|
FINGERBLASTER69 posted:Non-Koreans who use "selca" are guilty of cultural appropriation. https://youtu.be/RBwWKl1BSdE Koreans appropriated the Greek alphabet and strained yogurt. I think they got the better end of the deal.
|
#
?
Apr 15, 2015 06:11
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 23, 2024 14:17 |
|
|
Meaningfulness is arbitrary, and you were arguing that simple association is enough to change the meaning of some ritual. So if that is the case, then the only way that can happen is if, during the association process, either the person stops valuing the original meaning, or people who never understood the original meaning simply adopt the new meaning. That this can happen without anyone being forced to do anything is disproof that someone's value must be violated: either the value must change, or the value never existed in the first place. If some subject is worried that other people in their own culture may have the ritual lose their meaning (or rather, his meaning), and places value in that, then I have no respect for that value. The subject has no claim to demand that from others. Are the people today less racist/sexist/Bad because they are More Moral, Good People? No, the people today are the same kind of people that existed back then, it's just easier to do today what most people end up doing. When you start moralizing to other people, they're just as likely to reject you outright and ignore your proclamation. What are you going to do then, moralize more? They'll just reject you more. You want to make progress over time? You need to get over moralizing. You don't yell at water to make it move, you have to dig a ditch. So rather than saying that this things is good, but not accepted because of Bad people, you look at what is motivating them in the first place, and that's what you go after. I wouldn't consider 'guidance' the same as 'constraint' simply by what they imply, but that doesn't really matter here. Sure, a culture creates a perspective that makes certain assumptions or whatever easier than others. But is that a 'narrowing'? And careful what you say there, because you know where your Jew/Catholic logic leads you when you use it on poor minorities and things like crime, right? Here's much better logic: what you're saying is racist trash, people generally share similar goals on what they can get to, but have different communal resources/authority figures/opportunities within cultures, and so are constrained in these ways. Not because, what, the culture doesn't place value in achievement, that's dumb. rudatron fucked around with this message at 09:32 on Apr 15, 2015 |
|
#
?
Apr 15, 2015 09:25
|
|
|
What we have learned so far is that other cultures have value to the degree that they are exotic. This exoticness is referred to as "authenticity," where "authentic" is always used as a shorthand for "authentically exotic." When normal white people from America, who are the least exotic of all the peoples of the world, appropriate authentic cultural images or practices, the exoticism is diluted, and the result is inauthentic.
|
|
#
?
Apr 15, 2015 14:21
|
|
|
hakimashou posted:What we have learned so far is that other cultures have value to the degree that they are exotic. This exoticness is referred to as "authenticity," where "authentic" is always used as a shorthand for "authentically exotic." Exotic headgear that flows like the wings of a magnificent dusky eagle is the most authentic, because I hate school and won't pick up my room and racism.
|
|
#
?
Apr 15, 2015 14:27
|
|
|
hakimashou posted:What we have learned so far is that other cultures have value to the degree that they are exotic. This exoticness is referred to as "authenticity," where "authentic" is always used as a shorthand for "authentically exotic." Shots shots shots shots shots shots shots shots shots shost shost shots shosth s ohtsoh sohsod fired
|
|
#
?
Apr 15, 2015 15:29
|
|
|
hakimashou posted:What we have learned so far is that other cultures have value to the degree that they are exotic. This exoticness is referred to as "authenticity," where "authentic" is always used as a shorthand for "authentically exotic." Yes, this is the reasoning of the appropriators.
|
|
#
?
Apr 15, 2015 16:14
|
|
|
I thought this would be a appropriate question. When I play Saladin in Age of Empires 2 or the Aztecs, am I commuting cultural appropriation, and if I am what should be pertinence be?
|
|
#
?
Apr 15, 2015 16:23
|
|
|
I bet lowtax could make a couple hundred bucks if he banned everyone in this thread who did the "just asking questions" schtick.
|
|
#
?
