|
Tiny Brontosaurus posted:There is no version of "respect other people" that doesn't send goons into a sputtering fit of deflection and rules lawyering. You guys don't get it because you don't want to. It's very easy when you do. People will feel disrespected even if you do respect them. People will feel insecure and frightened and alone, even in the best culture you can create, because they're one of seven billion loving people.
|
#
?
Dec 19, 2015 20:26
|
|
|
|
| # ? Jun 9, 2024 21:06 |
|
|
Confirmed: bad sushi is racist http://oberlinreview.org/9055/news/cds-appropriates-asian-dishes-students-say/
|
|
#
?
Dec 19, 2015 20:36
|
|
Jazu posted:People will feel disrespected even if you do respect them. People will feel insecure and frightened and alone, even in the best culture you can create, because they're one of seven billion loving people. This is why there's nothing wrong with spitting on people. They'd just feel insulted no matter what.
|
|
|
#
?
Dec 19, 2015 20:49
|
|
|
pointsofdata posted:Confirmed: bad sushi is racist quote:Prudence Hiu-Ying, a College sophomore from China, cited an instance when Stevenson was serving General Tso’s chicken, but the product did not resemble the popular Chinese dish. Except it's not a traditional Chinese dish at all.
|
|
#
?
Dec 19, 2015 20:58
|
|
|
falcon2424 posted:But then the real injunction is "Don't culturally appropriate in cases where ..." That's why I suggested religious symbols and practices as a line to not cross. Ironically, that would include yoga. It would be better to just change the word 'yoga' to 'asanas', so people aren't using a religious term for their exercises, but I'm guessing it's too late for that. As for the examples Obdicut brings up, I would personally call them 'employment discrimination' problems. Yes, it was bad that record executives would push Elvis or Bill Halley over black musicians, but the problem there was not black musicians getting offended by white imitators adopting a part of their culture, it was a problem of not getting the same reward for the same talent. (Like how the producers of a 70's show called Kung Fu turned down Bruce Lee for the lead role in favor of David Carradine because audiences apparently were not ready for a Chinese guy to play a Chinese guy who does kung fu.)
|
|
#
?
Dec 19, 2015 21:00
|
|
Phyzzle posted:That's why I suggested religious symbols and practices as a line to not cross. Ironically, that would include yoga. It would be better to just change the word 'yoga' to 'asanas', so people aren't using a religious term for their exercises, but I'm guessing it's too late for that. Categorizing it as "getting offended" is disgusting in and of itself, but are you aware that it wasn't a matter of getting recorded (otherwise we wouldn't have Leadbelly or Muddy Waters or Fats Domino or Howlin' Wolf records) it was a matter of how the songs were treated- how white bands received the lion's share of the marketing, how black songs became acceptable once a white band covered them.
|
|
|
#
?
Dec 19, 2015 21:06
|
|
|
The dude at Sun who literally made Elvis' career chose him solely on the fact he wanted a white man who had the "Negro sound and the Negro feel" so he could make a million dollars. It's pretty hard to characterize it as anything but what it was when even the guy responsible for it straight out said that's what it was.
|
|
#
?
Dec 19, 2015 21:21
|
|
|
Paladinus posted:Except it's not a traditional Chinese dish at all. There is a good documentary on Netflix about General Tsos. It was invented in Taiwan by a chef that fled from the Hunan region of China, and the Taiwanese version would more closely resemble traditional Hunan style dishes. Chinese business people in the US then adapted it to western palettes. Sulphuric Asshole fucked around with this message at 21:31 on Dec 19, 2015 |
|
#
?
Dec 19, 2015 21:27
|
|
|
Oberlin students are whiny morons, news at 11.
|
|
#
?
Dec 19, 2015 21:30
|
|
|
pointsofdata posted:Confirmed: bad sushi is racist quote:a culturally appropriative sustenance system
|
|
#
?
Dec 19, 2015 22:00
|
|
|
Effectronica posted:Categorizing it as "getting offended" is disgusting in and of itself, Effectronica posted:but are you aware that it wasn't a matter of getting recorded (otherwise we wouldn't have Leadbelly or Muddy Waters or Fats Domino or Howlin' Wolf records) it was a matter of how the songs were treated- how white bands received the lion's share of the marketing, how black songs became acceptable once a white band covered them.
|
|
#
?
