And either way I agree, the Confederate Flag is still a piece of history. And is a historical monument. Personally I think it should be only used in the setting of let's a historical musuem or some kind of significant historical tie to the confederate flag.
But everywhere else, it should be common sense not to do.
Video games, as long as its historically accurate. Used for some kind of education or historical time piece.
Tattoos.....I would rather not see that on someone's skin, however, if its covered up on your skin. Sure whatever. I would prefer people to not put Nazis symbols or Confederate flags on their skin, but I can't stop them. That's the difference between me and some others who would want to see it banned.
I prefer not. But I cannot make that choice for them
Appropriation is painting your house the same colour as your neighbour's house, because you think it looks pretty, without asking their permission. (Like buying Japanese paraphernalia, or adopting Japanese philosophies, as a European, without asking a Japanese person about it first.)
Why would adopting Japanese philosophies be cultural appropriation? I think so long as your doing something because you want to do it and you believe in it fully that it shouldn't be an issue, it's only if your doing something because 'it looks cool' could allow for someone getting upset. Aren't many of the philosophies over there also religions? In that way it just being a conversion of some sorts? Or am I just misunderstanding something?
Why would adopting Japanese philosophies be cultural appropriation? I think so long as your doing something because you want to do it and you believe in it fully that it shouldn't be an issue, it's only if your doing something because 'it looks cool' could allow for someone getting upset. Aren't many of the philosophies over there also religions? In that way it just being a conversion of some sorts? Or am I just misunderstanding something?
I'm waiting for the day they realize that the whole time, they were the propagators of the very acts they wished to put an end to.
They place it on themselves to determine which characteristics belong to which culture. They prevent the free exchange of ideas which have allowed culture to become what it has. And they do it all in the name of personal liberty.
On the topic of the confederate flag: 90% of its use, I believe, is legitimately as a symbol of southern heritage and not racism. However, I think it's in poor taste to use it for this purpose.
As for the cultural appropriation fanatics: Their ideology is a perfect example of the new shape racism takes in our society. In the past, there was racial supremacy, now a days racism takes the form of racial collectivism-the idea that races are more valuable than the individual and that a person has a duty to their race. Racial collectivism seeks to create walls between races and cultures, and destroy any potential cooperation and synergy between two races.
I honestly think there is a difference between what could be called cultural appropriation in the way where you are appreciating a culture and what it offers, to outright disrespecting it.
Cultural appropriation's meaning is literally 'taking from another culture and making it your own'. It has happened since ancient times. The Romans culturally appropriated the Greek pantheon of gods and goddesses, as well as literature (the Iliad and the Odyssey, anyone? Until eventually a great Roman writer called Virgil got tired of seeing the younger generations of Romans keep on reading Greek literature only translated to Roman and wrote the Aeneid - though basically he still took from the story of the Iliad and Odyssey and took elements from it, so...). It is actually confusing to differentiate what cultural appropriation is.
If you look into Filipino pop culture you will also see what Filipinos have technically 'appropriated' from the American superhero comics - Darna by Mars Ravelo? Compare her to Wonder Woman. There are differences but you can say Wonder Woman was the base for Darna. What made it different was that Darna was uniquely attuned to Filipino tastes and culture - she wasn't a princess of some warrior tribe of women, but a poor girl who only wants to protect her family (also another Filipino - erm, Asian value).
I don't actually know if it's correct to term that it was actually appropriated from American comics now. They share similarities since the author took inspiration from the American superhero, but he gave his character her own background that appeals genuinely to Filipinos (I think. I don't read comics.). It wasn't done in a distasteful or disrespectful way at all.
The girl in @Mid's post is only appropriating and disrespecting a culture if she said something like 'Hahaha, I look better in this afro than black people do' or something like that. And among other examples, would you call a white woman - or someone from another country really - trying on a kimono as a cultural appropriation if they genuinely hold a fascination with said culture, and wish to experience it? I am taking a cultural tourism class. We study culture and what it means to exploit and commercialize it to satisfy tourists as a product or a service.
