|
Effectronica posted:The underside of "all cultural interactions are appropriation", beyond the overside where people declare that Lakota culture must be destroyed, is interesting in and of itself. It comes, and you can see people admitting this directly earlier in the thread, of the belief that taxonomy and analysis and all the poo poo where you think about something is bad. Simply awful. Action, without thought, is what is necessary. Thus, the "leftists" and "liberals" that reject it so completely. Cultural soverignty is a ridiculous idea, though. Cultures are amorphous and the same person will touch dozens or hundreds of distinct cultures, that they share in common with a constantly shifting and sometimes overlapping mass of people. There's no one to even arbitrate the boundries let alone credibly direct where, culturally-speaking, people can experiment.
|
#
?
Mar 30, 2015 20:22
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 23, 2024 10:46 |
|
TheImmigrant posted:Another fascinating position insinuated in this thread is that culture and ethnicity/blood/race are coextensive. This is a truly pernicious idea. Culture is by definition behavior, and as such voluntary, whereas the later grouping is immutable. I don't know about you all, but I have a serious issue with assigning behavioral expectations based on someone's skin color or eye shape. I know, it's hosed-up that such a racist position is comorbid with denying the existence of cultural appropriation.
|
|
|
#
?
Mar 30, 2015 20:22
|
|
|
wateroverfire posted:People who find you absolutely insuferable have thought the same thing was funny for a long time, and I agree with them. You asked me for my insight, I already asked you to take it to another thread, now that you are getting made fun of for bringing it up you want me to drop it? 
|
|
#
?
Mar 30, 2015 20:23
|
|
|
TheImmigrant posted:Another fascinating position insinuated in this thread is that culture and ethnicity/blood/race are coextensive. This is also something that has not only not been said, this accusation has already been raised and addressed. Also ethnicity/blood/race isn't immutable. You are whiffing a lot, like some sort of auto-wiffler.
|
|
#
?
Mar 30, 2015 20:23
|
|
wateroverfire posted:Cultural soverignty is a ridiculous idea, though. Cultures are amorphous and the same person will touch dozens or hundreds of distinct cultures, that they share in common with a constantly shifting and sometimes overlapping mass of people. There's no one to even arbitrate the boundries let alone credibly direct where, culturally-speaking, people can experiment. Okay, so in other words, there is nothing wrong with religious oppression.
|
|
|
#
?
Mar 30, 2015 20:23
|
|
|
Effectronica posted:I know, it's hosed-up that such a racist position is comorbid with denying the existence of cultural appropriation. Who denies the existence of cultural appropriation? I just wrote in a recent post that I engage in wanton cultural appropriation. (My kimchi -> sauerkraut analogy is way more apropos than your bibimbap -> meatloaf one though, you have to admit.) What I am questioning is how cultural appropriation is harmful. There are a lot of conclusory statements to that effect, but no one has explained how yet.
|
|
#
?
Mar 30, 2015 20:25
|
|
|
TheImmigrant posted:Who denies the existence of cultural appropriation? I just wrote in a recent post that I engage in wanton cultural appropriation. (My kimchi -> sauerkraut analogy is way more apropos than your bibimbap -> meatloaf one though, you have to admit.) Did you read the whole thread? PTD has given an explanation like two or three times I think
|
|
#
?
Mar 30, 2015 20:26
|
|
|
TheQat posted:Did you read the whole thread? PTD has given an explanation like two or three times I think I've given it like twice. But it kinda seems like theimmigrant is just a shitposter, since he's not bothering to defend anything he says, just making new claims. Obdicut fucked around with this message at 20:33 on Mar 30, 2015 |
|
#
?
Mar 30, 2015 20:27
|
|
TheImmigrant posted:Who denies the existence of cultural appropriation? I just wrote in a recent post that I engage in wanton cultural appropriation. (My kimchi -> sauerkraut analogy is way more apropos than your bibimbap -> meatloaf one though, you have to admit.) Woah, I didn't say anything about you. Delusions of importance all over the place. drat.
|
|
|
#
?
Mar 30, 2015 20:27
|
|
|
Zeitgueist posted:You asked me for my insight, I already asked you to take it to another thread, now that you are getting made fun of for bringing it up you want me to drop it? IDK dude. In your own interest it seems like you'd want to drop the talk about your personal life, given how sensitive you've been about it in the past. But if you want to keep at it maybe the mods will approve Zeitgeistchat for a little bit and you can awkwardly try to explain yourself again.
|
|
#
?