Dec 20, 2015 01:15
|
|
|
"White musicians profiting off-of covers of black musicians' songs to specifically bar black musicians from success" is an injustice. "White musicians profiting from original songs inspired by black musical traditions when black musicians are less successful" is unfortunate, but I don't see how it would be wrongdoing on the white musicians' part.
|
|
#
?
Dec 20, 2015 01:27
|
|
|
Hexmage-SA posted:"White musicians profiting off-of covers of black musicians' songs to specifically bar black musicians from success" is an injustice. "White musicians profiting from original songs inspired by black musical traditions when black musicians are less successful" is unfortunate, but I don't see how it would be wrongdoing on the white musicians' part. Something something cultural appropriation.
|
|
#
?
Dec 20, 2015 01:36
|
|
|
Sulphuric rear end in a top hat posted:There is a good documentary on Netflix about General Tsos. It was invented in Taiwan by a chef that fled from the Hunan region of China, and the Taiwanese version would more closely resemble traditional Hunan style dishes. Chinese business people in the US then adapted it to western palettes. My understanding of the history of the dish (from Fuschia Dunlop) is that it was a modern Taiwanese dish invented by a Hunanese chef for the express purpose of appealing to palate of visiting western businessmen and dignitaries.
|
|
#
?
Dec 20, 2015 01:50
|
|
|
Reasonable people can disagree about what sorts of things constitute cultural appropriation. But if we are at the point of classifying food as cultural appropriation, the idea has obviously been taken too far. What is the action item here? White people should only eat white food? The main effect of that would be to take business from non-white restaurant proprietors. (This also applies to saying white people shouldn't ever have henna - "Yeah, take that, immigrant henna artists trying to make a living off their art! You want to expand your customer base? Go back to Pakistan!") White people should not be allowed to cook and sell "foods of color"? That's flat-out illegal employment discrimination. School cafeterias should stop serving terrible versions of otherwise good food? Good luck with that.
|
|
#
?
Dec 20, 2015 02:17
|
|
|
Jimbozig posted:Reasonable people can disagree about what sorts of things constitute cultural appropriation. But if we are at the point of classifying food as cultural appropriation, the idea has obviously been taken too far. What is the action item here? Yes incessantly harping on
|
|
#
?
Dec 20, 2015 02:23
|
|
|
It's not incessantly harping, it's critical thinking. It's important to test the boundaries of any idea to clearly establish whether it is coherent, consistent and complete. This is how you test anything (eg- utilitarianism), you find where it performs worst and why (utility monster). If it doesn't match what you think is right, then you know that there is still something wrong.Effectronica posted:Yo, rudatron, you shouldn't declare that the problem is sanctimoniousness and hypocrisy and then act sanctimonious yourself. Because, you see, it justifies me ignoring any points you occasion yourself to make, by your own beliefs.
|
|
#
?
Dec 20, 2015 02:32
|
|
|
I think the concept of cultural appropriation has many problems. It's not very useful from an analytical standpoint, there's no clear way to distinguish appropriation from harmless acculturation. Much like Whiteness, the boundaries of appropriation are vague, arbitrary, and largely contingent on the popular understanding of any particular issue. Because the meaning is so vague it is easily and often misused, and there's no clear way to distinguish serious important cases from the non-serious. It's not very useful rhetorically, because it isn't immediately clear what the significance of appropriation is, and nobody should have to constantly explain their terms in an argument. I guess it comes from a leftist effort to create a coherent description of various processes that effect minority and marginalized communities. I don't think the the concept has really succeed at that purpose, instead the term seems to be way to show solidarity with specific causes, and demonstrate ones's own immersion in a particular activist culture. I remain unconvinced white artists getting paid more to produce the same kind of music as black artists is the same process and deserves the same label as stereotypical Indians getting used as mascots, or a cafeteria selling lousy sushi, or Irish Americans using cartoonish symbols of Irish identity. These issues, when they deserve a coordinated response at all, are better addressed using particular arguments.
|
|
#
?
