Where do you draw the line as to what is or is not cultural appropriation?

In My Humble Opinion
1

Occasionally I’ll peruse the AmItheAsshole and Entitled People subreddits and occasionally there will be a post where someone is accused of cultural appropriation. I’m sure a fair amount of them are fictional, but there are enough of them to pique my interest.

For my part I do believe CA is a thing with Maori tribal tattoos and Native American ceremonial headdresses being specific examples.

There were posts where a Caucasian girl wearing a sarong at a Japanese festival in the US was accused and another where a white guy with dreadlocks was in the same situation. These are examples I don’t agree with.

So I suppose my line is where there is cultural significance at play and whether the people whose culture is being copied are generally offended. Otherwise, imitation is the sincerest form of flattery.

Kabuki and Geisha outfits? I would say no, but would bow to the opinions of actual performers. If they say it’s all good then I’ll consider it official.

ETA: I don’t really intend for this thread to be a discussion about whether or not something is culturally insensitive like the Redskin tomahawk chop. Please try to focus on whether things are cultural appropriation.

2

I personally have a pretty high bar when it comes to what qualifies as cultural appropriation.

For me, it comes down to that word, appropriation. To appropriate something is to take something as one’s own, depriving the other party of its use. Borrowing something isn’t enough. Likewise, using something in such a way that the other party is largely unaffected also does not qualify. There also has to be a power imbalance; a weak party simply doesn’t have the capability to appropriate something from a stronger competitor. Also, there should be an aspect of inauthenticity involved, especially in representation/participation, though this isn’t necessarily an absolute requirement.

But the bottom line, though, in my view, is this: An act meets the standard of cultural appropriation if, as a result of the act, the original culture is obscured or compromised or replaced by the version being promoted or portrayed by the appropriating party. If the people of the original culture are able to carry on without their practices being marginalized or mutated by the influence of a stronger outside portrayal, if they are still able to represent their original culture fully and freely alongside the inauthentic alternative, then, for me, I would hesitate before using the appropriation label.

For example: Star Trek Voyager prominently featured a Native American character, Chakotay. The producers hired a cultural consultant to assist in making the character’s depiction as authentic as possible. As it turns out, the consultant was a total fraud, and the cultural details represented on the show were a mishmash of nonsense, half-remembered fragments stolen from various sources mixed with total fabrications straight out of the guy’s imagination. I would consider this cultural appropriation, not just by the guy but, more importantly, by the show itself. Despite having no experience with the culture in question, they wanted to put a superficial representation of it front and center for their own purposes. And by not doing the slightest bit of homework, especially into the background of their so-called expert, they wound up broadcasting a portrayal that left a wide audience with a false impression of Native American beliefs and practices, which activists have been trying to debunk ever since.

By contrast: The doofus who shows up at a Halloween party sporting a racist caricature of a Mexican bandit, with sombrero and serape and a big black stick-on mustache? He’s an asshole, but he’s not personally engaging in cultural appropriation, because nobody is going to confuse his offensive costume with the real thing.

TLDR: cultural appropriation is a real thing, but in my opinion there has to be some tangible impact — an obfuscation of the original, or confusion by outsiders between authentic or inauthentic, or a bleeding of inaccurate behaviors/practices back into the original — to qualify.

3

I don’t see that any cultural group can actually “own” a concept or an art form or a practice so “cultural appropriation” has a pretty tough hill to climb for me.

Get any tattoo of any style, wear any sort of hat or clothes, make any food, make any music. The world is a richer and better place by people trying other things and amalgamating the cultures of the world. As long as no one is stopping the originators from making or valuing the originals then I don’t see the harm.

If someone uses something to make a mockery of people then the fault is in the intent of mockery not the item being used.

No one has the right to insist that it can’t be done, or that something can’t be copied, though they should of course point out that it is a copy or adaptation if there is an attempt being made to pass it off as something else.