Mar 30, 2015 20:29
|
|
|
Effectronica posted:Okay, so in other words, there is nothing wrong with religious oppression. Religious oppression presumably includes acts of actual oppression so idk those things seem different.
|
|
#
?
Mar 30, 2015 20:31
|
|
|
wateroverfire posted:IDK dude. In your own interest it seems like you'd want to drop the talk about your personal life, given how sensitive you've been about it in the past. But if you want to keep at it maybe the mods will approve Zeitgeistchat for a little bit and you can awkwardly try to explain yourself again. I'm not the one who brought my personal life up, if you want to try and keep screaming "look how defensive he is" after this latest attempt bombed, I guess if it makes you feel better you can have that.
|
|
#
?
Mar 30, 2015 20:34
|
|
Obdicut posted:Why do you need one? But sure, the ongoing erasure of Native American cultures in various ways, and the use of Native American iconography and legends and all kinds of stuff to sell poo poo. I asked for a modern example to see if it was something that still needs to be worried about or if it was an artifact of history. As far as current Native American culture, nothing is stopping them from writing down or otherwise recording their beliefs and culture.
|
|
|
#
?
Mar 30, 2015 20:40
|
|
|
Armyman25 posted:I asked for a modern example to see if it was something that still needs to be worried about or if it was an artifact of history. That's not what I was talking about, though. Really, I totally agree there's lots to argue over about what is cultural appropriation, what is harmful about it, how it differs from cultural transference, but just ignoring what gets written isn't a very effective argument. Nobody has claimed that cultural appropriation takes away from the ability of Native Americans to record their belief or culture. But that's not what I wrote, so maybe try responding to what I wrote? And why on earth would you think cultural appropriation would be an artifact of history? What would have changed?
|
|
#
?
Mar 30, 2015 20:43
|
|
wateroverfire posted:Religious oppression presumably includes acts of actual oppression so idk those things seem different. You're the one saying that there is no such thing as sovereignty for a culture, so how could it be oppressive if you decide their religion for them?
|
|
|
#
?
Mar 30, 2015 20:45
|
|
|
Effectronica posted:You're the one saying that there is no such thing as sovereignty for a culture, so how could it be oppressive if you decide their religion for them? You're equivocating between the definition of "culture" as "a group of people related by x y and z" and "culture" as something like "a collection of practices, icons, memes, w/e".
|
|
#
?
Mar 30, 2015 20:53
|
|
|
Zeitgueist posted:I'm not the one who brought my personal life up, if you want to try and keep screaming "look how defensive he is" after this latest attempt bombed, I guess if it makes you feel better you can have that. You're being defensive now hth. If you want to stop talking about it stop talking about it. If you want to keep talking about it stop talking about talking about it and just talk about it. Why do you feel the need to have the last word?
|
|
#
?
Mar 30, 2015 20:55
|
|
wateroverfire posted:You're equivocating between the definition of "culture" as "a group of people related by x y and z" and "culture" as something like "a collection of practices, icons, memes, w/e". I think you're at the point where thinking solely in individual terms breaks down, haha.
|
|
|
#
?
Mar 30, 2015 20:55
|
|
|
TheImmigrant posted:Another fascinating position insinuated in this thread is that culture and ethnicity/blood/race are coextensive. This is a truly pernicious idea. Culture is by definition behavior, and as such voluntary, whereas the later grouping is immutable. I don't know about you all, but I have a serious issue with assigning behavioral expectations based on someone's skin color or eye shape. *beats American Indian child with belt* "Race and ethnicity aren't co-extensive young man. And your culture is 'white' now so act like it!" *crack*
|
|
#
?
Mar 30, 2015 20:57
|
|
|
People's attitudes. People in the thread keep bringing up black rock and roll singers from the 50s and i don't think that that is circumstance that will repeat itself. There are outlets for every kind of cultural expression. As far as the fading of NA culture, that is something that may or may not happen. In the past there were deliberate efforts directed at erasing those cultures. The erasure you are talking about doesn't seem to be deliberate though, but just a side effect of using NA imagery. I mark that as a different thing, and I would argue the use of that imagery by non-natives is not the cause for the erasure of culture, but that any minority group is likely to see their culture subsumed by the majority. If you have a group living with in a larger group, unless the smaller group goes to a lot of deliberate effort to maintain what makes them different from the majority, their distinctiveness goes away. My grandparents all lived to at least their 80s. Speaking with them about their childhoods in the mid-west and about their memories from when they were younger revealed that things were much more divided in the past. Ethnic differences like Irish versus German versus Bohemian (Czech) and religious differences such as Catholic vs Protestant vs Jewish were much more important than they are to my generation. The differences faded away and were replaced by a common culture that developed in the areas that all these people lived in. i am sure that some traditions and customs and parts of cultures disappeared, but they were replaced by a what came after. It is a thing that happens.
|
|
|
#
?
