|
Cultural appropriation is another trivial thing the worthless American left obsesses over while literally billions of "people of color" are suffering tremendously under poverty, exploitation and imperialism. The only reason why it is a hot button issue is because it involves Katy Perry and snotty college students.
|
#
¿
Mar 24, 2015 15:11
|
|
|
|
| # ¿ May 9, 2024 18:39 |
|
|
Canadian Surf Club posted:Another of your mistakes is presuming that we can't do these things today because of some terrible past history, when infact there's still a lot of exploitation and marginalization of certain minorities today. And that is something American progressives incapable of actually addressing, as they have repeatedly demonstrated, and no amount of "discussion" or "raising awareness" will change that. gently caress, they were the most culturally appropriative during their most radical phase. Hippie movement was nothing if it wasn't for cultural appropriation, and that's why it is a touchy subject even today. You are still battling the shadows of that era in an attempt to kick the dirty hippie. Because progressivism in America is mostly about whites disciplining other whites to show their class loyalties and get a leg up in their narrow social environments. Cultural appropriation argument is perfect for that because you signal not only you are a defender of poor minorities, you are also worldly and knowledgeable about "true" significance of whatever cultural element being stolen.
|
|
#
¿
Mar 24, 2015 19:55
|
|
|
Popular Thug Drink posted:This is a fair criticism, but it acknowledges that cultural appropriation is a real problem that actually exists. No it isn't. You know what is a real problem that will affect the lives of "PoC" tremendously and which Americans can do something about it? Global warming. Even the iPads you are using to have twitter debates about cultural appropriation is "problematic" for PoC in a way Katy Perry's loving dress never will be.
|
|
#
¿
Mar 24, 2015 20:09
|
|
|
Popular Thug Drink posted:So it's a problem because leftists do it, but it also isn't a problem at all, because it doesn't meet your threshold for seriousness? I don't hate leftists, I'm a leftist. I hate what passes as leftism over there and their silly blogs and campus communities. The global warming example (and it is just an example) was given to show you how far you people are up on your own asses, and how little motivation you have to actually change something. Be true to yourselves; who are you trying to discipline when you complain about cultural appropriation?
|
|
#
¿
Mar 24, 2015 20:32
|
|
|
Zeitgueist posted:Cultural appropriation is only something that happens to college socialists, not something used to oppress the global poor and PoC. See, this is the kind of sloppy, self-righteous poo poo I'm talking about. FYI Zeitgueist, I never drank Fiji water. In fact, I never even had the opportunity to drink Fiji water, it's not sold where I live. If you asked what I think about Fiji water, I would answer it as a huge waste of human resources, just the kind capitalism excels at making and the outcome of the economic system we're in. And not the result of whitey's insatiable lust for POC culture or whatever. But someone drinking Fiji water does not mean anything to me on a personal level. It is not a moral choice for me, because I don't have a choice at all. I wouldn't use what drinking Fiji water signifies to berate others, and I would never even pretend doing so is a service to global poor. And what I hear from you lot is a lot of noise and snark about Fiji water and not enough about the cruel and irrational systems of economic exploitation your country happens to be the boss of.
|
|
#
¿
Mar 24, 2015 21:15
|
|
|
paranoid randroid posted:But if you remove the airing of grievances at the personal level, what are you left with to cope? Indeed, that's the question isn't it? What else can a progressive movement can do?
|
|
#
¿
Mar 24, 2015 21:24
|
|
|
Zeitgueist posted:I'm not the one being self-righteous. Rich douchebags buying exotic luxuries has been a thing since there were rich douchebags. They are not douchebags because they are white and so culturally appropriating but because they became rich by exploitation. Zeitgueist posted:I was specifically talking about economic exploitation, not people making consumer choices.
|
|
#
¿
Mar 24, 2015 21:48
|
|
|
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... I have an important inquiry for POC culture scholars: I saw my friend Kyle smoking tobacco with a hookah the other day. Is he merely insensitive or a Real Shithead? Effectronica posted:One of them is done to the culture and the other by the culture. This shouldn't be hard. Who belongs to what culture, and under what right they have authority to dictate its content?
|
|
#
¿
Mar 25, 2015 14:21
|
|
|
Effectronica posted:Okay, dude, you're just as much a part of Nigerian culture as a guy from Lagos is.  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.quote:By the way, I enjoyed your sneering assertion that Native Americans are labor aristocrats earlier in the thread. Native Americans are living in literal 3rd world conditions in the United States, and yet when I hear about their problems in the mainstream channels and the social media it's always about some football team. Think about that for a moment. Who gets the real benefit from this discourse? Why does it get propagated widely instead of other issues? blackguy32 posted:I dunno, maybe Japanese people who actually know what context the Kimono is used for and who negative stereotypes affect the most have some say in what it should be used for. They certainly have more claim to it than Katy Perry ever did. What if other Japanese people disagree? quote:Again, no one is stopping you from wearing such things. It just makes you look like a huge shithead when you do. And why should we care?
|
|
#
¿
Mar 25, 2015 14:53
|
|
|
Effectronica 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. 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 quote: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? 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.
