Will the idiocy never end? Do these people have lives, or do they simply exist to harass others, to complain, to be offended? I'll start with the article link -
Washington Post Warns: Calling Food ‘Exotic’ Reinforces Xenophobia, Racism
To properly address each idiotic claim, I'll be quoting portions of the article, then responding to each one.
Referring to food as “exotic” creates distance between individuals and groups and “reinforces xenophobia and racism,” according to a recent Washington Post article which, instead, suggests people ask themselves why they are unfamiliar with certain foods and question their willingness to change that.
The Thursday article, written by the paper’s food section staff writer, Daniela Galarza, and titled “Stop calling food ‘exotic,’” begins by quoting a couple who praised Afghan restaurants and referred to the cuisine served as “exotic,” in an old Post essay.
Though she admitted the couple “meant no harm,” their use of the term “exotic” indicates that they see the world through a “presumptive Anglocentric perspective,” according to Galarza.
Right there, she's making a racist assumption herself. When a person lives in a majority-white nation, it isn't "presumptive" to speak from the point of view of someone of Caucasian descent. It's normal and expected. Would she claim someone from Japan was "presumptive" in calling American foods "exotic", and claim they were speaking from a "presumptive Asian-centric" perspective? No, of course not; only White people are told they are wrong for appreciating their own heritage and culture. meatloaf and mashed potatoes would seem exotic to someone in Japan, who was unfamiliar with American foods.
After receiving letters from readers critical of her inclusion of “exotic” spices and ingredients in her “Eat Voraciously” food-themed newsletter, she claimed the word hit her “like a slap,” leading her to conclude that it has lost its essential meaning.
“What’s ‘exotic’ to you isn’t ‘exotic’ to my neighbor, might not be ‘exotic’ to my mom, probably wouldn’t be ‘exotic’ to my best friend,” she wrote.
She also claimed that use of the term, particularly regarding food, “indirectly lengthens the metaphysical distance between one group of humans and another, and, in so doing, reinforces xenophobia and racism.”
Here, she's assuming that the very term "exotic" is somehow divisive. It isn't. It simply means different, unusual to the person speaking. It isn't divisive to recognize differences in cultures, including obvious differences in what we eat. The term is valid for the person using it. There is no obligation to speak from the perspective of someone else, either. Who is this woman, to demand someone speak from the perspective of someone else? How about she speaks from my perspective? I want to see her article explaining what an idiot she is, from my point of view.
Galarza then quotes Chandra D. L. Waring, professor of sociology at the University of Massachusetts Lowell, who claimed that the term is only used to describe something non-white.
“I have never heard the word exotic used in reference to something that is White,” the professor said.
“You know that exotic means ‘other’ or ‘different’ from a dominant-White perspective because no one ever says, ‘I’m going to go on an exotic vacation, I’m going to Lowell, Mass.’ No one ever says, ‘Let’s go to that exotic new restaurant, let’s go to McDonald’s,’” she added.
“Like ethnic and alien, the word exotic was invented to describe something foreign,” Galarza wrote, despite admitting that foreign often implies something positive.
Claiming that “language is never inherently neutral,” Galarza argues that the supposed history of the term is inseparable from its usage.
Now she's crossed into even more blatant racism. She's assuming, along with the person she quotes, that "exotic" means non-white. It does mean different, but her implication is that this difference is seen as something negative. In fact, when people use the word, it tends to mean interesting, as a virtue of being different, not negative by default. An apple pie would be "exotic" to a guy who lives in the Amazonian rain forest. That Americans, who are majority white, use the term to describe things from places that aren't, isn't some sign of racism or xenophobia. It's a sign of proper word usage. This control freak doesn't get to tell other people what words they can and cannot use.
“It’s been a long time since European explorers traveled the world in pursuit of wealth, spices, coffee, tea, chocolate and places they would colonize or people they would enslave — in short, things they would label exotic — but that history is inextricable from the word,” she wrote, before quoting others who agree.
“It’s completely tied to the history of colonialism and slavery,” Serena J. Rivera, assistant professor of Portuguese and Spanish at the University of Pittsburgh, is quoted as saying. “If you are exotic, if you’re automatically an ‘other,’ you’re not one of us.”
Here, she's tossed out that old trope of claiming everything White people have done is about "slavery". Never mind the fact that more non-whites have owned slaves and promoted slavery than have Whites, and that most cultures throughout history have had slaves; no, just blame the one race that actually made slavery illegal, and pretend the rest never happened, and isn't still happening. We must demand that the truth be told, and refuse these guilty label they push at us.
I notice these folks don't seem to mind "colonizing" our majority White nation. They don't seem to mind using all of the technology and benefits our "Anglo-centric" society has provided to the world. We discovered electricity, nuclear power, relativity,and the secrets of DNA. We invented automobiles, aircraft, submarines, radio, television, light bulbs, photography, telephones, computers, and much more. We made it possible to travel to space and visit the moon. We were first to circle the globe, climb the tallest peaks, visit both poles, exceed the sound barrier, and dive to the depths of the ocean. We formed the greatest, most free nation in the world, and we feed much of the world, and protect it as well. This nation is so awesome that people from all over the world want to come and live here. We have welcomed people from every race and culture, even when that hasn't been to our benefit. How about, if we are so bad, they stay elsewhere? How about they stop culturally appropriating everything we have created? Seems fair to me, to apply their own standards to themselves. But I digress.
