Am I right to be annoyed by this? (Cultural appropriation?)

[TheincredibleBookEatingManchot]

Or maybe I don't have the right to be annoyed?

A couple I know who are white British have named their dog a Sanskrit word, which is used in Hinduism and Buddhism. Also the woman wore a bindi at their wedding. Maybe it's just because I don't like this couple anyway so anything they do annoys me but I feel weirdly personally annoyed and kind of bitter about it.

I am ethnically half Indian but culturally completely white British and my Indian family were all Christians (and now atheists) so I have no claim on anything Indian/Hindu/Buddhist; it's not my culture they're appropriating.

But still I kind of feel like if I named my pet a word from an Indian language or started wearing bindis then my Britishness, my belonging in this country would be called into question, but this couple, with their pale skin and light hair are secure in their Britishness, no one's going to start questioning their identity or tell them to go "back" to India, so they get to use things from Indian culture to make themselves look interesting and exotic.

And I don't. But I don't want to. So am I unreasonable to be annoyed at them?

I don't think I've expressed myself very well but not really sure how to make myself clear.

Quite possibly I am unreasonable and this has nothing to do with me.

I would say that none of those things are cultural appropriation because you did them with an understanding of the culture

Also, you have a genuine and solide connexion with that culture; it's not done as a contextless fashion thing.

@MurielTheCamel Why the face? It looks quite rude but sorry if I'm misinterpreting it.

Ladybee I suppose I feel we as a society are headed in a direction that divides us more than it unites us. I don't mean conversations about cultural appropriation specifically, and I definitely see the point there even if I don't always agree with how it gets used. I think I'm just feeling a bit melancholy in general about life... I think social media can make things seem more polarised than they really are which doesn't help. It all seems very different to my memories as a teenager. I was one of only a few white Brits in my school and my friendship group was so varied and mixed and we learned from each other in different ways - well shared aspects of our culture I guess, and incorporated them into our lives. It wasn't all rainbows and glitter of course, I'd say the biggest racial problems we really had were mixed race relationships and disapproving parents but that wasn't like a regular thing (the disapproving parents aspect).

I'm also not sure that stopping people from doing things is the right way - I know nobody is actually forcing that white guy over there to cut his dreadlocks off or whatever - but the social pressure is there and I don't see how in the long run that helps with integration.

Say the first women to ever wear trousers got viciously abused for wearing trousers in public. But slowly, more and more women started to do it and slowly the public perception changed to the point that nearly everyone forgot that women weren't supposed to wear trousers. The original trouser wearing women could rightly be angry that the new trouser wearing women got to put on their trousers without ever facing the abuse they had faced, but stopped them from wearing trousers because they didn't know about/have to experience the struggles would be counterproductive. I don't know if that quite works as an analogy and I wish I could express myself better, and knew all the answers.

and before i go to bed, kim kardashian, always gets pulled up on these threads...

Really she's just been called out for doing blackface on a magazine cover. If you think that's not racist & a warped form of cultural appropriation then you black up and go out there. After all if its all cool then nobody will bat an eyelid will they?

Being married to a black man and having a mixed race child isn't a 'pass'.

In shit hit news, people with black friends and family ties can be racist too. Nothing new or 'sudden' about it

@Cantuccit oh do shut up. The 'us' comment was in response to the 'majority of posters' comment.

'Us' as in posters not 'us' as in white people ffs.

I think the OP is unreasonable and my grandfather was indian. I was born and lived in Derry and my dads family still practice 'the old ways' in regards to their heritage which can be traced back to the vikings.

You can see me in a sari (not for a long time though) theres also a clay Molnjir on my wall at home.

Yet to most people I appear white British.

Its amazing that people seem to think religious cultural appropriation is a big no no. But non religious is fine.

Why do people hold religious culture so much higher?

@Hirsutefirs

I’m watching television, which appears to be a Greek word

TV was invented by a Scot

My son has a sanskrit name and I'm white. Not because I want to appropriate a culture, I just like the name and what it means. Cultures do not own anything apart from their beliefs. It is really difficult to know where certain names, hairstyles and clothing really originate from, so it's dodgy territory to call someone out for this.

I think you are being OTT.

Do you actually know their family history though? Most people assume me to be completely white British, I look it 100%. However my maternal bloodline is Indian my own grandma moved here with her mixed race mother many years ago. My aunt is currently tracing our family in India. I would maybe do something along these lines as a nod to a culture which my family belongs yet people may not realise this going by appearance only

It really sounds like people are saying that if you're anything but white you can go for it, knock yourself out, extract and enjoy as much as you wish from all other cultures. However, if you are white, you stay in your box. You cannot access or enjoy anything from any other cultures because it makes you racist.
An example being a PP who suggested that a white person shouldn't be able to win an award for cooking Indian meals because that would be cultural appropriation. So, does that mean that no non-UK born chefs are 'allowed' to cook traditionally British meals? What about the Chinese takeaway that sells fish and chips? Or lists omelette under the 'English dishes' section? Isn't that racist to say that omelette is 'English' and aren't they culturally appropriating by cooking fish and chips?

