Author Topic: some thoughts on cultural appropriation  (Read 90275 times)

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

Offline Drunken Idaho

  • Natural Blonde
  • Reef Tank Owner
  • *********
  • Posts: 9971
  • Comrade Questions
Re: some thoughts on cultural appropriation
« Reply #255 on: April 08, 2017, 10:37:08 PM »
Maybe that's the issue... there are many folks (on both sides) in here trying to explain what the phrase means when I feel they should be discussing the varying definitions. As soon as I quit the "distracting and semantic" discussion of the meaning of the phrase, folks piled on to trade jabs mostly based on their varying definitions for the phrase.

This. Is why. It's worth. Discussing.
Strange women lying in ponds distributin' swords is no basis for a system of government.

Offline SkeptiQueer

  • Too Much Spare Time
  • ********
  • Posts: 7736
  • DEEZ NUTZ
Re: some thoughts on cultural appropriation
« Reply #256 on: April 08, 2017, 10:48:48 PM »
The person dismissing it out of hand as "PC nonsense" and resorting to Ken Ham levels of irrationality is not confused by definitions.

The person demanding that there be a single binary arbiter of what is cultural exchange vs what is cultural appropriation is not confused by the definitions.

The person who skips over several pages of discussion about the definition and about what is harmful vs benign is not confused about the definition.

The person who took his ball and went home because nobody would pick a single example to nail he entire argument to (again, the same illogic typical of creationism) was not confused about he definition.

6EQUJ5 discussed it in post #20. It was immediately dismissed. The issue isn't confusion over terminology, it's that people want the thing not to be real because it's incompatible with the worldview they've adopted.

Example: The first page of this thread.
HIISSSSSSSS

Offline Drunken Idaho

  • Natural Blonde
  • Reef Tank Owner
  • *********
  • Posts: 9971
  • Comrade Questions
Re: some thoughts on cultural appropriation
« Reply #257 on: April 09, 2017, 02:00:45 AM »
I wasn't talking about any posts that weren't mine, but if you feel any others were relevant to the discussion please quote them and respond directly.

I think there's far too much of responding to "that guy" in lieu of direct conversation going on.

Edit: grammar fixes
« Last Edit: April 09, 2017, 02:24:45 AM by Drunken Idaho »
Strange women lying in ponds distributin' swords is no basis for a system of government.

Online jt512

  • Frequent Poster
  • ******
  • Posts: 2615
    • jt512
Re: some thoughts on cultural appropriation
« Reply #258 on: April 09, 2017, 02:52:40 AM »

The multiple definitions listed in every dictionary seem to support my point that "cultural appropriation" can mean any sort of cultural borrowing, regardless of whether or not more good or bad results from it. Where do you take issue?


Appropriation is the antithesis of borrowing.
Ich verstehe nur Bahnhof.

Offline Drunken Idaho

  • Natural Blonde
  • Reef Tank Owner
  • *********
  • Posts: 9971
  • Comrade Questions
Re: some thoughts on cultural appropriation
« Reply #259 on: April 09, 2017, 02:59:05 AM »

The multiple definitions listed in every dictionary seem to support my point that "cultural appropriation" can mean any sort of cultural borrowing, regardless of whether or not more good or bad results from it. Where do you take issue?


Appropriation is the antithesis of borrowing.

Can you make your point more clearly?

Appropriation (generally) means taking without permission. Borrowing (generally) means taking with permission. Clearly they are not antithetical to each other, and the crux of this conversation revolves around whether or not a hypothetical person *needs* permission (and from who) to use a hypothetical idea (which may or may not belong to another hypothetical entity).

So, (by dictionary definitions), they are not antithetical... but I believe you have a point which is discussion-worthy if we can get to it using clear and direct language.
Strange women lying in ponds distributin' swords is no basis for a system of government.

Offline arthwollipot

  • Reef Tank Owner
  • *********
  • Posts: 9146
  • Observer of Phenomena
Re: some thoughts on cultural appropriation
« Reply #260 on: April 09, 2017, 03:25:23 AM »
Borrowing (generally) means taking with permission.
And returning it after you're finished with it.
Self-described nerd. Pronouns: He/Him.

Tarvek: There's more to being an evil despot than getting cake whenever you want it.
Agatha: If that's what you think, then you're DOING IT WRONG!

