Strange cultural differences people don't think about.

[Mightysword]

The thing is, though - Is it really legitimate? Some people want to be on the Cool Kids Bus and all the Cool Kids seem to be turning into Sketcher-wearing Feminists... Where did all the Birkenstocks go?

Idk, but even the cool kids in my culture wouldn't say that word, because it's not a 'cool' word to say, like you said I believe a lot of kids here use the word because they simply think it's cool ... and why do you think they have that impression?

Ah.. But, it's not, is it? It's not really a shift towards "conservative-oriental culture" is it? After all, almost none of those people know what conservative-oriental culture is. When I was growing up, parents didn't turn towards their kids and say "OK, kids, we do things in this household according to conservative-oriental culture." When I watched "Happy Days" on television, The Fonz didn't say "Conservative-Oriental culture is cool! Ayyyyyyy!"

Certainly, I doubt most of your activists on these issue actually look at some blue-print from an Eastern culture and have a eureka moment. Doesn't change the fact that it is shifting to that same value though. Another example is this: like I said all K12 in our culture must wear uniform, right. Of course, we were given the reason why:

- It is simple, it's time for school, put on that outfit. Antagonizing about "what should I wear today" is considered an unnecessary distraction for student.
- Students come from different background and wealth, but all that differences about social status is left at the school gate. In class, everyone look the same, and thus will study the same free of any materialistic prejudice.

Good reason, and tbh I doubt as students most of us thought much about it, it's a rule and we simply follow. 11 years of that and of course I would be surprise when I came to the US and don't have to wear a uniform. When I asked why, the answer was something like "oh here we value the freedom of expression, and dressing the way you want is a way for the students to express themselves and we don't want to limit that". Ok.

So ... this is not in the US, but I think a few weeks ago right before Chrismast I read an article (not sure on where) about a school in the UK decided to ban designer the coat to prevent "poverty-shaming". The first reaction was positive, enough that the school promised into similar action and increase the number of uniform days, of course it has also faced some backlast since then. So ... imagine here I am, seeing Western culture try to argue over something that has been part of my culture since ... before most people who are arguing about it, what do you think I was thinking.

First of all, don't even try to bring "Asian developers" into a discussion about video game developers and anything remotely to do with any sort of "beauty", "feminine", or "sexy." Just... no.

I think I know what you mean, or maybe I don't. Asian games always feature glamours figure because:

- We don't see a point of faking fantasy.
- The consummate are expected to know the line between fantasy and reality.

Take me as an example, as shown above I prefer having glamorous figures in my game, but in real life I'm also ingrained to value inner beauty over physical beauty. There is no conflict for me there, thus I don't see the point in creating a ugly fantasy to make a point.

Secondly - There is a longstanding tradition of teaching "values" in many mediums, including "games." Suitable games often include topical social statements, much like Morality Plays.

True, but usually not the "in your face" style that US developers seem to do. Other culture does this very subtly, and usually it's done on a macro level, it usually tries to send a message on the "value" instead of specify the issue. Some of the games from North American developer (and against, I'm emphasizing this is currently a problem unique to this location) make me feel like "oh hey, I just read something like this on CNN!".

There is a median, isn't there? Isn't there a point where we can balance "caring for a child as if they were a child" and "teaching a child how to be a good adult when they grow up?" Isn't there? Can't a child feel as if they are loved by their family, understand that they will eventually be responsible for their own life, be cared for and feel "special" in the eyes of their loving and nurturing parents...

Sure, so the question is how much you think our culture (as in the US's culture, since I'm a citizen too) is doing to achieve that median? Believe it or not, I think it is the Eastern culture that actually closer to that median than the Western culture, like my answer to Usenko above, it simply doesn't sound like that because Eastern culture do it in a much subtle way instead of of trumpeting it left and right. Here, I'll give you another small example:

- Despite all the harsh expectation, Asian kids are shifted to their adulthood in a much more gradual way:
+ Parents are expected to cover college expense so the teenage can focus on their study.
+ Family responsibility are shifted in phase. You are expected to take over tiny responsibility gradually, and by that I don't mean just paying the bill. Making decision, taking role in ceremony, and of course financial burden.
+ Only when you have a career, and settle down with a family, that's when the parents considered their job is done.

- Whether from my perception, it seems it's pretty normal for parents here to consider when the kid turn 18 they need to become independents. Many parents I came across (and students giving their story) seem to point out that it's normal for when you become a college students, you're an adult and have to be in charge of your life. And you know ... it's not even cultural, it's the law, it's illegal to reveal college student performance to their parents in here in the US. I'm not say it's something always happen, but it's definitely be considered normal here in the US culture, but in an Asian culture that would considered to be irresponsible, and that the parents have not done enough for their children future.

all without growing up wacko nutjobs on the edge of suicide or mass-murder?

Of course, and to that note here is some funny fact for you. According to data from United Nations Office on Drugs and Crime, here is the latest homicide rate per region:

Americas 16.3
Africa 12.5
Europe 3.0
Oceania 3.0
Asia 2.9

One more things that make the number even more impressive is that I can argue the relative low population from Europe and Oceania can certainly help them in this case, the Asia bloc contain the largest contingent of population of all including some of the most volatile area, yet it manages to stay at the bottom.

See who at the top and who at the bottom? Of course, you can argue that America region is skewl by the violence in South America, but note that Asia's data also contain unstable reason like South Asia and the middle East. So let's take a look further at some particular countries:

United State: 5.35
Japan: 0.28
China: 0.62
South Korea: 0.70
Singapore: 0.32
Vietnam: 1.52

Do you know why I listed those Asian countries in particular? Because in the region, these are known as culture that put the most pressure on their youth, as well as having the most draconian discipline system in education institutions ... yet they don't seem to murder people as much

[Mightysword]

Wait, what? Here in Australia teaching is mostly a 3-5 year Bachelors degree or a 1-2 year Masters course (i.e. on top of a specialist Bachelors degree). It is technically legal for schools to employ non-qualified teachers, but I'm not aware of any schools that actually do that (even one school I know run by a religious cult at least makes sure its teachers are qualified, even though they actually have an anti-intellectual slant!).

You're saying in the USA people can become teachers without a degree?

