbelievable curiosities, (even here at LV).
My opinion ultimately remains at you cannot judge a community by a universal blanket of acceptable behavior and standards. IMHO if anyone has the right to step in and dictate to a small culture as those highlighted in this list, then it should be the people of the closest “modern” society to each of these tribes. These are the people who would have the greatest understanding of these small culture’s, and the greatest chance of guiding a successful ans smooth integration into the “modern” world for these indigenous peoples.
My example of good intentions gone bad would be the practice of female castration, common throughout African nations. A great many of humanitarian groups and individuals crusaded through the continent to eradicate this “barbarian” practice/rite, that is traditional in both tribal and modernized communities.
This lead to a great deal of inter-family and inter-community conflict. Even the young women that were being “protected” revolted against the campaign. They felt that to be denied this traditional rite made them pariahs, and “unclean”. It made them un-marriageable in their communities. The campaign that was launched to help these young girls/women from being mutilated was rejected by those it was meant to “save”. Even by women who lived a modern life by western standards.
The practice still continues, and since it has started to take an “underground” status, where’s the medical help for the women whose rite went wrong?
So again I stand by my opinion. But that is ultimately what it is, my opinion.
@Wrichik (107): “What would you do if you had the choice of letting a sick tribal child be “treated” by a witch doctor or taking him forcibly to a modern hospital ?”
Wrichik:If I were to be the one holding the power of life or death over the head of a sick tribal child, of course I would chose the proven capabilities of modern medicine. If it were up to me and my hypothetical powers, ALL sick people everywhere would be healed. (Probably not very practical on a global scale, come on, the Earth is only so big with x-amount of resources available.)
No, I’m not gonna “forcibly” take that child. (Your word from the quotation.) I would just have to rely on my enviable powers of persuasion.
Sorry I’m not going to put my life in jeopardy in the outback by trying to KIDNAP a child for my own sense of propriety.But the question of sick children is not apropos here on this list. Never in this list do we know if these tribes are recipients of humanitarian health efforts. Health care is not the topic of this list. And if it were, what about all the sick children in EVERY modern city’s population. Do we not owe those children the same concern that you want to give to these children of this list?
Don’t try to paint me as an uncaring individual, I’m far from it. And I do believe that my caring nature is why I am speaking up for the validity of these rites to the people who practice them.
Don’t try to make me come off as some sort of person (freak?) who condones or welcomes these activities listed, as proper and acceptable in modern communites.
I DO NOT support or condone child abuse, or sexual exploitation/violence in any way.But I also believe that in the context shown in this list, these may not be the most accurate terms to define the activities of these rites.
I also believe that to have these rites opened up on a tourist basis to the outside world is a reprehensible practice and says more about those who would buy a ticket than those who sell it.
One last point. What about the sociologists who have studied these tribes and brought their practices into the limelight of society? Why have no commenters of this list brought them up to bear for leaving these people to continue their rites after they have had their chance to study and publish their findings for the sake of “science” and enlightenment?
And what are YOU doing to help bring these people “up to snuff” now that YOU know of their existence and horrible doings?
@deeeziner (109):Two posts. 21 paragraphs. 1029 words.
… and I still don’t get your point.
“Sati” was obviously difficult to eradicate because of the immense protests that the British govt faced from contemporary Indian society. Obviously the women who could escape their fate of being cremated alive found it extremely hard to find social acceptance; this goes to show the widespread acceptance of the practice as normal and does not, in any way, amount to a point in favor of “Sati”. Did the British invaders respect the Indian way of life ? No, they didn’t. However, that does not make all of the steps they took incorrect.
Think about it. Did the British rulers outlaw idol worship which was and still is a very prominent feature of Indian culture but completely in conflict with Western mores ? Did they outlaw the study of Sanskrit, Arabic or Persian ? Did they force the Hindu population to take up beef consumption and the Muslim population to take up pork consumption ?
They didn’t. They did all they could to preach their definitions of right and wrong, tried every underhanded trick to deprecate India’s cultural values and treated Indians reluctant to suck up to them as worms; and I condemn all of that as much as you do. When it comes to “Sati” though, I find what they did a welcome change in Hindu society. Muslim emperors in the past had tried to do the same, were met with resistance, and ultimately failed to eradicate it, but the Brits succeeded and I laud them for it.
