This is one thing ive never understood about “cultural appropriation.” If someone is partaking in your nations/cultures traditions, apperal, food, etc. Why is that a bad thing? Wouldnt people want their traditions known and shared and experienced by many?
Idk im just a white guy who loves dia de los muertos
As a Quebecois, I like that Canadians like poutine. I don’t like that they pretend they have invented it. I also like that they like maple syrup and the traditions surrounding it (cabane à sucre). I don’t like that they appropriate it as a thing of their own (we produce 90% of global maple syrup).
It’s a thin line between celebrating indigenous cultures and heritage and exploiting it. The Washington Redskins being something I feel everyone can clearly see was over that line, but wearing a sombrero is clearly nowhere near it.
Enjoying other cultures isn’t appropriation. I think the line where it becomes appropriation is profiteering. If you are commodifying and profiting off someone else’s culture that’s pretty shitty. Obviously that’s not a perfectly clear cut line (who ‘owns’ culture?), but it’s a good place to start.
So is every company making and marketing tortilla chips and salsa appropriating culture if they are from New York City? Is every pizzeria that isn’t in Italy profiteering off of Italian culture? Is a French Bistro in Kansas City wrong? Is it wrong to wear a Scottish Kilt made in Viet Nam?
I think each of the described situations has a different specific answer because the topic is nuanced. As stated above, it can sometimes to be messy to say who owns some piece of culture. But beyond that, the most useful tool is an examination of socioeconomic power dynamics.
If there is a cultural group that is poor, and an outsider from a rich/wealthy group commodifies and sells their culture, while giving nothing to those people, you’d probably agree that that’s a shitty thing to do. Their culture obviously had some kind of material wealth value that they received none of.
However, if you take a situation where both parties are well off it seems a lot less shitty. Especially if the cultural group in question is already commodifying and profiting off the same piece of culture.
If you can’t unravel the knot of cultural ownership, then does anyone really own it? It would appear to me that “everyone” owns it at that point and can partake in it freely and adapt it to their wants an needs. And no matter the culture, there is always socioeconomic disparities within that group. No matter how small or downtrodden they may appear to you. Someone is always going to be a little bit better off than you and someone else is always going to have a little more power than you.
So is Tostitos racist for not mailing checks to every Mexican person everywhere? Because they sure as hell are making bank selling those chips and Salsa to you. OMG! are YOU part of the problem?
Sorry for the double reply, but another useful perspective in this is derogation. I often forget this idea because I’m very class minded, but it’s also very important. This is the idea that a culture can be profited off of while simultaneously despising the people that practice it. In practice, this exists as a business around a specific cultural item succeeding specifically because the business is NOT owned/operated by the original cultural group. Some of the best examples of this are around Black American culture in the US. Some cultural products were only valuable AFTER they were owned, operated, and proliferated by White Americans. Which is kinda just Racism Classic™ but allowing certain useful things to cross the cultural line for profits sake.
The know of cultural ownership is absolutely unravel-able in many situations, just not all. In some situations it’s exceedingly clear and in others, not. I think you’re trying very hard to find hard-and-fast, absolute rules for these situations, but they don’t exist. The keyword is nuance, nuance, nuance. Each situation is different and each situation deserves scrutiny as to whether or not it crosses the line. This is a judgement call made by each and every person.
If you really want me to engage on the specific situation of Tostitos/chips and salsa I will, so you can see the process of my scrutiny.
First, I think that as any item of culture becomes more and more diffused (ethically or not), it’s original ownership becomes diluted. Things that were once appropriation in the distant past, if done today, would not be considered as such as the context around them changes (in a myriad of ways).
So, if Tostitos started as a company today, I’d say making chips and salsa is not appropriation. But, if Tostitos was founded a long time ago, before chips and salsa were a foodstuff ubiquitous across the US and Tostitos was created by one outside of that cultural ownership, then I’d say it likely was appropriation. It also might be fair to argue that in the modern day for Tostitos specifically, “the damage has been done” and there really isn’t much fixing it, so consuming their products isn’t necessarily problematic. But this would be a point as to why identifying appropriation early on and stopping it is especially important.
