"Cultural Appropriation"

[Losty]

Wow, that's just very close-minded of you.

Extremely so.

Now I better understand how the others are viewing your posts.

I could understand if someone was burning a dream-catcher in front of you, but if someone has one out of respect of the culture then you are the veritable asshat for claiming sole monopoly on your culture.

 
Sigh as I have already said over and over . If you own out of respect for another culture then fine. If your just owning one because it looks cool without respect for the item then I must disapprove . Now I'll admit I don't know the reason losty owns one . But neither do you. But considering the tone of the post I'm not confident in the former. Thou I totally open to being wrong and revising my post .

Hope that clears things up

Actually someone gave it to my daughter because she has nightmares. I think it's silly but I let her keep it because she thinks it helps. I never considered any culture when I made the decision.

I can get being offended if someone is out screaming bad things about your culture but to be offended by someone simply owning a Dreamcatcher in the privacy of their own homes is beyond ridiculous.

[The Grand Nudger]

I'm astonished that no one has mentioned a particular example of a sort of personal and individual cultural appropriation (maybe)...yet.  It was all the rage on the boards, mostly from the same corner that now insists that there is no such thing, or it's a good thing™.

Anybody member a certain white girl what said she was black, and rose to a prominent position in black culture..........what turned out not to be, even remotely...black.....

Questions to the usual suspects.  Was that;
A-Good
B-Bad
C-Didn't happen
D-all of the above

[Losty]

I would say that's an example of something people should actually be upset over.

[Losty]

What about people who are like 1/16 Cherokee and get a scholarship to college for that even though they know nothing about the culture. I would say that's something to be offended by.

[The Grand Nudger]

Let's not be hasty, we might have to wait for another opinion..maybe that was just cultural exchange.  She learned how to talk black and whatnot, what's the big deal? It was inevitably going to happen, maybe, too.

Should I blow the whistle here, or wag the dog, do you think, Luckie?

---

@1/16 cherokee (I've got jokes! tons of racist jokes from the pine ridge residents!).  Why would that be offensive, and to whom (obviously, other than the fine folks out at pine ridge...lol)?

[Losty]

I was just skimming, I must have missed where someone said this never happens or it's always a good thing.

[The Grand Nudger]

You've missed the best parts of the thread.

[Neo-Scholastic]

I presume you are talking about Rachel Dolezal. I don’t know all the specifics other than the headlines. It appears she was presenting herself as something she wasn’t in other to attain something she could not otherwise get from a group of people for whom certain criteria were important. It seems to me that Ms. Dolezal engaged in a kind of fraud but that is between her and the people she was apparently trying to fool.

Now you seem to be hung-up on the notion that appropriation is different from exchange. What you’re doing is using those words in an economic sense and sneaking in the idea that people and groups can have ownership rights to cultural products. How exactly does that work? What is the mechanism of exchange? From whom does the purchaser buy the rights or gain permission to use a cultural product. In most nations, there are legal mechanisms to grant ownership rights to a limited range of cultural products through copyrights, trademarks, and patents.

So what is your opinion about the Portland ladies that were shamed into closing their taco stand? It seems to me that two enterprising and resourceful ladies in Portland managed to replicate the traditional recipe for tortillas by asking questions and careful observation, even if it did involve snooping around. So what were they supposed to do? Pay royalties? To whom? And with whom could they have negotiated?

Now what is sometimes is objectionable is trivializing, disrespecting, or desacralizing symbols that are important to others. With respect to dream catchers, I went on made-in-china.com and saw that one could buy all kinds of dream catcher merchandise. Dream catcher ear rings for $0.80 each with a minimum 1000 piece order. Dream catcher temporary tattoos for $.10 each with a minimum 3,000 piece order. And my personal favorite for this discussion…a yoga matt with a dream catcher image printed on it ($9.89 each for a minimum 50 piece order)…a Chinese product for practicing Hindu rituals decorated with a Native American symbol! Do these trivialize the ceremonial aspect of dream catchers? Yes. (btw I don’t think uber-liberal Minimalist worries too much about the meaning his avatar had to ancient Egyptians.)

But just as often people trivialize their own culture. When I was at the Vatican, there were venders selling everything from jigsaw puzzles of the Sistine Chapel, to plastic Rosary beads, to beer bottle openers with cameos of Pope Francis. That’s not an act of oppression; it’s just the very human tendency to make vulgar and trivialize things that should be authentic and sacrosanct.

That is the nature of symbols, their meanings shift under different circumstances. The economic model doesn’t apply. Use and context are what matter. Marcel Duchamp puts a urinal in a gallery and elevates it to an artistic statement. Serrano photographs a crucifix submerged in a yellow fluid and titles it “Piss Christ”. Is it offense? Yes. Does it trivialize and disrespect a traditional Christian symbol? That’s one way of looking at it. Would its significance been different if the title was “Pineapple Juice Christ”? Absolutely.  

In a free society, people are free to be as annoying or disrespectful or inconsiderate as they want to be. The problem is when some people arrogate to themselves to be the sole arbitors of what symbols can and cannot mean, how they can be used and who can use them and then use threats of violence and force of law to impose their interpretation onto everyone else.

