|
Most Native American cultures in the USA are in pretty precarious positions and mass media depictions do have a lot of influence on them. Clearly, these labor aristocrats should have their cultures annihilated rather than white people not talk about spirit animals or wear buckskin or go "how".
|
|
#
¿
Mar 25, 2015 01:59
|
|
|
|
| # ¿ May 11, 2024 08:11 |
|
Powercrazy posted:I don't think I'm the one whining about a concept that I'm not even convinced exists. If anything, the people upset that I listen to eminem and have had a black girlfriend in the past are looking for something else to whine about. Oh, you were my freshman roommate? Small fuckin' world.
|
|
|
#
¿
Mar 25, 2015 03:12
|
|
Powercrazy posted:I'm pretty sure I wasn't your freshman roommate unless you were a frat-boy "appropriator" with an asian girl-friend. Perhaps it says something that my experience isn't all that unusual and that you are probably "incorrect" to assume there is something wrong with something that no one else seems to have a problem with. What are you on about now? Are you going to start blubbering about how a mean chick with dyed hair told you not to have sex with black women? Because, ah-ha, E/N is thataway *points to dumpster*.
|
|
|
#
¿
Mar 25, 2015 03:50
|
|
rakovsky maybe posted:Nah this phenomenon is mostly white people complaining about other white people. Hmm... I thought that I had exterminated all the other panoptics three thousand years before.
|
|
|
#
¿
Mar 25, 2015 05:05
|
|
Typical Pubbie posted:Still not seeing the difference between cultural appropriation and cultural diffusion in most of the examples given ITT (I'm pretty sure cultural diffusion can be commodified). poo poo like the Redskins mascot is not cultural appropriation, it's a racist caricature. What is being appropriated there besides a racist stereotype of American Indians created by white people? Leftists say that white people appropriated rock and roll from black people (as if rock and roll were invented in a cultural vacuum with no influence from European and Anglo-American styles of music), and that this is cultural appropriation because black musicians did not receive the pay and recognition they deserved. In other words, their criticism lies specifically with a racist music industry (and a racist white audience) discriminating against blacks--not white kids copying Elvis who copied stuff from rhythm and blues and gospel while adding his own style. The term is cumbersome and arbitrary to the point of uselessness. The only way to fight racism is to assume that it's all a big blob with RACIST on the front and not distinguish anything else at all. Mhm. And no, liberals and leftists say that rock n' roll has been culturally appropriated because it has been made white music. Blue-eyed soul, for example, didn't end up appropriating soul as a whole genre, because it didn't end up making white soul artists the norm. Jazz and the blues sit between the two, in that they've become much more white, but their history is still largely recognized and it's still ordinary to find black jazz and blues musicians. Rock n' roll has absolutely been appropriated.
|
|
|
#
¿
Mar 25, 2015 13:07
|
|
|
A lot of people are taking the position that any and all interaction with a culture not your own is appropriation. This would say a lot about their mindset, but I'm guessing most of 'em don't even try to parse what "cultural appropriation" would mean. Cultural appropriation is an interaction that damages the culture's ability to define itself by ripping parts of it out. So, wearing kimono to a tea ceremony is not appropriating. Wearing kimono as pajamas or a robe isn't even appropriating for most people. Wearing kimono as a fashion statement? Probably appropriating. Trying to make kimono a regular, everyday garment is almost certainly appropriating. Granted, this has limited ability to damage Japanese culture, but Japanese-American culture is a hell of a lot more vulnerable. Of course, there are a lot of people who are quite eager to see subcultures annihilated and would appropriate ever-more-furiously if it could force "assimilation".
|
|
|
#
¿
Mar 25, 2015 13:19
|
|
OwlFancier posted:I'm still having difficulty making a distinction between that and simply "change". One of them is done to the culture and the other by the culture. This shouldn't be hard.
|
|
|
#
¿
Mar 25, 2015 14:00
|
|
OwlFancier posted:If you're going to argue that only internal influences are permissible you're going to have to illegitimise a vast swathe of existing cultures. Living in the UK, almost everything we have came from somewhere else. That's not what's being argued. That's just the basic mistake you're making. This also isn't a historical thing to delegitimize existing cultures, or whatever you're terrified of.