As to whether I’m part the problem - for Tostitos no, but for other things almost certainly yes. I’m human and I don’t know everything, and I’ve certainly made mistakes in this area, but that’s okay. What’s important is that once I’ve learned something is in fact a mistake, I own up to it and stop making that mistake.
I think that’s still tricky. For instance, most parts of the world have few Japanese migrants, yet Japanese restaurants are almost everywhere. Usually these are owned by other Asian migrants. This is clearly profiteering, but I don’t see it as particularly problematic.
I think you can apply the socioeconomic and derogation lenses here. Socioeconomically, Japan has been ahead of nearly every other Asian country for a long while, with only places like China and Singapore recently catching up to them. So, I think that makes it feel okay. And derogatively, I don’t think these restaurants are successful because they specifically aren’t being run by Japanese people. So that’s good on the front as well. So I’d say, yeah, overall it feels fine. However, I’m not Japanese and don’t have a wealth of additional context that might provide counter arguments.
I think academically, derogation is often considered as a component. Like profiting off a culture while simultaneously despising the culture and the people who own it.
It’s a tough line to draw, because even if they aren’t the main profitees, the culture where the thing originated often still profited. e.g. AFAIK rock’n’roll getting popular with white americans was pretty good for black americans, even though many of the best selling artists (e.g. Elvis Presley) were white.
The popularization of Black American music is indeed a complex topic in this arena. Like, obviously a lot of cultural outsiders made a lot of money off of the situation, but there were at least some benefits to the arrangement, although whether or not they outweighed the cons is perhaps difficult to say. For example, if outsiders had abstained entirely from profiting, what would have changed? Obviously more of the money made percentage-wise would’ve gone to the owning culture, but would there have been less money overall? Would it have reached the same levels of popularity? If so, it almost certainly wouldn’t’ve happened as quickly, right? These are difficult questions to answer and I’m not educated enough in this area to really offer any. So, while not worth a damn, my gut feelings is that there are at least some strong arguments as to why overall the absence of outsider profiting would’ve been better for the owning culture.
I mean I’m Bavarian and if people wear Lederhosen and set up their own Oktoberfest it’s kinda lame. Not that I think it’s bad, it’s just that I’m not a fan of that stuff here either.
You can totally have all of that. I keep the many many small breweries making fantastic beer.
Yeah, but lederhosen are just kind of neat. Who doesn’t like their men in short leather shorts, right? (Seriously though, the construction for very traditional lederhosen is kind of neat. I’ve tried it, and it’s a challenge without being able to skive all your seams.)
IMO it’s appropriation if it’s done disrespectfully or in an exploitative or profiteering way. Otherwise, it would just be cultural segregation. Imagine liberalism turned full apartheid.
So if I want to open a Pinata factory, I can only sell them to Mexicans? Or can I sell them to anyone, but only to non-Mexicans at a profit? Or must every Pinata be made at home by a loving Mexican Grandmother for her Grandchildren only?
“Cultural Appropiation” is the single dumbest thing I’ve ever fucking heard.
All cultures grow by learning about and adopting customs of other cultures, or in other words by appropiating things from other cultures.
And if they did that didn’t we wouldn’t have things like anime (Japan took the art of animation from America, not only did The US invent cartoons, but anime evolve from styles used on early Disney cartoons), rock music (Rock musicians are predominantly white, but rock itself evolved from distinctly black forms of music), or really most food in general (Pizza’s from Italy, French Fries are from Belgium, Hot dogs are from Germany… Need I go on?)
At best, demonizing cultural appropiation is just encouraging segregation.
Now if you’re wearing the colors or clothing of another culture specifically with intent to insult or in a less-than-glamorous way… That’s a different story. (I’m talking about those of you who think putting on an ET Mask and a Sombreo and claiming you’re an illegal alien is hillarious)
This is the kind of Neo Liberal nonsense that makes me wish I had a party to root for that wasn’t the Democrats
“Cultural Appropiation” is the single dumbest thing I’ve ever fucking heard.
Really? Because I’d say it’s the perfect term to describe shit like this.
