Cultural Appropriation

[infectedmushroom]

Cultural appropriation to me sounds like the natural result of two or more cultures coming into contact with each other. If cultures didn't trade and occasionally "steal" (who owns culture?) aspects from each other, how could they possibly hope to find common ground and a reason for co-operation?

The notion that different cultures can live in close proximity to one another in our rapidly globalising world with ever accelerating access to information and knowledge WITHOUT some form of appropriation taking place is firstly impossible, and secondly naive.

A smart, moral human being has a natural inclination to integrate the good and reject the bad aspects of the culture(s) around them.

Where does the fear come from that others adopting certain aspects of your culture will somehow diminish the significance or potency of their benefits?

A practical example; in Japan, some high school students are taught the "Gemorah," an ancient Jewish book which aims to help them improve their reasoning skills. Now, I could sit here as a person with a Jewish background and say, "how dare they take what's mine! This has been part of my culture for thousands of years, and now they're stealing it with no appreciation of the history and struggle that's gone into ensuring its survival!"

Or, I could be less of a selfish twat, and say, good for them. I hope it helps them become better at reasoning.

The essential difference between hyper sensitive politically correct types hyper-vigilant about cultural appropriation and others is that the latter realises the similarities between human beings and cultures far outnumber the differences, and as such, the more we can share and sometimes even relinquish certain aspects of our culture that we might hold dear the better off as human beings we'll be as a whole.

 

[Pretty_Diamonds]

I think Hawaii is a perfect example of an asian fusion culture. So many Asian immigrants came to work on the fields and worked with Hawaiians. They had to find a way to communicate and ended up with their own fusion version (a mix of Japanese, Chinese, English, Hawaiian, etc) or what's now known as "Hawaiian pidgin".

Hawaiian gods are respected in Hawaii, shoes are taken off before entering a house (just like Japanese), chopsticks are used more often than forks, Chinese food is everywhere, etc. From my understanding, Japanese love that Hawaii is so Japanese... it increases their drive to learn more about Hawaii, a lot of them take hula lessons, learn Hawaii, and want to play the ukulele (moreso than people living in Hawaii!)

 

[Foreigner]

It depends who is being appropriated. If it's a conquered people, that's different than two dominant cultures exchanging wares and ideas.

Nobody seems to have a problem with a white guy wearing Chinese style shirts with short collars and frog buttons. Lots of people have problems with white guys who wear war bonnets and head dresses at music festivals, especially in areas where the festivals take place on the very land where native people were killed or displaced by colonizers. When there are so many outstanding grievances between two peoples, there are going to be tensions if you start adopting their practices before resolving the underlying conflicts.

Not all cultural appropriation is bad. Sometimes it is. Depends on the context.

 

[belligerent drunk]

You're making a very good point, OP. I also believe that concepts do not belong to anybody, and people can adopt them, criticize them, reject them based on their own judgement. I don't partake in the religious or cultural background of groups of people, but I'm an educator of science, and I'm extremely happy when the concepts of science propagate. I believe that rudimentary knowledge of the world is of utmost importance. I would go as far as to say that education is key to solving most of our world's problem, especially issues in developing countries, where education is repressed and looked down upon. I'm no genius by any stretch of imagination, but I see very well that objective, unbiased knowledge is pretty much the sole reason for who I am today.

It depends who is being appropriated. If it's a conquered people, that's different than two dominant cultures exchanging wares and ideas.

Nobody seems to have a problem with a white guy wearing Chinese style shirts with short collars and frog buttons. Lots of people have problems with white guys who wear war bonnets and head dresses at music festivals, especially in areas where the festivals take place on the very land where native people were killed or displaced by colonizers. When there are so many outstanding grievances between two peoples, there are going to be tensions if you start adopting their practices before resolving the underlying conflicts.

Not all cultural appropriation is bad. Sometimes it is. Depends on the context.

I think you're using the same emotional appeal that most people do. If I wear baggy pants and loose shirts (as I actually do), it doesn't mean that I support the subjugation of blacks. It actually is the opposite - I appreciate the culture and want to be a part of it. It is racist to deny me the right to do it if people of black color can do it without the same judgement.

 

[Foreigner]

I think you're using the same emotional appeal that most people do. If I wear baggy pants and loose shirts (as I actually do), it doesn't mean that I support the subjugation of blacks. It actually is the opposite - I appreciate the culture and want to be a part of it. It is racist to deny me the right to do it if people of black color can do it without the same judgement.

