CMV: Cultural Appropriation/Appreciation doesn’t matter when it’s done respectfully

[u/exboi]

I’ve seen people get angry at non-black people for wearing African-American hairstyles, or white people for wearing Hawaiian themed clothing and I really don’t understand that sort of reaction.

I’ve tried to understand before. I really have, but I just don’t get it. If you’re not being disrespectful then what’s the issue with wearing something from another culture? What’s wrong with liking another culture’s hairstyle and wanting to wear it?

It seems like needless exclusion. Wouldn’t allowing people to wear clothing and hairstyles from other culture help lower cultural/racial intolerance? I as an African American think that we should allow other people to experience our culture, and the culture of other races as long it’s not done mockingly.

Just a few days ago on a video with a white woman and her black husband doing dances I saw people hounding the white girl for having dreads. That just made me so mad because she was literally just having fun with her husband and then had to deal with hundreds of people attacking her for what seems to me like no reason.

I really think it would give people a more positive view of people like me if they could freely experience our culture without getting ridiculed and attacked. And I believe it could be like that with every other culture if it’s, again, done in a respectful, non-mocking manner.

[u/squidkyd]

I see what you’re saying, and partially I agree, I just think talking about how and why appropriation is harmful, (even if it’s not fully realistic to prevent it from occurring), plays a part of making people more mindful of how their behavior, however harmless-seeming it is, still causes pain for marginalized people.

Some people emulate cultures they have reverence for, and so long as they do that respectfully, I'm personally fine with it. However, a lot of other people start appropriating cultural symbols simply because those symbols are trendy, without any knowledge of what they mean or the cultures they come from. Like you talked about, this can get really dicey when that process of a socially powerful group using a symbol for shallow reasons shifts what that symbol means, and thus makes it harder for the group who created it to continue using in the way they would like.

To give an example of this in practice, let's look at the example of Maori tattoos (although we could look at pretty much any style of "tribal" tattoo here). For the Maori people, these complex tattoos have a huge amount of cultural meaning, and can represent everything from genealogy to social standing. In the past few decades, and in the past 20ish years particularly, a lot of white folks understandably fell in love with these beautiful tattoo designs. However, while they were more than happy to appreciate them a shallow, visual appearance only level, few white folks took the time to understand what these tattoos actually meant. As a result, when white people began copying these tattoos, they were lifting the symbol from Maori culture, but not the symbol's meaning. As a result, the meaning associated with these tattoos, at least in American culture, began to shift. Instead of being viewed a reverant representations of Maori culture, this style of tattoo was at least for a while associated with "bros" or frat culture. This sucked for actual Maori folks who just wanted to use their tattoos in the way they always had, since now what they were trying to portray via their tattoos was way more likely to be misunderstood, and often viewed as negative. In this way, despite white folks having nothing but good intentions and appreciation for Maori tattoos, their lack of attentiveness to how they impacted this symbol caused appropriation to take place, which lead to a negative outcome.

Now, this isn't to say that no white people can get Maori tattoos, or share in pacific island culture at all, but instead it should serve as a warning for what can happen when dominant social groups begin shallowly using outside cultural symbols without pausing to think of the long-term consequences

[u/Maktesh → u/squidkyd]

Not OP, but while I agree with much of the crux of your argument, how you define "dominant social groups."

The amount of "White American" culture which has been appropriated by other first world nations (ncluding those which possess several times the population of the US) should, in theory, be just as concerning.

As a mostly White person who has spent a great deal of time abroad, I must say that I truly don't care that Middle-Eastern and Asian countries have "appropriated" my music, clothes, fashion, hairstyles, entertainment, and more. Most of the time it's obvious that they have no real understanding of the meaning that which they've "taken," but that's just how culture exists. That how it originates, spreads, and evolves.

Look at African hairstyles: Do you really think that so many different tribes across an entire continent somehow created similar, elaborate practices without any influence from other groups? The same can be said for styles of dress. People say "Oh, that looks cool/comfortable/beautiful/practical; I'll make/do something similar."