Because that is not respecting an indigenous culture. That is taking something extremely important to them and perversely twisting it into some corporate sports team bullshit.
What else is that asshole doing if not appropriating someone’s culture?
But can’t we just call that racism? “Haha, I’m an Indian” is just racist. Making a new term of cultural appropriation then leads to all sorts of things getting that label that aren’t problematic. A lot of it I think actually veers back into racism. Like as a white guy, can I eat, for example, Cherokee dishes? Can I open a Cherokee restaurant? I’m not pretending to be from their culture, I just like the food and think other people would too. If I can’t do these things, you are reinforcing that Cherokees are a different group than all other Americans, which is where racism comes from. Being exposed to other cultures is how you combat racism, that’s why cities tend to be less racist.
I guess, but there are many different types of racism and this is not the same as, for example, burning a cross on a black family’s lawn.
This is not active hate. This person very likely has no animosity toward indigenous Americans. He probably has no idea about the significance of the war bonnet or why it’s offensive.
So I think this is a subcategory which needs to be highlighted specifically because of people like that.
I have no problem with that at all. Please dress up for the 16th of September, the Mexican Independence Day, or as a catrín on Día de los Muertos. My Korean friend looked so good as an Adelita and I was so proud of her.
I guess I’d only have a problem with a Halloween costume that exaggerates a negative and unrealistic stereotype but I don’t think people make those anymore, or at least I haven’t seen one.
Clothing and food are surface, but important, cultural signs. It can be easy to observe and emulate these for one’s own gain either socially or econically. All the while the culture from which these signs are derive are ignored.
Dressing up like a war chief for Halloween is partaking in the costume, but not the culture.
But who cares, right?
It’s important to root these in a history of colonial exploitation, marginalization, and erasure. A group of people whose way of life has been noted as barbaric, backwards, or savage were often the same reasons colonial powers saw it fit to steal from them, enslave, and murder them. Donning a cultures dress or making their food tastes “better” has done nothing to restore connection with that culture. It is just a more polite form of their erasure. They have been robbed of their soveignty.
Another phenomena, as noted in the comic, is the chill acceptance of this by the appropriated culture. Here, they face no real erasure. Heck, you don’t really see this in newly immigrated peoples who want to make a better life for themselves. Being seen is success. But you speak to their first generation children and having their culture flattened to the surface signs can be infuriating if you are the type who views assimilation as a type of loss.
I personally think there is space for a member of the dominant culture to appreciate the culture if they’ve been invited. But it is important to be careful here as well. Because you may have earned that right with one group from within the culture, but that is not transferable and that exception must be earned again.
Heck, it gets even more complicated when people looking to just keep their schools open and working sge adults employed couldn’t care less when asked, but will ask if there’s anything that can be done to stabilize their community.
So I’ve written a lot and feel like I missed so much and glossed over much of what is important. What have you read about the subject that really attempted to wrestle with the concept?
I am Latin American. We couldn’t even give an atomic sliver of a speck of fuck about gringos using part of our culture or the intention behind it.
If anything it’s enjoyable, one more for the family.
And if we get offended? Don’t worry. We don’t need anyone from a “dominant culture” to look down on us, thinking about saving us because we are oh so weak, or speak for us.
Good thing I’m not part of the “dominant culture”. Would hate to speak for you. Just speaking for myself. But there are Latin Americans who disagree with you.
Obviously intent comes into it, where wearing a reductive costume without any awareness (your Halloween costume example) is callous and ignorant of that person. I think some ignorance can be excused if this person couldn’t reasonably be expected to understand all the implications of a costume, even if it’s someone who should be expected to (thinking Trudeau Jr or Prince Harry when younger).
Regardless of the hypothesised (or real) impact to the community of someone wearing clothing arguably offensive to minorities with ancestry in the culture being mocked, those aspects aren’t what this cartoon is about. It’s about idiots who don’t understand nuance and repeat shit they see on social media unthinkingly until you get this absurd situation where someone wearing a hat and wearing it well is screamed at in public for no discernible reason.