You can't reduce what I'm saying by simply calling it an emotional appeal. A lot of people get worked up about their cultural wares being appropriated, especially by the oppressor class. At the same time, a lot of people don't. I'm sure you can find people of wither stance in any given ethnic group. But to call it merely an emotional appeal is myopic.

I live in a country where native people are still treated like crap, their reservations are third world with the highest suicide rates in the country, and many are still very hurt over things that happened just in the past few decades, such as residential schools. Stolen relics haven't been returned. If you've actually spent time on a native reserve volunteering and getting close to that community, then maybe I could sympathize with appropriation -- except for the fact that if you knew native communities at all, then copying clothing that is sacred to them and only worn by worthy elders, is offensive and hurtful. It's like adding insult to injury.

I don't know about blacks and thug sub-culture. There are lot of white people in that sub-culture too and in the mainstream media. The thug sub-culture comes from rap culture, which has its origins in the Bronx and NYC in the 80's. Some blacks brought rap to the mainstream, but a lot of it was given corporate sponsorship by whites, and especially Jews for some reason. White people have been profiting off of black sub-culture in the mainstream for a long time now. Again, there are people on both sides of this issue within that sub-culture. If you walked through most hardened black neighborhoods dressed as a thug, and you're white, you'd be making yourself a target. The reason is that black neighborhoods are still insular, as a result of decades of cultural grievances.

I dunno... you either have cultural sensitivity to this issue or you don't. Intellectualizing it is kind of pointless. People will do what they do, even if ignorantly so, and I know it's not my job to stop them. I'm just saying I understand why people get upset about it. For dominant cultures, like dominant white culture, it's all kumbaya and sharing, but it's sharing on their terms with the convenience of ignoring the past. And you can ignore the past because your culture was victorious. To the victor goes the spoils.

 

[belligerent drunk]

I'm a national minority in my place (Russian nationality living in Estonia - Estonians hate Russians because of what had happened during... well basically the whole 2nd millenium. Now the oppression has stopped, and Estonia has gained independence, and now the Russian residents get quite a bit of shit for what others had done to Estonians). So to say that I don't know what cultural disputes feel like would be incorrect. Still, I have absolutely no problem if somebody of Estonian nationality were to adopt some aspects of Russian culture - because it is not my fucken property. It really is that easy.

I want to ask you this question: what makes it offensive to adopt parts of others' cultures? I can easily understand how making fun of parts of somebody's culture could be seen as offensive, there is no denying that, but just using them? If there is no apparent mal-intent, then how do you assume that the person adopting those values does so in an oppressive/offensive way? And if they aren't, then what is your problem? Am I not allowed to wear the Jewish cap because I'm not Jewish? Please tell me how that isn't absolute fucking bullshit.

 

[drug_mentor]

I believe cultural appropriation can be inappropriate, but it is often invoked in situations where it isn't inappropriate.

I will use the Native American war bonnet as an example of inappropriate cultural appropriation and say why I think it is inappropriate. The war bonnet is something which is worn by individuals who have earned a large amount of respect within a given tribe, it is not something which is casually worn by Native American people in general. I can see how it is taken as disrespectful to Native American culture when someone who is not a part of that culture wears a war bonnet because it "looks cool", or some similar reason, it is because they are taking that part of Native American culture and using it in a way which betrays ignorance of, and/or a lack of respect for Native American culture

When you consider that Native American's have had a lot taken from them by white people, including their land, you might think it is understandable that they don't want aspects of their culture taken from them only to be misused. This is particularly problematic when you consider the fact that this part of Native American culture is not something which gets a lot of authentic attention. There runs a certain risk that people wearing the war bonnet to music festivals and the like becomes the normative standard for this particular type of headdress in the American mainstream. This normative standard would arguably equate to the erosion of an important aspect of their culture, or at the very least inadvertent propagation of ignorance about their culture.

You might argue that culture changes, and it is unreasonable to try and obstruct the freedom of individuals in order to preserve a culture. In many contexts I think this argument would be correct, but when a people have been dispossessed of their land, I don't think it is too much to ask that some respect is shown towards aspects of their culture in order for them to keep possession of said aspects of their culture for as long as possible.