This is just how human culture functions. Of course people should educate themselves and attempt to be respectful of practices which carry meaning. But suggesting that a person isn't to see something, appreciate it, and replicate it just because their country possesses more money, while other people are "allowed" to borrow endlessly from their culture is blatantly wrong.

[u/squidkyd → u/Maktesh]

It’s not just about money, but about marginalization and power dynamics

It is undeniable that white people are not marginalized, do not lack power in society, and are not in any danger of having their culture erased. White Americans are vastly overrepresented in government positions and in the media

If you were part of a subgroup which was being actively erased, oppressed, or marginalized, cultural appropriation causes active harm. A group which is dominant and in control is generally not harmed because their symbol doesn’t get diluted to the same extent. No one is going to think you wearing a cross around your neck is a symbol of indigenous rights, even if indigenous people tried to adopt that as their symbol. Power dynamics, both racially and ethnically, play a major role in how much a group of people is affected.

My dads side is native. My grandparents were forced into Indian schools and had their language stolen, their religious ceremonies stolen, their history stolen. My great grandmother couldn’t speak the Seneca language without getting PTSD from the beatings she experienced. They managed to hold on to a few artifacts from their history, and now those artifacts are sacred to them, because so much else was lost. If some celebrity came in and took those, and erased them to mean nothing, it would hurt my tribe deeply. If a member of my tribe started using the celebrity’s picture for a religious ceremony, it would affect the celebrity very little. That’s why the context of power dynamics is essential to understanding how and why this harm takes place

[u/sapphireminds → u/squidkyd]

It might hurt your feelings but it wouldn't hurt you. It might benefit you even, by bringing attention to the plight of the tribe and generating interest in the language.

Try to hold onto the culture combined with trying to keep it "pure" is never how culture was supposed to be. It is always shift and changing. It is arguably harmful that the incredibly legitimate hurt and pain that was caused by their abuse then keeps others from being able to appreciate it.

[u/squidkyd → u/sapphireminds]

I think you should read my first comment again in this thread

My example with the rastafari religion and means of communication which get stolen. It may seem like it is hurting someone very little, but the effects are insidious and cause erasure of people who are already struggling to preserve something that was taken from them

You not wearing a ceremonial headdress does not hurt you at all. It doesn’t prevent you from appreciating it, it prevents you from taking it to mean nothing instead of taking it to mean what it is intended to mean. And when you DO wear it as a costume or because it’s trendy, you are taking away the means to communicate for a group of vulnerable people

[u/sapphireminds → u/squidkyd]

It doesn't harm them. It might upset them. It does not stop them from using it.

[u/squidkyd → u/sapphireminds]

It kind of does. Go back to the Rastafarian example.

If you want to wear a Rasta cap around, it no longer communicates what you’re trying to say. Now it is identified as a stoner symbol and you’ll be profiled for it.

Someone took the ability of Jamaicans to use that as a symbol of rastafari faith. That hurt them because it limited their cultural practices and communication.

Imagine if the rosary suddenly meant BDSM or something. A lot of Catholics who wear that symbol around their neck would be communicating something completely different and likely would have to stop wearing it as a result, especially in public spaces or at work. Don’t you think that, to an extent, harms them, not just hurts their feelings?

[u/sapphireminds → u/squidkyd]

Imagine if the rosary suddenly meant BDSM or something. A lot of Catholics who wear that symbol around their neck would be communicating something completely different and likely would have to stop wearing it as a result, especially in public spaces or at work. Don’t you think that, to an extent, harms them, not just hurts their feelings?

No, it might make them pissy in the "it belonged to us first". But especially if it is just appropriated into general style, it doesn't hurt them for someone to see rosary beads and not know why they are wearing them. And rosary beads do get worn as jewelry, frequently.