Mar 30, 2015 20:57
|
|
|
Effectronica posted:I think you're at the point where thinking solely in individual terms breaks down, haha. Dude what does that even mean?
|
|
#
?
Mar 30, 2015 20:58
|
|
|
I mean, here is a woman who is incorporating the symbols of her military service into the traditional dances of her tribe. It doesn't look like her culture is being erased. http://projects.aljazeera.com/2014/native-veterans/woman-warrior/
|
|
|
#
?
Mar 30, 2015 21:00
|
|
Armyman25 posted:People's attitudes. People in the thread keep bringing up black rock and roll singers from the 50s and i don't think that that is circumstance that will repeat itself. There are outlets for every kind of cultural expression. There's still a Finnish-language newspaper in the Upper Peninsula of Michigan despite the majority of Finnish immigration happening a century ago. There would be German-language newspapers in Milwaukee and St. Paul today if the US government hadn't crushed them in the run-up to WW1. There's a Japanese school in Battle Creek, Michigan, a town with a breakfast-cereal-based economy. Homogeneity is less pervasive than you might think, and people can and do adopt multiple cultural identities, especially when those identities are free to flourish rather than attacked.
|
|
|
#
?
Mar 30, 2015 21:01
|
|
|
wateroverfire posted:You're being defensive now hth. If you want to stop talking about it stop talking about it. If you want to keep talking about it stop talking about talking about it and just talk about it. Why do you feel the need to have the last word? No, we can continue, this is going well for you. 
|
|
#
?
Mar 30, 2015 21:02
|
|
wateroverfire posted:Dude what does that even mean? You said that there's no such thing as sovereignty for a culture, because it's not strictly defined, but you're unable to explain why it's not OK to impose things on that culture, saying that there's a difference between the people and the practices as though that was relevant to the question of whether it's OK to criminalize Santeria or the Native American Church.
|
|
|
#
?
Mar 30, 2015 21:03
|
|
Effectronica posted:There's still a Finnish-language newspaper in the Upper Peninsula of Michigan despite the majority of Finnish immigration happening a century ago. There would be German-language newspapers in Milwaukee and St. Paul today if the US government hadn't crushed them in the run-up to WW1. There's a Japanese school in Battle Creek, Michigan, a town with a breakfast-cereal-based economy. Homogeneity is less pervasive than you might think, and people can and do adopt multiple cultural identities, especially when those identities are free to flourish rather than attacked. So, then what's the problem?
|
|
|
#
?
Mar 30, 2015 21:03
|
|
|
Obdicut posted:Your post doesn't really make a lot of sense, and kind of seems like you haven't really read much of the thread. The guy said he hadn't read the thread, and I don't blame him.
|
|
#
?