[The Grand Nudger]

I presume you are talking about Rachel Dolezal. I don’t know all the specifics other than the headlines. It appears she was presenting herself as something she wasn’t in other to attain something she could not otherwise get from a group of people for whom certain criteria were important. It seems to me that Ms. Dolezal engaged in a kind of fraud but that is between her and the people she was apparently trying to fool.

Sure, but it's pretty much a textbook example of cultural appropriation played out - uncommonly, as an individual act.  If a person understood -this- sort of thing to be cultural appropriation, both the problem and the offense become fairly apparent...wouldn't you agree?  

Now you seem to be hung-up on the notion that appropriation is different from exchange. What you’re doing is using those words in an economic sense and sneaking in the idea that people and groups can have ownership rights to cultural products. How exactly does that work? What is the mechanism of exchange? From whom does the purchaser buy the rights or gain permission to use a cultural product. In most nations, there are legal mechanisms to grant ownership rights to a limited range of cultural products through copyrights, trademarks, and patents.

I'd hardly say that I'm hung up on anything..no ones appropriating my shit.  I'm not sneaking anything in.  Explicit in the idea of cultural appropriation is some sense of ownership over one's own culture, at least in some scenarios.  As I already said..if a person doesn't see that or agree with that or find it compelling in a given situation...then they won't see a problem even when they see cultural appropriation......?

So what is your opinion about the Portland ladies that were shamed into closing their taco stand? It seems to me that two enterprising and resourceful ladies in Portland managed to replicate the traditional recipe for tortillas by asking questions and careful observation, even if it did involve snooping around. So what were they supposed to do? Pay royalties? To whom? And with whom could they have negotiated?

Not aware of the specifics, but off the cuff I'd probably think it was nonsense.  OFC, I'm not one of your "sjws"...so....?

Now what is sometimes is objectionable is trivializing, disrespecting, or desacralizing symbols that are important to others. With respect to dream catchers, I went on made-in-china.com and saw that one could buy all kinds of dream catcher merchandise. Dream catcher ear rings for $0.80 each with a minimum 1000 piece order. Dream catcher temporary tattoos for $.10 each with a minimum 3,000 piece order. And my personal favorite for this discussion…a yoga matt with a dream catcher image printed on it ($9.89 each for a minimum 50 piece order)…a Chinese product for practicing Hindu rituals decorated with a Native American symbol! Do these trivialize the ceremonial aspect of dream catchers? Yes. (btw I don’t think uber-liberal Minimalist worries too much about the meaning his avatar had to ancient Egyptians.)

Hmn, trivializing a sacred object is a real problem, but stealing and exploiting sacred objects of other cultures...the very essence of cultural appropriation......isn't?  Something seems amiss.

But just as often people trivialize their own culture. When I was at the Vatican, there were venders selling everything from jigsaw puzzles of the Sistine Chapel, to plastic Rosary beads, to beer bottle openers with cameos of Pope Francis. That’s not an act of oppression; it’s just the very human tendency to make vulgar and trivialize things that should be authentic and sacrosanct.

-which isn't what cultural appropriation is, so I don't know why we're going on about it at length..but hey...continue......

That is the nature of symbols, their meanings shift under different circumstances. The economic model doesn’t apply. Use and context are what matter. Marcel Duchamp puts a urinal in a gallery and elevates it to an artistic statement. Serrano photographs a crucifix submerged in a yellow fluid and titles it “Piss Christ”. Is it offense? Yes. Does it trivialize and disrespect a traditional Christian symbol? That’s one way of looking at it. Would its significance been different if the title was “Pineapple Juice Christ”? Absolutely.  

In a free society, people are free to be as annoying or disrespectful or inconsiderate as they want to be. The problem is when some people arrogate to themselves to be the sole arbitors of what symbols can and cannot mean, how they can be used and who can use them and then use threats of violence and force of law to impose their interpretation onto everyone else.

Are you finished?

[bennyboy]

Hehehe, the canadian flag thing is just a valid strategy for pleasant travel.  

No! Sooooo wrong.

The Canadian flag is for Americans to hide that they are American so people won't insta-hate them when they travel. But the problem is that in at least some countries, they've figured out that Americans are doing this, and so the Canadian flag has lost its good will and positive standing. Americans have literally devalued this icon of Canadian culture. Soon, you'll be claiming that Justin Trudeau is your president, instead of that dude with the fox pelt on his head!

Tiz is insulted by a misuse of what Tiz feels to be somehow sacred.  We are a secular nation, take a number.  That Tiz has grounds for feeling that slight is unfortunate, and to a great extent an effect of poor relations between america, american culture, and the natives.  I also sympathize, but the issue of dreamcatchers, today, doesn't fit the definition of cultural appropriation any more than white rappers or "black" hairstyles.  They can be the ongoing effects of oppression and inequality..past and current....but, they just aren't an example of a person engaging in what is referred to by the term cultural appropriation.  Despite the protestations of the mental midgets in the room..it really is a specific term to refer to a specific relationship and series of events.

I've seen Eminem rap. Dude has language skills for sure-- he's like Rainman or something. I'm just scared what happens when more black people start playing ice hockey. Am I going to be left only with curling?