|
|
|
#
¿
Mar 25, 2015 14:12
|
|
OwlFancier posted:Then I'm having trouble seeing what is being argued because all cultures are involutarily changed all the time. Technological progress has completely changed how things work over the past century or so, destroying a lot of old traditions across the world, but I'm not sure it makes sense to complain about it very much, as it's hardly likely to stop it from happening in the future. Well, yes, you're really stupid. But let me try this again- cultural appropriation is when you take something from another culture and damage or destroy their ability to use it for themselves. This differs from other forms of cultural change because it is done to a culture rather than by it, and because the cultural component is then used by the culture that stole it. Armyman25 posted:You're not allowed to use anything from a culture that isn't the one you grew up in. Nobody has said this in this thread. Not a single person. You're making it up because you're threatened by the possibility of refraining from doing something. Maybe we should call it "cultural trespassing", and then my fellow Americans would joyously shoot anyone that appropriated culture.
|
|
|
#
¿
Mar 25, 2015 14:18
|
|
fspades posted:When I left this thread we were almost there to talk about the systemic exploitation of the global poor, but we are back to discussing pop stars, actresses, and their kimonos then? Nice, nice... Okay, dude, you're just as much a part of Nigerian culture as a guy from Lagos is. By the way, I enjoyed your sneering assertion that Native Americans are labor aristocrats earlier in the thread. Armyman25 posted:But even using the example of the Redskin fan above, how does the sports team using a fake version of Indian traditions stop the actual tribes from still practicing them? 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 headdresses have no symbolic meaning than "is Indian", then the customs surrounding them become meaningless because "is Indian" outweighs those customs.
|
|
|
#
¿
Mar 25, 2015 14:27
|
|
Typical Pubbie posted:And look, we're back to dubious history as the only consistent method of proving CA. Please cite the black cultural movement of Rock and Roll that was scorched from existence by Elvis and Led Zepplin. If that proves difficult then maybe rock and roll did not replace a black cultural phenomenon, but created a parallel movement within white culture. Okay, so how many black rockers can you name? Hendrix, Little Richard and who else? Motown primarily focused on soul, and deliberately cultivated a sound that couldn't be replicated by white artists, so it actually strengthens the point. Which basically that in the 1950s you had a situation where "race music" became rock n' roll because white artists recording rockers completely displaced black artists out to the fringes, where they had to make use of soul, funk, R&B and so on to record music because rock had become overwhelmingly white.
|
|
|
#
¿
Mar 25, 2015 14:33
|
|
Armyman25 posted:Bullshit. Things are as important as you make them. A person's belief in a religion is not contingent on the opinions of other people. Catholic iconography is used all over the place in popular culture. It doesn't detract from the actual belief system itself. Do you think that people are completely free of influence from the environment in which they live in? Do you think that Native religions are in an identical situation to Catholicism in America? happyhippy posted:Is there any examples of this please, where an existing culture had to forgo and give up something they did just because another started to do the same. That's not what's being said. Please respond to what I actually said, and I will write up an answer, but you're not going to redefine things like this and get answers.
|
|
|
#
¿
Mar 25, 2015 14:36
|
|
Armyman25 posted:Of course people are influenced by the environment they grow up in. But at some point they have to decide what it is that they are going to believe and put stock in. Okay, but this decision is going to be influenced by that environment. In addition, I wouldn't say that the amount of ignorance is similar, and there aren't any people, say, promoting their own version of Catholicism which is all about getting drunk on sacramental wine and eating fried fish, and which most people treat as identical to the actual Catholic Church. Which is a better place than where many Native religions stand.
|
|
|
#
¿
Mar 25, 2015 14:49
|
|
fspades posted:
There are no nations, besides microstates, that are culturally homogeneous. Nigeria is more heterogeneous than the USA, but not so much that we can't say that there is a specifically Nigerian culture while admitting a specifically American one. So your points are just a bunch of gabble. Did you know, well obvious you didn't, that it's largely Native Americans who talk about that and make that an issue? Are they race traitors, or are they considering certain issues important even though they don't revolve around economics?
|
|
|
#
¿
Mar 25, 2015 15:06
|
|
It's really funny to me that out of all cultural identities you went for one that was explicitly created by white colonialists. So which Nigerian culture are you talking about? Are you talking about the Muslim part or the Christian part? Yoruba, Hausa, or Igbo? If the nation-state of Nigeria has some claim on "Nigerian culture" within its borders, how authentic that claim considering they are the product of imperialism? The moment you accept a notion such as an authentic Nigerian culture, you also accept cultures to form and flourish due to external factors and force.