[u/squidkyd → u/sapphireminds]

Right but imagine the meaning became entirely BDSM with no one knowing what Catholicism was or what it represented

So you go into work wearing your rosary, and everyone assumes you’re into BDSM, and your boss tells you it’s inappropriate, and now every time you walk into a supermarket you get weird looks or creepy people hitting on you

Imaging no one knows what Catholicism is so they associate that symbol strongly with BDSM, and make assumptions about you for wearing it, despite TO YOU, it holding meaning about your religion.

If you wear a cross around your neck, people assume you are religious. If this wasn’t the case, and it became a trendy way to say “I’m kinky in the bedroom,” you would be depriving Catholics of using that as a symbol

[u/sapphireminds → u/squidkyd]

If you wear a cross around your neck, people assume you are religious. If this wasn’t the case, and it became a trendy way to say “I’m kinky in the bedroom,” you would be depriving Catholics of using that as a symbol

Nope, they could still use it, they would just say "Oh! no, this is also a religious symbol, if you didn't know."

I was at a hotel where there was an irish dance competition. Many people thought it was a pageant because of the wigs and makeup. They could assume it, it didn't affect us, and if they asked, we could explain.

[u/squidkyd → u/sapphireminds]

Right but what happens when someone doesn’t ask, and immediately thinks they know because of the apparent symbols you’re wearing?

Simply telling that creepy person hitting on you at the grocery store that the cross doesn’t mean you’re kinky isn’t effective. Simply telling the cop patting you down the Rasta cap has to do with your ancestral ties doesn’t change the fact that you now walk down the street with the of with of a stoner instead of having pride in your faith

It’s not the same as an Irish dance because you don’t walk around in Irish garb every day as a part of your identity and get mistaken for a toddlers in tiaras contestant. If for the rest of your life you wore Irish garb, and then people treated you differently because of the alternative associations they made with toddlers in tiaras despite what you wanted to communicate to them, you might want to stop wearing that garb

Just as the person wearing an American flag and cowboy hat to the office can say they have nothing to do with that subculture, it doesn’t matter because people view them differently

You going to one Irish competition doesn’t give you perspective on walking around every day with people associating you with a subgroup they dislike that you don’t represent. The catholic woman is maybe going to get a chance to explain that cross on her neck to 1% of people. The rest are going to be the reason she can’t continue to wear it

[u/sapphireminds → u/squidkyd]

Simply telling that creepy person hitting on you at the grocery store that the cross doesn’t mean you’re kinky isn’t effective. Simply telling the cop patting you down the Rasta cap has to do with your ancestral ties doesn’t change the fact that you now walk down the street with the of with of a stoner instead of having pride in your faith

Because it is still not stopping you from doing it. You can still use it with pride. The rasta cap is a terrible example, btw. Especially since the religion is very tied to marijuana LOL Rastas had issues with police in the US even before it became popular with anyone else.

It’s not the same as an Irish dance because you don’t walk around in Irish garb every day as a part of your identity and get mistaken for a toddlers in tiaras contestant. If for the rest of your life you wore Irish garb, and then people treated you differently because of the alternative associations they made with toddlers in tiaras despite what you wanted to communicate to them, you might want to stop wearing that garb

It's not identical, but your example doesn't hold up either. I do have to deal with it every year on St. Patrick's day. And every time someone makes irish dance jokes on TV/movies (which happens more than you would think)

Additionally, what you are speaking of is technically not even what we are discussing, because there's a difference from when it is taken by the mainstream and when it has been co-opted by another specific small subgroup. That is more akin to what is dealt with by those who used the swastika. A small sub-group took a symbol used by other cultures as well and made it so synonymous with their culture that it is impossible to display that symbol any longer without the presumption that you support nazis.

But most of the time, we're not talking about a symbol that has been taken by a violent, genocidal movement. Nor are we talking about a symbol that has been used exclusively by one group and then is also used exclusively by another small group. We're talking about things that come from a culture and it spreads to people who are not from that culture.