Offline Drunken Idaho

  • Natural Blonde
  • Reef Tank Owner
  • *********
  • Posts: 9971
  • Comrade Questions
Re: some thoughts on cultural appropriation
« Reply #261 on: April 09, 2017, 03:31:26 AM »
Borrowing (generally) means taking with permission.
And returning it after you're finished with it.

Sure. So how do you feel this applies to the topic at hand? A musical or fashion expression, for example?
Strange women lying in ponds distributin' swords is no basis for a system of government.

Offline arthwollipot

  • Reef Tank Owner
  • *********
  • Posts: 9146
  • Observer of Phenomena
Re: some thoughts on cultural appropriation
« Reply #262 on: April 09, 2017, 03:32:35 AM »
Borrowing (generally) means taking with permission.
And returning it after you're finished with it.

Sure. So how do you feel this applies to the topic at hand? A musical or fashion expression, for example?
If I wanted to comment on how that applies to the topic at hand, I would have done so. I was just correcting one of your statements, which I felt was incomplete.
Self-described nerd. Pronouns: He/Him.

Tarvek: There's more to being an evil despot than getting cake whenever you want it.
Agatha: If that's what you think, then you're DOING IT WRONG!

Offline nameofthewave

  • Keeps Priorities Straight
  • ***
  • Posts: 393
Re: some thoughts on cultural appropriation
« Reply #263 on: April 09, 2017, 03:35:49 AM »
Purposeful antagonism is a different conversation than cultural appropriation, but in general one should have a good reason for attacking a different thing. Mocking someone else's religion just because it makes you feel better isn't a good reason to do so on it's own.

Sorry, off topic I know, but I'd have to disagree. There are religious people who find the mere existence of religious satire offensive. Such satire does not need any reason to exist or justify its existence, unless that reason is the fact that some folks are demanding it should remain taboo for no good reason other than it causes them offence. Is that a circular argument?
Satire absolutely needs a reason to justify it's existence, otherwise it isn't satire but mockery. If you're mocking someone else's beliefs only because you think they need to be taken down a peg, you're an asshole.

Satire *is* just a form of mockery. If it has a more general, harder to define purpose (e.g. undermining the taboo of being able to criticise aspects of religion and related ideas) rather than a specific one, ultimately the defenders of the targets of your satire may vehemently disagree with your justification of it, or argue that the justification is weak, and thereby view it as purposeful antagonism.
Hang on, because we're doing some wordplay here that's obfuscating the issue.

According to you, you are advocating mocking something that a person holds dear, because you think it's wrong for them to hold that thing dear. The justification for mocking the thing this person holds reverent is that they revere this thing and don't want other people to mock it.

Do I have that correct?

Kind of, except that I'm not making any judgements about whether people should hold certain things dear or not. Regarding the justification for satire, as an example I like the Jesus and Mo cartoons and find them pretty funny, but I know that many people find them offensive. I'm not sure if you can necessarily weigh any "good" they do by being out there against the offence they may cause some people. Saying that, I'm not going to, for example, wear a Jesus and Mo T shirt when visiting someone who is religious.

Offline Drunken Idaho

  • Natural Blonde
  • Reef Tank Owner
  • *********
  • Posts: 9971
  • Comrade Questions
Re: some thoughts on cultural appropriation
« Reply #264 on: April 09, 2017, 03:54:40 AM »
Borrowing (generally) means taking with permission.
And returning it after you're finished with it.

Sure. So how do you feel this applies to the topic at hand? A musical or fashion expression, for example?
If I wanted to comment on how that applies to the topic at hand, I would have done so. I was just correcting one of your statements, which I felt was incomplete.

After considering my reply, which took into consideration your idea about the idea's completeness, what do you think?
Strange women lying in ponds distributin' swords is no basis for a system of government.

Offline NEKSkeptic

  • Banned
  • Well Established
  • *
  • Posts: 1000
Re: some thoughts on cultural appropriation
« Reply #265 on: April 09, 2017, 06:29:11 AM »

The multiple definitions listed in every dictionary seem to support my point that "cultural appropriation" can mean any sort of cultural borrowing, regardless of whether or not more good or bad results from it. Where do you take issue?


Appropriation is the antithesis of borrowing.
Culture is a finite resource?   I don't see how there can be a "taking" in the sense that you suggest. 

Offline SkeptiQueer

  • Too Much Spare Time
  • ********
  • Posts: 7736
  • DEEZ NUTZ
Re: some thoughts on cultural appropriation
« Reply #266 on: April 09, 2017, 10:47:11 AM »


Purposeful antagonism is a different conversation than cultural appropriation, but in general one should have a good reason for attacking a different thing. Mocking someone else's religion just because it makes you feel better isn't a good reason to do so on it's own.

