I think the language about not pulling “dick moves” is really valuable and important. Making fun of a class of people who suffered or who’s ancestors suffered from genocide (a la “Redskins”) is a dick move. Starbucks commercializing the tea ceremony? Not so much a dick move.
But I think “cultural appropriation” as a frame of critique is a serious misstep and enacts racism because it presumes that the authentic self can never know the authentic other, except through gate-keeping (which always begs the question who get to be the gatekeepers? You wisely sidestepped that question.). The frame of cultural appropriate presumes that, for example, being from the West coast of the US we aren’t somehow Mexican, Japanese, white, Native American, straight, trans, immigrants, etc. It assumes that the authentic other can never be a part of who we are.
Aside: “Where are all the cherished people walking down the street screaming swear words at old women?” So I take it you haven’t spent much time in the US? Upon further reflection: I take it you did not track an election we had here in the US in November of last year?
Sorry, I don’t mean to mock. But honestly people get killed by racism, sexism and transphobia pretty much every day. So really fucking dangerous seems like an overstatement.
Yeah, it’s stupid. I saw a panel discussing this in terms of an upcoming Netflix version of Death Note. People saying that one large entertainment company purchasing rights to make a version of another large entertainment company’s intellectual property is cultural appropriation is nonsense.
I used the example of a kids show about African stories. After watching an episode I actually went and looked it up - was this some white guys trying to exoticize Africa for other white people, or was it people from Africa sharing their stories. That affects what I think of the show.
People are out there jumping to conclusions about things every day. It would be a better world if your former brother in law didn’t get judged by ignorant passers by. But if someone gets angry at me for being a murderer, I’m going to say, “I wish they didn’t assume I was a murderer” rather than “We need to stop saying murder is bad so this doesn’t happen again.”
I was intentionally simplifying the situation because the ‘complexity’ argument is often used to justify these situations. Yes, white musicians were treated horribly by music corporations, exploited, etc. etc. However, because it was a white world at the top, it was significantly easier for white artists to carve out their own power within the industry than it was for black musicians to do the same.
So it’s ok that they didn’t make as much as whites, because a tiny handful made out well?
Well, for example, how black do I need to be to wear cornrows? Half? 1/4? 1/64th? How about if I was white, but adopted into a black family, or raised by black step family after being orphaned?
Maybe hairstyle is a silly example- But then look at someone like Rachel Dolezal, who raised some really serious issues about whether transracial is a thing the way transgender is. After all, they may both be social constructs, but race has even less actual scientific basis than gender does.
Where it gets dangerous is when we start to look at those things and apply some kind of standard based on social constructs, regarding who is or is not “enough” to be part of whatever group- And that is one of the very things that leads to things like being killed over racism or transphobia.
And someone like Dolezal really kind of clearly illustrates the question: Are you the person you say you are, or the person your genes say you are, and who gets to decide?
This is a very good sentence taken out of context.
If I could add to that, though, I’d like to add that when we see something that was taken from / passes itself off as / references a culture, we should probably check whether people from that culture seem to think it’s a dick move.
Well, yelling swear words at old women after checking their party affiliation is totally different.
No. There is no blood quantum or litmus test. There is no hypothetical that will solve this issue. We just have to keep interrogating each instance as it arises and keep acknowledging that marginalized people (including sexual and gender minorities) have cultures that were hard won in a society that has attempted to eradicate their very existence.
Has anyone else seen the SNL skit “Wells for Senstive Boys?” It’s very appropriate to this conversation.
Nowhere am I justifying the inequality of the situation. You took a tiny fragment of my comment, misunderstood my intent, and started running with it. This discussion has strayed a long way from my original point, that an overly broad definition of what constitutes “cultural appropriation” is unrealistic and counter-productive.
Record companies treated black artists unfairly-- we agree on that-- but in my original comment I was addressing general popularity, not royalties. Maybe two pennies is no better than one penny, but one penny is better if one penny in royalties also means $1000 per gig, and a long string of guaranteed gigs. This is really what I was talking about, exposure.
What makes appropriation “good” or “bad” really depends on the intent behind it. Appropriation in of itself is a neutral concept.
What is good: appropriating aspects of another culture while recognizing and respecting the source and giving something back in return. What is bad: appropriating aspects of another culture while taking credit for it and not respecting the source.
“Good” cultural appropriation is an exchange, “bad” cultural appropriation is exploitative.
A good explanation someone once told me is something along the lines of making friends with someone else and being inspired by them versus cutting off a piece of their body and keeping it for yourself.