No, they do need to have a degree in a field. What I am saying is in my culture, becoming a teacher is a "career" choice that must be made early, and not a fall back or plan B option. Just like someone who want to become a doctor will go to Med school after highschool, someone who want to become a teacher must go to the college of education. It's a 4 years process, and you'll receive a bachelor degree that will qualify you for teaching, and most school will put you through a 2 years trainee period fresh out of college. Like I said, you do need to have a certification to teach here in the US, but I have the impression it's nowhere a process as rigorous as the one in Asia. What usually happens is teacher have a degree (BS/BA or MS/MA) in a field, and then obtain a certification later to teach. Basically, it's pedigree before pedagogy. In fact, no teachers I know actually have an education decree as their first, it's just something they picked up later when they decided to start teaching. I actually went through one program myself, and as far as my experience go it only teaches you the technically how to cover your chosen field. It does not teach you the interpersonal skill on how to handle students on academy unrelated matter. You can pick up those skill too, but usually through workplace training, or getting another decree in communication or something. Of course, that is if you assume everyone gonna go and try to pick up all the relevant skill like collecting eggs on thanksgiving days.

A degree in education in Asia though, is usually a all in one package deal.

P.S: In fact, I think this issue has only become a soul searching within the US education system only recently. People just seems to realize NOW that we have a lot of smart specialists without teaching skill as teachers. The push for pedagogy in parallel or even above pedigree is definitely a very recent thing.

[Morkonan]

... and why do you think they have that impression?

The "Forbidden" is always "cool" to some pubescents.

(Were there things that were "cool" like that in your own Asian culture? Things that were controversial or forbidden that adolescents giggled about or tried to emulate?)

I used the word "pubescents" because those are the only ones that could meaningfully use that word. And they don't have any furniture with corners in their room because they've rubbed them all off... It's a very crazy time, physiologically speaking, and not much would surprise me there.

Certainly, I doubt most of your activists on these issue actually look at some blue-print from an Eastern culture and have a eureka moment. Doesn't change the fact that it is shifting to that same value though.

And, that's the whole point - It's not specific to Asian culture. Or, did you think it was? Could you imagine conditions existing that would promote that sort of "educational culture?" Imagine Science-Fiction environments, if you need to. They're wonderful for ferreting out these sorts of socio-economic-political-cultural conditions that could promote things that some people might think are "extreme" behaviors or attitudes.

Wiki: Right of Passage

In some cultures, this is a supreme event in the life of a young person. In some cultures, it's a fairly brutal trial that they train for all their young lives until the moment they must attempt it.

Is the pressure to succeed in some particularly archaic and tribal "Rights of Passage" any different than the stress that may be placed on some students in some cultures? I'm not saying that this applies just to Asian cultures, but to all human cultures where there is an extreme emphasis on success, achievement, or passing some culturally significant point. What is the impact on those young people in such cultural systems?

Aside from the expected "economic impact" let's look at the psychological effects that are achieved with such cultural imperatives: Wiki: Right of Passage Psychological Effects (Not sure if the link will parse well.)

By perpetuating these cultural imperatives, the society is promoting these psychological and social effects, isn't it? And, where a society promotes such effects, there must be a reason that they are valued. But, how long can a stable society exist if some of the qualities they wish to promote are also inevitably destructive should certain likely conditions occur?

If a tribe of people promote an increasing emphasis on group identity and someone builds a road to their village that is now traveled by a bunch of strangers, how long will those strangers remain in possession of their own heads? What will win? Will the cultural isolation promoted by ever-increasing group identity win out over the forced introduction of "The People From Over the Hill" or will globalism and cultural acceptance win?

..11 years of that and of course I would be surprise when I came to the US and don't have to wear a uniform. When I asked why, the answer was something like "oh here we value the freedom of expression, and dressing the way you want is a way for the students to express themselves and we don't want to limit that". Ok.

And, some districts in the US require School Uniforms for the same reasons you mentioned and some don't require them for the same reasons you mentioned... We didn't have any "uniforms" when I was in school except for Physical Education Uniforms, which was a pair of shorts and a t-shirt with the school's logo on it. (To keep our other clothes from getting dirty during P.E. and, one assumes, to keep kids fully and adequately clothed. If left up to their own devices, who knows what some kids would have worn during exercise class and sports instruction?

.. before most people who are arguing about it, what do you think I was thinking.

For myself, I think there might have been some desire to promote "conformity" in your previous (Being an American, AFAIK, you're one of "us" whether you like it or not! ) society rather than certain other values that were put forth. Uniforms of various types have long been used as extra reminders and inducements for "conformity." It's a very ancient tradition in human culture, especially in striated cultures where one's social or legal standing was mandated by the society. (Can't where purple, have to wear a pin, can't carry any weapon, must wear a collar, allowed to wear a full toga, allowed to wear silly hats etc...)

Take me as an example, as shown above I prefer having glamorous figures in my game, but in real life I'm also ingrained to value inner beauty over physical beauty. There is no conflict for me there, thus I don't see the point in creating a ugly fantasy to make a point.

Uh... OK. Let's just say that some "Asian games" go waaaay further than that. And, in fact, some "Asian games" approach some subjects a bit too... freely. Some would, apparently, think that putting kitten ears and a tail on a character that looks like a prepubescent girl is sufficient evidence necessary to avoid a prison sentence, even in their own culture. And... let's just avoid the discussion, 'cause eventually someone is going to ask for an example and then we're all doomed as the cancer spreads.

I do remember some games of Asian origin that had "ugly" characters in them. Fight games, mostly, though.

But, that does bring up the subject of "Heroic Characters." There is, of course, an ideal of "Heroic Figure" and it's generally pretty solid - Smaller head, broader shoulders, narrow waist, longer legs, and, where secondary sex characteristics are dominant, more prominence of those characteristics. More well-defined muscles, larger pectorals for men, larger boobies for women, etc, etc... Think of "Super Hero" proportions in comic books for a good example of likely "Heroic Proportions." These are not constant, though, through all societies/cultures, it seems. For instance, there appears to be a very strong influence in some Asian male "Heroes" to emphasize much more feminine proportions. Childlike proportions, as well, with larger heads, bigger eyes or slightly more separation between the eyes, smaller lower faces/jaws, etc, also make their way into Asian Heroic Ideals. (Note: This is not the same as the "Ideal Proportion" when it comes down to human physiology and phenotypes. AFAIK, those are fairly consistent across cultures/societies with little variance.)

PS - IMO, "Sex Selection" could play something of an evolutionarily reinforced role, here. There could be sex-selection preferences that could influence such heroic and ideal human form proportion interpretations if there is any evolutionarily reinforced component to them. I assume the latter has to exist, therefore the former is necessarily applicable.

... Some of the games from North American developer (and against, I'm emphasizing this is currently a problem unique to this location) make me feel like "oh hey, I just read something like this on CNN!".

Some of that may just be due to topical subjects that can be advanced in marketing or can be used for player involvement, satisfaction, and "relevance" to a player's experience, making it a bit easier for them to find extra value in a game. I don't think many AAA games are ever seriously trying to address any relevant social issues purely for the purpose of attempting to put forth some interpretations of "good moral judgement." There isn't much money to be made, there, according to the Grand Theft Auto franchise. The days of "Everything I ever needed to know I learned from "Star Trek"" are over. (The original series taught me so much "good" stuff.)

