cultural appropriation

[nceccoli]

Just had a discussion. aibu to say that cultural appropriation works both ways? A number of black bloggers and models have slated Kim Kardashian and Kylie jenner for wearing "boxer braids". But I have yet to see anyone commenting on Beyonce culturally appropriate Indian culture , hairstyle, dress and adornment for her song Hymn for the Weekend?

Interesting business model, that Everyday Feminism site.

What they basically do is rack their readers with guilt about everything they ever do, think, or say ("10 Ways You Didn't Know Using A Dishwasher Is Racist/Cissexist/Whatever").... and then sell them pricey self-love emotional care courses so that they can feel better again. I mean, what can you say? It's genius.

Thank you for posting the link, I understand what the view is but do not agree. In a way it promotes cultures isolating themselves and no mixing or borrowing from other cultures, I understand the view that this only applies to the less dominant cultures which means that in some parts of the globe the role is reversed. Surely cultures evolve. Where do those who advocate this view draw the line, what about Indian prints, or other materials that are traditionally associated with particular cultures, scottish kilts - history would say that the scottish people have been oppressed, is that in their view cultural appropriation?

That was an interesting article.

But can I just say how I hate this new tendancy to post a link and simply state

"I am just going to leave this here"

with no other information about what is is about.

Agree Big, especially when you can't read it anyway because of the stupid iPhone thing,

men in drag is also appropriation

Omg, I have just had a eureka modem on this whole subject which I will explain later and it's in relation Europe laws in place at the moment. I think that will give people some perspective.

I posted it yesterday, with a lot of context, including the reservations I have about it.

I certainly haven't read through the entire site. A student mailed me the link a couple of weeks ago, asking what I thought, and I think it's a decent place to start on the topic. Anyway, this thread is starting to take a real emotional toll on me. I'm not just a cultural studies lecturer. I'm a mixed race woman with an Arabic name, olive skin, very dark eyes and hair, and I've felt the deeply personal effects of institutional racism my entire life, with increasing intensity over the past 10 years. Educate yourself on the issues if you care. I'm leaving this thread now.

I don't see the problem. When black people like Beyoncé straighten their hair and use make up to make themselves look more Caucasian nobody seems to mind (I am prepared to stand corrected on this however). So I don't see the difference when white people want to take certain hairstyles etc associated with black culture and wear them? Everyone should be able to wear what they want as long as it is not done in a mocking way.

From reading on this topic, it's says that black people when they either bleach their skin or relax their hair and use weaves, wigs and all the other things black people do to their hair is because they are trying to attain the european standard of beauty that dominates most of their lives. It is also a form of assimilating to societies ideal to help them integrate. It's a survival technic to help them get jobs, or to avoid judgement because of their ethnic look which is considered inferior. (Lips, nose, bum, hair, body shape).

The body image and standard of black women is not something that the media has only started portraying now or the last 40 years. In one of the previous post above someone mentions the house n word. From my understanding of things is that this was one of the reason that black women in America and Europe has such issues. The pursuit for fine hair and fair skin colour. The pursuit to have the look that is admired and desired.

I know that a lot of people will disagree with me here but I think it's in the same way of thinking Rachael dolezal has (she self consciously made the choice). However, For a lot of black people in the western world they don't even question it because it's away of life. A lot of people sleep walking within it without thinking or knowing because from the age of one and onwards the hair is already being messed about with because it has to be managed. The older they get the more had-core the hair products.

I do think that on the image topic black men almost fall off the radar unless dreadlocks is mentioned. They seem to almost have a free ride on that one. Misogyny, misogyny that's all I can say for that.

I also don't believe that you can say that an issue can only be discussed by a a particular group

I do think that with this whole debate going on, its best to here both sides. It's something that is needed at the moment. The reason why am saying this is that I think the whole kardashian hair debacle has got nothing to do with hairstyles itself but more to do with the current state in race relation. This debate is needed and hopefully a conclusion will come out of it one day, more inclusion than exclusion.

I also hope that when newspapers pick up stories like this they should be able to explain why. If all hair types, skin tones, music and all things ethnic where given the same respect. I don't think this would be an issue. I might be thinking in a naive way. I don't know.

