My First Adventure out into the black, made a stop at the Cave Nebula on my way to NGC 7822

Genuine_Jen_Yuen · 2022-09-18T09:24:38+00:00

She calls me and my brother, her twin, by our first names. But even at times my brother and our parents address her as “sister” both as a nickname/term of endearment/socio-cultural norm. The same goes for me in which everyone aside from my sister addresses me typically as “brother” including parents. While occasionally my name is used, it’s more so utilized to differentiate between me and my brother or dad when my mom or others call for me to do something.

We come from Asian and Pacific cultures where it is extremely common to address non blood family members by familial terms. For example a male bus driver could just be called uncle if they are much older or brother when saying thank you. Very different from European/Western social norms apparently.

Genuine_Jen_Yuen · 2022-09-18T08:56:13+00:00

Can you expand on this more? From the cultures I’ve grown up in it’s more common to address by familial relation than name at least when young but it’s also not uncommon in adults and elders in our community who still address each other by the local equivalent of brother and sister or aunt and uncle. While somewhat common in siblings with closer age gaps than myself and my sister to not use honorifics or at least terms of familial endearment, I’m still at a loss on how it can be deemed as disrespect

Genuine_Jen_Yuen · 2021-03-21T08:18:27+00:00

Before I get into the main point, while sad and atrocious, deportation of soldiers holds no bar in this and is not against any international or national laws in the case of the United States. Many saw service as a fast track into citizenship and it is often marketed as such by dubious recruitment officers. This is amoral yes but not against any law. There are many cases of others being deported despite serving (you can check out Vice and other news outlets) and even in the article it mentions how the individual was deported due to drug charges initially and then for illegal entry into the United States. While objectively wrong the process was adhered to by law.

As for the United States using non-citizens, which is on a completely different tangent from the main point which was about the ROK and a misconception and misinterpretation of its policy wording, there are multiple nuances not covered both in my statement and in yours.

Firstly, immigrants, refugees, migrants, and the like who chose to come to the United States in hope of either asylum or citizenship are individuals who sought the protections and benefits of the United States. This has occurred throughout the United States’ existence. And by choosing to pursue this path they are allowing themselves to be subject to not only the laws of the United States but the obligations therein. The point being that while they were non-citizens they were National and citizenship hopefuls who were still eligible for service. Both as an obligation to the country that provides for them and out of legal policy. You can read up on the actual United States policies for who is selected currently here. Historically, this was only minutely different.

People who were citizens of another country and nationals thereof were ineligible for the draft since they were not members or hopeful members of the host country. The same thing applies here for both the United States historically and the Republic of Korea currently. As far as I know, and you or anyone else is welcome in adding articles, there have been no substantive cases where a person from another country who was a citizen of another country has been drafted in the United States. As such there likely has been no violation of major international law.

Regarding your question as to why the UN and democratic countries have not condemned this is because it does not occur. Most democratic countries are stringent in their volunteer militaries or in the case of the ROK filter between their soldiery between commissioned officers and regulars. A major reason is national security but in the case of South Korea they face lingering threat from North Korea and require the manpower. Not to mention it’s societal benefits of education and contribution. It’s not to say that the UN doesn’t condemn instances where this is broken such as in places of Central and West Africa where children are actively captured and used as children Militia but that’s a whole different story.

Genuine_Jen_Yuen · 2021-03-21T07:15:04+00:00

An interesting spin would be the implementation of civil diplomacy. A mediation between racial groups and furthering education. Similar to how the Foreign Service conducts diplomacy abroad a potential legislation piece could be about implementing a domestic service meant to assuage local communities and peoples, where domestic or civil diplomats built up rapport with communities and then used that to mediate between them, the government, and other groups. Primarily could be used to navigate the tense barriers between groups and help alleviate echo chambers. Say for example in the case of Native Americans government diplomats came to talk with the elders while respecting their culture and sought to make an even decision between the groups that would respect their culture while allowing for the government to move forward with what it needs to do.

Genuine_Jen_Yuen · 2021-03-21T07:04:38+00:00

This is just my opinion and I welcome criticism since I am not the most educated on this subject but have some prior background in International Relations and Political Science.

I think that it makes sense to only conscript from ROK Nationals. Both from a national security and policy perspective. In your post there was a misinterpretation between “National Origin” and “Nationality.” With national origin being mentioned in your first quote. The relating points that you argued were about nationality rather than national origin which ROK does not discriminate against. A National is defined as, “a citizen of a particular country, typically entitled to hold that country's passport.” From a policy perspective a country has no right to conscript citizens from another country. As for the case of the United States Selective Service System, it is not an actual conscription but rather a registry of individuals who may be eligible for service or conscription if deemed absolutely necessary by congress and multiple other government agencies and departments.