Sure, so the question is how much you think our culture (as in the US's culture, since I'm a citizen too) is doing to achieve that median? Believe it or not, I think it is the Eastern culture that actually closer to that median than the Western culture, like my answer to Usenko above, it simply doesn't sound like that because Eastern culture do it in a much subtle way instead of of trumpeting it left and right. Here, I'll give you another small example:

But, that we can cherry-pick whatever "good" qualities we find in a society's culture doesn't mean that we can then apply them to another. And, some of them might not even be relevant. Some of them may also reflect conflicting "values" too, right?

Is Asian culture better at caring for their children than, let's say, US Western Culture?

"Asian" singled out, click on the Bar Chart for all totals

Some are better, some are not. Some are fairly equal, like China. But, then again, the Chinese government has waged an extensive campaign against certain practices like drowning babies, which used to be "a thing" if they weren't born with external plumbing (Male). Reporting may also be a bit lacking, considering the wide variances of economic development and suitable infrastructure in China. And, if China's Five Year Plan ever goes pear-shaped, the last agency to know about it is going to be some silly UN agency that relies on self-reporting from the Chinese government... "We're all doing fine, here. How are you?" <rampant screaming and explosions in the background, cue Wookie roar>

But, what about the "culture" that children are expected to "grow into?" Keeping in mind that the "Rights of Passage" mentioned above is to demonstrate cultural/social traditions that are used to reinforce certain desired things, how does how a child is educated prepare them for the society they are expected to enter?

You mentioned earlier the emphasis on things like "networking" and other social contacts in US schools. For myself, while this was discussed, it wasn't really a topic in my gradeschool or college curriculum other than to present its advantages for those seeking employment. (It was a serious study in Sociology and studies that focused on how people sought and gained employment, though. It just wasn't "personalized" very much.)

Back in college/university, it was determined at the time that the primary means that people used to obtain a job that provided them a working wage was simply "personal contacts" or, in other words, "word of mouth." People were informed or introduced to employment opportunities by people they personally knew in some way. Later, as in as I studied the subject, there was a growing interest in how this expanded to include social and professional organizations. People broadened their contacts with others to afford them better employment opportunities.

These days... if you're not on Linkedin, you aren't getting hired by anyone. And, "you" are no longer what is presented at an interview for a job, but what is on your Linkedin page or resume no matter how awesome of a person you are actually "in person." Don't even think you'll get a good job where you live, right now, either, since you'll probably have to travel to where the good jobs are.

All of the above is fairly easy to achieve, though, in the US compared to some other countries isn't it? And, if expanding one''s "Network" is much easier and if people still find the best jobs by "word of mouth" it's much easier for qualified people to compete for such jobs, right? Promoting those ideas might actually be much more of a benefit to students in the US than it might be in other markets.

Of course, and to that note here is some funny fact for you. According to data from United Nations Office on Drugs and Crime, here is the latest homicide rate per region:
....
Do you know why I listed those Asian countries in particular? Because in the region, these are known as culture that put the most pressure on their youth, as well as having the most draconian discipline system in education institutions ... yet they don't seem to murder people as much

I didn't mean to start that particular discussion. It should be obvious that one can't easily draw conclusions of "causality" here, especially if we're just talking about cultural differences in raising and educating children.

My point was that can't we come upon a system that reinforces what we think is "good to reinforce" that doesn't have a great possibility of producing broken people but still produces and encourages adults that are exceptionally capable human beings?

IMO, to get down to it, there's a growing discrepancy, in my opinion, between the evolution of the "family unit" and even the responsibilities of those within that unit (as you suggest) and what could generally be considered to be productive and beneficial for the society in question - The U.S. and some similar societies. I think we can come to an agreement on the basics necessary to promote a stable society with the values that we profess to hold. I just don't see a lot of evidence of people pursuing that agenda these days.

There's a heck of a lot of very demanding "static" in our society on the subject of what's best for "us." That static is actively promoted and valued by, IMO, agents (people or groups of people) that don't give a crap about our society or our ever-changing culture. In many cases, they're actively benefiting by promoting ideals that are in opposition to our culture's current values and exploiting the results.

For a very long time on this forum, I've occasionally made the claim that "I could get a house-cat elected as President of the United States." Well... there ya go. Though I had nothing at all to do with it, we now have one and it's apparently sitting on Trump's head.

[Usenko]

Wait, what? Here in Australia teaching is mostly a 3-5 year Bachelors degree or a 1-2 year Masters course (i.e. on top of a specialist Bachelors degree). It is technically legal for schools to employ non-qualified teachers, but I'm not aware of any schools that actually do that (even one school I know run by a religious cult at least makes sure its teachers are qualified, even though they actually have an anti-intellectual slant!).

You're saying in the USA people can become teachers without a degree?

No, they do need to have a degree in a field. What I am saying is in my culture, becoming a teacher is a "career" choice that must be made early, and not a fall back or plan B option. Just like someone who want to become a doctor will go to Med school after highschool, someone who want to become a teacher must go to the college of education. It's a 4 years process, and you'll receive a bachelor degree that will qualify you for teaching, and most school will put you through a 2 years trainee period fresh out of college. Like I said, you do need to have a certification to teach here in the US, but I have the impression it's nowhere a process as rigorous as the one in Asia. What usually happens is teacher have a degree (BS/BA or MS/MA) in a field, and then obtain a certification later to teach. Basically, it's pedigree before pedagogy. In fact, no teachers I know actually have an education decree as their first, it's just something they picked up later when they decided to start teaching. I actually went through one program myself, and as far as my experience go it only teaches you the technically how to cover your chosen field. It does not teach you the interpersonal skill on how to handle students on academy unrelated matter. You can pick up those skill too, but usually through workplace training, or getting another decree in communication or something. Of course, that is if you assume everyone gonna go and try to pick up all the relevant skill like collecting eggs on thanksgiving days.

A degree in education in Asia though, is usually a all in one package deal.

P.S: In fact, I think this issue has only become a soul searching within the US education system only recently. People just seems to realize NOW that we have a lot of smart specialists without teaching skill as teachers. The push for pedagogy in parallel or even above pedigree is definitely a very recent thing.

I find that quite astounding. One tends to assume that much that you'd experience in the USA would be pretty similar to Australia, but this is poles apart from my experience.

Even if you have a relevant degree in a field, in Australia you won't become a teacher unless you have done a teaching degree as well. This can be done as a one year course if you already have a bachelors (full time), but it is a serious study, and not undertaken as a "plan B". If you are not fully trained in pedagogy you will not get a job as a teacher in Australia (although to be fair, I don't think anyone would try it).

