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 took the mick out of this with my friend the other day, we are set to dress up in Native American style at various events, as on American based fb groups this is what they bang on about.
It's silly imo, i can't see how any of it can be racist if there is no intent of racism behind it.
It's just clothes or accessories.

No, in many cases it isn't "just clothes or accessories". It's approximations of artefacts that have real cultural or religious significance for groups of people who have been historically oppressed.

Dressing up as Native Americans deliberately in order to piss off people who happen to care about CA is a pretty twattish thing to do, TBH.

Nigella Lawson makes a lot of money out of food that she's adapted from Italy.

Shall we accuse her of CA?

Or are Italians the wrong socio-racial-ethnic group for our patronage?

I think anyone with an ounce of common sense knows that a lot of foreign dishes served in the US, will be anything but authentic.

Quite. Getting huffy enough about that fact to warrant news articles suggests a level of weird ego fragility that just makes the complainer seem like they perhaps can't cope in the real world without a lot of support.

So someone is doing a shit job of making a food from a different country. That's really, truly not a social justice issue. Someone who is making it a social justice issue needs to work on their own resilience (or perhaps offer some lessons to the canteen staff) not get taken seriously as an sufferer of terrible wounds of oppression.

TheRoyal Family are bad for cultural appropriation, all those kilts!

Talking of cultural appropriation, perhaps the French should be up in arms about the fact that French fine wines now do a roaring trade in China - where rich businessmen mix them with Coca-Cola because they want to show off buying a premier cru but don't like the taste.

Perhaps the French are oppressed and should be lecturing the Chinese about sensitively respecting French culture? Or is it only white people who are considered capable of cultural appropriation?

In India, there is no such dish as curry. Our idea of Indian food is not at all authentic. It is food adapted to British tastes. Is that CA?

I don't get CA at all. I'm mystified by it. I abhor racism but wearing another cultures clothing or hairstyles means nothing...unless of course it done to be unkind.

I watched the article on CA on news night last night. It was a shockingly crap. I learnt nothing from it. The two women were useless.

This type of thing detracts from real issues relating to race.

Interesting thread. I chose my username after reading about the accusations of CA at Bowdoin College, Maine. (Washington Post has an article on line.)

I think serious issues have been hijacked by student bodies trying to make a name for themselves, the offending tiny sombrero and tequila party sounds naff but to discipline the students seems madness to an old timer like me.

Cleaty: I was served "English breakfast tea" in an organic, hippyish cafe this week in a non British city. It tasted strongly of mint and I suspect it had been living communally with the organic peppermint. "Disappointed" didn't cover my reaction.

It's white privilege in action to think that as a member of the majority group who have historically been the oppressors, you get to decide what is or isn't cultural appropriation.

The less integrated different ethnicities are within a society, the more likely that society is to have problems with racism and intercultural tensions. So it seems really stupid to invent a concept like CA that seems designed to keep cultures and ethnicities in special separate boxes, and to police the boundaries between them so exchange and integration can never happen.

I think that sums up my opinion better than my post did, othehuge!

Perhaps the French are oppressed and should be lecturing the Chinese about sensitively respecting French culture? Or is it only white people who are considered capable of cultural appropriation?

The difference is that a bottle of wine from France will have the label French wine. The thing is the European Union Protects their label. The European unions is also looking at expanding this world wide. This applies to other things too.
The other difference is you are not going to buy a bottle of French wine which is already mixed with Coke. If they are then it would more than likely have a different name.
no, the French are not being oppressed seeing that they are the ones selling their wine and earning money out of it.

The only way the French market would suffer is when people prefer Italian or Australian wine and people decide to not buy French wine at all. The other thing is that there are lots of places in the world which produce wine.

Mixing it with Coke in China is probably good for the French. When it leaves their country it's in wine bottles with French labels.

page if you read my next posts we are dressing up as part of performing and representing an actual part of their culture, not deliberately taking the piss out of it.

I've most recently come across CA in the context of a couple of well known sling manufacturers pulling their designs due to allegations of CA eg teepee prints on a carrier, traditional mexican illustrations on a wrap. I read the issue as being particularly about those cultures being appropriated for profit which caused the offence.

took the mick out of this with my friend the other day, we are set to dress up in Native American style at various events, as on American based fb groups this is what they bang on about.

Very clever and mindful. I bet you do other things too to pee off other races and cultures by mocking them. Your comeback to this would probably be that you have lots of Native American friends, Indian friends, gay friends, black friends and all people in the world and you love them equally. Everyone should follow your standard and your way.

