How far are you willing to go with cultural relativism?

How far are you willing to go with cultural relativism?

I know some things are objectively bad but what about practices that are in the grey area, like Iraqi shias who whip themselves with cattails or African scarification and that thing where the slowly get huge lips or a giant giraffe neck. What about cultures that don't pluck thier unibrows or their women don't shave body hair. What about Haitians eating cakes made of dirt and people eating cow eyes and brains.

Should we put a stop to all that?

By shitposting? Well then I guess we better get started.

Mate.

Tbh the Iraqis whipping themselves was the only thing I could think of off the top of my head. But I think the gaint lip/neck shit can be considered self mutilation

Why would you give a fuck, hipsters also bore holes in their ears and shit, its just fashion and shit.

...

I'd say Haitians eating dirt is dangerous.

Why?

Do you think eating dirt is healthy thing to do?

I dont know and I dont particularly care tbh.

they eat it not for nutrition but to ease the pain of starvation the fucking US caused, you moron

Healthier than starving to death

How did the US cause it?

They really could not find anything else? I thought if there was no live stock, fruits or vegetables people would turn to eating insects.

You still have to find enough insects somehow.

Let's not exaggerate. A significant part of Haiti's problems is due to their own shitty mentality.

t. PhD in sociology

wasn't haiti hit by earthquake that damaged most of the country?

That earthquake was a punishment from god because they didnt praise free market

Correct, the 2010 earthquake. Its effects were magnified but the utter deforestation of the land by locals so top (fertile) soils slid into the sea.

Whatever could possibly be attributed to "their own shitty mentality" is absolutely dwarfed by the rampant corruption and subjugation orchestrated by the Clintons with their Clinton Foundation. They purposefully cripple any sort of recovery efforts so that the millions in aid continue to pour in, and they just gobble it up.

No, you fucking idiot, which is why they're eating mud pies.

Academically (stuff like anthropology specifically) it's a must

Anthropology is probably the academic field that is the most compromised due to people that a have a political axe to grind who are twisting their findings to cater to their own ideologies.

...

Really? Wasn't haiti, NOT a horrible helll hole before they decided to kill every last white person?

Haiti did not finish paying reparations to France until the 1950s.

...

People are fully within their right to act like dipshits if they aren't harming others in the process. Financially supporting large companies has done more damage to modern society than any questionable cultural behavior–and the former isn't even a choice for most people.

Besides, no one wants to admit when their culture has "degenerate" qualities. I can't think of any Islamic nations with 500 pound people on motor scooters.

Idk what anthropology you've studied but that is not the case in what I've seen. The anth classes I've taken have all invluded legitimate critiques of capitalism on economic, environmental, and ideological levels, while also not forcing any kind of agenda. Probably the most open minded department I've studied in outside religious studies

The 1804 massacre was a horrific atrocity, and its consequences on the whole were negative - but Haiti spent most of its history under French rule as a giant slave plantation. It was a hellhole before the revolution too, and a worse one for most people living there.

...

tdlr toussaint l'oveurture did nothing wrong

You forgot blood pudding.

That's just the thing OP. If you're basing your ethics in objective principles (i.e. principles that are not merely personal taste and relativistic), then you've answered your own question.

For me, I subscribe to the objective ethics of Bookchin's dialectical naturalism. Through dialectical naturalism whether a society is good or bad, moral or immoral, is objectively determined by whether it has fulfilled its potentialities for rationality and morality.