In Australia many teachers quit by about 2 years into their career, so the teacher education process aims to try to improve the odds. If you survive your first 5 years, you're probably good to go for the long haul.

Whilst it is possible to do a Masters to convert from another degree[1], this is not the usual approach. Most teachers start with the 4 year Bachelor of Education course.

Of course, and to that note here is some funny fact for you. According to data from United Nations Office on Drugs and Crime, here is the latest homicide rate per region:

Americas 16.3
Africa 12.5
Europe 3.0
Oceania 3.0
Asia 2.9

One more things that make the number even more impressive is that I can argue the relative low population from Europe and Oceania can certainly help them in this case, the Asia bloc contain the largest contingent of population of all including some of the most volatile area, yet it manages to stay at the bottom.

See who at the top and who at the bottom? Of course, you can argue that America region is skewl by the violence in South America, but note that Asia's data also contain unstable reason like South Asia and the middle East. So let's take a look further at some particular countries:

United State: 5.35
Japan: 0.28
China: 0.62
South Korea: 0.70
Singapore: 0.32
Vietnam: 1.52

Do you know why I listed those Asian countries in particular? Because in the region, these are known as culture that put the most pressure on their youth, as well as having the most draconian discipline system in education institutions ... yet they don't seem to murder people as much

I'm afraid Australia wrecks those neat stats for you (0.94). Granted we're a little higher than Asia (but our suicide rate is far lower), but don't put us with those American nutjobs!

Incidentally, Oceania is a little bit of an artificial region. Think of it as a sort of "Misc" drawer. People who live in it do not identify themselves that way, because the cultural differences between Australia/New Zealand and the Pacific Islands are immense - chalk and cheese. Papua New Guinea and Timor L'Este tend to raise the homicide figures for the region. Unfortunately, in Australia homicides are also concentrated in the Aboriginal community.

[1] I started doing a Bachelor of Science, and wound up with a Bachelor of Arts in History, with a diploma of Education - that was the old way of doing things. They changed the system as I was completing university. Nowadays the diploma of education (itself quite a rigorous course involving pedagogy and educational psychology) has been replaced with the Masters of Education, so if you already have a bachelors you need to trade up to become a teacher.

[pjknibbs]

Even if you have a relevant degree in a field, in Australia you won't become a teacher unless you have done a teaching degree as well. This can be done as a one year course if you already have a bachelors (full time), but it is a serious study, and not undertaken as a "plan B". If you are not fully trained in pedagogy you will not get a job as a teacher in Australia (although to be fair, I don't think anyone would try it).

There's a similar process in England and Wales--you have to have a Bachelor's degree and also sufficient additional training to achieve QTS (Qualified Teacher Status). This can be done on the job, but a lot of teachers opt for a one-year PGCE (Postgraduate Certificate of Education) course that automatically grants them QTS when finished. (The process in Scotland is a little different, but I'm not sure entirely how).

Oddly, it used to be the case that you could teach in a public school (e.g. what any sensible country would call "private" schools, ones where the parents pay a fee to put their children through) without QTS--you only needed that to teach in a state school. I have no idea if that still applies today.

[BugMeister]

Even if you have a relevant degree in a field, in Australia you won't become a teacher unless you have done a teaching degree as well. This can be done as a one year course if you already have a bachelors (full time), but it is a serious study, and not undertaken as a "plan B". If you are not fully trained in pedagogy you will not get a job as a teacher in Australia (although to be fair, I don't think anyone would try it).

does that apply to lecturing as well, Mr U..?

- we don't see many lecturers in our state-run schools, btw..
- more "jailers" and "zoo-keepers", I'm afraid..

[Mightysword]

(Were there things that were "cool" like that in your own Asian culture? Things that were controversial or forbidden that adolescents giggled about or tried to emulate?)

Would you be surprise if I say no? At least, I can't think of one right on top of my head. Now, kids be kids, they always come up with some mischief and do thing outside of the rules, I'm a regular offender myself both at home and at school. But I can say the reason was ever about that particular "mindset". Again, I think you downplay or trying hard to avoid the point about consistency. Seeing kids utter certain words while may have something with that mindset of being cool, but ultimately I believe it's because they see it being accepted and used freely by others in their environment. The kids in my culture doesn't use it because they're not being shown an example.

In fact, take smoking as an example. Parents and teachers in Asian come down on it pretty harsh. Yet you do see highschool students try to smoke behind the back, why? It's simple really, because the adult does it, so no matter how bad you tell the kids or how much you forbid them, they are exposed to bad example. Again, teaching a kids is always about setting up consistency environment.

And, that's the whole point - It's not specific to Asian culture. Or, did you think it was? Could you imagine conditions existing that would promote that sort of "educational culture?" Imagine Science-Fiction environments, if you need to. They're wonderful for ferreting out these sorts of socio-economic-political-cultural conditions that could promote things that some people might think are "extreme" behaviors or attitudes.

Hum, don't know why you so hang up on this. It serve as a point of reference, so why not? If you hear someone "you look just like person A", it's not necessary you are going out of you way to impersonate person A, it just means it's a quick description on the similiarity. The original point for me is that I find it a bit amusing to see in recent years that the liberal/progressive culture of the West trying to shift toward some old/tradition conservative value of oriental culture. Whether you're aware of that, or want to call it under a different label make the same difference for me, because it is my point of reference.

Wiki: Right of Passage

In some cultures, this is a supreme event in the life of a young person. In some cultures, it's a fairly brutal trial that they train for all their young lives until the moment they must attempt it.
Is the pressure to succeed in some particularly archaic and tribal "Rights of Passage" any different than the stress that may be placed on some students in some cultures? I'm not saying that this applies just to Asian cultures, but to all human cultures where there is an extreme emphasis on success, achievement, or passing some culturally significant point. What is the impact on those young people in such cultural systems?
...
If a tribe of people promote an increasing emphasis on group identity and someone builds a road to their village that is now traveled by a bunch of strangers, how long will those strangers remain in possession of their own heads? What will win? Will the cultural isolation promoted by ever-increasing group identity win out over the forced introduction of "The People From Over the Hill" or will globalism and cultural acceptance win?

Again, why keep cherry pick on extreme examples? If we're talking about culture, I think we should talk about what consider to be the social/average norm. All of my examples can be readily verified by just taking a few steps outside of your house, be it in Eastern or Western culture.

