If you are moving here, READ THIS!

"A person does not experience culture shock when they are experiencing their own culture."

True, but everyone gets to define their culture for themselves. Culture is not a static thing and one's culture is not fixed. After one has become acculturated to an environment, even if it is not the environment of one's birth or ancestry, one can experience culture shock when one ventures into an environment that is different from the environment to which one has become acculturated. After all, West Indians do not really identify with Danish culture or feel especially culturally connected to the Africans that sold their ancestors to slave traders. If one allows that West Indians can legitimately define for themselves a culture independent of their ancestry, fairness demands that one must allow non-West Indians to do the same.

dntw8up,

I believe that you may not especially be well versed on how West Indian culture has been influenced by African culture. Furthermore, all West Indians were not influenced by Danish culture as you mentioned in your post. Mainly, your point is not relevant to my post. Therefore, I will not entertain your response. However, a quick review of sociology 101 will give you further understanding about the topic of culture shock as introduced by the initial post.

Also, be careful about making presumptions about West Indians cultural identity.

Happy reading:)

Yeah! I'm so glad this post came back up to the top. I had told my husband to expect culture shock when he first moved, but (as most husbands do) he didn't listen to his wife. He has been telling me all this time how lonely he is, which is very out of character to my social husband who always wants to do things with his friends and makes friends very fast. Then, just last week he told me he wanted to move to Arkansas to be near his father. No offense to Arkansas...but he has NEVER wanted to move to Arkansas, of all places. And he and his dad aren't really that close. So, I sent him this post, and now, finally, he realizes the mental stages he is going through (and hopefully I won't be moving to Arkansas anytime soon!)

I also remember the "re-entry" or "culture shock" or whatever you want to call it when I moved back from the Philippines. I just remember that the airport seemed so sterile, like a hospital. Everything that I experienced in that first week back seemed so "bright" and fake. It was a very surreal feeling.

johnnycake,

I responded to your comment with civility and thoughtfulness. My response, unlike your comment to me, was not condescending.

"I believe that you may not especially be well versed on how West Indian culture has been influenced by African culture."

That's fine, but what you believe about how well or how poorly I understand the influence of African culture on West Indian culture isn't relevant.

"Mainly, your point is not relevant to my post. Therefore, I will not entertain your response."

Since your response does not end here you are, in effect, responding to my post.

"However, a quick review of sociology 101 will give you further understanding about the topic of culture shock as introduced by the initial post."

Your posting history reveals that you buy into sociological imaginations, Tough Guise, invisible knapsacks and the like. Some folks reading this may not know what I'm talking about but you surely do. The fact that you have bought what some academics sell does not make what they sell fact; after all, sociology is not a science.

If, as sociology students and their instructors believe, gender, race, etc. are social constructions, then culture must also be a social construction. If culture is a social construction, then people define it. If people define culture, then one's cultural identity is a matter of perspective and opinion, not fact. If one's cultural identity, like one's gender and racial identities, is a matter of perspective and not fact, then one's cultural identity is the culture with which one identifies, regardless of one's ancestry or place of birth. If you do not wish to be required by law to adopt a culture with which you do not identify or be excluded by law from a culture with which you do identify, then you should be willing to allow the same choice of cultural identification for others.

Culture shock does not only occur when an individual is in an entirely new culture. A person can experience culture shock when they are experiencing a culture they used to be a part of but with which they no longer identify. A mainlander who has moved to the USVI and become acculturated to the USVI does not simply experience, "a reorientation to [his] custom and norms when visiting the mainland…basically seeing [his] culture from a new perspective." Everyone in the USVI is a transplant from elsewhere, either historically or contemporaneously, and it is incorrect to suggest that only historic transplants acculturate, that only years in a place can shape one's cultural identity. I know West Indians who have lived on the mainland longer than I've been alive and they still identify culturally with the VI. Likewise, I know folks who were born and reared in the VI by West Indian parents, who lived and worked and reared families of their own in the VI, who now choose to live on the mainland, and in a relatively short period of time have chosen to identify themselves entirely as American and not at all as Virgin Islanders or West Indians. One's cultural identity is a personal matter shaped by where one feels included and part of the fabric of a society, not a matter of birthplace and ancestral history.