Female Genital Mutilation is another valid point that you mention. The attempts at banning it have resulted in various adverse consequences. In some places the practice has taken on a new importance as a feature of cultural identity in face of external forces to diminish it. In others it has only forced the practice underground where it is even riskier. While this highlights the importance of the method to be adopted in eliminating such practices, it does not detract from the fact that these practices ’should’ be eliminated. Local initiatives, which do not outright insult prevalent cultural norms and do not give rise to vehement xenophobia are certainly important. Even in the case of Sati, Indian social reformers like Raja Rammohan Roy stood up against the practice and this helped the movement to a good extent.
Two observations I would like to make here are the following.
1) A practice which seems barbaric to an external society and normal to the practicing society will very often be perfectly acceptable and even desirable to the victims themselves. The victims’ volition does not make the practice any more acceptable than a child’s permission to being subjected to acts whose consequences he/she does not understand makes statutory rape okay. A lot of teenagers find drug use enjoyable and might find it hard to refuse out of peer pressure, but that does not make it any less important for responsible adults to compel them to quit and go into rehab if necessary, by all means possible.
2) Sometimes you have the choice of solving a problem nice and slow … strategizing, making policies, consulting people, expressing reverence for native customs etc …
At other times, you have to take decisions on the spot, without the luxury of armchair meditations, and take risks for a greater good. This is what brings us to my and your second posts resp.
@deeeziner (110):
Let me begin by clearing this confusion up. I am not trying to paint you as an uncaring individual or a freak. I’m only raising these questions in order to make my point that respect for another group’s traditions is extremely significant, but there are cases where this respect translates to tolerance of certain things which, in my opinion, should not be tolerated. So, do not take my points personally … once we’re done discussing this, we can go out for coffee, if that’s okay with you
Now, back to the discussion.
You mention how you would heal the world if it were possible but it isn’t, how the scenario is not relevant to the list, how the practices enlisted are not what they seem to you and me in the context of their cultures and how sociologists should be lynched in your opinion of my opinion.
First up, I wasn’t asking you a Miss Universe question, I was giving you a choice that is faced on a much larger scale by governments of several nations. I completely agree with you that tactless force can further worsen the situation, so the process of providing modern medical facilities to sick people who might not be aware of their existence or effectiveness should be approached with care and respect. However, faced with the precise choice that I outlined in my previous post, I would prescribe and practice force. Would that always be possible considering that I might end up dead trying to retrieve a sick child ? No … not always. Would that lead to further complications ? Likely yes. But whenever possible, I’ll do my best to save a life now and worry about ostracization later.
As for sociologists, I don’t think they wield enough power to bring about the changes that I’ve been supporting and you’ve been questioning. They are society’s eyes and ears along with photographers and journalists. If any of them had a good chance to prevent, say, a ritual murder and didn’t do it out of scholarly interests, then I condemn his action too.
As for children in cities, I do think that they should be treated too … where did I indicate otherwise ?
I totally agree with you about the people who come to watch the jumpers in Vanuatu being more depraved than the ones who try to make a profit out of it. That is also the feeling that I reserve for spectators in bullfights in Spain, just in case you felt I was biased in favor of European/Western cultures.
What have “I” done for these people, now that “I” am aware of their horrible doings ? Why, I have shared my opinions on this most esteemed website with complete strangers and proceeded to purchase front-row tickets to watch the next round of Harmar cow jumping with castrated females from sub-Saharan Africa, while wearing a baby seal waistcoat and eating illegally hunted shark fins.
I have not had an opportunity to make a difference, but that should not restrict my right to express my thoughts freely. I acknowledge the presence of vast grey areas in the landscape of what is right and wrong but I have pointed out some things that I do not see as grey.