Lots of people seeing it will do the same kind of wrong-generalisation in the opposite direction though, and take the valid point the cartoon makes to write off all concerns with cultural appropriation, including the valid ones you just made in your first paragraph.
The world is nuanced, and that’s nearly never conveyed well in our current public communications systems…
Some people just love to find reasons to get offended.
Hell, a way to carry a baby was called cultural appropriation by some black people where I live when first Nations have been carrying their baby the same way on our territory since way before any black people set foot in northern America but we don’t hear them complain.
Also, plenty of Latin American culture was basically forced on the indigenous by the Spanish. There’s a reason why poor people in countries like Bolivia dress more like 16th century Spanish peasants than their indigenous ancestors. Those bowler hats people wear in Bolivia aren’t part of Incan culture.
If you dress like what people consider to be traditional Bolivian dress these days and you’re American, I guess you’re appropriating Spanish culture from centuries ago? I don’t think anyone would give a shit.
Besides, no one here knows what the deal is with getting offended on behalf of someone else. If anyone has a problem, they speak up their minds.
I can explain. In theory the person who SHOULD be offended is a member of a minority and speaking their mind would open them to backlash from the majority so they say nothing. Its mental gymnastics that let’s a member of the majority “be a hero” for a minority even if that person doesn’t exist. But who cares about that as long as the white lady can think she is a good guy.
Its stupid and is not really about the appropriated culture.
Literally no Latin American is going to be bothered Or annoyed in any way whatsoever if you don typical dresses of their culture.
We love our culture and love it even more when we influence gringos to dress as our ancestors did.
The joy is palpable. It makes you part of the family. And that’s plenty
Besides, no one here knows what the deal is with getting offended on behalf of someone else. If anyone has a problem, they speak up their minds.
Slurs? Motherfückêr, that’s half our language.
I was with you until the last sentence. Can’t say I agree with the n word being a beautiful expression of English.
This is one thing ive never understood about “cultural appropriation.” If someone is partaking in your nations/cultures traditions, apperal, food, etc. Why is that a bad thing? Wouldnt people want their traditions known and shared and experienced by many?
Idk im just a white guy who loves dia de los muertos
As a Quebecois, I like that Canadians like poutine. I don’t like that they pretend they have invented it. I also like that they like maple syrup and the traditions surrounding it (cabane à sucre). I don’t like that they appropriate it as a thing of their own (we produce 90% of global maple syrup).
There’s a big difference between participation and appropriation, and the “anti-woke” hive mind goes out of it’s way to conflate the two.
It’s a thin line between celebrating indigenous cultures and heritage and exploiting it. The Washington Redskins being something I feel everyone can clearly see was over that line, but wearing a sombrero is clearly nowhere near it.
Enjoying other cultures isn’t appropriation. I think the line where it becomes appropriation is profiteering. If you are commodifying and profiting off someone else’s culture that’s pretty shitty. Obviously that’s not a perfectly clear cut line (who ‘owns’ culture?), but it’s a good place to start.
So is every company making and marketing tortilla chips and salsa appropriating culture if they are from New York City? Is every pizzeria that isn’t in Italy profiteering off of Italian culture? Is a French Bistro in Kansas City wrong? Is it wrong to wear a Scottish Kilt made in Viet Nam?
I think each of the described situations has a different specific answer because the topic is nuanced. As stated above, it can sometimes to be messy to say who owns some piece of culture. But beyond that, the most useful tool is an examination of socioeconomic power dynamics.
If there is a cultural group that is poor, and an outsider from a rich/wealthy group commodifies and sells their culture, while giving nothing to those people, you’d probably agree that that’s a shitty thing to do. Their culture obviously had some kind of material wealth value that they received none of.
However, if you take a situation where both parties are well off it seems a lot less shitty. Especially if the cultural group in question is already commodifying and profiting off the same piece of culture.
If you can’t unravel the knot of cultural ownership, then does anyone really own it? It would appear to me that “everyone” owns it at that point and can partake in it freely and adapt it to their wants an needs. And no matter the culture, there is always socioeconomic disparities within that group. No matter how small or downtrodden they may appear to you. Someone is always going to be a little bit better off than you and someone else is always going to have a little more power than you.