Three EU schemes known as PDO (protected designation of origin), PGI (protected geographical indication) and TSG (traditional speciality guaranteed) promote and protect names of quality agricultural products and foodstuffs.
What this means
The following EU schemes encourage diverse agricultural production, protect product names from misuse and imitation and help consumers by giving them information concerning the specific character of the products:*
*
To qualify for a PDO, the product must have qualities and characteristics which are essentially due to its region of production: it must also be produced, processed and prepared exclusively within that region.

Ok this is my thought on this EU regulation in relation to cultural appropriation and am going to use is the Cornish pasty as an example. The whole reason for this setup is to protect different types of food, wine and cheese and where they come from in Europe. It's offering copy write for specific type of food to an area. Anyone else, for example, cannot use the name Cornish pasty if it's not prepared and made in Cornwall with what you would call original ingredient (which is debatable according to some food critics who don't like the idea).

So let's put this into perspective for those who were debating for globalisation and how we should chose and not be inhibited by other people's culture while celebrating multiculturalism in the processes. In this case, you can make a pasty in London with the same ingredients and method but you cannot call it Cornish pasty if you wanted to sell and market it any where in Europe and soon to be the world too.
The whole reason for this scheme is to offer protection to products that define a certain place and in the process protecting the ethnicity of the people who live in the chosen area. This is the equivalent of stoping appropriation. The you Eu cannot ban the making of these products but it can ban you from profiting from a minority group and they are recognised as one in the uk.

www.theguardian.com/uk-news/2014/apr/24/cornish-recognised-national-minority-group-first-time

Ethnic groups ( i.e, none Europeans or Americans) in the western world are asking the dominant majority to acknowledge the ethnic cultures , before its made cool by individuals from the dominant community to call something by its appropriate name. Eg, Bantu notes and not fancy noted buns and re-write history of its origin or when it last originated. To this designer came up with this hairstyle at last weeks fashion week.

Using yoga and not understanding the struggle the people who fought to keep it alive went through. Not practicing it in the right way by watering it down or down grading it from its spiritual Nature to just exercise.

Gosh! I hope I explained it right. Please fire way if I misunderstood the whole eu scheme and the link with appropriation and the law to protect the endangered cultural products.

I think with the EU thing (using pasties), it's saying 'everyone can make pasties but the Cornish Pasty is this one and this one only. You're all welcome to make/eat/sell your own version of the pasty, but don't call it a Cornish Pasty because it's not'.

Don't know how you would translate that to hair, style, dress or appearance though because they are not an object being sold to make profit.

A straightforward example of appropriation would be the male/female one.

Male thinks make up looks cool, so starts wearing it - fine, that's ok, but don't appropriate being female because you've done some things that are associated with being female.

Or cultural.
You're from Egypt. You speak fluent French, live in Paris and enjoy partaking in French culture - again, that's fine, knock yourself out, but don't say you're French because you're not.

I understand though that it's the history and the associated oppression etc that is at the root of the CA thing with race, and that is why it can feel like a group of people are being sidelined.

If it were done in a mocking or subversive way then it is wrong, but simply copying a hairstyle, music or form of dress because you admire it and think it's cool is not a bad thing surely?
If a white person put cornrows in their hair and said 'I'm now black', then that's wrong. If a white person puts cornrows in their hair 'because I saw xxx with cornrows in and I loved them' then how can that not be ok?

Bunny what is fuelling this whole debate in the media between black and white or the media is because of who is profiting from what is considered a black thing. The commercial aspect of things such types of songs written and sang by black people for years then elvis comes a long and he is the origin of rock and roll. A black person not feeling confident enough to walk down the street with a particular hairstyle but it's used on the run way to sell cloths. 90 or more of all black hair shops and body products is owned by none black. Not even BET because the black person who owned it sold it off.

From watching Chris rocks "hair" the movie. I think there is only one black company in America that exist which produces hair creams, relaxers and all the other products that go with it.
The biggest one I think is softsheen Carson producers of dark and lovely products which was bought by l'oreal.