I hope the fact that this is a bad analogy doesn’t dull the similarity between what these people talked about and what’s missing with how some people approach Hikikomories.The thing is, unless there are signs of physical abuse, a Hikikomori once committing a crime has no valid moral comeback to represent his actions anymore and at the same time, a Hikikomori who hasn’t committed a crime can’t really justify that they are in the right by warning someone that they will try to hurt them if said people tried to forcefully invade their identity. (nor will warnings often be heeded otherwise people wouldn’t have invaded the Hikikomori’s room) While it’s true that unlike the conversation above, Hikikomories are seen as a negative act precisely because they’re anti-dominant culture rather than a part of it but it is also somewhat true that for some Hikikomories, once they become one, the lifestyle becomes their dominant culture. In fact part of the reason why some of them can succeed at shocking people they live with by suddenly becoming a Hikikomori is because the people they live with are the ones who actually don’t pay attention to them and they miss the signs until suddenly it’s in their face. That’s why pre-Hikikomori people can suddenly turn the Hikikomori lifestyle to their dominant lifestyle: they used their current environment to make them smoothly “assimilate” their identity to their current culture until “they exist as Hikikomories”. Unfortunately some people, particularly humiliated parents who live with them, interpret it the opposite way. They think it’s a fad or a sudden action and like many things sometimes they either try to fix things “their” cultural way and it endangers them if not flat-out causes the Hikikomori to murder them. This doesn’t justify the Hikikomori’s actions from a “social moral compass” perspective but it hopefully sheds some clues as to how the fight and flight mechanics of Hikikomories works. (at least for some of us although I haven’t experienced this situation nor am I a Hikikomori who has done a crime while I was a Hikikomori) It’s actually very in-line with the philosophy behind liberty particularly the harm principle. A Hikikomori sometimes turn Hikikomori not only as a flight response but as a “fair” response: That is even though from some outsider’s perspective they are asking to be fed and wanting the right to be lazy and hold back people who live with them, in their mind, they are doing the one thing that allows them to live their life without imposing who they are to others and imposing only themselves to themselves. (Of course this particular issue avoids mental disappointments they cause to others but this is among the disputed areas for liberty too.) That’s why this “sacrificial” mindset gets changed to fight when another person tries to impose their will on the Hikikomori. Particularly in the subject of getting them out of their rooms. This doesn’t mean Hikikomories are unable to resist hurting someone but it is a predictable reaction they may have because it is indeed true that the invader didn’t handle their approach well.@Wrichik (112):
@Wrichik (113):I believe our discussion can be honed to one response, so here goes.
To your observances about Indian culture and the eradication of sati, I agree with what you have expressed, although I will clarify for myself that I laud the Indians. Primarily for the fact that they have chosen to lay the practice of sati by the wayside, when they could have easily reinstated it’s importance to their society upon their gain of freedom.
Since it was the British that made India aware of their potential participation in the scheme of world-wide trade, politics and cultural exchange, and the standards of living and moral and ethical values involved in such an exchange, then the Brits should receive their due as well.
Taking us to the observations you have made:
1.) Peer pressure and isolated acts of abuse do not equal community collective consciousness and tribal ritual initiation. These activities/rites are not engaged in for the purpose of personal gratification on behalf of the elders presiding. Death of the participants is in NO way the desired outcome of these rites. Quite the opposite. The survival of the teens in question is foremost in the minds of the elders. For how else can these newly matured kids be of service to their families and their community.
Not to mention that these are the beloved children of the elders performing the rites. NO ONE on Earth could love these children more than their parents and close neighbors.
And if you accept those two above mentioned concepts, then…
2.) Yes. The task of “educating” and “modernizing” SHOULD be well planned and incorporated. Should be slow and methodical. Of course, this would mean assimilating these communities into “our” society. Thus changing permanently or possibly making these tribes EXTINCT. (Obviously none of the tribes mentioned in this list are in the position of ever becoming an “India”. i.e. The difference between a tribe and a nation.)
But I don’t see circumstances, except in the extreme, (as in natural disaster, control of epidemic infection, or being in the direct path of modern warfare), for big brother to have to initiate an abrupt and shocking change to the ideology of these people.
I have read and re-read your comments #112, and for the most part it seems that you and I are actually on the same page.
For the sake of our discussion I would like to point out that my original comments were aimed at those whose initial response here was “That’s barbaric and unacceptable and should be outlawed immediately if not sooner!” (Not verbatim, but the general gist of the combined comments.)
I had tried to make a short comment, (look where we are now…rolls eyes.
) to point out to those commeters, that distasteful as we may find these practices from the confines of our computer enhanced world, these tribes deserve a subtle approach from us “moderns” to change their ways.
As for your post 113, I apologize if I made you out to be an “armchair activist”. Even if that were an accurate description of you, I would have to describe myself likewise.
But I laughed at your “Miss Universe question” reference. Obviously you haven’t seen a current picture of me.
So again, I see us on the same page regarding your last posting.
Enough so, that I extend this invitation…If I should ever be in your neighborhood, you choose the coffeehouse and I’ll pick-up the bill. By the way I also like pie with my coffee.
