|
Popular Thug Drink posted:You literally said you don't understand how people feel like they can belong to a culture. Well, that is rather an odd idea too but it's understandable at least. But what I said was that I don't understand how people feel like a culture can belong to them, which is quite different. To object to the participation in and modification of something by others, is to feel possessive of it. Culture very, very definitely to my mind is a one way thing. You can identify as part of one, be affected by one, but you can't claim creative control over one, not meaningfully anyway. Even the strongest cults of personality or ideological movements rapidly degenerate into a variety of subgroups which all borrow from other sources and ideas. To claim that you should, or can realistically have ownership over a set of shared ideas is nonsense, even intellectual property cannot stop people from making derivative works. You can't control the contents of other people's heads. Popular Thug Drink posted:That person wasn't agreeing with you. I know they weren't, but that is exactly what it feels like from my perspective at the moment.
|
#
?
Mar 25, 2015 17:07
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 25, 2024 11:23 |
|
|
"Culture doesn't exist, and it's cool when white guys declare what authentic Chinese food is" - a guy who got his political beliefs from The Matrix and a guy who really loves watches.
|
|
|
#
?
Mar 25, 2015 17:09
|
|
|
OwlFancier posted:You can't control the contents of other people's heads. I have a feeling that some politicians would disagree with you.
|
|
#
?
Mar 25, 2015 17:10
|
|
|
OwlFancier posted:Culture very, very definitely to my mind is a one way thing. You can identify as part of one, be affected by one, but you can't claim creative control over one, not meaningfully anyway. Is there a difference between group belonging as identity formation and actual ownership of a tangible concept in your mind? Do you think that you actually own your group of close friends? Like if you reduce human behavior to a wonky intellectual property analogy uh yeah I can see how that doesn't line up, in your mind. I don't know if I care to explain basic social concepts about how people have ideas to a rando forums person, but that might be the foundational source of your baffling inability to accept that people construct their identity through shared symbols, objects, and practices.
|
|
#
?
Mar 25, 2015 17:11
|
|
|
OwlFancier posted:Do you have a suggestion about how one might realistically enforce laws if "I don't recognise the validity of your legal system" was an acceptable defence? Look here old chap, either we take the land of the savages since they didn't register a deed with the records office in London when they came here 1,000 years ago; or cats and dogs will live together, people will eat each other on the streets, and there will be no laws at all!
|
|
#
?
Mar 25, 2015 17:11
|
|
|
Jakcson posted:I have a feeling that some politicians would disagree with you. And they're bloody daft as well. I know plenty of people try to do that sort of thing but you can't realistically do it with accuracy. Popular Thug Drink posted:Is there a difference between group belonging as identity formation and actual ownership of a tangible concept in your mind? Do you think that you actually own your group of close friends? No, of course I don't own them, which is why I don't tell them what to do? vvvv paranoid randroid posted:Why on earth not? Culture doesn't just happen irrespective of people. It doesn't happen irrespective of people but it does happen irrespective of individual people. Culture is the net expression of a lot of people's ideas and thoughts, as you introduce more people, the net expression changes as a result. The only way you can avoid that is by being completely isolationist? And even then, that also changes the culture because now isolationism is a component of it. How can you possibly exist in communication with others and not have either them, or you, or both, be changed as a result? OwlFancier fucked around with this message at 17:18 on Mar 25, 2015 |
|
#
?
Mar 25, 2015 17:11
|
|
|
OwlFancier posted:To object to the participation in and modification of something by others, is to feel possessive of it. Culture very, very definitely to my mind is a one way thing. You can identify as part of one, be affected by one, but you can't claim creative control over one, not meaningfully anyway. Why on earth not? Culture doesn't just happen irrespective of people.
|
|
#
?
Mar 25, 2015 17:13
|
|
|
OwlFancier posted:No, of course I don't own them, which is why I don't tell them what to do? So you interpret crticism of bad behavior as "telling someone what to do"? OwlFancier posted:Culture is the net expression of a lot of people's ideas and thoughts, as you introduce more people, the net expression changes as a result. The only way you can avoid that is by being completely isolationist? And even then, that also changes the culture because now isolationism is a component of it. You must be British.
|
|
#
?