TheImmigrant posted:Fascinating statement of racial determinism. The Motown Sound was deliberately crafted so that it was very difficult to replicate, meaning that covered Motown songs would sound distinctly off, meaning that Motown had a cachet that couldn't be easily taken away. Granted, you're just in this to snipe at me, so I dunno, why not do this via PM? Chicken?
|
|
|
#
¿
Mar 25, 2015 15:09
|
|
fspades posted:You missed my point. I think there is a Nigerian culture, but you are not understanding the implications of this. Earlier you were going about how something "done" to a culture can only diminish it, and yet here we have a brand new cultural identity directly imposed by white colonialists. Nigerian culture, no matter how valid it is, is an imperialist construct backed by a nation-state. You seem to believe in cultures as these clearly delineated intellectual and social spaces that we must protect from unwelcome intruders; otherwise they'll diminish somehow. But these things are not so easy to untangle from history, and who or which institution has the right over which cultural artifact is actually a hotly debated issue everywhere In other words, Nigerians have no control over their destinies and have not modified their culture, which is distinct from a superposition of all the cultures in Nigeria. LOL. quote:I'm pretty sure Native American activists complain about other things too. But the complaints that gains traction always happens to be the ones white liberals can use to stick it to their racist neighbor and conveniently ignore the systemic injustice in America and their complacency within it. Oh for sure dude. You definitely know a lot more about Native American activism than people who live in the USA possibly could.
|
|
|
#
¿
Mar 25, 2015 15:34
|
|
|
"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: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
|
|
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
|
|
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
|
|
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
|
|
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
|
|
Powercrazy posted: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? JeffersonClay posted:So native people should only throw off the shackles of religion once enough white people have done the same? How egalitarian. Okay, so we've got both of you under "bitter New Atheist", would you like to provide any more identifying information? I do like how the leftist and the guy who hates leftism are coming together against the super-villain who suggests people should be able to define themselves with minimal cultural imposition. I clearly need an outfit and a codename.
|
|
|
#
¿
Mar 25, 2015 17:53
|
|
A big flaming stink posted:So wait, youre actually against dictating to people what culture they are allowed to partake in, or have I lost your message amidst the snark I don't know how you could look at the posts where I repeatedly say that what is bad about CA is that it impairs people's ability to use and define their own culture, and come to this sort of conclusion. It's baffling. Hieronymous Alloy posted:What about cultural appropriation as part of the Artistic process? Should we stop listening to the Beatles, Led Zeppelin, or gilbert and Sullivan's Mikado?/ What about fantasy novels like Bridge of Birds or The Wind-up Girl? Nobody said that you should immediately throw away anything that was appropriated. Meanwhile, the only people who would say that Bridge of Birds, for example, is a priori appropriation, are people insisting that cultural appropriation is nonsense. Nobody arguing that CA is a meaningful thing has said that it's the only way to interact with other cultures.
|
|
|
#
¿
Mar 25, 2015 18:06
|
|
Powercrazy posted:"Minimal cultural imposition," I'm sure this is a rigorously defined position that no one could possibly disagree with unless they are "bitter" or something. I realize that someone who views the world through the lens of a cheesy sci-fi movie from 1999 might not understand this, but rigid definitions are pretty easy to break and fall apart, and then you've got people like you cheering at the extermination of Santeria because there's one fewer religion.
|
|
|
#
¿
Mar 25, 2015 18:09
|
|
JeffersonClay posted:Actually you suggested that people should be able to define the cultural identity of their children with minimal interference. Is Marx culturally destructive because his work encourages people to reject religion? Yes, and his work is all the better for it because some elements of culture should be destroyed. Agreed. You, for example-
|
|
|
#
¿
Mar 25, 2015 18:10
|
|
Powercrazy posted:In this case I'm using rigorous as an adjective meaning "thorough." I realize that definitions of words are difficult (and sometimes they change meanings wtf?), but they are one of the fundamental aspects of communication. I'm also not sure why me being aware of dawkins somehow makes me an atheist who lusts for religious death. Okay, it's quite simple. Take this hammer, and repeatedly hit your right hand with it until all the bones are broken. Through the pain, you should understand. If not, please find someone to assist you in doing this to your left hand.
|
|
|
#
¿
Mar 25, 2015 18:26
|
|
Powercrazy posted:Perhaps we could use the bludgeon you've fashioned and called Cultural Appropriation to do the deed? Look, you're convinced that there's a conspiracy afoot to prevent you from listening to Miles Davis, and I sure as hell can't convince you otherwise rationally, so...
