For starters, I didn't notice any citations in your claims of academic relevance. Have you read papers from reputable institutions that support your positions as their central thrust (rather than a side note or speculation)? If so please cite one and let us know how many of your points are part of its central argument.
Taking it down a notch from academia, even the Wikipedia article on American stereotypes does agree with your list. Too many biased Americans on WP? Even anecdotally in countries I've lived and stayed in, many people were happy to share their American stereotypes and I enjoyed the discussions, but they never mentioned your list.
Some of the things I'm used to hearing: Americans are fat? Not a pleasant thing to hear but objectively true. Americans are gun crazy? Not everyone but still, there is solid foundation here. So this is not a matter of (just) being insulted, I simply call into question your ability to back up your specific claims with sound evidence and data.
Finally your claim that self compassion is "fundamentally juxtaposed" to eastern meditative traditions is incorrect (I assume you meant to write opposed). On the contrary, it is vital component of some practices and one of the first things studied (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mettā#Mett.C4.81_meditation).
With everything happening in the US right now the last thing we need is people making false assumptions that all of us support the same leadership, same homogeneous viewpoints, same personal failings, etc.
Second, I prefaced to ensure this was taken as tongue in cheek as intended. Clearly you missed that part.
Third, having spent many years researching Buddhism we must agree to disagree regarding your suggestion that self-targeted compassion and Pali metta[0] are similar.
Finally, a passing generalization is clearly not the same as viewing everyone as identical.
Incorrect. "ethnocentrism: evaluation of other cultures according to preconceptions originating in the standards and customs of one's own culture"
>I prefaced to ensure this was taken as tongue in cheek as intended. Clearly you missed that part.
I didn't miss it. Writers get to imply as they like. Readers are free to infer as they like. That's how it works.
>Having spent many years researching Buddhism we must agree to disagree regarding your suggestion that self-targeted compassion and Pali metta.
I'm sorry, this is just completely untrue.
1) From your own sources: "Right at the start loving-kindness should be developed towards oneself."
2) From my source: "[In] practices that focus on compassion...the practitioner is targeting oneself"
3) Choose any master you like who has written on metta/lovingkindnessand and compassion. By long tradition the start of the path is self compassion.
>a passing generalization is clearly not the same as viewing everyone as identical.
I hope not. The problem with generalizations and false stereotypes is they tend to encourage that sort of thinking.
No disrespect, but it's so American that someone should use it as an academic linguistic example of culture-specific communication! (Eg, psychotherapy, negative social groups of social groups, pop culture referrals, second-person counseling as casual jokes, capitalia, shameless and fundamentally American reform of compassion in a context Linked to the ego ...)
Penises and vaginas. Since those with ambiguous genitalia are a rounding error, they can flip a coin.
Please don't take this the wrong way.
this is so American
I felt that the commenter was expressing themselves in a way that was particularly unique to Americans.
someone should use it as an academic linguistics example of culture-specific communication!
I believe the example is of such a high quality that it would be useful in an academic context (ie. college/university courses) as an example of communications made within one culture that are unique to that culture versus other cultures speaking the very same language, ie. people born in Scotland or New Zealand would generally never communicate in this way.
The examples list arguably American cultural traits present in the paragraph.
(Edit to explain points: 'psychotherapy' = more prevalent in US culture, 'negative third party social group stereotyping' = ~all those people are <negative-something>, 'pop culture references' = vampires, 'second person framing of self-help advice as casual banter' = grammatical form where "you gotta X", or "you should Y", or "when you X you Y!", 'capitalia' = THIS BIT IS GRATING, 'reformation of compassion in an ego-linked context' = compassion for self, which is fundamentally juxtaposed to traditional not-self usage as linked to eastern meditative traditions (vipassana, etc.) and where increased egocentrism is widely considered a quintessentially American cultural trait).
In particular, there's about 140,000 hits for "emotional vampirism" when you Google it in Russian (pop culture, eh?).
Same thing about writing in ALL CAPS: http://lurkmore.to/CAPSLOCK
May I ask you, which many languages, besides English, do you browse the Internet in? I am curious about your the basis for comparison.
^People are becoming more open about seeing a therapist (психолог), but it's something out of reach of most people.
(eg. psychotherapy, negative third party social group stereotyping, pop culture references, second person framing of self-help advice as casual banter, capitalia, shameless and fundamentally American reformation of compassion in an ego-linked context...)