So is Tostitos racist for not mailing checks to every Mexican person everywhere? Because they sure as hell are making bank selling those chips and Salsa to you. OMG! are YOU part of the problem?
Sorry for the double reply, but another useful perspective in this is derogation. I often forget this idea because I’m very class minded, but it’s also very important. This is the idea that a culture can be profited off of while simultaneously despising the people that practice it. In practice, this exists as a business around a specific cultural item succeeding specifically because the business is NOT owned/operated by the original cultural group. Some of the best examples of this are around Black American culture in the US. Some cultural products were only valuable AFTER they were owned, operated, and proliferated by White Americans. Which is kinda just Racism Classic™ but allowing certain useful things to cross the cultural line for profits sake.
The know of cultural ownership is absolutely unravel-able in many situations, just not all. In some situations it’s exceedingly clear and in others, not. I think you’re trying very hard to find hard-and-fast, absolute rules for these situations, but they don’t exist. The keyword is nuance, nuance, nuance. Each situation is different and each situation deserves scrutiny as to whether or not it crosses the line. This is a judgement call made by each and every person.
If you really want me to engage on the specific situation of Tostitos/chips and salsa I will, so you can see the process of my scrutiny.
First, I think that as any item of culture becomes more and more diffused (ethically or not), it’s original ownership becomes diluted. Things that were once appropriation in the distant past, if done today, would not be considered as such as the context around them changes (in a myriad of ways).
So, if Tostitos started as a company today, I’d say making chips and salsa is not appropriation. But, if Tostitos was founded a long time ago, before chips and salsa were a foodstuff ubiquitous across the US and Tostitos was created by one outside of that cultural ownership, then I’d say it likely was appropriation. It also might be fair to argue that in the modern day for Tostitos specifically, “the damage has been done” and there really isn’t much fixing it, so consuming their products isn’t necessarily problematic. But this would be a point as to why identifying appropriation early on and stopping it is especially important.
As to whether I’m part the problem - for Tostitos no, but for other things almost certainly yes. I’m human and I don’t know everything, and I’ve certainly made mistakes in this area, but that’s okay. What’s important is that once I’ve learned something is in fact a mistake, I own up to it and stop making that mistake.
I think that’s still tricky. For instance, most parts of the world have few Japanese migrants, yet Japanese restaurants are almost everywhere. Usually these are owned by other Asian migrants. This is clearly profiteering, but I don’t see it as particularly problematic.
I think you can apply the socioeconomic and derogation lenses here. Socioeconomically, Japan has been ahead of nearly every other Asian country for a long while, with only places like China and Singapore recently catching up to them. So, I think that makes it feel okay. And derogatively, I don’t think these restaurants are successful because they specifically aren’t being run by Japanese people. So that’s good on the front as well. So I’d say, yeah, overall it feels fine. However, I’m not Japanese and don’t have a wealth of additional context that might provide counter arguments.
also when it becomes an issue is influenced by how accurate it is, how overused it feels, and (obviously) if it was made with the intent to insult
I think academically, derogation is often considered as a component. Like profiting off a culture while simultaneously despising the culture and the people who own it.
It’s a tough line to draw, because even if they aren’t the main profitees, the culture where the thing originated often still profited. e.g. AFAIK rock’n’roll getting popular with white americans was pretty good for black americans, even though many of the best selling artists (e.g. Elvis Presley) were white.
The popularization of Black American music is indeed a complex topic in this arena. Like, obviously a lot of cultural outsiders made a lot of money off of the situation, but there were at least some benefits to the arrangement, although whether or not they outweighed the cons is perhaps difficult to say. For example, if outsiders had abstained entirely from profiting, what would have changed? Obviously more of the money made percentage-wise would’ve gone to the owning culture, but would there have been less money overall? Would it have reached the same levels of popularity? If so, it almost certainly wouldn’t’ve happened as quickly, right? These are difficult questions to answer and I’m not educated enough in this area to really offer any. So, while not worth a damn, my gut feelings is that there are at least some strong arguments as to why overall the absence of outsider profiting would’ve been better for the owning culture.