I actually had this conversation with @bibliophile20 back in the day:
IMHO:
If I enjoy, say, Hamentashen cookies and make them for myself, It’s not appropriation
If I enjoy the cookies, decide to make them for a family get-together, and tell them “hey, these are Jewish cookies, there’s a cool history around these you should check out” but otherwise just serve them, that’s not appropriation
If I start selling them at a farmers market along with other baked goods, with no reference to their history or origin, that’s appropriation
The question is if I sell them at a farmers market along with a note explaining what they are and their history, is it still appropriation? In my view it isn’t - I’m noting their historical significance and (theoretically) not being culturally inappropriate with them (other than making them out-of-season, maybe).
An alternative would be making something like Aboriginal-inspired clothing and either passing it off as authentic (obvious appropriation) or indicating it’s “inspired by” authentic designs (also appropriation IMHO.). But what about a non-aboriginal who chooses to make aboriginal clothing using the same methods and materials, who includes information about the history and journey they undertook to learn and understand the history of the clothing? Is it appropriation at that point just because the person isn’t aboriginal?
My question about cultural appropriation is how long before something is considered to be a part of your culture? We don’t talk about the Picts and the Celts and the Britons as being separate people in current times because they’ve all merged into “British people” regardless of the original differences in their ethnic and cultural heritage. So it seems like there’s an amount of time that can pass until cultural appropriation isn’t considered an issue, such as the Celts adopting knotwork art from the Nordic people or vice versa. Does your culture have to be completely assimilated into another for this to occur?
If you’re of completely white Northern European ethnic heritage but your parents taught you how to make Mexican food dishes when you were growing up and you taught them to your children, how many generations would have to pass before it was considered a part of your culture rather than appropriation? Can Eminem’s children claim that hip-hop is their cultural heritage because of their father’s career and the culture he grew up in?
What about getting training from an original cultural practitioner, like Bruce Lee teaching Americans kung fu?
It seems like the problem with cultural appropriation is there is no definitive guide as to what it is and isn’t and different people from the same groups disagree so Bruce Lee might be glad to teach you kung fu but someone else might say you’re guilty of cultural appropriation.
I would say same category as in “subjective” but not necessarily to the same degree as at least most of those things. Racism is pretty easy to spot if it’s personal racism (e.g. “I hate _____ people”). Systemic racism can be more subjective, but cultural appropriation seems to have a much wider range between people who are okay with something and people who seem to think it’s the most offensive thing you could do because it seems to hit a greater level of fundamental differences of belief on what culture is, who can “own” it if anyone, how it’s presented and perceived, et al. It just seems a lot murkier and more filled with minefields.
And yet you have people engaging in long discussions over whether islamophobia or antisemitism are “racism” because they are hatred of a religion rather than a race but in practice can often come out as hatred of people with a certain appearance.
I’m totally willing to accept that disagreements over what is and what is not cultural appropriation are currently more wide-ranging than disagreements over what is and what is not sexism (but by quirk of the internet they are currently less wide-ranging that disagreements over what is an what is not a sandwich). We get confused by what cultural appropriation is because we are new to the idea. But we can’t put that on the idea itself or we sound like someone watching our first game of cricket and saying, “This game doesn’t make any sense” instead of recognizing we just don’t know the rules.
I agree there is no definitive guide to what is and isn’t cultural appropriation but I think a reasonably self-aware person should be able to sense when something is beginning to cross the line.
For the Bruce Lee example, there’s nothing inherently wrong with a Westerner learning or mastering Kung Fu. But it starts to become problematic when a white guy starts decorating his studio with Chinese calligraphy he doesn’t know how to read or adopts other superficial trappings of a culture he isn’t part of in an effort to lend “authenticity.”
So for the burrito deal I’d say it’s great for more people to learn how to make delicious Mexican-style food but I’d hope the women in question don’t brand their business with caricatures of mustachioed guys in big sombreros riding donkeys.
Cultural appropriation is one of those things that’s really bugged me, because I believe it’s important to respect other cultures. I also fear the world becoming way too homogenized, and think we need to maintain cultural differences. But this phrase gets trotted out WAY too often. Two white ladies making Mexican food doesn’t strike me as cultural appropriation. Neither does a non-Latino dude wearing a guayabera. Urban Outfitters selling festival wear lifted from religious imagery does. My line is: is someone trying to make a buck by stripping all meaning from something someone else finds meaningful?
Upon further reflection: I take it you did not track an election we had here in the US in November of last year?