Dec 20, 2015 03:17
|
|
Hexmage-SA posted:"White musicians profiting off-of covers of black musicians' songs to specifically bar black musicians from success" is an injustice. "White musicians profiting from original songs inspired by black musical traditions when black musicians are less successful" is unfortunate, but I don't see how it would be wrongdoing on the white musicians' part. Okay. How do you plan to rectify this misfortune? How do you stop this from happening without burning down the music industry and slaughtering record company executives on live TV, or white musicians, and listeners, actively avoiding taking part in this process? And when you look at this process, you see it repeated all across society! At some point, you either have to do what righties do and declare it good and celebrate the extermination of Native Americanness, or decide to restrict your own behavior. rudatron posted:It's not incessantly harping, it's critical thinking. It's important to test the boundaries of any idea to clearly establish whether it is coherent, consistent and complete. This is how you test anything (eg- utilitarianism), you find where it performs worst and why (utility monster). If it doesn't match what you think is right, then you know that there is still something wrong. Rudatron, being unable to comprehend a simple English sentence, as you have demonstrated with this post, means that you are too stupid, dishonest, or jackassy to have a conversation with. (USER WAS PUT ON PROBATION FOR THIS POST)
|
|
|
#
?
Dec 20, 2015 03:27
|
|
|
Worthless nerds are terrified of change and have staked their entire sense of self-worth on being Smart, and as everyone knows being Smart means you've maxed out your knowledge tree and have nothing else you could possibly learn. Therefore, when new ideas appear, it is necessary to build a cage of rules around them to certify both that you don't need to change and that no one is allowed to criticize you for not changing. Anyone who claims to understand something you don't is a fraud who's only out to trick you. Don't fall for it.
|
|
#
?
Dec 20, 2015 04:07
|
|
|
So how many of you complaining about cultural appropriation gone mad actually bothered to read the article? Because the complaint isn't "They're using my culture's food!", it's actually the exact opposite: A Vietnamese kid saw a staple from his cuisine on the menu, decided to order it, then it turns out it wasn't actually what he expected it to be, or even anything approaching that, which was a major disappointment. Many other kids from other backgrounds also expressed similar disappointment when it turns out pulled pork and coleslaw isn't actually a Chinese recipe etc. It's a stupid choice of words but then again students are stupid - that's why they're still students.
|
|
#
?
Dec 20, 2015 04:14
|
|
|
Can everybody itt please chill the fukc out. This thread would be a lot more pleasant if we could all stop calling each other worthless and stupid and actually talk to one another.
|
|
#
?
Dec 20, 2015 04:14
|
|
Squalid posted:Can everybody itt please chill the fukc out. This thread would be a lot more pleasant if we could all stop calling each other worthless and stupid and actually talk to one another. Real life is not like a videogame, and you don't have to expend 50 Anger Points to use your "Cussing" ability.
|
|
|
#
?
Dec 20, 2015 04:17
|
|
|
Everyone is valuable, and the hostility to the term is that it's not useful. It's fair enough to talk about how students lack, uh, wisdom, I guess, but then what is that wisdom? Why is the choice of words stupid, if it on the face matches the correct usage? If you have to already understand a set of unexplained, implicit rules to determine whether or not it is being correctly applied, then that means there's still a problem in the way it's being thought about. One option is that the concept is itself bad, and it's the use of that wisdom that papers over the faults - the rule you're actually acting on is not the one you actually believe. Of course that's just one option, but that's my interpretation.
|
|
#
?