I don't think I have ever heard anyone proposing that cultural appropriation should be illegal or anything like that. It is mainly seen as a kind of tactless faux pas. It should be remembered that the cultural significance of the war bonnet means that it is not only inappropriate for people who are not Native American's to wear it, in most (if not all) circumstances it would also likely be considered inappropriate for Native Americans who did not have the relevant social standing to wear it, it is just that in the latter case the transgression would not be referred to as cultural appropriation.

 

[tantric]

example of rampant cultural appropriation

my systemless campaign setting for RPG's based on Bantu mythology

WajabuPDF

i was told i had to remove the sapient mandrills because 'talking monkeys in an afircan rpg are offensive'

said the talking monkey

 

[Foreigner]

I'm a national minority in my place (Russian nationality living in Estonia - Estonians hate Russians because of what had happened during... well basically the whole 2nd millenium. Now the oppression has stopped, and Estonia has gained independence, and now the Russian residents get quite a bit of shit for what others had done to Estonians). So to say that I don't know what cultural disputes feel like would be incorrect. Still, I have absolutely no problem if somebody of Estonian nationality were to adopt some aspects of Russian culture - because it is not my fucken property. It really is that easy.

I don't know about Russia and Estonia to really comment. Maybe the context is different. Are there Estonians who would be offended? I get that you, personally, might not be offended, but are there those who are? If so, why is it so unreasonable to understand where people are coming from, even though they've formed differently conclusions than you would?

I want to ask you this question: what makes it offensive to adopt parts of others' cultures? I can easily understand how making fun of parts of somebody's culture could be seen as offensive, there is no denying that, but just using them? If there is no apparent mal-intent, then how do you assume that the person adopting those values does so in an oppressive/offensive way? And if they aren't, then what is your problem? Am I not allowed to wear the Jewish cap because I'm not Jewish? Please tell me how that isn't absolute fucking bullshit.

Take something like the war bonnet in native culture. People have put feathers in their hair for thousands of years all over the globe, there's no appropriation there. But the design of the war bonnet, it can ONLY refer to native culture. Only war chiefs are traditionally honoured with that garment, chiefs who, in countless numbers, were killed as part of overt European attempts at genocide in North America, as part of war. You don't see it as potentially problematic that white people are taking the war bonnet and wearing it as a party costume, after we killed countless numbers of people's ancestors and wiped out entire tribes? Honestly, is it THAT hard to understand?

About your question of wearing a kappah... yes, you certainly can. When Jewish people talk to you about their faith and find out you're not actually a practicing Jew, don't be surprised when they think you're an idiot.

It's not about "allowing". You don't need anyone's permission to be stupid, just go do it. Lots of people do. You are free to do whatever you want, especially in the western world, just as people are free to call you out for your ignorance. If you think that people can and should wear whatever they want, divorced of cultural context, then go do that. Just don't expect everyone to be nice to you about it. It's not about property it's about fucking human decency. People who are compassionate, aware of history, and aren't totally narcissistic understand this.

 

[belligerent drunk]

I don't know about Russia and Estonia to really comment. Maybe the context is different. Are there Estonians who would be offended? I get that you, personally, might not be offended, but are there those who are? If so, why is it so unreasonable to understand where people are coming from, even though they've formed differently conclusions than you would?

There are Russians who would be offended if Estonians were to adopt certain cultural values, but as a Russian (so to speak) myself I'm strongly against that. I understand the reasons, but I cannot agree with the logic - cultural property does not belong to anybody. The concepts are free for the taking, so to speak.

Take something like the war bonnet in native culture. People have put feathers in their hair for thousands of years all over the globe, there's no appropriation there. But the design of the war bonnet, it can ONLY refer to native culture. Only war chiefs are traditionally honoured with that garment, chiefs who, in countless numbers, were killed as part of overt European attempts at genocide in North America, as part of war. You don't see it as potentially problematic that white people are taking the war bonnet and wearing it as a party costume, after we killed countless numbers of people's ancestors and wiped out entire tribes? Honestly, is it THAT hard to understand?

About your question of wearing a kappah... yes, you certainly can. When Jewish people talk to you about their faith and find out you're not actually a practicing Jew, don't be surprised when they think you're an idiot.

It's not about "allowing". You don't need anyone's permission to be stupid, just go do it. Lots of people do. You are free to do whatever you want, especially in the western world, just as people are free to call you out for your ignorance. If you think that people can and should wear whatever they want, divorced of cultural context, then go do that. Just don't expect everyone to be nice to you about it. It's not about property it's about fucking human decency. People who are compassionate, aware of history, and aren't totally narcissistic understand this.