Mar 25, 2015 17:19
|
|
|
Popular Thug Drink posted:So you interpret crticism of bad behavior as "telling someone what to do"? Well that is sort of literally what criticism is but certainly the person being criticized is at liberty to ignore it.
|
|
#
?
Mar 25, 2015 17:21
|
|
OwlFancier posted:Well that is sort of literally what criticism is but certainly the person being criticized is at liberty to ignore it. No, this isn't the case. Criticism doesn't mean that.
|
|
|
#
?
Mar 25, 2015 17:22
|
|
|
Effectronica posted:No, this isn't the case. Criticism doesn't mean that. What does it mean then? Because I'm not sure I believe that people point out things they disagree with without hoping the person being criticised will change as a result. It would be rather a waste of words otherwise.
|
|
#
?
Mar 25, 2015 17:23
|
|
OwlFancier posted:What does it mean then? Because I'm not sure I believe that people point out things they disagree with without hoping the person being criticised will change as a result. It would be rather a waste of words otherwise. Criticism doesn't require you to propose an alternative in order to do it, duder.
|
|
|
#
?
Mar 25, 2015 17:25
|
|
|
OwlFancier posted:What does it mean then? Because I'm not sure I believe that people point out things they disagree with without hoping the person being criticised will change as a result. It would be rather a waste of words otherwise. wiktionary.org posted:Noun Jakcson fucked around with this message at 17:28 on Mar 25, 2015 |
|
#
?
Mar 25, 2015 17:26
|
|
|
Effectronica posted:Criticism doesn't require you to propose an alternative in order to do it, duder. Then would "telling people what not to do" satisfy your definition?
|
|
#
?
Mar 25, 2015 17:26
|
|
|
OwlFancier posted:What does it mean then? Because I'm not sure I believe that people point out things they disagree with without hoping the person being criticised will change as a result. It would be rather a waste of words otherwise. It is a corrective measure for sure, but it is hardly "telling someone what to do." Criticism usually involves what was done wrong and then the receiver of the critique can either try something different, not do the same thing, or just ignore the critique.
|
|
#
?
Mar 25, 2015 17:26
|
|
|
OwlFancier posted:What does it mean then? Because I'm not sure I believe that people point out things they disagree with without hoping the person being criticised will change as a result. It would be rather a waste of words otherwise. Me pointing out that your posts are bad and your arguments are bad is not me implicitly saying you should stop posting. In fact I appreciate every post you make.
|
|
#
?
Mar 25, 2015 17:26
|
|
|
OwlFancier posted:Culture is the net expression of a lot of people's ideas and thoughts, as you introduce more people, the net expression changes as a result. The only way you can avoid that is by being completely isolationist? And even then, that also changes the culture because now isolationism is a component of it. I think the major difference between what people call CA and cultural exchange & mutation is that CA is taking place in the context of the modern commodification of everything. People arguing against CA are reacting to what they perceive as having bits and pieces of what makes them them hoovered up and turned into cute little accouterments to be sold at a premium. In cultural exchange there's usually some kind of interplay between peoples, even if it's not necessarily a net positive for one or both sides. CA is viewed as one way.
|
|
#
?
Mar 25, 2015 17:28
|
|
|
I loving guarantee you that no one in japan gives a gently caress about westerners wearing traditional pajamas in an unusual context. Well maybe the hard right nationalists do. The degree to which this thread magnifies the impact of personal fashion choices of white people is pretty egotistical. Like what you wear has a profound impact on the struggle for justice.
|
|
#
?
Mar 25, 2015 17:28
|
|
|
blackguy32 posted:It is a corrective measure for sure, but it is hardly "telling someone what to do." Criticism usually involves what was done wrong and then the receiver of the critique can either try something different, not do the same thing, or just ignore the critique. I'm not sure I see a meaningful difference, but I appreciate the explanation.
|
|
#
?
Mar 25, 2015 17:28
|
|
|
A big flaming stink posted:The degree to which this thread magnifies the impact of personal fashion choices of white people is pretty egotistical. Like what you wear has a profound impact on the struggle for justice. Why do you think any discussion of cultural activity is a "cry for justice"? It's like whining about how talking about sexism in games directly translates to a desire to ban sexist games. The defensiveness levels are off the charts ITT
|
|
#
?