And, some districts in the US require School Uniforms for the same reasons you mentioned and some don't require them for the same reasons you mentioned... We didn't have any "uniforms" when I was in school except for Physical Education Uniforms, which was a pair of shorts and a t-shirt with the school's logo on it. (To keep our other clothes from getting dirty during P.E. and, one assumes, to keep kids fully and adequately clothed. If left up to their own devices, who knows what some kids would have worn during exercise class and sports instruction?

Mork, repeat after me, say this word 10 times: consistency. See, when that school in the UK does it, it became a point of context between different philosophy. In Asian culture the discussion never appears because every single person (or schools) do it. Again I have to remind you we're discussing things not base on a system individual merit, but within the framework of culture. To me, both the eastern and western justification for having or not having uniform are valid, but that's not the point. The point here is Uniform in Asian is a 'culture'. If you press for a reason behind a culture you will certainly be provided with an answer, but the point is not many inside that culture would even bother to ask in the first place, we just do it. That's why it's called culture

Uh... OK. Let's just say that some "Asian games" go waaaay further than that. And, in fact, some "Asian games" approach some subjects a bit too... freely. Some would, apparently, think that putting kitten ears and a tail on a character that looks like a prepubescent girl is sufficient evidence necessary to avoid a prison sentence, even in their own culture. And... let's just avoid the discussion, 'cause eventually someone is going to ask for an example and then we're all doomed as the cancer spreads.

By Asian I assume you mean Japanese Here is some food for thought for you: remember how I mentioned that despite having a very strict protocol for intergender contact, my culture still able to use gender barrier as a disciplinary tool in the classroom. You admit it yourself it seems to be an impossibilities to be surrounded by the opposite sex for year and maintain composure the way I described, and the external factor must be huge. It's not that different with the Japanese culture really. They have the biggest sex industry in the region, yet at the sametime, it's also one of the most conservative culture. How can it achieve that? The answer is very clear ... if you can connect the dots, I already gave you plenty of hints though.

[Mightysword]

You mentioned earlier the emphasis on things like "networking" and other social contacts in US schools. For myself, while this was discussed, it wasn't really a topic in my gradeschool or college curriculum other than to present its advantages for those seeking employment. (It was a serious study in Sociology and studies that focused on how people sought and gained employment, though. It just wasn't "personalized" very much.)

Back in college/university, it was determined at the time that the primary means that people used to obtain a job that provided them a working wage was simply "personal contacts" or, in other words, "word of mouth." People were informed or introduced to employment opportunities by people they personally knew in some way. Later, as in as I studied the subject, there was a growing interest in how this expanded to include social and professional organizations. People broadened their contacts with others to afford them better employment opportunities.

That's not what I'm getting at, so I'll give a picture of how the K12 classroom is structured in our culture, I think it'll explain the point better:

- A class will usually contain 40-50 students.
- It is divided into 4 sub-group. Each group will have a captain and vice captain. These two does not necessary have good academia performance, but expected to have above average behavior. They are in charge of things like checking if their group had done homework, keep order during lecture, dividing tasks during school activities.
- Each class is lead by a Class President. This person is the most well rounded in term of academia, and usually is the best or second best performer, also have exemplary behavior, often time also charismatic. In charge of acting as a liaison between the students and the teachers, as well as making formal reports of what going on in the class.
- Each class also have two vice presidents. A VP of Academia, and a VP of Discipline. The VP of Academia is without contest the best students in the class, but often time too soft to effectively making decision. He/she in charge of look after class performance, especially provide tutelage and help to struggling students, usually the most approachable person in the classroom. The VP of Discipline is like the opposite, doesn't need to have the best grade (but usually above average) but is a person who does not afraid of stepping on foots to keep the class in line. Together with the president, these two VP form the leadership team of a class.
- Not all classes have this, but it's not rare to have a set of subject specialist. These students are not all rounders like the leadership team, neither having the best behavior/discipline, how they tend to be the best in class on particular subject. So, struggling with homework, don't understand that last lecture ...etc... these are the students you go to for question.
- Schoolwise, you have the students council, how it is formed/called/operated depending on the cultures but it's there in most. Mine is a council formed by all class Presidents and their VP, Japan actually have a separate body and set of officers for that. But it functions as a representative of the student body and make sure the school policy from administration is inline with the student's best interest. I don't they have have the VP of discipline, but in return they have a disciplinary committee (run by students of course) along side the student council .

So that's the gist of it, of course the whole structure are phased in gradually as you move through the K12 years, but it's definitely started in first grade. By the time it comes to full maturity in highschool, the students actually function almost as an autonomous body instead of being micro by the teachers, something that I think Western culture mistakenly have the complete opposite impression. And the system is designed that necessary values are taught and ingrained in the students, whether they are aware of it or not. By contrast:

- I never heard the teacher promoting the idea of "leadership" when I was a student. But in retrospective, I think the system have more built in leadership experience then the one in the US, FAR MORE in fact. But guess which system yelling the word "leadership" louder and more often?
- Most people think schools in Asia is very restrictive and dictatorial when they heard about our cultures, but I think it actually provides far more opportunity for freedom of self-govern than American school do. The teachers in Asian institutional is a lot more scary and dictatorial, true, but only if you screw up and involve them, and the self-governing structure is supposed to keep thing to rarely go there.
- It teaches you how to respect authority and know your mistake. Like I said I was regular offender in term of disciplinary, was just that kind of kid. So I ran afoul of the VP of discipline a lot. But you know ... I never hold a grudge, thinking "you're a snitch, stuck up bitch, you rat me out!!!", after all ,the environment allowed no room for such contempt.
- Kids need examples to follow right? And I think the point of having the leadership team is we always know, in no uncertainty term of what we should aim for, and what is expected of us.

Like I said, many of these values are taught and the teachers never really told us they are teaching us those value. A lot of time you only realize it after retrospective look at them once you entered adulthood, at that point the teaching already did it part in shaping your perception. In another word, the culture ran its course, subtly, and consistently. . Again, I wasn't lying or being dramatic when I said "school in Asia is not supposed to be fun" because it is what was said, and it is always a clear expectation from day one. But if someone outside of our culture took that literally as "school in Asia is not fun", then they're badly mistaken.

[Mightysword]

I'm afraid Australia wrecks those neat stats for you (0.94). Granted we're a little higher than Asia (but our suicide rate is far lower), but don't put us with those American nutjobs!

That's actually another interesting point of contrast between Eastern and Western culture, and I think that difference is a vindication of what I have been saying. Whether committing murder or committing suicide, its cause is usually mark the break down of a person's psyche when they can no longer deal with what's going around them. The culture influences how that break down happens though:

- From all I had said so far, you can see the Asian culture leave very little room to argue or make excuse. It has high expectation but at the same time, the kids are also groom and support much farther to meet those expectation. So when an Asian collapse, the direction is "inward". The world had done so much for me and yet I still fail, thus I don't deserve to live, I am sorry - a common theme in Asian suicide notes.