|
|
|
#
¿
Mar 25, 2015 18:42
|
|
Hieronymous Alloy posted:I don't think that''s the case though? Like, I've seen people say they didn't like Bridge of Birds for that reason. Cultural appropriation is a real thing and a valid concept but it just seems to me like one issue that has to be weighed in the balance vs. everything else. I said a priori for a reason. People can consider it appropriating after experience with it, sure, and that's potentially valid, just like with Bacigalupi's novel. Powercrazy posted:Nah, I'm not beholden to other people doing things I don't like, so I listen to miles davis and led zeppelin with a clear and free conscience. Some people apparently have a problem with it, and so I'm trying to figure out why. Who are these people. Name them.
|
|
|
#
¿
Mar 25, 2015 18:57
|
|
dogcrash truther posted:Cultural appropriation is cool and should happen as much as possible with no regard for "respecting" anyone. Agreed, let's ignore what the word "appropriation" means because we can't tell the difference between liking J-Rock and insisting that paying a con man ten thousand dollars for an hour in a smoke-filled sauna is authentic Indian religion.
|
|
|
#
¿
Mar 25, 2015 19:05
|
|
Powercrazy posted:The people who are concerned with cultural appropriation. You and the OP for example. Can you provide an example, within or without this thread, of me saying those things that you are attributing to me, or at least provide an example of your reasoning so I can get a diagnosis for you?
|
|
|
#
¿
Mar 25, 2015 19:13
|
|
hakimashou posted:Yup, nothing has ever been so murderous and abominable as the communist campaign against human culture. Real people died, in numbers never before seen and, one can hope, never to be seen again. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=cJQQgQIg-D8
|
|
|
#
¿
Mar 25, 2015 19:32
|
|
Series DD Funding posted:Is santeria appropriation or diffusion? It's syncretism
|
|
|
#
¿
Mar 25, 2015 21:58
|
|
The Insect Court posted:If a goy goes to a deli and orders a pastrami on rye he's basically recapitulating the Holocaust, is something we can definitely all agree on. Unless of course he's also buying a potato knish in remembrance for the victims of the Shoah, in which case he is a second Oskar Schindler. Oh, word? What are your credentials? Where did you do your undergraduate? How many papers have you published?
|
|
|
#
¿
Mar 26, 2015 02:04
|
|
|
Even though there probably isn't any physiological reason, belief in such a physiological reason can promote alcoholism as an inevitable consequence.
|
|
|
#
¿
Mar 26, 2015 03:05
|
|
David Corbett posted:Not beyond socially, no. On the other hand, embroidering the butt of your pants with a big ol' American flag, say...
|
|
|
#
¿
Mar 26, 2015 04:07
|
|
unlimited shrimp posted:Would still be acceptable? Maybe distasteful in the sense that you shouldn't deliberately piss people off just to be a dick, but it seems like it's ultimately a question of cultural values. If there were ever some zero-sum game between the right to desecrate the flag and the obligation to respect conservative demands that the flag be upheld as sacred, then I would heat my home with every flag I could get my hands on. I could say it's distasteful or mean or ignorant, but I would still uphold the right to do it sooner than I'd support a measure to ban it. Jesus dude, that was in response to a post about wearing the flag. It's an example of how appropriation can work by people making unintentional mistakes out of ignorance that end up potentially offensive. You're really tetchy.
|
|
|
#
¿
Mar 26, 2015 04:15
|
|
themrguy posted:He absolutely can be the arbiter of whether or not it's worth giving a poo poo about. Someone's seething rage about their favorite game getting being infested with "casuals" can be quite genuine, it doesn't mean I have to treat it as legitimate or worthy of respect. No, I don't think he can be "the" arbiter.
|
|
|
#
¿
Mar 26, 2015 05:22
|
|
Powercrazy posted:Aau Contraire I'd say that getting upset is the entire raison d'être for caring about what other people do/say/wear/listen to, especially on the internet. Outrage Culture is real. Oh?
|
|
|
#
¿
Mar 26, 2015 05:28
|
|
|
|
| # ¿ May 11, 2024 08:11 |
|
Powercrazy posted:https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Q7tupJRSi7M Oh?
|
|
|
#
¿
Mar 26, 2015 05:45
|
|