Mar 25, 2015 17:30
|
|
A big flaming stink posted:I loving guarantee you that no one in japan gives a gently caress about westerners wearing traditional pajamas in an unusual context. u must be one of them since you're pretending japanese-americans don't exist 
|
|
|
#
?
Mar 25, 2015 17:31
|
|
|
Series DD Funding posted:Pouring one out for all the cosplayers arrested by the IP police. If you have a business showing up to kids' birthday parties as Belle and Jasmine, you won't have a business as soon as Disney finds out. ("Arabian Princess" "French Princess" and "Indian Princess" are just fine, though!) No, they don't go after every single case of unlicensed t-shirts and kids dressing up in homemade costumes. But the claim was that "original idea do not steal" isn't a thing in law, which is loving ludicrous. IP is in fact a thing, and our current IP laws don't deal well with "traditional" stuff.
|
|
#
?
Mar 25, 2015 17:33
|
|
|
Popular Thug Drink posted:Why do you think any discussion of cultural activity is a "cry for justice"? It's like whining about how talking about sexism in games directly translates to a desire to ban sexist games. The defensiveness levels are off the charts ITT Look buddy if youre gonna call me caremad just come out and say it.
|
|
#
?
Mar 25, 2015 17:34
|
|
|
If anyone wants to appropriate and destroy my Baptist heritage feel free.
|
|
#
?
Mar 25, 2015 17:36
|
|
|
Effectronica posted:Because their ability to say that "this is the meaning of this" in relation to their culture is destroyed. There's always the appropriated stuff with its meanings, itself more powerful than anything the tribe can do. If "spirit animals" are thought of as New Age bullshit, then Native religion becomes bullshit as well, because young people attempting to become part of the religion will still have the New Age nonsense in the back of their heads. If young native people decide that spirit animals are bullshit because white people appropriated them, perhaps they are right and those white people have actually helped them. What right do older native people have to indoctrinate their youth without interference?
|
|
#
?
Mar 25, 2015 17:37
|
|
|
paranoid randroid posted:I think the major difference between what people call CA and cultural exchange & mutation is that CA is taking place in the context of the modern commodification of everything. People arguing against CA are reacting to what they perceive as having bits and pieces of what makes them them hoovered up and turned into cute little accouterments to be sold at a premium. I think that is a better criticism of cultural identity than commodification. We have a lot of people over here who get real mad about people not speaking English all the time, or wearing clothing that isn't traditionally british, or having places of worship that don't use church bells. While not related to commodification, I think that's fairly stupid because your personal identity probably shouldn't be tied up in your culture, such that attacks or changes on that culture are viewed as attacks or changes to you. Because there is no reason why they should be. You exist as an independent entity and changes to the ambient ideas around you don't need to change yours if you don't want them to. Culture and people aren't the same thing, and a person is not entirely a vessel for their culture, or at least I would hope not. It would be selling them rather short if that were so. Culture changes, always. Planting your identity in it is probably a bad idea if you want something enduring to define yourself. If you're looking for that I think it's going to have to be a conscious decision on your part to stick to the ideas you like, regardless of outside influences.
|
|
#
?
Mar 25, 2015 17:38
|
|
|
hakimashou posted:Not a very good comparison is it? Hmm, a sari isn't anyone's intellectual property. We know this because according to the ancient, immutable, and traditional rules of intellectual property handed down by the gods themselves, a sari does not qualify. These trademark, copyright, and patent laws certainly aren't imperfect, made by human beings, or subject to criticism and change, right? Also, if you go somewhere and plant a flag, and the people living there don't have a courthouse with a filed deed for that piece of property, you own it now. That's just the rules. And besides, if I move in beside them and declare a right to their stuff, it's just increasing and celebrating diversity.
|
|
#
?
Mar 25, 2015 17:38
|
|
|
Bob James posted:If anyone wants to appropriate and destroy my Baptist heritage feel free. I'm gonna make snake-handling and tongues-speaking the new hotness in greenwich village this fall and you ain't gonna get poo poo out of it. l8r, rube.
|
|
#
?
Mar 25, 2015 17:38
|
|
|
Effectronica posted:u must be one of them since you're pretending japanese-americans don't exist Honestly id call j-a culture and japan culture as really loving distinct. Japan's cultural memes pretty much straight up call anyone that spends significant amount of time out of the country as "not really Japanese"
|
|
#
?