- Like I said earlier, my perception about the US culture is it values individualism greatly, and instill this "you are special" mindset from a very early age, and I dare say it's one of the thing that is maintained consistently in this culture. You're not getting the help you need, you're not getting the support you deserve, it always tries to send this message that everyone can be success if only if they meet the right environment. A very humane message maybe, but the flip side is ... what if someone reach the breaking point? Here, when someone in the US hit that point, the direction of their collapse is "outward". I wasn't given what I need to success, others had taken what that should have been rightfully mine. You know, not counting the one that relate to organize crime, read up the psy-profile of murders in the US and you can see a fairly obvious pattern: they carry a tint of vengeance, the world had fail me, so I take revenge.

Suicide or murder, at the core I think it's the same problem, it just surfaced in two different ways because of cultural influence. I think that is why the rate for those two between Easter and Western culture tend to be the reverse of each others .

[Morkonan]

... The kids in my culture doesn't use it because they're not being shown an example.
... Again, teaching a kids is always about setting up consistency environment.

Yes, kids often emulate their elders and especially those they idolize or look up to. And, I would counter that while consistency is important, stability is probably more important. In the way you use the word, I think that's a more appropriate term.

Hum, don't know why you so hang up on this. It serve as a point of reference, so why not?

Because saying it's "Asian Culture" doesn't have much meaning. Yes, of course, it's a culture you're very familiar with, but I don't really know "what it means." Some of the examples you have cited are very helpful, but there's still that "Asian Culture" idea that isn't really fully defined. So, I was hoping to get it parsed out so it becomes defined.

For instance, it seems that the family unit is very strongly represented, yes? Children are told from a very early age their potential impact and responsibilities regarding the family unit. Further, parents do not or should not consider their familial obligations complete until their children are able to appropriately care for themselves and are able to pursue their adult lives. From my old classes, long ago, I "know" (from books/papers/studies) that the family unit is very important and extended families, including not just parents and their children but surviving older relatives like grandparents or aunts/uncles are important, too. Extended families all living in the same household, if not actually under the same roof, but nearby, are also very common. Are these things true in your experience?

Again, why keep cherry pick on extreme examples? If we're talking about culture, I think we should talk about what consider to be the social/average norm. All of my examples can be readily verified by just taking a few steps outside of your house, be it in Eastern or Western culture.

Because in extreme examples we can often see the impact of various factors much more clearly. They're not always directly translatable to other conditions, but we can at least see evidence in extreme examples that we may not be able to see elsewhere. But, they're still there.

The participants of various rights in that link are all humans. That's a shared variable in all of this, right? Then, maybe the reactions and responses of people in demanding situations that have a lot of social impact can be very similar, even if those specific demands and situations are not? Perhaps there are some similarities between US Western Culture and Asian Culture as well, since they both have human beings involved?

...The point here is Uniform in Asian is a 'culture'. If you press for a reason behind a culture you will certainly be provided with an answer, but the point is not many inside that culture would even bother to ask in the first place, we just do it. That's why it's called culture

Is there something that the uniform represents that is taught to the new generation of children? What qualities does the uniform represent, itself? What is its intrinsic cultural value, if any? And, do adults wear school uniforms? (Not "those" kind of "uniforms," but the ones the schoolchildren wear. )

We agree on the intentions and the purposes of instituting a uniform policy, but is that really "culture?" Maybe it is in Asian? In the US, perhaps it is not yet truly part of our cultural lexicon. But, that does not mean that we are any less aware of the issues or our own intentions for making use of uniforms.

By Asian I assume you mean Japanese

Well, for certain types of "games," yes. But, Korean and even some Chinese markets have games that emphasize certain things that aren't, necessarily, "gamelike." Chinese games, likely due to heavy government crackdowns and licensing, are a bit more tame in that regard than either Korean or Japanese. I can't recall any games specific to other Asian developers, but I'm sure they're also intended for these large markets. (I'm leaving out other "Asian" regions, like India, simply because that's broadening the scope a bit too much.)

...You admit it yourself it seems to be an impossibilities to be surrounded by the opposite sex for year and maintain composure the way I described, and the external factor must be huge. It's not that different with the Japanese culture really. They have the biggest sex industry in the region, yet at the sametime, it's also one of the most conservative culture. How can it achieve that? The answer is very clear ... if you can connect the dots, I already gave you plenty of hints though.

I didn't say I couldn't maintain my composure. My "composure" would be just fine. I sat by a lot of girls in school with absolutely no criminal charges ever filed against me. Do I know why my physiological development demanded that I could not answer the question on the board even though my only thoughts were directed towards solving algebraic equations? @$@$% no! But, that's adolescence for ya.

Japan... Oh, Japan. They got some weird screwed up crap right there, they do. Japan, despite their "sex industry" is one of the most sexually repressed and sexually problematic cultures in Asia. (Not just my opinion.) Casual sexual acts may be easily condoned and even encouraged in certain situations, but meaningful and emotional sexual acts between adults? Not as much, it seems. There are various social movements trying to correct this problem, especially between married couples. There are reasons beyond "industrialization" and "work" and "technology" that is causing Japan's birthrate to plummet.

[Mightysword]

Yes, kids often emulate their elders and especially those they idolize or look up to. And, I would counter that while consistency is important, stability is probably more important. In the way you use the word, I think that's a more appropriate term.

no ... pretty sure consistency is the right word. Stability is more along the line of:

- Don't get into a fight and send your kids to take refuge at their grandparents house.
- Don't divorce and force the kids to choose, and eventually meet your new spouse.
- Don't bury your nose into work so much that you can not have enough face time with your kids.

Those are stability. Tell your kid "this is a bad word, don't use it", then never use it yourself and reprimand any adult who say it within the sense of your kids (which is something Asian parents are REALLY good at), that's consistency. Tell your kid "don't drink, it's bad for you" then go and open a bottle in front of your kid "I can do it because I'm an adult", that's also (in)consistency.

Because saying it's "Asian Culture" doesn't have much meaning.

Except I'm not talking about Asian Culture in 'general'? I think I'm very specific with one or two particular trait, namely the gender awareness and interaction. I don't think there is much room for ambiguity there.

Because in extreme examples we can often see the impact of various factors much more clearly. They're not always directly translatable to other conditions, but we can at least see evidence in extreme examples that we may not be able to see elsewhere. But, they're still there.

The problem with extreme examples is often they conform to existing stereotype, and that is unhelpful in a discussion when some parties might lack the actual exposure to a culture. Like I had pointed out a few times, looking at some of the cultural trait in literal sense can result in a skewl, if not flat out incorrect interpretation.