Mar 30, 2015 21:08
|
|
|
Armyman25 posted:People's attitudes. People in the thread keep bringing up black rock and roll singers from the 50s and i don't think that that is circumstance that will repeat itself. There are outlets for every kind of cultural expression. What do you mean by 'people's attitudes'? Are you thinking that racism is now below some threshold, so cultural appropration can't take place? quote:As far as the fading of NA culture, that is something that may or may not happen. In the past there were deliberate efforts directed at erasing those cultures. The erasure you are talking about doesn't seem to be deliberate though, but just a side effect of using NA imagery. I mark that as a different thing, and I would argue the use of that imagery by non-natives is not the cause for the erasure of culture, but that any minority group is likely to see their culture subsumed by the majority. Okay, make the argument that the use of that imagery by non-natives is not a cause of the erasure of culture. Right now, you just asserted it. quote:If you have a group living with in a larger group, unless the smaller group goes to a lot of deliberate effort to maintain what makes them different from the majority, their distinctiveness goes away. My grandparents all lived to at least their 80s. Speaking with them about their childhoods in the mid-west and about their memories from when they were younger revealed that things were much more divided in the past. Ethnic differences like Irish versus German versus Bohemian (Czech) and religious differences such as Catholic vs Protestant vs Jewish were much more important than they are to my generation. The differences faded away and were replaced by a common culture that developed in the areas that all these people lived in. i am sure that some traditions and customs and parts of cultures disappeared, but they were replaced by a what came after. It is a thing that happens. This doesn't in any way serve to argue cultural appropriation isn't a big part of the mechanism of action here. Do you realize that? Part of what you're saying is"The culture got subsumed into the majority of culture for most immigrants" and yes, that is part of the claim of 'cultural appropriation'. Talking to various people about their impressions, that sort of convenience sample qualitative research, isn't really very good, by the way. It's not a great way to gather data on a subject. It's a nice way to add color and depth to quantitative information, but it can't replace it. I lived in Chicago, where what you're claiming is definitely not true: There are Polish neighborhoods with 3rd generation Polish people who have a very observably different culture from the Greek neighborhood with the 2nd and 3rd generation Greeks. Here in NYC, we have third-generation Dominicans and Puerto Ricans up in Harlem with a deeply different culture than the Jewish neighborhood of Menlo Park. Are the differences less than previously? Almost certainly. Did the differences fade away, to be replaced by a common culture? Not for many people in many neighborhoods throughout the US. It really seems like you're avoiding looking straight on at what cultural appropriation is, and trying to just talk around it, as though by not talking about it directly it won't also be 'a thing that happens'. Nobody has claimed that cultural appropriation is the only mechanism whereby minority culture gets erased and oppressed, either, and that's all you're arguing against here.
|
|
#
?
Mar 30, 2015 21:08
|
|
|
Armyman25 posted:As far as current Native American culture, nothing is stopping them from writing down or otherwise recording their beliefs and culture. The larger point is, will anyone care if they write it down when you can just casually pick up aspects of that culture in a commodified form? Neo-pagans love to bedazzle themselves with native american cultural trappings which just perpetuates this noble savage at one with nature and the earth stereotype. A native american cultural historian could write dozens of reference manuals about the spiritual meaning of dreamcatchers or whatever but that might not matter at all to people who want to scatter them about as interior decor.
|
|
#
?
Mar 30, 2015 21:11
|
|
Armyman25 posted:So, then what's the problem? Gee, maybe because these cultures are under varying degrees of attack?
|
|
|
#
?
Mar 30, 2015 21:12
|
|
|
Effectronica posted:You said that there's no such thing as sovereignty for a culture, because it's not strictly defined, but you're unable to explain why it's not OK to impose things on that culture, saying that there's a difference between the people and the practices as though that was relevant to the question of whether it's OK to criminalize Santeria or the Native American Church. Holy poo poo dude. There is a difference between "a culture" in reference to, say, a group of people who share something like ethnicity and religion, and "a culture" in reference to the nebulous cloud of beliefs, rituals, foods, clothing, etc we might talk about as their culture even though it's an amorphous thing that's very hard to define. Of course there's a problem with oppressing THE PEOPLE by idk burning their temples down or whatever. But that's not the meaning we're talking about when we talk about cultural appropriation.
|
|
#
?
Mar 30, 2015 21:13
|
|
|
Obdicut posted:This has been answered repeatedly. It has the effect of erasure, removing the original culture, and usually means that, in whatever way there is a profit or a living or anything of that sort to be made from the culture, it goes to the white majority and not the minority from whom the culture is appropriated. This has been heavily, heavily covered in terms of rock and roll (and blues and jazz) being appropriated. You could find those posts and read them. Yeah, and when rock and roll and blues and jazz got appropriated, hip-hop became a thing. African-Americans lost a unique thing, so they made a new one to replace it. Presumably if hip-hop becomes a "white" thing there'll be another movement to replace hip-hop. Is my point making a little more sense now? And yeah, no poo poo I haven't read much of the thread, I literally said I hadn't read much of the thread and apologized in advance if my question had already been answered because this thread is kind of a massive shitfest and I didn't feel like slogging through the noise for the signal.
|
|
#
?
Mar 30, 2015 21:14
|
|
wateroverfire posted:Holy poo poo dude. Yeah, actually, we are talking about the people involved, you loving idiot. The whole point of the definition being used is that cultural appropriation damages and eventually destroys the ability of the people to practice that part of their culture
|
|
|
#
?