Apr 15, 2015 16:26
|
|
|
Crowsbeak posted:I thought this would be a appropriate question. When I play Saladin in Age of Empires 2 or the Aztecs, am I commuting cultural appropriation, and if I am what should be pertinence be? If you have a public stance against cultural appropriation, or wear exotic headgear with Correct Understanding of its significance, you're in the clear.
|
|
#
?
Apr 15, 2015 16:26
|
|
|
SedanChair posted:Yes, this is the reasoning of the appropriators. Well, "the appropriators" are pretty much almost everyone everywhere, in all times and places. To lots of folks around the world, American culture, or German culture or Italian culture or British culture is quite exotic, so it has a lot of value to them. All around the world you see people dressing like Americans, or for that matter like "British country gentlemen." Tourists from far and wide, the very ends of the earth, take pictures of themselves in tyrolean hats or Scottish kilts. It's exotic, so it has value to them. Everything is relative. What is exotic to us isn't exotic to someone from the Far East. But its authentic exoticness is still what gives it comparative value. It's sometimes hard for us in the west to imagine other powerful cultures, thinking instead that all the others are weak. But consider this article from the times http://www.nytimes.com/2014/12/27/b...erish.html?_r=0 These companies need to try to portray themselves as authentically exotic in order to stay competitive. As is the ordinary human way of looking at things, exoticness is the fount of cultural value. Consider the customers of Biemlfdlkk, happily assured that they are dressed in the most authentically exotic German or French golf apparel. Golf is a big deal in China, it's so exotic.
|
|
#
?
Apr 15, 2015 16:32
|
|
|
hakimashou posted:Well, "the appropriators" are pretty much almost everyone everywhere, in all times and places. No, all people participate in cultural exchange. Only the ignorant and racist are the appropriators.
|
|
#
?
Apr 15, 2015 16:35
|
|
|
7c Nickel posted:I bet lowtax could make a couple hundred bucks if he banned everyone in this thread who did the "just asking questions" schtick. If this were a No Questions Zone, how could there be debate or discussion? I think a person could get himself into a lot of trouble if he made this thread into a drinking game where he had to take a shot of liquor every time he saw displays of what Dr. Sir Martyn Poliakoff described as "signs of madness."
|
|
#
?
Apr 15, 2015 16:36
|
|
|
SedanChair posted:No, all people participate in cultural exchange. Only the ignorant and racist are the appropriators. That's an awful thing to say about North Americans, South Americans, Chinese, Japanese, British, Russian, Roman, Greek, Indian, Korean, Thai, Pacific Islander, French, Spanish, Italian, Portuguese, German, Arab, Persian, and African people don't you think?
|
|
#
?
Apr 15, 2015 16:39
|
|
|
hakimashou posted:That's an awful thing to say about North Americans, South Americans, Chinese, Japanese, British, Russian, Roman, Greek, Indian, Korean, Thai, Pacific Islander, French, Spanish, Italian, Portuguese, German, Arab, Persian, and African people don't you think? You are completely failing to understand, or pretending ignorance (I suspect the latter). Only the ignorant and racist people in those cultures are the appropriators.
|
|
#
?
Apr 15, 2015 16:40
|
|
|
SedanChair posted:No, all people participate in cultural exchange. Only the ignorant and racist are the appropriators. There is no difference.
|
|
#
?