Is there something that the uniform represents that is taught to the new generation of children? What qualities does the uniform represent, itself? What is its intrinsic cultural value, if any? And, do adults wear school uniforms? (Not "those" kind of "uniforms," but the ones the schoolchildren wear. )

Not sure what you're asking here because I thought I already explained those question about uniform. Also yes, Asian culture generally have a stricter dresscode even for adult. In K12, the teachers while don't have a formal uniform, they also have a very narrow dresscode of what they can wear. In fact, in term of style they have to wear the samething the students do, but allowed to choose color and pattern (within reason). We have this idom: when the idiot get naked, it's the smart people who get embarrassed. And people tend to not want to be embarassed, so they will force you wear things that appropriate.

We agree on the intentions and the purposes of instituting a uniform policy, but is that really "culture?"

In my culture, yes, given the fact by highschool the uniform (for the girl) is our traditional dress itself to begin with, and the boys pretty much wear the same thing for 12 bloody years. The UNI in the word uniform in my culture is a very big UNI. It's not something that's designed by each school just so all students at the school wear the samething, the entire country wear the exact samething. There is no question about style and look, in fact when you need a new uniform, all the tailor need is your size, because there is only one way it gonna come out, or you can just buy ready made uniform.


This is a highschool class photo: Pic 1 . The one with the yellow dress is a teacher/staff, and you can see while she's allowed to wear a more colorful version, it's the same dress that the students wear. Here is a class photo that includes the boys, note what the guys are wearing. Here is a middle school boys photo, see they have the same style as the highschool guys? Oh and that lady in picture also wear the same traditional dress. Actually, found a picture for the teachers and staffs

The "white" color is considered to be students color in my culture, and it carries symbolic meaning as well. Students is view as a white paper, and the knowledge they pick up is like the words written on the page and must be done with care, and this is something taught to both the students and educator a like, because it's very easy to write something down a blank paper, but it is much harder to erase it even if it's wrong. If you stand outside a school when it's time for school out, you will see the entire streets and neighborhood flooded with white color for about half an hour, and that very image is considered iconic. In a way, it represents the innocent of the k12 period. We have plenty poems songs written that connect the color of our uniform to that particular life period.

So yes, it is culture. ... and consistency

[Morkonan]

...Except I'm not talking about Asian Culture in 'general'? I think I'm very specific with one or two particular trait, namely the gender awareness and interaction. I don't think there is much room for ambiguity there.

What you've described isn't unique to Asian culture.

The problem with extreme examples is often they conform to existing stereotype, and that is unhelpful in a discussion when some parties might lack the actual exposure to a culture. Like I had pointed out a few times, looking at some of the cultural trait in literal sense can result in a skewl, if not flat out incorrect interpretation.

No.

What was linked was information derived from formal studies. Anthropologists, psychologists, sociologists actually observe these sorts of rituals. They interview the participants where possible. This isn't a case of someone cracking open a National Geographic Magazine and then attempting to interpret the pictures.

Not sure what you're asking here because I thought I already explained those question about uniform. A

Is there a meaning attached to the uniform that doesn't have anything with designating those who wear them as "students." Is there a ceremony associated with receiving the uniform? Perhaps a ceremony related to the uniform itself after the person is no longer in school? Are uniforms ever worn anywhere else but when the person is in school? In other words, is there any occasion or interpretation surrounding the uniform that doesn't have anything to do with school?

In my culture, yes, given the fact by highschool the uniform (for the girl) is our traditional dress itself to begin with,

Interesting. So, it's a white cheongsam dress for all ages?

...So yes, it is culture. ... and consistency

"Predictability," perhaps?

But, is there something about these uniforms that is associated with them that doesn't have anything directly to do with school/education?

[Usenko]

It's interesting that the use of a uniform has more than one reason.

In Australia nearly all schools up to Year 12 (18-ish years old) have uniforms. The main reason[1] is to avoid students using clothes as a status symbol, and that has proved valuable (so much so that the two schools in my region which were non-uniform during the 1980s had eventually switched back to uniform by the late 1990s). However, uniforms are also advertising for the school - kids in natty uniforms tend to lead to other parents phoning us up and saying "Hey, do you have a spot in year 7 for next year?" Therefore, uniforms are designed by the school (often by the students themselves), and vary from school to school.

(Here are a few kids wearing the uniform of the school where I work. For comparison, here is the uniform of the school down the road - note that the variation most often encountered is the collared T-shirt rather than the version with the tie.)

It's fairly conventional now for senior students to have a different uniform to other students, hence the students in white shirts in our picture. Incidentally, Olivia (the tall student in the centre) is INSANELY tall. I'm not short (180 cm), but I get a neck strain talking to her! She just graduated last year.

[1] The UNOFFICIAL reason for uniforms is that if students want to rebel, we find that most rebellion is confined to minor uniform infringements - e.g. refusing to wear correct school socks. Therefore uniforms lead directly to better behaviour in school. Strange but true!

[Mightysword]

What you've described isn't unique to Asian culture.

And who said it is?

Doesn't change the fact it's the culture that is closest to the marker. Is Hollywood the only place on the planet that makes movie? No. Is Hollywood an iconic part of the American culture? Yes. Is it normal to see American comparing a foreign made movie to Hollywood's product? Absolutely, and it happens frequently. Imagine you have this board that shows various value and spectrum on this issue, and it just happens that it has been the case that one culture is "here" and the other culture is "there", and now the observation is that one is moving to where the other is. You can say "hey go over there" and people may ask what is "there", it's simply easier to have a point of reference for that "there", like "go over there, next to the chair". Again, I feel you're get so hung up on this technicality for no understandable reason, at least for me.

What was linked was information derived from formal studies. Anthropologists, psychologists, sociologists actually observe these sorts of rituals. They interview the participants where possible. This isn't a case of someone cracking open a National Geographic Magazine and then attempting to interpret the pictures.

History is part of the culture, but unlike history culture also evolved. For example, one the stereotype about Japanese culture from the west is this whole Bushido things. Is the code of Bushido still a relevant part of modern Japan? Absolutely. But citing examples of people cutting their belly in a modern discussion server little else then re-enforcing stereotypes.

Is there a meaning attached to the uniform that doesn't have anything with designating those who wear them as "students." Is there a ceremony associated with receiving the uniform? Perhaps a ceremony related to the uniform itself after the person is no longer in school? Are uniforms ever worn anywhere else but when the person is in school? In other words, is there any occasion or interpretation surrounding the uniform that doesn't have anything to do with school?