With these type of companies I would blame the sellers and not the buyers. By doing so they are inhibiting the progression of black people. Reason being that the interest won't be to cater for the needs of those who it originally intended. (Its my view and I don't know whether that is true or not. I haven't got the facts to back it up).

The big bum Kim is making money out of and breaking the Internet with because it has never exited before. The cornrows to show their edginess for her Instagram post which brings in more money. The big lips for selling lipsticks and the rest. Most of the people told off tend to be celebrities.

One of the things I have read somewhere was that the most beatboxers are Asians and I think because its not being commercialised in away that it's not detrimental to black beatboxers, its not being debated on or seen as cultural appropriation.

Can I just clarify that when am writing these post is to explain the debate and not because I believe that different cultures can't borrow from other.

I've been reading all the posts, I'm really interested in all the different views and the background.

I think I get it, I understand where the anger comes from and I agree it's shit that it takes the 'white approval' for the 'black acceptance' in so many different things and ways.

I think that although it's about white/black, it's also about rich/upper class & poor/lower class.
The kardashians are considered very trashy by many and actively sneered at by 'old money' types.
A large part of their style is adopted from black culture, but even though girls from all races are copying their style, it's still denigrated by the rich white folk.

I'm probably rambling because I'm getting tired now! But I wanted you to know I'm reading and absorbing everything that gets posted and am trying to understand.

Ethnic groups ( i.e, none Europeans or Americans) in the western world are asking the dominant majority to acknowledge the ethnic cultures

'Ethnic' doesn't and shouldn't mean 'minority group' or black. Everyone has ethnicity and an ethnic culture.

When these threads come up, the examples and discussion are so often American or about America that it is a bit depressing, and can be misleading. For example, I know that in America employers can be very repressive in relation to people of African descent having braids and other natural (i.e. not chemically processed hair styles). I don't know of the same thing happening here on remotely the same scale.

Debri's very good post at 22:15:03 is about the US entirely, and many people know more about that history that anything specific to the UK or the Empire. I think that's not only a real shame, but something that has real consequences in the present day.

Slavery was unenforceable in England and Wales at least, from 1772 and abolished throughout the Empire, with small exceptions, in 1833 (1843 in India).

As far as I can tell, none of the various Reform Acts exempted black people so black male householders would have got the vote in 1865, black women got the vote with their white counterparts in 1928. The first Indian MP was Dadabhai Naoroji in 1892, the first MPs of African descent were Bernie Grant, Diane Abbot and Paul Boateng in 1987.

Inter-racial marriage was never illegal, I think.

There were few if any laws enshrining discrimination in British law. That didn't stop it happening, but it did mean that the struggle to be treated fairly and equally was very different.

It also means that sensitivity to things like cultural appropriation tends to be different.

I have just read what I have written and the spellings are terrible. Am sorry for that.

Bunny I think that although it's about white/black, it's also about rich/upper class & poor/lower class.
The kardashians are considered very trashy by many and actively sneered at by 'old money' types.
A large part of their style is adopted from black culture, but even though girls from all races are copying their style, it's still denigrated by the rich white folk.

What that family is marketing is what sells in hiphop and I think that is why you get a lot of comments about dating black rappers and men in general.

Years ago before the that family were on the scene I remember this being discussed. If I can recall what was said was that the hiphop image started when rap became commercialised. According to the discussion one of the people credited for this was MC hammer in the early 90s with the "can't touch this" song. Before that you had Run DMC which was accessible to white people but they were never really controversial even though they are credited for the trainers (sneakers) and jeans image with the hoody tops for everyday use. When mc hammer made it accessible you didn't really have video girls either. You had female dancers dancing in videos but not a lot of booty popping the way it is when you first forward to 1999 early 2000. The people credited for this shift is actually j.lo dating puff-daddy. His influence in hiphop at the time led a lot of the rappers choosing females that were light and more than likely looked Latina. This lead to the extreme rise in weave (yaki weave by sleek and Brazilian hair being the go to hair extensions). The language towards women (black women in particular) become more derogatory and explicit too.