I mean I’m Bavarian and if people wear Lederhosen and set up their own Oktoberfest it’s kinda lame. Not that I think it’s bad, it’s just that I’m not a fan of that stuff here either. You can totally have all of that. I keep the many many small breweries making fantastic beer.
Yeah, but lederhosen are just kind of neat. Who doesn’t like their men in short leather shorts, right? (Seriously though, the construction for very traditional lederhosen is kind of neat. I’ve tried it, and it’s a challenge without being able to skive all your seams.)
IMO it’s appropriation if it’s done disrespectfully or in an exploitative or profiteering way. Otherwise, it would just be cultural segregation. Imagine liberalism turned full apartheid.
So if I want to open a Pinata factory, I can only sell them to Mexicans? Or can I sell them to anyone, but only to non-Mexicans at a profit? Or must every Pinata be made at home by a loving Mexican Grandmother for her Grandchildren only?
It’s awesome, racists and progs have the same end goal
Segregation.
It’s called White Savior Complex.
“Only I, a white person can save you from-- pick a thing. Because I believe you are incapable of fending for yourself, I shall be offended for you!”
“Cultural Appropiation” is the single dumbest thing I’ve ever fucking heard.
All cultures grow by learning about and adopting customs of other cultures, or in other words by appropiating things from other cultures.
And if they did that didn’t we wouldn’t have things like anime (Japan took the art of animation from America, not only did The US invent cartoons, but anime evolve from styles used on early Disney cartoons), rock music (Rock musicians are predominantly white, but rock itself evolved from distinctly black forms of music), or really most food in general (Pizza’s from Italy, French Fries are from Belgium, Hot dogs are from Germany… Need I go on?)
At best, demonizing cultural appropiation is just encouraging segregation.
Now if you’re wearing the colors or clothing of another culture specifically with intent to insult or in a less-than-glamorous way… That’s a different story. (I’m talking about those of you who think putting on an ET Mask and a Sombreo and claiming you’re an illegal alien is hillarious)
This is the kind of Neo Liberal nonsense that makes me wish I had a party to root for that wasn’t the Democrats
Really? Because I’d say it’s the perfect term to describe shit like this.
Because that is not respecting an indigenous culture. That is taking something extremely important to them and perversely twisting it into some corporate sports team bullshit.
What else is that asshole doing if not appropriating someone’s culture?
But can’t we just call that racism? “Haha, I’m an Indian” is just racist. Making a new term of cultural appropriation then leads to all sorts of things getting that label that aren’t problematic. A lot of it I think actually veers back into racism. Like as a white guy, can I eat, for example, Cherokee dishes? Can I open a Cherokee restaurant? I’m not pretending to be from their culture, I just like the food and think other people would too. If I can’t do these things, you are reinforcing that Cherokees are a different group than all other Americans, which is where racism comes from. Being exposed to other cultures is how you combat racism, that’s why cities tend to be less racist.
I guess, but there are many different types of racism and this is not the same as, for example, burning a cross on a black family’s lawn.
This is not active hate. This person very likely has no animosity toward indigenous Americans. He probably has no idea about the significance of the war bonnet or why it’s offensive.
So I think this is a subcategory which needs to be highlighted specifically because of people like that.
I have no problem with that at all. Please dress up for the 16th of September, the Mexican Independence Day, or as a catrín on Día de los Muertos. My Korean friend looked so good as an Adelita and I was so proud of her.
I guess I’d only have a problem with a Halloween costume that exaggerates a negative and unrealistic stereotype but I don’t think people make those anymore, or at least I haven’t seen one.
which would just be racism really
Yeah, I wanted to set some parameters for it. I thought it’d be unhelpful without specifying where I draw the line.
How dare you
Clothing and food are surface, but important, cultural signs. It can be easy to observe and emulate these for one’s own gain either socially or econically. All the while the culture from which these signs are derive are ignored.
Dressing up like a war chief for Halloween is partaking in the costume, but not the culture.
But who cares, right?