Helena. The other difference is that you can use their style to take the Micky but in your culture would you wear it to work. The headless and clothing is not respected enough that is seen as something you party with. Not even a formal dinner party but more fitting to a festival. If people would like to integrate it and give it the same respect they would be able to wear it to a work in the bank or law firm in the city.

The the clothing 'suits' or even 'kilts' get more respect than some of the other native clothing.

You dress up and call them funky or ethnic, Tribal or what ever word western world use to describe them.

The headless is meant to say headdress

Debriana we are dressing up for "work" as stated in posts after my op, we are actually representing a part of their culture, my op was misinterpreted it wasn't Native Americans I was taking the mick out of it was people who in my opinion were taking CA overboard and getting offended on their behalf, which what I gather this thread is for is to find out exactly what CA is and where the line is.

Anyway I have since stated I can understand CA of religious/sacred things but other than that where is the line to be drawn.

debbriana
"History helps."

only if you take it all the way back and find that some of the things that are being accused of CA are from a different culture.

Fish and chips is actually of Jewish origin so that's already a CA right there...

Honestly I think this is all a bit silly. The woman on Newsnight was fascinating - very articulate but very determined not to let go of her point which seemed a very small one.

She objected to Elvis Presley being known as the King of Rock and Roll as she argued that rock and roll is of black origin. Well. Sort of. Blues is definitely black. But folk is not and there's a strong strand of folk in rock and roll. And country. And all sorts of other stuff. It's a mish mash. Like a lot of the best art forms.

And although clearly many black artists are underrepresented, the major blues and soul artists are black and no one is taking that away from them. There are of course many white soul singers but if you had to name the top five exponents they'd probably all be black (mine would anyway - Sam Cook, Otis, Marvin Gaye, Gladys Knight, Aretha). So the idea that only oppressor cultures get credit for art forms is just not true - at least not in the music sphere which is the area she chose to focus on.

I get that it's infuriating when a more powerful culture takes your material and presents it in a way that you wouldn't (The Mel Gibson Robin Hood, Disney's Peter Pan) but it's not a slur. It's not racist. It's just people playing with ideas and imagery.

The racism is when only one culture's outputs are appreciated and the others are denigrated. But that's not what is happening when Beyonce does a Bollywood show.

I also think it's quite patronising to these cultures that are deemed 'weaker' and oppressed. I don't think people in Lagos or Mumbai spend much thought on this - they have a vibrant culture with some native bits and some borrowed bits that create a new mish mash - some of which we might borrow ourselves one day.

It's white privilege in action to think that as a member of the majority group who have historically been the oppressors, you get to decide what is or isn't cultural appropriation.

This is racism, and bullying.

You are saying that someone who is white is in some way more linked to historical oppression than someone who isn't, and should have to modify their behaviour now, today, because of this level of ignorance and prejudice?

Every single white person is descended from oppressors, and oppressed, from slaves traders, and from slaves.

So is every single black person.

Fish and chips is a working class thing not a white thing anyway.

When I was growing up fish and chips were sold by our Chinese neighbours. Now I live in Scotland and buy my chips from Scottish - Italian run takeaways.

i think jarvis was mocking a form of appropriation in the song common people, when rich people take on aspects of gritty working class culture for show and for a laugh, but really its a pisstake.

Also men in drag is appropriation of course, and yes, st pattricks day crap is also appropriation. The irish have historically been oppressed, and yet now we can all stereotype for a laugh

Its not necessarily just a race issue

I dont think we should all be told that this is something we should be offended by if we are not. I can accept and respect the fact that some people will be offended by my dreads, or by me doing yoga etc etc, but, if they are projecting their (probably valid) feelings of oppression onto one thing, like someones hairstyle or food, then it doesnt feel progressive, it feels more divisive.

white privilege in action to think that as a member of the majority group who have historically been the oppressors, you get to decide what is or isn't cultural appropriation.

The majority group of oppressors have been economically and socially privileged, not racially privileged.

What a silly (but sadly fashionable and therefore to be swallowed and spewed back out without intellectually digesting) thing to say.

There are plenty of underprivileged white people. Thinking otherwise is sweeping racism.

I once saw a documentary about dogs in Japan. One of the moments they showed a church for dogs. Like -- immitation of a Christian church building and a painting of Holy Mary, holding not a baby Jesus, but a puppy.
Well, i love dogs very much, and i get that the Japanese aren't Christians, but this seemed quite disrespectful.

Common People is a great example.