To not fully understand "cultural appropriation"

[hettyGreek]

It seems like its a US phrase that is slowly getting adopted in the UK.

For the most part I just don't get it. If something is racist just call it racist.

I don't have any issue with someone white having dreadlocks for instance. These have been worn by many people of different cultures across the earth. Or am I missing something? If anything its funny if one culture try to take ownership of something that has a very mixed origin.

I see it as being where A gets to draw on something from B's culture, and A gets credit for it (e.g. Kim getting credit for 'popularising' cornrows) or at least doesn't draw negative attention from it (like having trouble getting a job, not being taken seriously, or not being considered as attractive by societal standards). Whereas when B does that thing, it's either not credited appropriately, or it's actively looked down upon.

So under this definition, anglo-heritage kids wearing a headdress at festivals can be cultural appropriation, whereas an Asian man in a suit would not be.

I see it as being where A gets to draw on something from B's culture, and A gets credit for it (e.g. Kim getting credit for 'popularising' cornrows)

but that wouldn't be Kim committing CA. That's her wearing a hairstyle. The people raving about its being 'better' or more 'acceptable and mainstream' because she is wearing that hairstyle would be the ones committing CA. In this example.

This is why it's so complicated and very confusing for a lot of people.

Personally I think CA just has some people taking it to far. Doesn't mean that sometimes it's not a valid complaint.

What about when black people dye their hair blond and have it straightened, are they guilty of CA?
I just don't get it and it seems to be the 'professionally offended' who mind rather than the minorities affected. Surely if someone has adapted fashion, whether clothes or hairstyles, it's because they like them and it's a compliment.
I'd never even heard of it a year ago but it crops up now and again...usually here on Mumsnet and in the Daily Mail.

Me too,its as others have said, all a bit silly.
No culture stands still,i think its more about how grants / money is given out - if you are a group of say, banjo players from peru ,who get a cash injection from the local council to perform somewhere ,but then next year everyone picks up a banjo so as to get the grant - the first group shouts " culture appropriation."

curren I guess I don't know enough about Kim's use of cornrows to comment either way. Things like whether she gave a nod to the people who inspired that style, or how she reacted to the 'popularising' publicity make a difference. Of course, I have zero interest in what she does, so I'm happy to leave that example at that.

Society develops and changes, traditions come from many sources. I find the term cultural appropriation rather confusing. Surely these examples are a choice and anyone can use/adopt these practices. The only time when I argue that it was inappropriate would be when adoption was done in a deliberate the attempt to ridicule.

Would we find it acceptable for people to making or using fake veteran's medals as fashion accessories? That would be the closest equivalent I can think off. The feathered headdresses of the Ojibwe, Lakota, and other Plains American Indigenous nations are earned, precious items. It was illegal within living memory for people from those nations to wear them - or any traditional clothing [until the 1970s, American Indigenous religions and all related items were illegal in the US], people from those nations are still being fined for wearing them in some places.

Surely, people can see the resentment it causes when the very people for whom this is a great honour not being allowed to wear them while others treat them as toys particularly for those who suffered through residential school period where their White teachers would make them wear fake ones out of sticks and feather bits to show how horrible their traditions were to try to "kill the Indian, save the man"].

When it comes to white dreadlocks, there is no historical usage of them in Europe - the Celtic glibs involved adding things to the hair to matt their hair together which is nothing like dreadlocks. The main issue with these is how often the current lived experience of people being fired, fined and more for how their hair grows naturally out of their head [yes, there are still employers that fire people for it] while White people at the same company can be treated as eccentric. That's before getting into the repeated issues in the media, including the last year, where Black celebrities wearing their hair naturally got destroyed, said they smelled of pot while White celebrities doing the same were praised for their 'creativity' and 'creating new hairstyles'. Until both groups are treated the same - until everyone can grow their hair naturally and wear them, there will be resentment when White people make fake matted-dreads without the same problems that Black people face.

Cultural appropriation is when one groups enjoys taking another group's traditions, important items, and/or physical features that are historically and often continuously denied to group it came from -- which causes a lot more resentment than being told 'please don't' a few times unless one think everything should be theirs for the taking. The division is caused by systems our society is built and continues to be supported on where some can get away with murder and be celebrated for dancing in their victim's clothes while the victim's family's are blamed for dividing society for having an issue with that.

durham it's not the professionally offended although if you e mainly encountered it on the Daily Mail I can see how you may have formed the view that it is petty and not to be taken seriously. The DM tends to report it as "political correctness gone mad" rather than what it actually is about.

