
A Lesson in Acceptance - woldemariam
https://www.oxfordamerican.org/magazine/item/1945-lesson-in-acceptance
======
scottlocklin
This article deserves some kind of award for peak pretentious smugness, a la
South Park fart huffing. I'm not sure what the point is. Restaurants are nice.
Muh facemasks.

>"restaurants are where life is lived"

As opposed to ... the rest of where life is lived?

>"Restaurants bring humanity to a city. They’re central to my memories. "

I'm pretty sure bringing food to a city is more central to restaurantness than
bringing "humanity" to a city.

"Eating out in Houston is an exercise in acceptance." -are you shitting me? Do
people actually feel virtuous and beatific because they bought a bucket of
pork fried rice from someone not of the same race as them? What the hell is
going on here?

~~~
perl4ever
>Restaurants are nice. Muh facemasks.

I wear a mask when I go to a store, and I'm glad I live in an area where
people generally do and you don't get harassed for it.

But I would get serious cognitive dissonance if I went to a restaurant or did
anything else that met my personal threshold for "not really necessary". I
mean, say there's someone who isn't wearing a mask. Can I really complain or
feel superior, given that neither of us has to be there?

------
wyclif
Point of clarification: "Latinx" is not a real word. "Latino" serves perfectly
well, and should be used instead of some made-up word created to assuage
notions of wokeness.

~~~
microcolonel
Furthermore it doesn't make any sense in the Spanish language, where it is
perfectly normal to have Latinos (n. m), Latinas (n. f), and Latinos (n. n).

It is a word entirely for the American activist class.

~~~
readarticle
The point is obviously to disrupt that normality, but it’s absolutely a word
for and by US activists speaking English.

The word used by activists in Latin America is “Latine”, if you’re curious.
It’s actually pronounceable in Spanish!

~~~
paradoja
In the Spanish-speaking world you can find the endings -e, -@, and -x.
Depending on the area/organization one or other can be used (also, differing
ways of pronouncing them; I'm a native and barely have heard any one pronounce
the -e versions ever).

------
danShumway
> Eating out in Houston is an exercise in acceptance. Someone who probably
> doesn’t look like you—whether that’s the waitstaff, the back of the house—is
> letting you into their home.

This is just a wild sentence. People don't become less racist after eating
foreign food. People should not feel proud about themselves just because they
spent money on a bowl of ramen.

> In Houston, most days out of the week, I’ve found myself in the company of
> family that wasn’t my own, that’s adopted me nonetheless.

There has to be a way to express, "restaurant workers are struggling
financially because of COVID", without projecting that the minimum wage
workers at your favorite Korean restaurant think of you as an adopted family
member.

They just want to do their job and earn a living without contracting a
contagious disease. They shouldn't, on top of that, be forced to emotionally
validate their customers.

~~~
perl4ever
>People don't become less racist after eating foreign food

No, I think the point is, people (like the author) _feel_ less racist after
eating foreign food among people who don't look like them. Pride is one
possible emotion, but relief is one that seems like it would generalize more.
The internet is full of faceless people talking about racism, and getting out
in the real world and doing normal things around normal people can be
therapeutic. Like taking a walk outside the cult compound.

>They shouldn't, on top of that, be forced to emotionally validate their
customers.

Well, the point is to describe how they _do_ , whether or not intentionally;
do you have a proposal for how they should stop gratifying customers?

You're entitled to find the picture painted _ugly_ , but if it's really
shocking, then writing the article may be worthwhile regardless.

------
abhayhegde
Interesting people are still dining out. How effective are the measures taken
in dine-out places there? Someone can shed light on this?

~~~
matz1
The chance of getting infected and having serious symptoms is very very low. I
don't need restaurant to do any special measure.

------
andi999
So things are not so bad in the US, if one can still worry about dining-in
food. Glad to hear. Media here made it sound much much worse.

~~~
wffurr
Lots of places in the US have had less strict lockdowns and earlier reopenings
than other countries. That may be part of why the US has had such a worse
outbreak than those other countries.

I wouldn't take a single author writing about eating in a restaurant as an
indication. Look at the numbers instead; it's pretty bad.

~~~
matz1
If you look the number case, yes it can be considered "high" because the virus
spread easily but then again you see vast majority of it is either
asymptomatic or only have mild symptoms, it doesn't make sense to lockdown.

~~~
wffurr
172,000 dead.

I'm going to stick with the advice from public health experts, which has been
consistent and unanimous, thanks.

For details on how the US's death rates (CFR, per capita, etc.) compare, you
can read more here, but it's not good. Other places aren't good either, but
many places are much better.

[https://www.npr.org/sections/goatsandsoda/2020/08/05/8993658...](https://www.npr.org/sections/goatsandsoda/2020/08/05/899365887/charts-
how-the-u-s-ranks-on-covid-19-deaths-per-capita-and-by-case-count)

~~~
matz1
>172,000 dead

Thats such a low number ~0.05% of the population. This should viewed as good
news that the virus is not that deadly.

~~~
calvano915
Not to mention hundreds of thousands more with heart damage and other long
term effects of infection that are still not well understood. Death should not
be the only metric of disease severity or burden.

~~~
matz1
All diseases could cause long term effect in some of the population.

Flu can cause long term damage too.

Do you know what else could cause long term damage ? Lockdown

>still not well understood

Especially when is still not well understood, we shouldn't do lockdown as it
surely can cause damage.

~~~
calvano915
Lockdown without adequate support to mitigate the known negative effects,
sure. We know what can happen from a lockdown and can plan accordingly. We
also know the long term effects of flu (not nearly as severe as what known
about Covid, so even loosely comparing the two is irresponsible).

We may overreact for the unknown effects of Covid, but it's sure convenient to
say we should do nothing instead and oops later if you underestimated (which
is interestingly exactly what happened at that start of the pandemic and got
us to our current death rates). Sad that your preference is all for the sake
of leisure and convenience, perpetuating a system dependent on low wage
service laborers that are offered no choice in the matter.

We have other options, but a flat refusal to offer or consider any does indeed
leave every man for himself. But careful what you ask for, because when you
force people into such desperation they will only put up with so much before
deciding to take back or destroy it all.

~~~
matz1
>but it's sure convenient to say we should do nothing

I didn't say we should do nothing. There are things that can be done other
than lockdown such as finding vaccine still have to be done, improving
treatment method still have to be done, improving health care capacity still
have to be done, etc.

>sake of leisure and convenience

Its not just leisure and convenience, people losing job, bankruptcy, mental
health problem, suicide, domestic violence, delayed treatment for non-covid
cause, kids receiving poor education due school closure, etc

Flu kills thousand every year too, yet we didn't require lockdown.

Likewise be careful when you ask for lockdown, because when you force people
into such desperation they will only put up with so much before deciding to
take back or destroy it all.

Lockdown maybe justified if the threat is proportional to the severity for
covid its not worth it.