Calling continued use of the word “an attempt at ostracizing the other in the service of empowering oneself,” she then quotes Rivera again, stating, “Calling a food exotic puts the onus of the puzzle on the people who make the food to define it, to rationalize, explain, or whitewash it until it’s palatable to the dominant culture.”
How does this woman determine that calling something exotic is some attempt to "ostracize" anyone? How does describing a food as different from what is familiar "empower" a person? This is beyond idiocy. There is no logic whatsoever to such claims. This is nothing more than a lame attempt to score points with idiots that think it's "cool" to claim everything is racist. It's virtue signaling, lame pandering, and more than a little old.
It gets worse.
Claiming that Americans have access to nearly anything today at their general grocery store, Galarza then quotes author Lisa Heldke who states, “By exoticizing a food even though it’s actually accessible, you’re assigning it a value that’s lower than the status quo.”
Now, she's claiming that stating something is different somehow makes it less valuable. What caused such insecurity in her, I wonder? Plus, she can't even write properly. "Exotic" is an adjective, not a verb. By using the language so poorly, she's devaluing her own writing.
Next, she actually asserts, along with some others, that recipes should be altered - she calls it "repaired" - to avoid terms that could be addressing White readers. In a majority White country.
Galarza also asserted recipes are more than mere directions for food preparation.
“[R]ecipes are not just instructions, they’re documentation. They’re history. They’re representations of a culture. That’s why the language we use to describe any type of food should be regularly questioned,” she wrote.
Quoting food and recipe writers Priya Krishna and Yewande Komolafe, Galarza criticized the assumption publishers make that their audience is “made up of White readers who demand what’s convenient for them above all else.”
“Food media is always addressing the White reader,” Komolafe told Krishna.
Praising recipe site Epicurious’ announcement last year that it would be combing through its site’s archives to “edit or ‘repair’” recipes that had been “put through a white American lens,” Galarza highlighted that the term “exotic” was one of the first to go.
“One of the first issues ‘repaired’ was use of the word ‘exotic,’” David Tamarkin, Epicurious’ then-digital director, was quoted as saying then.
“I can’t think of any situation where that word would be appropriate, and yet it’s all over the site,” he added. “That’s painful for me and I’m sure others.”
Addressing which word to use instead, Galarza presented a couple of options, ultimately preferring a complete change in perspective.
“It’s not so much about replacing ‘exotic’ with another word, though ‘rare’ or ‘difficult to find’ might be more accurate descriptions for food in some cases,” she wrote. “It’s about reframing your worldview.”
She continues on demanding that people change the words they use, and even how they think, so that she can approve of them. Of course, she won't approve even those who are stupid enough to comply, because she hates White people.
She concluded by suggesting that instead of using a term to refer to foreign food, people should simply become familiar with that food instead.
“Ultimately, there are just two kinds of food: food you’re familiar with, and food you’re not,” she wrote, adding, “If any particular food fits into the latter category, for you, rather than expressing disgust or disdain, ask yourself: Why am I not familiar with it, and don’t I want to change that?”
This is not the first time the Washington Post created controversy over terminology associated with food.
In 2019, food reporter Tim Carman dropped his “$20 Diner” Post column title, claiming it created “artificial limits” and helped “confirm deep-seated biases.”
In 2015, Post reporter Ellie Krieger created a list of terms to avoid using in reference to foods, including “cleanse,” which “has a somewhat morally judgmental tinge to it,” and “skinny,” which “says nothing about what your body needs.”
“Do yourself a favor and replace that word with one that reflects how you want your body to feel, such as energized, strong, or nourished. Reframing your thinking in that direction will probably help you look your best, too,” she wrote.
That same year, Post columnist Lavanya Ramanathan demanded people stop calling immigrant food “ethnic.”
“[I]t’s time to stop talking about ethnic food as though we’re Columbus and the cuisines served up by immigrants are ours for the conquering,” she wrote.
I think it's time idiots like this were removed from their positions, as mentally ill, and that they received treatment for their insecurities. "Ethnic" simply refers to a culture. Cheeseburgers are "ethnic" food associated with White people. As for "conquering" cuisine, what does that even mean? What, we aren't supposed to appreciate foods from other cultures now? Only non-whites can have access to anything, and Whites are to be prohibited from even discussing foods? No, not playing that BS game. I refuse to feel guilty for being who I am, for having ancestors that worked hard, fought for freedom, and contributed so much to the world, just because someone from a culture that did less feels bad that they their own ancestors did less. Boo hoo. Get over it, get up and do something for yourself. Don't steal from my culture, remake things by destroying them, that you didn't create, and demanding that everyone call you a victim and give you something for nothing. Enough is enough. Work hard, speak properly, dress decently, learn to appreciate real music, stop committing crimes, stop assaulting everyone different, learn a skill if you want a better job, don't demand lowered standards, follow the rules, be polite to others, and you can accomplish something of your own. Obviously this isn't addressed to most readers here, but to the ones like this ding-a-ling claiming food discussion, along with most everything else (as discussed n a previous blog, is somehow "racist". I'm sick of this nonsense. I'm sick of seeing people pander to this, talking about their "white guilt", and praising "diversity" (meaning "not white") and "multiculturalism" (meaning not American). These days, they are even claiming the American flag is "racist" along with anyone who flies it. Perhaps this author should move to Haiti, if she's so against everything about this country.