As PO have already said, it is to do with the dominant (powerful) culture 'using' things from another culture so no, like an Asian man wearing a suit, a black person straightening their hair does not count.

http://www.mumsnet.com/Talk/amiibeingunreasonable/2579317-cultural-appropriation?msgid=59550526

Here is the link to the other Cultural Appropriation thread that's been mentioned.

It's another way for the perpetually offended to continue their plight.

aussie I am not saying she is or isn't guilty or CA. I don't much about her either. What I do know is from here or the drama about Oj Simpson which is on at the moment

I am just saying that's why it's so complicated. Do people have to give a nod to where they got the inspiration for their hair from? Should people to that?

Again not saying either way. I do find it an interesting subject to discuss.

The issue of th American Indian headdress is that it's a deeply religious symbol. They object to the music goers trivialising something that is deeply important to American Indians. Western Christians would not like if American Indians took the mick out of our religious beliefs. Of course it's harder for a subdued people to take the Mickey out of conquerors.

I think that objecting to a white man having dreadlocks is silly. It's only a hairstyle. Cultures have shared ideas since the dawn of time. It is not necessarily unacceptable. The sharing of ideas is how mankind has advanced.

Bravo DN4GeekinDerby

I thought cornrows were what David Beckham had about a decade ago? That picture of Kim Kardashian looks like two French/Dutch braids? Or does she have more than two and I can't see it on my tiny phone?

How can one culture claim to "own" a hairstyle? My mum used to make two braids like that in my hair in the 1980s in Sweden. She made them on me because her mum had made them on her in the 1950s. My grandmother learnt from HER mother to make them. And she was probably shown by her mum before that. I can't guarantee it, but I'm fairly certain that my great great grandmother a hundred years ago didn't "steal" the idea from a black person - there wasn't much cultural diversity in Sweden back then. As far as I was aware braids were invented by my ancestors - Vikings. But they probably weren't, so I'm not going to try to claim them on behalf of all Scandinavians or whatever. Let people wear their hair however they want.

When it comes to white dreadlocks, there is no historical usage of them in Europe - the Celtic glibs involved adding things to the hair to matt their hair together which is nothing like dreadlocks.

dreadlocks are featured on Ancient Greek art and sculptures.

I don't fully get it either- they were talking about it on radio last night. It dosnt go for all religious though just apprently minoritied. I remember few years ago (and now to some extent) crosses became fashion statement so big chunky chains with a cross on. As a Christian I did raise an eyebrow as to why someone would wear it as fashion not a religious statement but each to their own choices.

I do get in American where is alot my discrimination over black culture why dreadlocks could be seen as bit off but surely if loads white people started wearing them and didn't get the same discrimination as a black person wearing then it can only lower the prejudice against everyone else wearing too? So can only be good?

Those people fixated on the hair style issue.... What do you think about cultural appropriation for sacred symbols/religious symbols? (Genuine question not rhetoric).

I ask because I think the hairstyle issue can be easily trivialised and it is not necessarily the best or most representative example. It can be somewhat of a straw-man.

Also, do you think it can be difficult for people to understand the potential disrespect caused by appropriating certain cultural symbols if the history/importance/struggles of that culture are not widely known and understood? Therefore, some 'cultural appropriation' could be more easily overlooked than others. Most people unilaterally condemned the clothing brand who decorated t-shirts with the Star of David, for example. That is CA as much as wearing Native American headdresses at a music festival.

I think there is a difference with religious symbols, and the case of the North American headdress shows a lack of respect. I think that usage applies to all religions. In the case of hair design or clothing in general I do not think that is cultural appropriation or if it is I do believe it is wrong.There are many examples where different parts of the UK have adopted other areas culture, the kilt for example, that is choice , I agree that we do not always know the reason behind any action. I

I know very little about Kim kardasian but isn't she married to a black man? Can you really appropriate the culture of someone in your own family?

Never heard such a load of guff. Who came up with the term?

Eh? cock OK. The poster had said they'd only heard about it from the DM and my point was that I think the DM misrepresents the CA argument. Every DM article I've seen in CA is very very trivialising and misrepresentative. I wasn't saying that if you don't believe in CA then you must read the DM. And don't tell me to fuck off. No need.

Whilst there are extreme examples that turn people off this idea and then think it's all silly, I think DN4GeekinDerby post has a lot of good information in it.

In my view it's a non-issue. How far do you take it?

So I can't drink Gluehwein or enjoy Lebkuchen because they are a German Advent tradition? (Christmas trees anyone?) Or enjoy Belgian chocolate because it's er Belgian and not British?

Imitation is the sincerest form of flattery as they say, so if you like a tradition of another culture, by all means embrace it.

Funnyusername has explained it better than I can but still people are arguing cornrows are just a hairstyle