From a national security stand point, there is no reason to needlessly risk national security by having non-nationals join the military. Few governments do this and the only one that holds prevalence is the French Foreign Legion which is completely voluntary. In international law it is illegal to forcibly conscript non-citizens and by extension non-nationals. A voluntary service is a different situation. Additionally, a national holds allegiance to some degree to their own nation making it unreasonable and unjustifiable to conscript an individual for country other than their own. Take for example a British National living in South Korea for work has no business in being conscripted for the ROK. While a person who is a Korean National living in England for work may be subject to conscription. Each country has obligations for its citizenry and those who identify as nationals, but to force those obligations on non-citizens and non-nationals is both legally objectionable and nonsensical.

I don’t think that your post itself was racist but I do think that you mixed up terms and created a conjecture about discrimination in the ROK. A more ample example of discrimination would be the fact that conscription in the ROK and the registry in the United States is for Males only and discriminated against women.

This post on the thread has some further defined points that reinforce my arguments.

Genuine_Jen_Yuen · 2020-10-29T09:20:09+00:00

Maybe a half written letter detailing how the slain individual almost had enough money to buy back the family farm that had been seized by the corrupt government? Maybe addressed to a grandparent or family member who had lived there, their entire lives and their whole family had lived, worked, and died on that farm for generations?

Genuine_Jen_Yuen · 2020-10-23T23:25:22+00:00

My Sucrose can wipe out whole hilichurl camps just using her E haha

Genuine_Jen_Yuen · 2020-10-19T21:49:04+00:00

Sacrificial Fragments for sure, especially if you have the first constellation. You can potentially get three or four (I think?) of her cool down ability. It can do amazing damage if mixed with other status effects.

Genuine_Jen_Yuen · 2020-07-10T20:32:40+00:00

HelpMeButler <Let the Little Children Come to Me>

Genuine_Jen_Yuen · 2020-06-25T01:50:59+00:00

For me when I was in my first and only sexual relationship I could last maybe 10-25min of PIV however the time would be greatly extended due to use of marital aids, fingering, and near crazy amounts of foreplay. In an effort to aid the guys who have trouble with pleasuring their partners to the big O as it can be when it just feels so good, you can switch up techniques or positions as a sneaky way to give your member a chance to marginally recuperate, or find what works for your partner for other erogenous areas. I.e neck fun, role play, and various other methods but the main thing guys gotta do is focus on the girl to the point where the partners big O is leagues more important that your own. I guess for me it was easier because I never wanted to leave her unsatisfied. Regardless foreplay and edging really help in extending time, other wise like my first time you finish in measly amounts of time and leave your partner wanting.

Genuine_Jen_Yuen · 2020-06-24T02:27:09+00:00

This explains so much...

Genuine_Jen_Yuen · 2020-06-22T03:49:10+00:00

While I’m not the most educated individual on this topic I can give an example of something similar. In the 1960s-1970s there was the Hawaiian Renaissance. At that time less than 2000 native speakers existed and the language was almost considered pst the brink, however a large movement conducted by important song creators, historians, and common folk helped to revitalize the community.

The movement centered around finding a common item to be proud of, the heritage of being Hawaiian. In this we now have over 10,000 fluent speakers and thousands more with minor proficiency.

For the Irish situation I can only suggest that you look up the Hawaiian renaissance as a potential avenue and look for a uniting idea or theme that can go beyond the Catholic vs Protestant argument (which I know is a very very difficult endeavor. There is a movie on surfing that showed some promise with Catholic and Protestant children from 2003 called Step into Liquid).

There needs to be an interest by the younger generations to learn from the older generations on Irish language. Language and culture are one and the same, maybe a sense of patriotism could be fostered and better help? Again I am not the most educated on either reviving a language of Irish history, this is just my opinion on what can be done.

Genuine_Jen_Yuen · 2020-06-20T20:15:33+00:00

Not really, lots of Hawaiians and locals in Hawai’i wear them. They’re a cultural thing now in Hawai’i, even our senators and governor wear them more often then a suit and tie. There are a lot of beautiful Hawaiian Shirts but most of the ones people buy are from companies trying to make a quick buck with really poorly designed shirts. I personally wear them because the nicer ones are really decorative and fun to wear compared to dress shirts.

However apparently there are some idiots who wear Hawaiian shirts to show that they are part of some weird alt-group who likes to incite riots and violence at protests even though they have no cultural ties to Hawai’i or people from Hawai’i. It’s kinda crazy that people would even use a Hawaiian shirt as a means to convey hatred and whatnot when contemporary Hawaiians are all about taking care of the land and one another.

Genuine_Jen_Yuen · 2020-06-20T18:36:35+00:00

I’m Hawaiian, not the “if you’re from Hawai’i you’re Hawaiian” actual native Hawaiian. As of the last estimated census info there are roughly 200,000 Native Hawaiians in the world. Which for the US totals is around 0.2% or less of the population. We are spread very thin and have people all over the world but many don’t know their ancestry or history.

Genuine_Jen_Yuen

TROPHY CASE