Dec 20, 2015 04:33
|
|
|
Squalid posted:It's not very useful rhetorically, because it isn't immediately clear what the significance of appropriation is, and nobody should have to constantly explain their terms in an argument. I guess it comes from a leftist effort to create a coherent description of various processes that effect minority and marginalized communities. I don't think the the concept has really succeed at that purpose, instead the term seems to be way to show solidarity with specific causes, and demonstrate ones's own immersion in a particular activist culture. I think this ambiguity is what makes the term so appealing to the people who use it. Conservatives use the same trick when they rant about "Criminals". That's a term that covers everything from murder, to arson, to jaywalking. What makes "Appropriation" different is that don't have the language to talk about trivial cultural-offenses. If anything, this makes "appropriation" more useful as rhetoric (and infinitely less useful for analysis). An attack that went, "Hillary Clinton is a CRIMINAL!" / "Oh? What did she do?" / "She crossed the street OUTSIDE OF A CROSSWALK!" would come off as petty. And rightfully so. An attack that went, "Miley Cyrus is a RACIST!" / "Oh? What did she do?" / "She APPROPRIATED TWERKING," is weird, or at least novel enough of an accusation that people don't seem sure if they can dismiss it as stupid, out of hand. This gives a significant tool to people who want to position themselves as cultural critics. They get to level serious-sounding accusations, and when called on it, retreat to a position that's not technically a lie. I think this is also why discussion about the stupid, obviously trivial examples generates so much white-noise and chaff. Acknowledging that 'appropriation' can refer to Japanese people eating hamburgers gives the trick away, just as much as acknowledging that 'criminal' can refer to jaywalkers. So we get nonsense-defenses like, "Why are you so obsessed with those edge-cases?" falcon2424 fucked around with this message at 04:46 on Dec 20, 2015 |
|
#
?
Dec 20, 2015 04:43
|
|
falcon2424 posted:I think this ambiguity is what makes the term so appealing to the people who use it. I think it's sad that you're suffering from undiagnosed Paranoid Personality Disorder, and also that none of the goobers who scream and stamp their feet will point out how you're attributing conspiratorial motivations to anyone, anywhere, who expresses sentiments along the lines of "cultural appropriation is real".
|
|
|
#
?
Dec 20, 2015 04:47
|
|
|
Tiny Brontosaurus posted:Yes incessantly harping on Huh? Me incessant? I think you must be mistaking me for someone else.
|
|
#
?
Dec 20, 2015 04:50
|
|
|
Effectronica posted:Rudatron, being unable to comprehend a simple English sentence, as you have demonstrated with this post, means that you are too stupid, dishonest, or jackassy to have a conversation with. Effectronica posted:Actually, I think that most people are completely sincere when they make that accusation. Probably it's because you use "accusations of prejudice and malice" tactically that you assume other people do so. Effectronica posted:I'm sorry. I can only reply to the actual words you said, which were that accusations of maliciousness, or racism, are generally tactical in nature. This, to put it simply, is paranoia. Effectronica posted:I think it's sad that you're suffering from undiagnosed Paranoid Personality Disorder, and also that none of the goobers who scream and stamp their feet will point out how you're attributing conspiratorial motivations to anyone, anywhere, who expresses sentiments along the lines of "cultural appropriation is real". Sorry you're sad, and that everyone's paranoid and against you. 
|
|
#
?
Dec 20, 2015 05:11
|
|
|
I'd also like to say that while I think the way the term is used is often nonsensical the grievances are usually legitimate. For example the Washington Post article I posted described the sorts of identity problems that have long troubled the children of immigrants. Not sure what that means about bad cafeteria food though
|
|
#
?
Dec 20, 2015 05:35
|
|
|
I saw ex US virtua on champ and forum user Darko posting about the whole black hair thing and wanted to give my thoughts on it. I've had past experiences as a child that put me in possession of many cats. All of these cats had fairly unique fur types, some had nice silky smooth fur, some felt really dry. one cat in particular felt like a cheap car seat. My family all complimented the smooth furred cats and playfully mocked the car seat cat. All of the people who we had by similarly expressed a dislike for car cat and I can't blame them. Who would want to rub a car seat? Another point is that western society seems to prefer less hair. I don't know how this could be if what is causing the hair preference is white supremacy, since whites have some of the hairiest ethnicities on the planet. Even beyond that, going back to when Europeans first came in contact with Native Americans, the Europeans would often comment on the natural beauty the natives had, noting their less hairy bodies. Maybe the weird hair preferences our society has has something to do with weird side effects of greater personal domestication.
|
|
#
?
Dec 20, 2015 07:14
|
|
|
Ddraig posted:So how many of you complaining about cultural appropriation gone mad actually bothered to read the article? Because the complaint isn't "They're using my culture's food!", it's actually the exact opposite: A Vietnamese kid saw a staple from his cuisine on the menu, decided to order it, then it turns out it wasn't actually what he expected it to be, or even anything approaching that, which was a major disappointment.
|
|
#
?