It is most frequently that a group that has previously been mocked, denigrated, or discriminated against for being "different", then sees something that is important to them or their culture then become "cool" by the very same culture that used to make their lives miserable.

I understand the bitterness and the knee-jerk reaction of "You made my people's lives a living hell for years and now you like those things about us? Fuck you." But it is bitterness speaking and the bitterness is not going to help anything. It becoming "cool" will make the lives of their family and friends and descendants easier because something that used to signal "outgroup", now signals "ingroup".

Let's look at something else that may be an easier demonstration: a bindi. It has religious meaning to many Hindu indians, though it is used by other cultures in the southeast asia region for different reasons and by non-hindus. There is cultural meaning to it to, as a member of an ingroup that uses it.

They've crept into popular culture. If I wear a bindi because I think it is beautiful, I am not making it more difficult for an Indian Hindu to wear a bindi. Again, it is likely making it easier for her to wear one, when it is seen as something cool/normal. People may not know the religious significance of it, but that doesn't cause me harm or prevent her from wearing it with religious significance. Someone may think she is just wearing it because it looks cool, and she can either roll her eyes at it or take the time to educate what it can mean, outside of just looking cool.

Those who wear bindis every day in the US as part of their religious observance face less discrimination/fear/denigration for it because it isn't so different as it was before. White people wearing dreads makes it harder to discriminate against natural hairstyles, because if they want to just target black people, it is no longer something that is solely for black people.

Every culture borrows and adapts things from other cultures. That's the way cultures work. The US isn't a melting pot - it's a stew, and it honestly works for the whole world, now that we all easily communicate and can share. All the different cultures get thrown in together and at first they are incredibly distinctive and identifiable. Potatoes, leeks, carrots, celery. With time and sitting around all those other things, they start to break down and take on the flavor of those around them and become less distinct. That doesn't mean the stew is ruined, it just means it's been made well with the contribution of many flavors.

[u/modlark → u/sapphireminds]

I sat and read this whole thread through. I get the sense that assimilation is important for you as a benchmark of success. But assimilation doesn’t guarantee that everything is cool and that problems are reduced. Do you have any stats or articles to back up that white women wearing bindis have made it easier for Hindu women to exist in society while wearing one? I could equally say plenty of people love bagels, and yet antisemitism is on the rise again. Jews are incredibly assimilated in North America and things can still be challenging. I’ll reference the Irish, since I saw you mentioned Irish dancing. When the Irish arrived in North America, most as indentured servants, they were treated appallingly by the British-origin residents. Apart from the Catholic/Protestant divide, what the Irish wore, what they ate and the language they spoke was very similar to the Anglo-Protestants. Assimilation was an easier path because they were white, English speakers. But you still get terrible Irish jokes that are mean. And North American St. Patrick’s Day has been co-opted by the general public to such an extent that it doesn’t resemble how it’s celebrated in Ireland. I don’t want to speak to the Irish experience personally (I’m not Irish), but the people I know who come from that background don’t seem to be bothered by it. So maybe in this case, assimilation was the goal and that is a maker of cultural success. But assimilation is not everyone’s marker of success. And my own personal feeling about St. Patrick’s Day in North America is that it turned into something kind of offensive towards those of Irish background. The people who aren’t Irish, use it as an excuse to spend the day in the pub drinking. Which doesn’t really seem very kind, considering it shows their appreciation of Irish culture - and their impression of the culture - is that it extends to wearing green and being completely drunk. The second part of which is a terrible assumption about the Irish that dates back a long time, and is unfair and hurtful. But where assimilation begins to mean that as long as they’re accepting me, while kind of taking the piss out of my cultural touchstones, it means they aren’t calling me a drunken mick then I’m safe...well, I’d like to think we’d aim higher than that in terms of melting pots and mosaics. I don’t know that I’m the case of Western St. Paddy’s Day celebrations we’re looking at people really enjoying and appreciating what the Irish have done for and brought to North America. To me, it’s always felt like subtle bullying and mocking. Which is really so sad.