"Also, be careful about making presumptions about West Indians cultural identity."

And you should be careful when making assumptions about another posters ancestry, cultural identity, educational background, etc.

"Your posting history reveals that you buy into sociological imaginations, Tough Guise, invisible knapsacks and the like."

You are obviously throwing around terms that you do not understand. A person can not make such general assumptions about another individual's beliefs without engaging in personal discourse. However, it is interesting that you took time to form such a creative response.

Anyway, judging from your past post history your comments are often argumentative and as I learned not to long ago accusatory. Apparently this has been brought to your attention before. Good luck arguing with yourself.

promoguy,
perhaps they never utter the word, food, because the have thier mouths full with another type of "utter. " what is needed is a before and after picture. String bean to jelly bean. lol.

One Love Ironman

johnnycake: I believe that dnt said that all West Indians were NOT influenced by the Danish culture. And I find that many West Indians who grew up before the 70s do not have a connection to African culture. I hope we can agree to watch those "all" statements. A favorite trick of teachers in true/false tests!

I also look for a bit more kindness on this board.

johnnycake,

You recently stated, "One of the reason I have chosen to participate less on the board is because of the pervasive colonialist attitude that the American way is the only and best way..."

https://www.vimovingcenter.com/talk/read.php?4,58674,58833#msg-58833

You also said, "I also do not identify as an African American. West Indian culture is not African American culture. The fact is that political borders makes us American citizens but does not define our culture as American culture.

https://www.vimovingcenter.com/talk/read.php?4,51846,51999#msg-51999

You also said you consider yourself "native," despite the fact that you're of African descent, and consider those of European descent "colonizers," even though blacks on island have no first hand experience with colonization and whites on island have no first hand experience colonizing anyone. If one wishes to hold a population of people responsible for one's ancestor's colonization, one might consider beginning with the Africans who sold them into slavery.

https://www.vimovingcenter.com/talk/read.php?4,53282,53290#msg-53290

You accuse me of making general assumptions about your beliefs without engaging in "personal discourse" with you, but participating on this board is a form of discourse. As a student in cross-cultural psychology you surely know that "discourse" needn't be one-on-one and/or face-to-face to be legitimate:

Discourse: "…a: formal and orderly and usually extended expression of thought on a subject b: connected speech or writing…

http://www.m-w.com/dictionary/discourse

As to my posts being argumentative, I think no more so than most, and less so than many.

As to accusing you of anything, you are referring to my post in a thread Islander pulled. Someone calling herself "native daughter" started the thread. In the thread, you and she discussed "colonizers" and oppressed "natives." Someone else posted and expressed annoyance that neither you nor native daughter were registered users, after which I posted a comment saying that you and native daughter may sound a lot alike but surely aren't the same person because you would never invent another id and have a discussion with yourself. You then accused me of suggesting you were "native daughter," even though I explicitly said you were not, and claimed I owed you an apology, that I must imagine you are the only West Indian poster on the board, etc., after which Islander yanked the thread. I equated native daughter's thoughts with your thoughts because in that thread, you and she were of one mind. I didn't think stating that your perspectives are alike would be offensive, unless perhaps you know native daughter and vehemently disagree with her, but even if that were the case, nobody on this board knows either one of you so there's no real reason to assert offense.

As to your suggestion that complaints about my participation on this board have been brought to my attention in the past, you must have me mistaken with someone else because your complaint is the first. I don't know why you're so angry with me. I do not share your perspective on colonization, oppression etc. but even so, your hostility toward me based on my posts seems harsh. Perhaps you do know me and your dislike for me is not related to posting on this board at all? That seems unlikely because I'm pretty easy going and I don't spend much time on STX and am unlikely to have been there when you've visited. In any case, I'm sorry I'm such a source of irritation for you.

Lastly, should anyone be wondering why this discussion is being conducted publicly, it's because it is not possible to send you a private message.

dntw8up; I wouldn't get too worked up. Discussions, by definition, need to be at least two-sided. Just throwing out one-liners is not a discussion of ideas, so if I were you, I'd just say "yeah, whatever".

Probably have to wait for the advancement to Sociology 102, or higher.

Angela