Apr 15, 2015 16:40
|
|
rudatron posted:The minority culture does not and should not need to 'adopt' any ritual, that's a clear case of imposition that you can rightfully and morally oppose. Why? It's immediately effecting the welfare of some minority member for no real reason. So if your worry is that CA must lead to something bad, and it therefore should be opposed, what is the reason for not just opposing The Bad in the first place? If it's because you think that that imposition cannot be opposed, then why is opposing CA any easier? I don't want to 'force' a loss of diversity, but I do not see the value in cultural diversity. Analogies here are usually made with biological diversity, but the environment is different: You have horizontal transfer of any cultural elements (through exchange), elements are products of the mind and so can be created and recreated at will, and a 'culture' is not alive in the same way a living thing is, so it's life has no value other than what people may find in it. Does this 'narrow the human mind'? Not really, I don't think that human thought is constrained in that way (strong sapir-whorf is wrong, which isn't itself proof, but I think it is suggestive). That and sub-cultures will always spontaneously form, divide and then die. So whether there is any loss in diversity at all is debatable, it may just be a different kind of diversity. I'd much rather let things roll out as they would naturally, because there's nothing to gain in a particular kind of cultural environment. I dunno where to start. I think this really deserves to be broken down thought-by-thought, assuming there are any in there. So let's begin at the top. You are refusing to engage with what I actually wrote, except in this vague way where you agree that the process I have outlined is a bad thing, but the remedies I proposed don't exist. Instead, you're arguing that although it may be a bad thing, I can't call it cultural appropriation because you've defined that word differently. I guess that, given the totality of this thread so far, I should probably start making burnt offerings to Hera Argeia for shared definitions, because that will be probably more effective than asking for common ground on them. You then go on a lengthy tangent that relies on this idea that appropriation is more "natural" than imposition, which is not justified. Why don't you do that first? Part of this tangent involves misunderstanding the Sapir-Whorf Hypothesis, and also arguing that norms and mores don't influence how people think, and while those are sad, sad things to admit, they're still somewhat irrelevant until you justify the naturalness of appropriation and the artificiality of imposition. Real people are also hurt when things they value are damaged or destroyed. Do you think that if celebrating Christmas was made illegal, this would not harm people in countries that celebrate it? You have this bizarre dualism going on where cultures exist on some ethereal plane apart from the people who practice them, so that you can argue for individualistic approaches. Your question is thus somewhat irrelevant, but also fairly relevant in that people regularly argue that individual racism does not contribute to the overall oppression of people, because you can't point to the literal harm that crossing the street to avoid black people does to any particular person. They can do this without, as I define it, being actively racist (given that between 80-95% percent of people in the US and Western Europe are passively racist), but maybe you define that as active racism. But it's a neat twin to your argument, because a great deal of harms are things that can be shrugged off when received by individual people, but which create an active climate of hostility in the aggregate. Unfortunately, the aggregate is as abstract a thing as culture is, so we can't actually say that day-to-day racism has any relationship with the broader structural racism of our societies, according to your logic. No, I was talking about the purpose for implementing it, not what it is today. Those are distinct things, neither of which you have shown to be your bit of philosophical-linguistic speculation, which is itself almost an example of Sapir-Whorf, though since it stops at a single word rather than moving on into grammar... But no, it does not imply that it has to be replaced. You're assuming that we must abandon the idea of tolerance altogether (funny in light of your belief that subcultures will make up for the death of Chinese New Year celebrations etc. in providing diversity in American experience) in order to add new ideas to people's heads. This is a gamified view of reality. You're also assuming that the current situation is the effect of tolerance as an ideal, primarily or solely, which you have never justified and admitted you can't justify. Finally, even if you could justify it, I have never said the things you are attributing to me. Crowsbeak posted:I thought this would be a appropriate question. When I play Saladin in Age of Empires 2 or the Aztecs, am I commuting cultural appropriation, and if I am what should be pertinence be? That's not cultural appropriation and you know that it's not and you should go back to your pic-thread hugbox. TheImmigrant posted:Exotic headgear that flows like the wings of a magnificent dusky eagle is the most authentic, because I hate school and won't pick up my room and racism. I like to yell at younger people because I fear them. I am convinced of my intellectual superiority even though I am doing the exact same thing the boomers did to my generation.
|
|
|
#
?
Apr 15, 2015 16:41
|
|
|
Miltank posted:Their is no difference. There is no difference you are willing to admit to, at least.
|
|
#
?
Apr 15, 2015 16:41
|
|
|
SedanChair posted:You are completely failing to understand, or pretending ignorance (I suspect the latter). Only the ignorant and racist people in those cultures are the appropriators. No, there is a third option, don't you think?
|
|
#
?
Apr 15, 2015 16:41
|
|
hakimashou posted:No, there is a third option, don't you think? Well, yes, but I doubt you'd willingly submit to having the motor nerves in your arms cut.
|
|
|
#
?