Sorry, off topic I know, but I'd have to disagree. There are religious people who find the mere existence of religious satire offensive. Such satire does not need any reason to exist or justify its existence, unless that reason is the fact that some folks are demanding it should remain taboo for no good reason other than it causes them offence. Is that a circular argument?
Satire absolutely needs a reason to justify it's existence, otherwise it isn't satire but mockery. If you're mocking someone else's beliefs only because you think they need to be taken down a peg, you're an asshole.

Satire *is* just a form of mockery. If it has a more general, harder to define purpose (e.g. undermining the taboo of being able to criticise aspects of religion and related ideas) rather than a specific one, ultimately the defenders of the targets of your satire may vehemently disagree with your justification of it, or argue that the justification is weak, and thereby view it as purposeful antagonism.
Hang on, because we're doing some wordplay here that's obfuscating the issue.

According to you, you are advocating mocking something that a person holds dear, because you think it's wrong for them to hold that thing dear. The justification for mocking the thing this person holds reverent is that they revere this thing and don't want other people to mock it.

Do I have that correct?

Kind of, except that I'm not making any judgements about whether people should hold certain things dear or not. Regarding the justification for satire, as an example I like the Jesus and Mo cartoons and find them pretty funny, but I know that many people find them offensive. I'm not sure if you can necessarily weigh any "good" they do by being out there against the offence they may cause some people. Saying that, I'm not going to, for example, wear a Jesus and Mo T shirt when visiting someone who is religious.

We can certainly try, or at least begun by asking what purpose does it serve. Racists jokes are enjoyed by many people, but that enjoyment alone is generally considered not to outweigh the larger (for lack of a better word) shittiness of telling racist jokes.
HIISSSSSSSS

Offline SkeptiQueer

  • Too Much Spare Time
  • ********
  • Posts: 7736
  • DEEZ NUTZ
Re: some thoughts on cultural appropriation
« Reply #267 on: April 09, 2017, 10:48:08 AM »

The multiple definitions listed in every dictionary seem to support my point that "cultural appropriation" can mean any sort of cultural borrowing, regardless of whether or not more good or bad results from it. Where do you take issue?


Appropriation is the antithesis of borrowing.
Culture is a finite resource?   I don't see how there can be a "taking" in the sense that you suggest.
Something does not have to be finite for theft. This is the entire basis of IP law. Plagiarism doesn't make the orog8nal word disappear, but we still consider it theft.
HIISSSSSSSS

Offline Caffiene

  • Stopped Going Outside
  • *******
  • Posts: 5105
Re: some thoughts on cultural appropriation
« Reply #268 on: April 09, 2017, 10:59:13 AM »
Something does not have to be finite for theft. This is the entire basis of IP law. Plagiarism doesn't make the orog8nal word disappear, but we still consider it theft.

No we dont. Thats why we call it piracy and plagiarism instead of calling it theft, and why there is such a thing as IP law instead of it being dealt with by theft laws. Corporations that own a lot of IPs like to try to paint it as theft to control public perception, but its largely unsuccessful as evidenced by the fact that piracy is significantly more widespread than physical theft.
[Lurk Mode Disengage]

Offline Quetzalcoatl

  • Stopped Going Outside
  • *******
  • Posts: 5188
Re: some thoughts on cultural appropriation
« Reply #269 on: April 09, 2017, 11:37:33 AM »
If we assume that rap music in the 90's was a largely rooted in the African-American community, one can argue that Eminem cost at least one African American person an opportunity to be a successful performer.  But isn't it possible that the good eclipsed the bad?  Eminem brought rap music to the masses, which undoubtedly led to the rise of many African-American artists who may never have had the same opportunities but for Eminem's success.  It also created a cultural bridge between the white and African-American communities.  Countless whites were led to an appreciation of at least this aspect of African-American culture.

I know that you argue against the proposed claim here, but I find the claim to reflect an absurd way of thinking in the first place. Eminem did the music he liked, and he was successful. His skin color is irrelevant. Various music genres are not "reserved" for specific skin colors.
"I’m a member of no party. I have no ideology. I’m a rationalist. I do what I can in the international struggle between science and reason and the barbarism, superstition and stupidity that’s all around us." - Christopher Hitchens

 

personate-rain
personate-rain