Culture itself is developed and passed down from generation to generation. Culture is a way of life at its most basic and it evolves as time passes. It isn't carried through only in physical aspects. A textbook definition of culture in my class is 'Culture thus refers to a human-made environment which includes all the material and non-material products of group life that are transmitted from one generation to the next.'
Culture is the expression of our nature in our modes of living and thinking. It may be seen in our literature, in religious practices, in recreation and enjoyment. Culture has two distinctive components, namely, material and non-material. Material culture consists of objects that are related to the material aspect of our life such as our dress, food, and household goods. Non-material culture refers to ideas, ideals, thoughts and belief.
It also doesn't remain static. It doesn't only get enriched and molded through different generations passing down what they know to the succeeding ones, it also includes the experiences and ideas shared between different groups of people. There is nothing wrong with that. As a whole, humanity has a culture too. It's called human heritage.
As the world is becoming more and more global and we coexist on a more global level we can't just think there's only one right way of living or that any one is valid. The need for coexistence makes the coexistence of cultures and beliefs necessary. In order to not make such mistakes, the best thing we can do is get to know other cultures, while also getting to know our own. How can we dialogue with other cultures, if we don't really know what our own culture is?
There's nothing wrong with letting another culture enrich you and widen your horizons and worldviews, if you treat that culture with the care and respect you would give your own. Every culture deserves respect since it is a treasure that is passed down from our ancestors. Of course this is only my way of seeing things from what I have heard and learned from experience and my classes.
I'm waiting for the day they realize that the whole time, they were the propagators of the very acts they wished to put an end to.
They place it on themselves to determine which characteristics belong to which culture. They prevent the free exchange of ideas which have allowed culture to become what it has. And they do it all in the name of personal liberty.
"There is perhaps no phenomenon which contains so much destructive feelings as "moral indignation," which permits envy or hate to be acted out under the guise of virtue. The "indignant" person has for once the satisfaction of despising and treating a creature as "inferior," coupled with the feeling of his own superiority and rightness."
— Erich Fromm.
A quote I hold in high regard, as I sometimes ask myself if what I'm about to say is based on what I feel is right, versus what I can discernibly, logically deduce is right. Feeling like you're working for a righteous cause is utterly intoxicating, and the longer you hold onto it, the further the poison spreads. It gets harder and harder to accept that what you believe may be wrong the further you hold onto it as a core life value. The more you do in the name of a cause, the harder it will be to acknowledge the cause as faulty, leave alone outright wrong. We base a significant amount of our identity based on what we care for most. To walk away from it is a traumatic experience in and of itself, comparable to a man walking away from the trail they know into the dark forest, full of vicious beasts that could swallow them whole at any moment.
The reason many of these protesters shout down other ideas is because they fear that all of their righteous vindication will prove faulty... And that would put them in the wrong. If a core part of you is outright wrong?... That is extraordinarily hard to accept, and takes a great deal of personal courage to look that far.
Because, something we have failed to do for the past generation is teach them to look into themselves. We validate their emotions, without forcing them to become introspective. We teach them what to think, not how to think. We teach them that expressing emotions are okay, but not to figure out the cause of those emotions. We teach them tolerance of others, but not to deconstruct them and attempt to understand and assimilate parts that could improve themselves. We teach them to respect others, without teaching them how to understand others. We teach them that their emotional stability has greater value than the capacity for logic and reason.
Here's a fun question. Why tolerate people who think differently than you? If the answer to that question is "because my ideology says so," then congratulations: You've been taught what to think, but not how to think.
Then again, you were the one to point out in a different thread that thinking about how to think is not a common skill, and is something humans do not possess naturally in any sort of efficient capacity. So I think I'm mostly preaching to the choir with you. I'm sure others might find it interesting, though.
There's nothing wrong with letting another culture enrich you and widen your horizons and worldviews, if you treat that culture with the care and respect you would give your own. Every culture deserves respect since it is a treasure that is passed down from our ancestors. Of course this is only my way of seeing things from what I have heard and learned from experience and my classes.
If we live in a world where Tom Cruise can't Samurai harder than the Japanese who kept him around as a curiosity, I don't want to live in this world anymore.