Apr 15, 2015 16:43
|
|
|
Effectronica posted:Well, yes, but I doubt you'd willingly submit to having the motor nerves in your arms cut. Are you alright? In all seriousness I don't know what to make of that.
|
|
#
?
Apr 15, 2015 16:49
|
|
|
quote:Real people are also hurt when things they value are damaged or destroyed. Do you think that if celebrating Christmas was made illegal, this would not harm people in countries that celebrate it? You have this bizarre dualism going on where cultures exist on some ethereal plane apart from the people who practice them, so that you can argue for individualistic approaches. Fart noises and false equivalencies right here.
|
|
#
?
Apr 15, 2015 16:50
|
|
hakimashou posted:Are you alright? quote:We could have exterminated them forever when we had the only nuclear arms.
|
|
|
#
?
Apr 15, 2015 16:51
|
|
|
Has anyone considered that this might all be the result of cultures fetishiIng themselves as exotic? I mean, all cultural appropriation really is is the dilution of the authentic exoticness of a culture. To most people. This isn't an issue because we don't see our own cultures as exotic. We see them from our own perspective, as the comfortable default. Surely in order for the dilution of authentic exoticness of one's own culture to be a hardship, one has to first shift his perspective to view his own culture's exoticness as its value. Only then can loss of exoticness begin to equate to loss of value. If we encouraged people to see their own cultures in the right perspectives, as members rather than outsiders, wouldn't all the harm be mitigated completely? A white American can say that wearing a headdress, or what have you, devalues a certain American Indian culture because it dilutes its exotic authenticity, but how can a member of that culture say the same thing unless he already equates his culture's value to its exotic authenticity, and how can he see it that way at all unless he is priviliging the perspective of outsiders over insiders?
|
|
#
?
Apr 15, 2015 16:57
|
|
|
So because I'm a bad stupid person who said a bad stupid thing, I should have my arms mutilated? Maybe I am a bad, stupid person, because I said a bad, stupid thing, and after all, it is considered good form in any discussion or debate to argue against the person, instead of his arguments. It's even called one of the logical accuracies. You aren't making any more sense than you did before. Really is everything ok? hakimashou fucked around with this message at 17:02 on Apr 15, 2015 |
|
#
?
Apr 15, 2015 16:59
|
|
|
hakimashou posted:So because I'm a bad stupid person who said a bad stupid thing, I should have my arms mutilated? it's an overly elaborate way to say "stop posting" because if your motor nerves were cut then you couldnt type posts
|
|
#
?
Apr 15, 2015 17:03
|
|
|
hakimashou posted:Has anyone considered that this might all be the result of cultures fetishiIng themselves as exotic? miltank posted:Cultures whose internal identities are 'threatened' by cultural appropriation must already be a part of the primary culture. Claims that the appropriation of certain cultural icons by outsiders somehow undermine the group's ability to self identify is a tacit admission of the group's status as little more than one of the hundreds of subcommunities within our primary culture. Appropriation is intimidating because it forces some natives (as just one example) who draw their own identities from within the primary culture, to realize that there is no difference between what they and the frat boys are doing- playing Indian. Miltank fucked around with this message at 17:11 on Apr 15, 2015 |
|
#
?
Apr 15, 2015 17:06
|
|
hakimashou posted:So because I'm a bad stupid person who said a bad stupid thing, I should have my arms mutilated? hakimashou posted:How much of the deadly conflict and the slaughter of the post war 20th century can be put down to communism and the Cold War?
|
|
|
#
?
Apr 15, 2015 17:06
|
|
|
A big flaming stink posted:it's an overly elaborate way to say "stop posting" Your "overly elaborate" is my "disturbingly, Vividly brutal." I have an excuse for my own regrettable post. I was drunk and on a roll, and thought it fit better into my overarching "human life is so valuable that if we have to kill one million people to save one million and one, we absolutely should" theme than it did in retrospect. It certainly makes for a nice "gotcha," for people who are in to that sort of thing. That's why I asked if effectronica was alright. It doesn't seem like something somone would say if they were on an even keel, at the time.
|
|
#
?