It’s important to root these in a history of colonial exploitation, marginalization, and erasure. A group of people whose way of life has been noted as barbaric, backwards, or savage were often the same reasons colonial powers saw it fit to steal from them, enslave, and murder them. Donning a cultures dress or making their food tastes “better” has done nothing to restore connection with that culture. It is just a more polite form of their erasure. They have been robbed of their soveignty.
Another phenomena, as noted in the comic, is the chill acceptance of this by the appropriated culture. Here, they face no real erasure. Heck, you don’t really see this in newly immigrated peoples who want to make a better life for themselves. Being seen is success. But you speak to their first generation children and having their culture flattened to the surface signs can be infuriating if you are the type who views assimilation as a type of loss.
I personally think there is space for a member of the dominant culture to appreciate the culture if they’ve been invited. But it is important to be careful here as well. Because you may have earned that right with one group from within the culture, but that is not transferable and that exception must be earned again.
Heck, it gets even more complicated when people looking to just keep their schools open and working sge adults employed couldn’t care less when asked, but will ask if there’s anything that can be done to stabilize their community.
So I’ve written a lot and feel like I missed so much and glossed over much of what is important. What have you read about the subject that really attempted to wrestle with the concept?
I am Latin American. We couldn’t even give an atomic sliver of a speck of fuck about gringos using part of our culture or the intention behind it.
If anything it’s enjoyable, one more for the family.
And if we get offended? Don’t worry. We don’t need anyone from a “dominant culture” to look down on us, thinking about saving us because we are oh so weak, or speak for us.
We can speak and do speak for ourselves.
Good thing I’m not part of the “dominant culture”. Would hate to speak for you. Just speaking for myself. But there are Latin Americans who disagree with you.
Obviously intent comes into it, where wearing a reductive costume without any awareness (your Halloween costume example) is callous and ignorant of that person. I think some ignorance can be excused if this person couldn’t reasonably be expected to understand all the implications of a costume, even if it’s someone who should be expected to (thinking Trudeau Jr or Prince Harry when younger).
Regardless of the hypothesised (or real) impact to the community of someone wearing clothing arguably offensive to minorities with ancestry in the culture being mocked, those aspects aren’t what this cartoon is about. It’s about idiots who don’t understand nuance and repeat shit they see on social media unthinkingly until you get this absurd situation where someone wearing a hat and wearing it well is screamed at in public for no discernible reason.
I wasn’t responding to the cartoon, but to one comment asking why cultural appropriation is a bad thing.
Lots of people seeing it will do the same kind of wrong-generalisation in the opposite direction though, and take the valid point the cartoon makes to write off all concerns with cultural appropriation, including the valid ones you just made in your first paragraph.
The world is nuanced, and that’s nearly never conveyed well in our current public communications systems…
Some people just love to find reasons to get offended.
Hell, a way to carry a baby was called cultural appropriation by some black people where I live when first Nations have been carrying their baby the same way on our territory since way before any black people set foot in northern America but we don’t hear them complain.
Also, plenty of Latin American culture was basically forced on the indigenous by the Spanish. There’s a reason why poor people in countries like Bolivia dress more like 16th century Spanish peasants than their indigenous ancestors. Those bowler hats people wear in Bolivia aren’t part of Incan culture.
If you dress like what people consider to be traditional Bolivian dress these days and you’re American, I guess you’re appropriating Spanish culture from centuries ago? I don’t think anyone would give a shit.
It’s damn true. I ran a crew of workers that were Spanish speaking. After two years all I gotta say is, is there a word that isn’t used as a dick?
Everything means dick in Spanish if you try hard enough
It applies to everything btw.
To date, “the thing from the thingy” is the most sought spare part in all of Latin America.
You don’t know what it is, no one knows, but it means nothing and everything at the same time.
Our hardware store dependents are fluent in trillion of languages at this point
I can explain. In theory the person who SHOULD be offended is a member of a minority and speaking their mind would open them to backlash from the majority so they say nothing. Its mental gymnastics that let’s a member of the majority “be a hero” for a minority even if that person doesn’t exist. But who cares about that as long as the white lady can think she is a good guy.
Its stupid and is not really about the appropriated culture.
So, virtue signaling?
Ah, as expected