Thanks for explaining. I never understood the American outrage about cultural appropriation but it’s just about respecting sacred symbols from other cultures? Sounds about right, please feel free to dress as a Frenchman with beret and baguette as long as you respect our no-tipping policy.
Next item to discover on my list: why are Americans so upset about “black face”.
That’s because of minstrel shows. They were American comedy acts where actors would paint their faces black and act out racist stereotypes. The premise was “look at me! I’m a black person!” and then they’d do something stupid and everyone would laugh. Note that black people were slaves at the time. When slavery was (mostly) abolished after the civil war, the shows and makeup became symbols of racism.
It’s kind of like how a swastika in a Buddhist temple is fine but a swastika tattoo on a white American isn’t. The swastika doesn’t have to be racist symbol, but there are few places you could display one without it being interpreted as a racist symbol.
The other comment explains most of it, but when it comes to acting specifically there’s also some level of “why didn’t you just get an actual black person”
To an extent, like (as a Mexican) I don’t give a shit if people wear sombreros or ponchos as a form of clothing, but I see them wearing specifically as a costume especially on days like Cinco de Mayo (which is not a sacred holiday) and it pisses me right off.
My culture is not a costume, and that’s where I draw the line at appropriation. If you want to wear a sombrero or poncho cause you think it looks cool and you wear it as a part of your daily wear, that’s fuckin weird bro, but you do you.
It’s also when someone takes from other cultures and then claim it as their own without acknowledging the origin. Like how Elvis covered songs from black artists and didn’t credited the original artists and now white people think they solely invented rock n roll.
I wouldn’t say it offends me, but it is a bit annoying when someone wears a weirdly modernized/made-sexy version of the traditional clothes of my region, when they’re from somewhere else and don’t give a shit about the history. Like, it’s not problematic or anything, like it would be with religious items or clothing of marginalized groups, but I’d still prefer they don’t.
I think the more important factor is taking ownership over something that originated elsewhere.
Even though it isn’t sacred, I would argue that the association between Great Britain and tea comes from appropriation. It wasn’t necessarily appropriation for the Portuguese to bring tea back to Europe, but it certainly was when the British used Chinese seeds and cultivation techniques in India to push China out of the trade.
I think the more important factor is taking ownership over something that originated elsewhere.
This describes virtually every tool, food, piece of clothing, etc you have ever used that was invented before the 20th century. Most of them originating somewhere else and being copied, rebranded, and modified over and over for decades or centuries until they reached their current forms. The only real difference is how recently it happened and if you can wedge it into a power hierarchy in such a way as to be able to blame someone who’s an acceptable target for that blame.
Cultural appropriation is when you take something sacred or special and don’t treat it with respect. Sombreros and parkas are just clothes.
Thanks for explaining. I never understood the American outrage about cultural appropriation but it’s just about respecting sacred symbols from other cultures? Sounds about right, please feel free to dress as a Frenchman with beret and baguette as long as you respect our no-tipping policy.
Next item to discover on my list: why are Americans so upset about “black face”. And that’s what I witnessed in Sevilla (Spain) recently which did not seem racist to me at all: https://cnnespanol.cnn.com/2023/01/05/polemica-espana-blackface-reyes-magos-trax/
That’s because of minstrel shows. They were American comedy acts where actors would paint their faces black and act out racist stereotypes. The premise was “look at me! I’m a black person!” and then they’d do something stupid and everyone would laugh. Note that black people were slaves at the time. When slavery was (mostly) abolished after the civil war, the shows and makeup became symbols of racism.
It’s kind of like how a swastika in a Buddhist temple is fine but a swastika tattoo on a white American isn’t. The swastika doesn’t have to be racist symbol, but there are few places you could display one without it being interpreted as a racist symbol.
Great explanation, thank you very much!
deleted by creator
The other comment explains most of it, but when it comes to acting specifically there’s also some level of “why didn’t you just get an actual black person”
Fair enough!
I’m a dude playing a dude disguised as another dude!
To an extent, like (as a Mexican) I don’t give a shit if people wear sombreros or ponchos as a form of clothing, but I see them wearing specifically as a costume especially on days like Cinco de Mayo (which is not a sacred holiday) and it pisses me right off.
My culture is not a costume, and that’s where I draw the line at appropriation. If you want to wear a sombrero or poncho cause you think it looks cool and you wear it as a part of your daily wear, that’s fuckin weird bro, but you do you.
It’s also when someone takes from other cultures and then claim it as their own without acknowledging the origin. Like how Elvis covered songs from black artists and didn’t credited the original artists and now white people think they solely invented rock n roll.
Yeah this comic is just for snowflakes trying to feel better.
I wouldn’t say it offends me, but it is a bit annoying when someone wears a weirdly modernized/made-sexy version of the traditional clothes of my region, when they’re from somewhere else and don’t give a shit about the history. Like, it’s not problematic or anything, like it would be with religious items or clothing of marginalized groups, but I’d still prefer they don’t.
According to you.
I think the more important factor is taking ownership over something that originated elsewhere.
Even though it isn’t sacred, I would argue that the association between Great Britain and tea comes from appropriation. It wasn’t necessarily appropriation for the Portuguese to bring tea back to Europe, but it certainly was when the British used Chinese seeds and cultivation techniques in India to push China out of the trade.
This describes virtually every tool, food, piece of clothing, etc you have ever used that was invented before the 20th century. Most of them originating somewhere else and being copied, rebranded, and modified over and over for decades or centuries until they reached their current forms. The only real difference is how recently it happened and if you can wedge it into a power hierarchy in such a way as to be able to blame someone who’s an acceptable target for that blame.