|
|
#
¿
Mar 25, 2015 15:32
|
|
|
Effectronica posted:Orientalism doesn't mean fostering negative stereotypes. I realize that this is "rhetorical malpractice" and that my snide aside about how your view of anti-racism as being about fighting this enormous blob with "Racism" written on the front is sadly accurate. People are rightfully asking "is this really racist?" or "does this foster negative stereotypes?" because that's what they care about and they don't give two shits about academic subjects such as orientalism. That subject, btw, is much better discussed in a scholarly environment and not on the internet over dumb tattoos. edit: also, I don't find people finding Chinese/Japanese calligraphy beautiful as weird or dumb because that was the artist's intention. You people honestly need to relax a bit. fspades fucked around with this message at 15:48 on Mar 28, 2015 |
|
#
¿
Mar 28, 2015 15:32
|
|
|
Effectronica posted:No, I don't think that's what "people" care about, I believe that's what you care about, and are transplanting onto people generally. I dunno, don't think your objections are good enough without having to invoke a silent majority? This thread has failed to bring a coherent and clear definition for cultural appropriation. Ultimately all you claim is "I know it, when I see it." It's very easy (and satisfying, I bet) to throw empty platitudes about cultural sensitivity and not being a dick, but if you can't even define a problem how are you expecting to solve it? In fact, the ample amount of snark and not-so-subtle accusations of racism going on in this thread helped to confirm my suspicion that cultural appropriation is a rhetorical beating stick to claim social superiority over others and feel good about it. fspades fucked around with this message at 16:22 on Mar 28, 2015 |
|
#
¿
Mar 28, 2015 16:19
|
|
|
Effectronica posted:There have been multiple people posting varied definitions of cultural appropriation, none of which you have responded to as far as I can see beyond this post saying that none of them satisfy your criteria. Well, is there anything that would satisfy your criteria? I suspect that nothing will ever convince you, because you have already made up your mind on the issue. So for example, this statement from the UN Declaration of the Rights of Indigenous Peoples: No, instead I will insist this is a very specific case of protecting certain spiritual practices only and explicitly reserved for cultural insiders from commodification. It is something very, very different than Westerners wearing Chinese calligraphy tattoos and saris. Which is also different from early Rock artists aping from black musicians. And all of these are different from Redskins. I dare you to come up with a consistent definition of cultural appropriation that applies for all of these cases while also allowing cultural borrowing and interaction. edit: nice snark and not-so-subtle accusation of racism btw 
fspades fucked around with this message at 16:43 on Mar 28, 2015 |
|
#
¿
Mar 28, 2015 16:36
|
|
|
Effectronica posted:Maybe for the second one, but for the first? Did you even read it? Of course you didn't. Also, Redskins are emphatically not an example of cultural appropriation, even under this definition. You are confusing racist caricatures and racist speech with the appropriation of cultural artifacts. Maybe you could claim Redskins fans wearing feather headdresses is an example of cultural appropriation but that's not the real problem with Redskins isn't it? quote:Then they say that appropriation is only bad when it becomes damaging to the culture taken from! I, personally, in this thread, have said that appropriation is only this case of damaging to the culture borrowed from, because I consider the "appropriation" part to be important. What does this even mean?? In what way can a culture be damaged? How do you define a culture and where does the borders of a culture end and others begin? How do you distinguish benign cultural change from cultural destruction or degeneration? quote:This also covers all of these things except hanzi tattoos, which I merely said were Orientalist, so long as we consider Indian-American culture as something distinct from Indian culture and also as a real culture. ...what? quote:Granted, you could argue that the overwhelmingly white nature of rock n' roll past the mid-50s is entirely coincidental, or that "Redskins" doesn't damage Amerindian cultures because you can't show that it causes exactly 12 units of cultural damage or whatever, or that Indian-Americans using the sari as a sign of their cultural identity is wrong, but then you've already accepted my terms. No, that'd be stupid.
|
|
#
¿
Mar 28, 2015 17:11
|
|
|
Effectronica posted:James O. Young, professor of philosophy at the University of Victoria, and Susan Scafidi, professor of law at Fordham University, are two in particular who get cited fairly frequently in pop mentions. Ok. From James O. Young we have Cultural Appropriation and the Arts. Looking at the reviews, he does not give a precise definition of culture and wants to focus on cultural appropriation during artistic production. Interestingly, he disagrees with your position and suggests a culture cannot claim ownership for an art product or artistic style, only individuals can, and only concrete objects at that. He also finds cultural harm argument weak as it can be done both by outsiders and insiders; also, cultural insiders would still have the ability to produce appropriated motifs and styles. Also causing offense to a cultural group might not necessarily be an ethically wrong thing to do. Basically a more comprehensive version of all the objections already given in this thread... I couldn't get any review or summaries for Scafidi, so if you'd summarize her argument it'd would be helpful. quote:Have you ever seen the Redskins' logo? Because your position, like many of the others you have expressed, seems to be based on major ignorance. Maybe you have them confused with the Cleveland Indians' old logo. quote:Okay, so if I were to burn down the Louvre, this would be a benign cultural change?  (to people who have never heard of Mona Lisa even) would that be objectionable action on the grounds that I distorted Renaissance era Italian culture and diminished the Louvre's standing? In fact, you could argue (and people do argue) Mona Lisa and everything else in the Louvre museum, including the artifacts that were explicitly stolen during the colonial period rightfully belongs to all mankind and not exclusively to this or that culture. Do you disagree with this view?quote:Just forestalling the response that it doesn't damage Indian culture, which has been used previously in this thread with regards to use of Japanese cultural artifacts. Didn't figure you'd go for insisting that all cultural change is necessarily neutral. Whether cultural change is positive or negative depends heavily on someone's starting position. If I were a xenophobic cultural essentialist I could easily argue cultural appropriation is harmful... for the appropriators. It would be a logically consistent position if we agreed with its initial premises, but we don't have to. You, on the other hand, are making some controversial assumptions about culture but do not bother to back them up as if they were self-evident and anyone who disagrees with those assumptions is looking for an excuse to be a dick to minorities.