The question is not about societal perception. Society thinks that morphine is not OK, but you can logically disprove that statement. What exactly makes a piece of clothing OK for one person to wear, but not another?

If I've gone through heavy alcohol withdrawal, do I get the exclusive right to wear tight jeans? (again, I'm being rhetoric)

 

[Foreigner]

The question is not about societal perception. Society thinks that morphine is not OK, but you can logically disprove that statement. What exactly makes a piece of clothing OK for one person to wear, but not another?

Your question has already been answered.

It's not about rights and freedoms. You can do whatever you want.

It's about cultural values and sensitivity to recent history, which isn't exclusively logical, but is an important facet of human existence. You can feign logic all you want but humans aren't robots, we have feelings and intuitions, and that includes cultural grief.

Let's go a bit deeper. What do you feel about using medical research that's obtained from torturing human beings, like in Nazi labor camps? Same idea. Appropriating knowledge from heinous historical events, justified as "free sharing". I mean, someone might as well use it, right?

Some countries outlaw this appropriation, out of respect for past victims, while other countries freely use it. Is that merely an emotional appeal too?

Do you see how this might be a problem?

It would be like payos or kippahs coming into style in post war Nazi Germany after all the Jews had been exterminated, or a much smaller number survived to witness the new fashion trend.

If you don't know how shit like that is hurtful and psychopathic, then your "logic" has lead you away from decency. It's no different from the European empires stealing artifacts from conquered countries, and won't give them back even to this day, but instead put them on display in their museums for people to pay to see, or sell them into private collections.

What you wear is just a small snippet of the larger appropriations that have happened. You can't just dismiss it all as intellectual freedom. The dominant cultures ALWAYS claim that nothing is the matter. I agree with your right to wear what you want but you can't feign obtuseness over how it hurts other people to see their culture on display, especially among the oppressor class.

 

[infectedmushroom]

Cultural appropriation can be insensitive and hurtful, I can't agree more.

However, one shouldn't speak for an oppressed (whether current or historical) minority unless they come from that community. Don't presume a Jew wouldn't be insulted or incensed if they met a non-Jew wearing a kippah and peyos. Don't assume that a Native American would or would not be offended by a white person wearing a war bonnet.

Thinking you can speak on behalf of the feelings of an oppressed class is very... oppressor-like, isn't it...?

Which leads me back to my main point.

Who owns culture and what at the requirements to being an owner?

 

[Foreigner]

Cultural appropriation can be insensitive and hurtful, I can't agree more.

However, one shouldn't speak for an oppressed (whether current or historical) minority unless they come from that community. Don't presume a Jew wouldn't be insulted or incensed if they met a non-Jew wearing a kippah and peyos. Don't assume that a Native American would or would not be offended by a white person wearing a war bonnet.

Thinking you can speak on behalf of the feelings of an oppressed class is very... oppressor-like, isn't it...?

Which leads me back to my main point.

Who owns culture and what at the requirements to being an owner?

I've been an ally to these communities for years and this topic has been raised countless times. Some people don't care but a lot of people do. I'm not speaking for anyone, I'm relaying the message.

It's not about ownership. *face palm*

Maybe in 200 years nobody will care if you wear a war bonnet, but right now it still matters.

 

[belligerent drunk]

It's about cultural values and sensitivity to recent history, which isn't exclusively logical, but is an important facet of human existence. You can feign logic all you want but humans aren't robots, we have feelings and intuitions, and that includes cultural grief.

So you're effectively saying that logic can be used as long as it suits the person's agenda - if it offers no help, then one can just throw it out. I'm baffled by that, because I think that logic should be used in every case. If something makes you uncomfortable, then just suck it up. "This feels bad" is not an argument against using logic.

Let's go a bit deeper. What do you feel about using medical research that's obtained from torturing human beings, like in Nazi labor camps? Same idea. Appropriating knowledge from heinous historical events, justified as "free sharing". I mean, someone might as well use it, right?

While I sympathize for the people who suffered through the experiments, I also respect the work. Those experiments provided some information about the world that perhaps could have not been easily obtained otherwise. I expect you to argue that humans are not the same as rats, which is obvious bullshit. The way we learn about the behaviour of certain matter (like humans) is by studying similar matter. You don't learn about Earth much if you study some other planet. So while I don't wish any animal (mouse or human) the suffering, it also is what it is, and there is no point playing Captain Hindsight.