Mar 25, 2015 17:38
|
|
JeffersonClay posted:If young native people decide that spirit animals are bullshit because white people appropriated them, perhaps they are right and those white people have actually helped them. What right do older native people have to indoctrinate their youth without interference? Extermination of religion should be equitable. I'll consider your post when Christianity is considered as contemptible as belief in katsinas.
|
|
|
#
?
Mar 25, 2015 17:39
|
|
|
IDK if those things I said are even Baptist things. Baptists are like the generic store brand of Protestantism in my mind.
|
|
#
?
Mar 25, 2015 17:40
|
|
A big flaming stink posted:Honestly id call j-a culture and japan culture as really loving distinct. Japan's cultural memes pretty much straight up call anyone that spends significant amount of time out of the country as "not really Japanese" okay, but complaints about white people wearing kimono largely come from j-a people, who are much more culturally vulnerable than japan is
|
|
|
#
?
Mar 25, 2015 17:44
|
|
|
"You kids! What did I tell you about baptizing each other in my rain barrel! Get out of h- no! No, don't you dare hold a convention to establish the truth of biblical literalism! Don't you dare split, I don't need two of you little shits running around! Don't you DARE advocate salvation through grace on my lawn! I know your father!"OwlFancier posted:Culture changes, always. Planting your identity in it is probably a bad idea if you want something enduring to define yourself. If you're looking for that I think it's going to have to be a conscious decision on your part to stick to the ideas you like, regardless of outside influences. "Everything dies. Family, friends, your ideals, everything you love - it dies. It's foolish to even try to define yourself in the face of a hostile, entropic world. Be free of all obligations to self." -A goon who deeply understands people
|
|
#
?
Mar 25, 2015 17:45
|
|
|
paranoid randroid posted:IDK if those things I said are even Baptist things. Baptists are like the generic store brand of Protestantism in my mind. Hardly generic. Baptists have a jacuzzi center stage for those adult baptisms.
|
|
#
?
Mar 25, 2015 17:46
|
|
|
paranoid randroid posted:IDK if those things I said are even Baptist things. Baptists are like the generic store brand of Protestantism in my mind. I'm pretty sure protesting at funerals and holding signs that say "God hates fags" is a Baptist thing. 
|
|
#
?
Mar 25, 2015 17:47
|
|
|
Jakcson posted:I'm pretty sure protesting at funerals and holding signs that say "God hates fags" is a Baptist thing. I hope nobody appropriates that.
|
|
#
?
Mar 25, 2015 17:48
|
|
|
Popular Thug Drink posted:"Everything dies. Family, friends, your ideals, everything you love - it dies. It's foolish to even try to define yourself in the face of a hostile, entropic world. Be free of all obligations to self." -A goon who deeply understands people Close, but more that it's foolish to pick something extremely mutable to borrow your self definition from. Absolutely define yourself if you want to, go nuts with it, but if you want something that lasts, you're going to have to spend some work internalising everything and making it your own. Or embrace change or something, whatevs works for you. Wanting permanence but relying on outside definitions of yourself is probably going to suck though.
|
|
#
?
Mar 25, 2015 17:48
|
|
|
Effectronica posted:Extermination of religion should be equitable. I'll consider your post when Christianity is considered as contemptible as belief in katsinas. What if the native children decide that religion is a crutch for the weak minded after reading some Dawkins and therefore view Christianity in contempt as well as their crazy Grand Pa's animal spirits. Is that ok, or would they be appropriating your culture?
|
|
#
?
Mar 25, 2015 17:49
|
|
|
Effectronica posted:Extermination of religion should be equitable. I'll consider your post when Christianity is considered as contemptible as belief in katsinas.
|
|
#
?
Mar 25, 2015 17:50
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 25, 2024 11:23 |
|
|
OwlFancier posted:Close, but more that it's foolish to pick something extremely mutable to borrow your self definition from. I think you're confusing the presence of thousands year old cultures with people acutely, in the present moment, being a fool. It's an easy mistake to make, so I understand your confusion.
|
|
#
?
Mar 25, 2015 17:51
|
|