Apr 15, 2015 17:08
|
|
hakimashou posted:Your "overly elaborate" is my "disturbingly, Vividly brutal." The point of insults is to unsettle and anger people.
|
|
|
#
?
Apr 15, 2015 17:09
|
|
|
Nice! I admit I have skimmed over a great many of the back-and-forths in here.
|
|
#
?
Apr 15, 2015 17:10
|
|
|
hakimashou posted:Nice! I admit I have skimmed over a great many of the back-and-forths in here.
|
|
#
?
Apr 15, 2015 17:12
|
|
|
Effectronica posted:The point of insults is to unsettle and anger people. Is that what the point of insults is? I had always wondered. I try to go out of my way not to insult others, especially in a debate. "Don't make it personal" is a worthy goal to aspire toward, don't you agree? hakimashou fucked around with this message at 17:14 on Apr 15, 2015 |
|
#
?
Apr 15, 2015 17:12
|
|
hakimashou posted:Your "overly elaborate" is my "disturbingly, Vividly brutal." honestly after this post i'd like to imagine your spinal cord will be damaged so that you'll live out the rest of your life unable to move or speak except by blinking to ask your family to finally let you die so the constant pain that defines every waking moment of your life will go away but out of some misguided religious or philosophical beliefs, they don't, they just prolong your suffering as long as they can
|
|
|
#
?
Apr 15, 2015 17:13
|
|
|
Miltank posted:E: effectronica told me I should be excecuted for that post btw. He is not ok in his brain. Well, it's good to see that in some circles, "calling for the death of millions!" Only rates some arm cutting, with the death penalty reserved for the most irredeemably heterodox.
|
|
#
?
Apr 15, 2015 17:13
|
|
|
Effectronica posted:The point of insults is to unsettle and anger people. If skepticism about your pet theory expressed by strangers unhinges you to the point where you are wishing violence upon them, you've taken a wrong turn, son. Lighten up, Francis.
|
|
#
?
Apr 15, 2015 17:14
|
|
Miltank posted:effectronica told me I should be excecuted for that post btw. He is not ok in his brain. hakimashou posted:Is that what the point of insults is? I try to go out of my way not to insult others, especially in a debate. "Don't make it personal" is a worthy goal to aspire toward, don't you agree? hakimashou posted:Well, it's good to see that in some circles, "calling for the death of millions!" Only rates some arm cutting, with the death penalty reserved for the most irredeemably heterodox.  TheImmigrant posted:If skepticism about your pet theory expressed by strangers unhinges you to the point where you are wishing violence upon them, you've taken a wrong turn, son. First they call you mad, then they call you crazy, then they buy you a redtext, then you lose.
|
|
|
#
?
Apr 15, 2015 17:16
|
|
|
Effectronica posted:
Shouldn't that say "then they lose?" And I prefer to think of "mad" as a synonym for crazy, the way Dr Sir Martyn Poliakoff does.
|
|
#
?
Apr 15, 2015 17:18
|
|
|
Effectronica posted:
People are pointing and laughing at you, you spaz. What do you sound like when you're really angry?
|
|
#
?
Apr 15, 2015 17:19
|
|
|
Anyway, the point I addressed to the honorable member from sedan chair, was that rather than not understanding, or pretending not to understand his opinion, there was a third option he hadn't considered: That I didnt -agree- with it. All too often we see the ugly head of orthodoxy rear up from its ash heap and proclaim, "ours is not to convince, but to educate! There is no dissent, merely ignorance!" hakimashou fucked around with this message at 17:24 on Apr 15, 2015 |
|
#
?
Apr 15, 2015 17:21
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 23, 2024 14:17 |
|
TheImmigrant posted:People are pointing and laughing at you, you spaz. What do you sound like when you're really angry? That's pretty arrogant of you, assuming that you're a person.
|
|
|
#
?
Apr 15, 2015 17:22
|
|