Cultural appropriation can be insensitive and hurtful, I can't agree more.

However, one shouldn't speak for an oppressed (whether current or historical) minority unless they come from that community. Don't presume a Jew wouldn't be insulted or incensed if they met a non-Jew wearing a kippah and peyos. Don't assume that a Native American would or would not be offended by a white person wearing a war bonnet.

Thinking you can speak on behalf of the feelings of an oppressed class is very... oppressor-like, isn't it...?

Which leads me back to my main point.

Who owns culture and what at the requirements to being an owner?

I come from a minority, and am "oppressed". And I'm saying that culture does not belong to anybody, it is a concept like any other, which is free for the taking.

 

[belligerent drunk]

I don't know why this thread was unapproved, and we're waiting for comments from senior moderators, but as far as me and Xorkoth can tell, there is nothing wrong with this thread, so I have opened it again. I'm sorry for the confusion, and hope everything is well.

 

[One Thousand Words]

Am I still allowed to use Roman numerals?

 

[belligerent drunk]

^ no, it seems to me. Bloody oppressor.

 

[drug_mentor]

Cultural appropriation can be insensitive and hurtful, I can't agree more.

However, one shouldn't speak for an oppressed (whether current or historical) minority unless they come from that community. Don't presume a Jew wouldn't be insulted or incensed if they met a non-Jew wearing a kippah and peyos. Don't assume that a Native American would or would not be offended by a white person wearing a war bonnet.

Thinking you can speak on behalf of the feelings of an oppressed class is very... oppressor-like, isn't it...?

In this case (the war bonnet) plenty of Native American's have expressed their offense at this type of cultural appropriation. Acknowledgement of this fact is not speaking on the behalf of Native Americans, nor is it an assumption. To compare this type of acknowledgement to any kind of oppression is ridiculous.

I come from a minority, and am "oppressed". And I'm saying that culture does not belong to anybody, it is a concept like any other, which is free for the taking.

Your situation is a bit different than those in which I consider cultural appropriation to be a legitimate grievance. If Estonians invaded Russia and made Russians an ethnic minority in their homeland, then proceeded to misuse Russian culture in such a way that there was a serious risk of that culture being eroded due to the misuse of such culture becoming the dominant conception of said culture, then you might feel a little differently.

I feel I articulated a fairly logical argument against some forms of cultural appropriation, but it doesn't seem like anybody wants to engage it. That's fine, but it is a little disingenuous to act like arguments against cultural appropriation are purely emotive in the very same thread which I made my post.

 

[belligerent drunk]

^ I experience negative treatment if people sense that I'm not of their culture, just because of who my ancestors were, and because of my first language. If I'm able to mask the accent and speak perfect Estonian, then I'm considered a normal human being, but if I don't (intoxicated, tired, or whatever), then I suddenly notice difference in approach. I think that can be counted as some form of discrimination.

I don't know how to respond to your arguments, other than what I've already said. I say that concepts (such as cultural views) do not belong to anybody, and people can use them if they want to. If one is not deliberately making fun of, or trying to somehow else offend that particular culture, then just using its ideas is... neutral? Using the principles of, say, mathematics is not anyone's property, and neither is using other principles IMO.

 

[drug_mentor]

It isn't simply about discrimination though.

As I pointed out in my post, when non-Native American's misuse the war bonnet this is called cultural appropriation. However, if a Native American was to misuse the war bonnet in the same way this would likely be frowned upon by the community, it just so happens that cultural appropriation would not be the correct term for it.

I don't think anyone owns culture, I think culture is something which can ideally be shared, but the way in which it is shared should be respectful. Numerous US Presidents have worn the war bonnet when participating in certain Native American celebrations, the reason this is not cultural appropriation (regardless of the Presidents race) is because they are a member of the community who has earned a large amount of respect and their wearing it is respectful of the cultural tradition from which the attire originates, this is distinctly different from people wearing the war bonnet to a music festival because they happen to think it looks cool.

I think that when a people have been dispossessed of their land and their culture is at risk of being eroded then it is not unreasonable for that people to ask that some respect is shown towards their cultural traditions, instead of being parodied by a bunch of insensitive clowns. Again, nobody that I am aware of is proposing cultural appropriation should be illegal, but I think it is right to describe it as tactless and insensitive.