Again, I'm not sure the meaning of the question you're asking. Is culture can only be defined through association of ceremonies. I don't see the point but I'll trying to answer the best I can:

- It is the traditional wedding dress.
- You see it is worn by government official when receiving foreign diginaries.
- A gray/plain version is often worn during religious ceremony.
- Opening ceremonies often have the dress featured.
...etc...

So yes, it has a very deep ceremonial image, as for why ... who know? It would be like asking why the Japanese wear the kimono and hakama, or why the Korean wears the Hanbok. The students in my country just happens to be given a plain-white color version of it as the uniform for one reason or another. Protecting traditional value, national prize, humbleness, avoiding wealth-discrimination ...etc... who know. That's why it is culture.

But even without them, it's still considered a culture. If culture can only be defined through ceremonial mean than the US have almost no cultural trait. But we have Hollywood, freedom-fry, cheese burger ...etc... even the 2nd amendment is cherished as not only only as constitutional law, but as a cultural trait that defines many American behaviors. Is the US the only unique place protecting freedom of speech? No. Does that stop American celebrating it as a proud cultural trait? No.

Again, I don't see the reason of getting hung up on irrelevant technicality.

[Morkonan]

..Again, I feel you're get so hung up on this technicality for no understandable reason, at least for me.

There has to be some term that defines what you're describing that is better to use than "Asian Culture." That's all. What would it be? "Conservative Culture?" Doesn't fit for everything... "Family-Centric Cutlure?" I don't think so, since almost all human cultures gravitate towards providing the most stable support for the family unit as possible. ie: That's what human culture generally tends to attempt to accomplish.

Some specifics are certainly "Asian" only. There are other factors coming into play, there. But, in principle, the foundations that you describe are also ideals in other cultures, too.

History is part of the culture, but unlike history culture also evolved. For example, one the stereotype about Japanese culture from the west is this whole Bushido things. Is the code of Bushido still a relevant part of modern Japan? Absolutely. But citing examples of people cutting their belly in a modern discussion server little else then re-enforcing stereotypes.

Bushido is one thing, but Shintoism may have an impact too? Buddhism? Confucianism in some cases? (Not sure how prevalent it is in Japan.) Some religious practices are reflected at all levels in a society and culture. They may even have principles of government/governance and law that are applied. (Confucianism, Taoism, etc.) In short - A lot of philosophical ideas find themselves as cultural forcers. For instance, Islam goes further than the other Abrahamic religions in providing culturally-defining principles. Christianity would likely be the most lax of the three in that regard.

Again, I'm not sure the meaning of the question you're asking. Is culture can only be defined through association of ceremonies. I don't see the point but I'll trying to answer the best I can:

So, for instance, how would it be different than a Military Uniform? The uniform of at a fast-food restaurant?

That question is directed in how the female School Uniform is regarded, not the "dress style" itself. I assume that one can tell the difference between a girl wearing a School Uniform and a similar dress at some other type of event?

So yes, it has a very deep ceremonial image, as for why ... who know? It would be like asking why the Japanese wear the kimono and hakama, or why the Korean wears the Hanbok. The students in my country just happens to be given a plain-white color version of it as the uniform for one reason or another. Protecting traditional value, national prize, humbleness, avoiding wealth-discrimination ...etc... who know. That's why it is culture.

Aha! I think we've gotten somewhere with this!

It's not the cultural value of the School Uniform, but the fact that the previously existing cultural value of this specific dress was then applied to a "School Uniform."

So, let's see what's up with the boy's uniform - IIRC, the young boy uniform included what we in the West would call a "neck scarf." It is not a "necktie." There could be important cultural origins for that distinction, since there's no reason why those young students couldn't wear a "necktie."

So, is the wearing of the scarf significant of something else that has cultural roots? Or, is it just something that evolved to designate the difference in some grade rank or age between the two groups? (Or, is it that it's just local formalities/practices? Though, I am assuming this is nation/culture wide.)

...Again, I don't see the reason of getting hung up on irrelevant technicality.

Because "ceremonies" and other special things like that are components of the transmission of culture. They are viewed as important, cultural, events. Attending these things is "special" and reaffirms the values being displayed in the ceremony. Though more often used for defining formal religions, they are easily seen in cultural demonstrations as well as other cultural values of importance are often reinforced at the same time, too. So, yes, if there was a formal "ceremony" involved in receiving such clothing or being allowed to wear it, I assume that there was some formal reaffirmation of cultural values going on, too, and would wonder what they were.

We have "Graduation Days" in the US that are a fairly big deal. There's all sorts of formalities and things to do, from the form of dress worn to what attendees should wear. There's usually some speech that reaffirms the values on display and that encourages the graduates to hold to them, etc, etc, etc... Is the "Graduation Ceremony" part of US "Culture?" Hmm.. Perhaps, in some ways, it may be. We place a great amount of import on "Graduation" but maybe not much import on the "Graduation Ceremony." There are, however, still forms of dress that are only worn on such occasions and most people don't really understand any of the meaning of them.

[Usenko]

I don't know if this is the intention, but to me the red neck scarf on the boys' uniform screams "Yes! I am indeed a communist!"

[Golden_Gonads]

In the UK, a vodka and coke is a regular drink in bars and nightclubs up and down the country. Apparently in the US its a bizarre concoction that most people would never consider trying.

[Usenko]

BBQ Sauce.

BBQ sauce is one of two standard condiments you find in every low to midscale restaurant in Australia. It's mandatory in McDonalds or the local pub, but also in any place where you get a decent steak or schnitzel (more about that in a moment).

I was stunned to discover this doesn't exist in any other place I've been to. Not the UK, not New Zealand, not Turkey, not France.

Oh, a condiment called "BBQ sauce" exists, but it's a different thing (usually a marinade or baste sort of thing, or in the UK a variation of HP sauce). It's not the natural partner to Tomato sauce that is universal in Australia.

Oh, speaking of steaks and schnitzel . . . if you order a schnitzel in Australia, without any qualifier, it will be a big slab of crumbed chicken breast. Not veal. Chicken. If you want veal, you need to specify a "Veal schnitzel," and if you do that anywhere except a German theme restaurant, you're likely to get a waiter with a blank face for a moment saying "I'll check if we've got that."

[Mightysword]

I don't know if this is the intention, but to me the red neck scarf on the boys' uniform screams "Yes! I am indeed a communist!"

It is. Google "Cuban school Uniform" or "Chinese School uniform" or "North Korean School Uniform" or "Vietnamese school Uniform" and you'll see they all have that red caft. In fact it goes back to the Soviet school uniform

The ribbon/necktie on the Japanese/South Korean uniform signify the grade they are in. The Vietnamese uniform achieves this by a color-coded ID sew onto the shirt.