|
|
#
¿
Mar 28, 2015 18:29
|
|
|
You jest but I definitely remember a 3rd generation or something Japanese American crying cultural appropriation for white people treating rice cookers as an ordinary kitchen appliance. Because her family had one when she was growing up you see... edit: found it. fspades fucked around with this message at 05:47 on Apr 7, 2015 |
|
#
¿
Apr 7, 2015 05:31
|
|
|
blackguy32 posted:Because different people of a specific cultures may think or believe different things. Yes, and who are we going to give primacy and believe when it comes to CA? People have came up with lots of examples where a 2nd generation or higher immigrant decries cultural appropriation over something, while the people from the original country said "no, it's okay." Even in that Lakota spirituality example there's an apparent disagreement within the community because it seems some Lakota holy men saw it fit to share their teachings with outsiders for profit. Why do we have to give deference to people who wrote that declaration? Who gives them the right to police Lakota spirituality? This isn't piddly bullshit just because you say so. We have to have something more than just CA to pass a judgment. It shows any discussion of CA must include things that are outside of the cultural dimension.You have to talk about subjects of power, authority, property rights and material conditions. You simply can't have a coherent, rational position on CA without making some judgments on all of these. As a bonus point, these other issues affect peoples' lives much more directly and concretely anyway. But people who tout the CA horn are content on sticking to cultural ephemera and symbols. Because it is exactly this incoherency that allows them to go on witch hunts and declare outsiders in order to gain social credit in their narrow environments. If you don't come up with concrete principles then The Enemy can't pin down your argument, and you're flexible to accuse everyone and anyone of being insensitive and ignorant shitbags, depending on your need. fspades fucked around with this message at 08:32 on Apr 18, 2015 |
|
#
¿
Apr 18, 2015 08:29
|
|
|
VitalSigns posted:Because "well my black friend" is not and never has been a good defense for being a dick to people. If you base your political opinions on what a given group of people thinks then what you have is not an ideology but just reflexive conformism to get by in your social environment. You grant a lot of authority to an imagined majority when that is a very dangerous way to do progressive politics. The oppressed can be collaborators in their own oppression. For the longest time in the Western world, (as it is today in elsewhere) a great amount of women opposed feminism and women's liberation much in the same way Phyllis Schafly do today. Of course, that wasn't an threat to feminists' conscience because their position had concrete principles and a coherent worldview based on a historical perspective. This was exactly my point. Reflexive outrage is not enough; you must have a reference to a real injustice to make sense of it. This idea that if you're offending someone then you are on the wrong is asinine, baseless and harmful to actual social justice. It obfuscates oppression rather than confronting it. And it gives the idea if everyone stopped "being a dick" we would solve racism, sexism etc. No, I'm afraid it doesn't work that way.
|
|
#
¿
Apr 18, 2015 10:29
|
|
|
VitalSigns posted:Respecting someone's traditions isn't a political opinion anymore than saying "please" and "thank you" is a political opinion. No, gently caress that. If someone's tradition results in suffering and inequality I'll be the first in line to disrespect it. Tradition is a bullshit category anyway. It's inherently political. fspades fucked around with this message at 11:03 on Apr 18, 2015 |
|
#
¿
Apr 18, 2015 11:01
|
|
|
|
| # ¿ May 9, 2024 18:39 |
|
|
VitalSigns posted:Sorry I thought you were complaining that some Lakota people would rather you not adopt their rituals as a self-aggrandizing showpiece and treat their religion as some silly game. No, my goalposts are the same. I give zero shits about "tradition" in itself. Something being perceived as traditional means nothing to me. As I've said, it's a bullshit category that we should do well to erase from our language. I respect people though, and if somebody claims I'm trampling their traditions, I'll listen and consider it. Not because traditions deserve that, but because "it's our tradition!" argument is usually used to prop up some other and more relevant grievance. Sometimes that grievance is valid and sometimes they should just shove it. I realize this might not be a popular opinion, but then again I've never been a conservative. If you want to talk in the language of tradition and gain some approval go talk with those.
|
|
#
¿
Apr 18, 2015 16:36
|
|