Dec 20, 2015 10:52
|
|
|
Squalid posted:I'd also like to say that while I think the way the term is used is often nonsensical the grievances are usually legitimate. For example the Washington Post article I posted described the sorts of identity problems that have long troubled the children of immigrants. Not sure what that means about bad cafeteria food though No matter what the term was you guys would be complaining about the term. You people complain about every term used to describe every grievance a marginalized group has. It's your first line of defense.
|
|
#
?
Dec 20, 2015 11:30
|
|
|
Tiny Brontosaurus posted:No matter what the term was you guys would be complaining about the term. You people complain about every term used to describe every grievance a marginalized group has. It's your first line of defense. No, if the complaint was simply that the dishes were a horrible affront to cuisine, I'd be in complete agreement. Using a term that implies a degree of racism is when I get off the train. It's not racist to be bad at cooking. Is putting beans in chilli 'reverse racism' in your mind?
|
|
#
?
Dec 20, 2015 13:58
|
|
|
Bitching about how someone prepares your chicken is absolutely not a legitimate grievance.
|
|
#
?
Dec 20, 2015 14:16
|
|
|
Would it be okay to complain if they got beef instead of chicken? Theoretically speaking.
|
|
#
?
Dec 20, 2015 14:22
|
|
|
A Buttery Pastry posted:The more appropriate word to use would be cultural denigration; creating awful parodies of treasured parts of another culture and presenting them as authentic. To get around the issue, the dishes should be renamed to Americanized (Traditional food), or (Traditional food) inspired dish. This would help people from that culture by not getting their hopes up, and stop the mockery of foreign culture through the culinary arts. American dishes could be likewise be sold as cafeterianized dishes, if the student body felt that the dishes diverged too far from what they understood them to be. Squalid posted:I'd also like to say that while I think the way the term is used is often nonsensical the grievances are usually legitimate. For example the Washington Post article I posted described the sorts of identity problems that have long troubled the children of immigrants. Not sure what that means about bad cafeteria food though
|
|
#
?
Dec 20, 2015 14:29
|
|
|
You can't make everyone happy all the time, or even most of the time. I'd go so far as to say that the kind of people who immediately think racism is the cause of their school lunch entree being kind of lovely shouldn't have anyone going out of the way to cater to their delusional paranoia.
|
|
#
?
Dec 20, 2015 14:37
|
|
|
Again, the article doesn't actually claim that it's racist or even use the word racism, racist or any variation thereof. Here's the summary for those who can't be bothered to read it: Cafeteria claims to have dishes that are from the culture the kids are a part of. They think this is neat, so decide to order it. They order it, turns out it's not actually that dish, it's some weird hosed up version. They speak to other kids who have had similar lovely experiences. They tell their school, the school says it doesn't mean any offence by it. School then sets up something so these students can discuss the lovely food and hopefully get better food. It's very much a non-story, presumably why it's only been picked up in the student newspaper and is not, say, the topic of the Daily Show.
|
|
#
?
Dec 20, 2015 14:47
|
|
|
It's such a weird thing to keep going back and harping on cultural appropriation, and in this case, it is the company preparing something completely different and trying to pass it off as a traditional Vietnamese dish. I don't think that is something crazy to be upset about.
|
|
#
?
Dec 20, 2015 14:54
|
|
|
|
| # ? Jun 9, 2024 21:06 |
|
|
Ddraig posted:Again, the article doesn't actually claim that it's racist or even use the word racism, racist or any variation thereof. I was under the impression that the phrase 'cultural appropriation' did fall under the broad umbrella of racism. And they definitely called it appropriation. Should we protest the fact that pizza in Hong Kong is weeeird? I actually love the fact that pizza changes from one place to another. Chicago, Naples, Hong Kong, and everywhere else all have their own variations on pizza and they are all interesting and good in their own way. Jimbozig fucked around with this message at 14:58 on Dec 20, 2015 |
|
#
?
Dec 20, 2015 14:56
|
|