Mar 30, 2015 21:15
|
|
|
LORD OF BUTT posted:Yeah, and when rock and roll and blues and jazz got appropriated, hip-hop became a thing. I think your causality is a little off here. And it's not like anyone 'took' black music styles, they just made those same things palatable for a white audience. Pat Boone, who is like the ISO 9000 definition of a honky, made bank because he sang black songs that white people liked if and only if a white person sang them. It's not like black people couldn't do those things anymore, it's just that watching a white person copy you exactly and be way more successful is the cultural equivalent of being forced to use the service entrance. I don't even think Jazz was ever appropriated. Rock & Roll is fairly obvious appropriation, in that it suddently got popular when white people started doing it, but jazz has always been seen as a black thing and if you were into jazz generally you were cool with black artists. Like try to list famous black early jazz artists and famous black early rock & roll artists and see which list is longer. boner confessor fucked around with this message at 21:20 on Mar 30, 2015 |
|
#
?
Mar 30, 2015 21:18
|
|
|
LORD OF BUTT posted:Yeah, and when rock and roll and blues and jazz got appropriated, hip-hop became a thing. Actually, no, it was doo-wop, which then got appropriated, disco, which then got appropriated, etc. etc. Music is a part of culture that evolves pretty quickly, but even then it's a constant stream of economic exploitation via appropriation. Why isn't this problematic for you? quote:And it's not like anyone 'took' black music styles, they just made those same things palatable for a white audience. RIght, which is the appropriation bit. quote:I don't even think Jazz was ever appropriated. Please read the section of the thread on Brubeck. Simply put, you're factually wrong. In addition to Brubeck, have you ever heard of a gentleman named Glenn Miller? He's kinda important. I'm going to go ahead at this point and conclude you don't actually know much about the history of jazz. quote:Like try to list famous black early jazz artists and famous black early rock & roll artists and see which list is longer. What is this supposed to achieve, exactly?
|
|
#
?
Mar 30, 2015 21:29
|
|
|
Obdicut posted:Please read the section of the thread on Brubeck. Simply put, you're factually wrong. In addition to Brubeck, have you ever heard of a gentleman named Glenn Miller? He's kinda important. I'm going to go ahead at this point and conclude you don't actually know much about the history of jazz. Brubeck was notably vocal about desegregation and civil rights, and big band is just a whiter form of jazz. You should have hit me with Benny Goodman if you wanted to make the "jazz was appropriated" argument 3/10
|
|
#
?
Mar 30, 2015 21:39
|
|
|
In conclusion, cultural appropriation exists and there's nothing to be done about it except gently chide the appropriators in the hope that they will willingly desist. Also, it's symptomatic of the underlying, fundamental flaws in human thinking that manifest as bigotry/racism/prejudice/etc. Finally, appropriation must be determined on a case-by-case basis. Good work everyone we've accomplished a lot this thread.
|
|
#
?
Mar 30, 2015 21:40
|
|
|
unlimited shrimp posted:In conclusion, cultural appropriation exists and there's nothing to be done about it except gently chide the appropriators in the hope that they will willingly desist. Also, it's symptomatic of the underlying, fundamental flaws in human thinking that manifest as bigotry/racism/prejudice/etc. Finally, appropriation must be determined on a case-by-case basis. That's a pretty lovely summary. For example, you have to wilfully leave out the copyright law that is being used to challenge the Redskins name. Also, 'gently chide' is something only you said, right? Why do you think posts like this are a good idea? Why be all flaccid like that? Popular Thug Drink posted:Brubeck was notably vocal about desegregation and civil rights, and big band is just a whiter form of jazz. You should have hit me with Benny Goodman if you wanted to make the "jazz was appropriated" argument 3/10 It's not Brubeck that was the problem, he was stellar. It was Time.
|
|
#
?
Mar 30, 2015 21:42
|
|
unlimited shrimp posted:Also, it's symptomatic of the underlying, fundamental flaws in human thinking that manifest as bigotry/racism/prejudice/etc. lol
|
|
|
#
?
Mar 30, 2015 21:42
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 23, 2024 10:46 |
|
|
Effectronica posted:The whole point of the definition being used is that cultural appropriation damages and eventually destroys the ability of the people to practice that part of their culture No, it doesn't.
|
|
#
?
Mar 30, 2015 21:48
|
|