Eminem apart from his many accolades and being the best selling raper of all time, for me he is also credited for making all of the garbage rap Offers as cool to listen to by everyone. It become acceptable to listen to the misogynistic messages spouted out and being commercialised upon. I have read a few articles where the rappers say the only things they are allowed to talk about is guns, drugs and women. A lot of them choose the easy route that degrades their own race. Probably they don't see it that way.

This is mainly America but the influence always trickles down to the rest of the world.

Yes, the UK and US experiences are very very different. All these issues are fascinating. I've advised on the EU regulations on designation of origin before now - in a sense it's rather nationalistic but it designed to ensure the public are not fooled - that what you get is the real champagne not fake or the real parma ham.

The other issue we sometimes come across at work is where commercial companies might take a cure in say a hoodia cactus from the local native people in an area who have used it for that purpose for 30,000 years and then the company patents it. They usually try to make sure a percentage of the profits go back to the original peoples but it is still the same issue of who is taking from whom and what is allowed in patent law in that case.

I certainly support the comments about the very non classy, very trashy Kardashians. I have never watched anything they are in as they are not by cup of tea and I hardly know what they are but from press comment they seem to have been fairly financially successful. They are not whites are they?

I agree some rap songs have appalling lyrics which are very denigratory of women and we would all do well to avoid.

I would hope all cultures can learn from each other. Those of us who live in very mixed areas like London though are in a different world now though. I think my borough is about 80% not UK born, probably higher and at least 70% not white so I am a minority here, not that is any kind of issue as I am a human like everyone else is.

I do think it's horrible that there is such a massive market for skin whitening products in places like India and the marriage market will advertise a woman as having whiter skin when black sking is absolutely gorgeous and why anyone would want my pasty and often bright red difficult skin I just don't know. I was at bikram yoga today looking like an absolute beetroot when everyone else looked normal. Okay yes I accept there are definite advantages in many places of being white and we've a long way to go to reat everyone regardless of gender or colour equally but it's a shame if people want to be whiter.

Myfavourite I know what you mean with the ethnic terminology. That is why you have minority added when your talking about a sub-group within a dominant ethnic society. When am on boots or superdrug website my hair products are under ethnic section. In Tesco you have an ethnic food section too.

American influences always affects black people in the uk.

I read this brief summary of black people in the uk and how they have existed in this country since the 12 century. There has never been a law that has prohibited interracial marriages even though it's always been frowned upon by the upper classes. It also mentions some of the well known prominent black people in British history. I also believe that the first ones must have travelled with the Romans when they conquering places in Europe and that is how they ended up in the uk.

For example "More famous yet was Olaudah Equiano (c.1745-1797), a former slave who went on to become a radical reformer and best-selling author. In 1773 he became the first black person to explore the Arctic when he sailed, on the same ship as Horatio Nelson, on Lord Mulgrave's famous expedition to find a passage to India."

http://www.bbc.co.uk/history/british/empireseapower/blackkbritons01.shtml

Deogratias A few months ago someone on Mn started a thread about how the west is culturally appropriating food from poor countries. The article they linked was about the Andean people being affected because of the rise in prices of quinoa and food shortage. Most of the farmers are only growing the quinoa for export to the west as super food and not other crops that the locals would need. From doing a search on line it also states that their first food consumption has gone up because the locals find it cheaper than the local food produce.

And the quinoa thing again is because of rich middle class people being 'aspirational'.
I'm pretty sure your average working class lower earner isn't on the quinoa wagon trying to prove their clean eating credentials

Reading all of these posts and the links has been really interesting and I've learned a lot.
I think the American/UK difference is an important one as well (mentioned earlier). Approaching the subject as a 41 yr old working class white woman who has lived and worked all across Britain and in quite diverse work environments (socially, economically and racially diverse), I cannot see on a day to day basis how (for eg) copying something is appropriation (imitation is a form of flattery etc).
But had I grown up in the US I would have had a completely different experience and a different understanding/thought process as a result.

Have just read the BBC article Debbri, horrible to imagine a person being nothing more than a form of currency or a mute decoration.

It struck me too that interracial marriage was not uncommon but 'frowned on by the middle classes' and that the black community had their allies within the poor white community.

It does seem to have been more about social class in Britain than skin colour.