Should I become offended at people wearing kilts since I am Scottish?

Where are we going to stop with all this bullshit? I often think when people don't have any real problems to contend with then they start specifically looking for a bee to put in their bonnet.

@roboticmom

Cultural appropriation is taken pretty seriously here in Canada- it's strange reading these posts of people seemingly ignorant of what it actually is. Kilts are not it.

Interesting, why not? (Genuine question, not being goady)

Do you get decide that the highland clearances were too long ago to count?

No, just trying to offer a rough idea of how the term is commonly used, since you asked.

Why the face? It looks quite rude but sorry if I'm misinterpreting it.

Sorry if it came across as rude. Your examples seemed so obviously not cultural appropriation that I thought you were being goady.

I have a similar heritage to you OP.

I can't get upset by that situation because you can't know someone's heritage from their skin colour.

This works both ways.

I look white (my brother doesn't) I can't culturally appropriate my own heritage, but if skin colour is the deciding factor, I could be accused of it. Which is clearly ridiculous.

@calamityjam

Exactly - nobody can know

What this whole thread shows is that utter confusion and fundamental problem with 'cultural appropriation'.

The first aspect is that people of minority groups still often get treated differently to people of the majority group for the exact same behaviour, hairstyle, etc. This isn't right. If a person with Indian heritage wears a bindi they may get accused of not integrating. If a white person does it, there are no such accusations. This is a fundamental problem that runs deep within our society - the 'othering' of people, with a good dose of xenophobia and racism thrown in.

However, the proposed solution of crying 'cultural appropriation' in these instances is both completely unworkable and gets people's back up. The reasons are understandable. In terms of clothing or hairstyles, the origins are often not clear as cultures have (thankfully) mixed for millennia.

The larger issue though is the 'you can't tell me what to wear/eat/name my dog'. And while I think many posters on here have been rather rude about that point (and dismissed the OP's valid feelings of unease), I essentially agree with it. I want a shop to have the right to sell toilet seats with Hindu gods on it (see example above). Not because I think it's big or clever or tasteful. I would personally never buy it. But as I will defend anyone's right to practise their religious freedom, I will also defend anyone's right to not give a shit about religion or religious symbols. Religious symbols have been used as fashion items for ages. In a free society, this is fine. You can choose to get offended, you can choose to disagree, you can engage a person in a conversation of why you don't like it. But you cannot (and should not) control their behaviour or accuse them of racism (I realise the OP has not done this, but it's often thrown in the mix when cultural appropriation is brought up). It's the reaction of society that is often racist.

I will also defend anyone's right to not give a shit about religion or religious symbols

Treading around some pretty dangerous ground there....

I agree that the concept of cultural appropriation does get misinterpreted a lot – it's a sociological phenomenon and a descriptive term, not an individually prescriptive imperative.

Sure, do what you like. Name your dog whatever you want. Lucky for us, we do live in a 'free country' (whatever that means).

Just... be aware that doing whatever you want (whatever that might end up being) has a cumulative social impact on others over time.

I agree with forkun.

However people in general in life should try to be kind if they can.

On the original post I thought a good few white British people are buddhist and that that religion was not based on race or background?

Rather than it paying homage to somewhere they obviously like they’re accused of this ‘cultural appropriation’.
Right...

*I will also defend anyone's right to not give a shit about religion or religious symbols

Treading around some pretty dangerous ground there....*

Why is this dangerous ground? I understand that the cross has a deep meaning for Christians. However, as an atheist, I still want to retain the right to use the symbol as the cross as I see fit. It's not theirs to own and dictate the rest of society of how to use it.

The dog's name is just a name. The bindi is a bit harder to decipher - it could have been just for decorative purposes or it could have been cultural appropriation. Probably depends on the wider context.

id say a white person winning awards for Indian cuisine could arguably be an example of cultural appropriation - whereas a lot of curry houses would have suffered racism in the past

But wouldn’t a white person not being allowed to win a cooking award also be racist? Shouldn’t the food just be judged on its merit and not the culture or ethnicity of the person who’s cooked it?

I just can't take people who talk about 'white British culture' seriously.

If you don't even know the most basic things about the UK you are in no position to berate others.

For the record the UK is a union of countries, plural, and those countries are religiously, linguistically, historically, culturally distinct.

id say a white person winning awards for Indian cuisine could arguably be an example of cultural appropriation

You'd be wrong. As I've said, I am white. I am also 1/2 Indian. I'll take my award for great Indian cuisine, thank you.

This cultural appropriation thing is bloody ridiculous. Where does it end? SOME people might be annoyed if someone dons something from their culture. But others won't be annoyed. So does that mean that nobody can ever don anything from any culture on the offchance that someone, somewhere, with a loose connection to the culture in question might be annoyed about it? Why is their opinion more important than the opinion of the people who don't care? Or the people who get offended by the people always crying cultural appropriation? The UK has descended into MADNESS. I'm an expat and read stuff like this with a mixture of frustration and amusement. It's all just nonsense, isn't it?