The Feminist Hub

Re: Cultural Appropriation

So, something becomes a negative form of cultural appropriation when combined with a certain context and privilege. Just as an example I've seen around to make sure I'm kind of getting it, it would therefore be 'acceptable' for say, a white American to have an interest in Native American spirituality, but what would be unacceptable is for a white American to adopt/use that spirituality and disregard its significance? I.e. buying something belonging to such a culture or spirituality due to a genuine interest vs buying and wearing something with spiritual significance (like a headdress) purely because it's 'chic'. I use that example just 'cause it's one I've seen around a LOT, what with big US companies selling Native American inspired apparel, and with conflicting views on it.

Things like academic or personal interest in another cultural are not problematic in particular, but adopting (and in many cases making a mockery of) another culture with no thought given to what you're adopting is? Basically, it's not so much the items, even if they do have a deeper significance, or the interest in a certain culture, but the ATTITUDE that the person using or even adopting them has towards them?

I suppose even an interest can be problematic in that respect, depending on the person's individual treatment of it? I mean, a lot of people say that they're interested in another culture and often seem respectful enough, but really they seem to only like it because it's 'weird' or 'different' and still occassionally treat it as though it exists for their entertainment.

Apologies, I'm rambling now. Thanks for your response!

thezombiesaid

Lots of things happening here, and I will address only a few things as I’m low on spoons today. I’m linking a lot of things on cultural appropriation, I hope you’ll read it.

1. Cultural appropriation is complicated, but there is no “good” cultural appropriation. There is no “acceptable” way to commodify and objectify a culture. If someone from [x] culture specifically invites you, gives you [x] that holds some cultural significance to that community, that’s not cultural appropriation. All instances where privileged people saunter in uninvited and violate cultures is cultural appropriation.

2. Intent doesn’t matter — Spirituality for many of the people of the First Nations was OUTLAWED by the govt. People of the specific communities and tribes wouldn’t be allowed to practice their own religions and spiritual practices. As I said before too, it’s NEVER okay to appropriate a culture’s spirituality. Here the “genuine” interest doesn’t matter as these communities and peoples have been denied their own religion, it is sacred to them. Whether you believe or not, respect their beliefs.

2. Items like the “headdress” is wrong on so many levels. I’m linking you to an extremely important and poignant reblog that explains about the headdress. I hope you understand, things like reducing spirituality of the First Nations people’s to OBJECTS is wrong and furthers dangerous stereotypes and it’s a part of cultural theft, to START with the problems of such stereotyping.

3. What do you mean by an “academic” or “personal interest”? POC aren’t lab rats you can study. Attitude (or intent) doesn’t matter again, if you’re treating POC as objects of an experiment.

4. You’re right about that last bit on interest — which is why I don’t use intent, attitude and interest for arguments ever, because despite the most honorable intentions and whatnot considerable hurt and damage is done to marginalised people.

Here’s what I stick by — if someone from the community tells you to stop, to not appropriate, to not invade their culture, then don’t do it.

Here is another link on cultural appropriation.

~Jaded.

Posted 12 months ago

8 notes View comments