4

The problem is that (some) white people historically haven’t had a good track record in knowing what is or isn’t hurtful to minorities.

Having said that, I admit I kind of rolled my eyes a bit at the idea that wearing hoop earrings is cultural appropriation.

5

I don’t think that personal offence is a good enough reason to stop people from doing something. There is no shortage of personal offence and it is impossible to police and unwise to try.

6

Agreed!

I think we should remember this important truth; “Imitation is the sincerest form of flattery.” For example, instead of being offended that some white women want African style braids, Black women should feel flattered that white women admire aspects of their culture and want to emulate them. I honestly believe that identifying with aspects of another culture is good for race relations, not bad.

7

Yes, certainly with things like hair, makeup, clothes, art etc, it doesn’t even need to be an appreciation of a culture specifically. It can just be that another person thinks it looks good. That is reason enough to copy it or adapt it.

8

Other than soup, I use chopsticks to eat my meals at home. It’s just my preference. If anyone finds that offensive, that’s their problem as far as I’m concerned.

9

It’s not something I’ve thought a lot about, but I like @Cervaise’s explanation.

10

For me, an instructive analogy is so-called “stolen valor” laws. It’s not against the law for a civilian to buy a fake Army uniform with a fake Purple Heart or CIB and wear it around town. You can wear it as a Halloween costume if you wish. People may get mad, but you’re not really in trouble until you lead others to believe that you earned these awards through service. Whether that law is constitutional or not, the intent of it is reasonable: it’s considered a violation to steal prestige, honor, or a sense of belonging that you didn’t earn.

To me, that neatly illustrates the spectrum of cultural appropriation, and why some forms are more severe than others.

Wearing culturally meaningful items from a culture you’re not part of? Probably that’s mild CA, but not malignant CA, and folks should mind their own business about it. White people wearing dreads? Distasteful, but not really malignant.

Wearing culturally meaningful items to present yourself as being part of that culture, when you didn’t earn it or weren’t born to it? That’s offensive CA and should be called out. Wearing religious tattoos or other sacred stuff that isn’t yours… big no-no.

11

That’s interesting! One of married buds has a husband who has always had a problem with eating too fast. She gave him the idea to eat with chopsticks because it would slow down his whole eating process. It has actually worked well although, over time, he has become pretty adept with them, so his speed has increased somewhat. It’s still better than it was.

12

That’s the biggest case for legitimately calling something CA. Well, I guess another legitimate case would be if an artist was inspired by a cultural style and claimed that they came up with it themselves, but cases like that are rare.

But even in this case, sometimes (but not always) the people claiming that it is CA take the case too far, since they claim that the people who use the cultural items don’t even understand their significance. With the strong implication that it makes them stupid, i.e. a blithe naivete that could easily be cured by taking the time to understand the readily available cultural significance.

Whereas a lot of sacred cultural knowledge and customs are closely guarded from outsiders. So while it is legitimate to call it cultural appropriation if, for instance, a fake shaman pretended to have knowledge that they did not and you used it to enrich themselves, meanwhile promulgating misunderstanding, it is not legitimate to also blame them for their own ignorance.

13

I don’t think anyone would excuse CA from a person who got Maori tattoos, and rationalized it by saying “it’s OK, I read a book, I know what it means.” In some ways that’s worse.

The ignorance contributes to the problem, but the ignorance isn’t the problem. The problem reveals itself when you address the ignorance, and the person won’t reconsider what they’re doing. Then we see that the real problem is not ignorance. The problem is a feeling of being entitled to use other people’s traditions for your own adornment or amusement, and a disregard for other people’s sense of sacredness toward their traditions. It all comes down to respect (or a lack of it).

14

Calvin Trillin once said that was an excellent reason not to use chopsticks.

I can’t think of when I’ve appropriated anyone’s culture (unless you stretch the definition to include a long perennial border vaguely inspired by classic English ones, but vastly improved on in my humble opinion). In any case, I don’t draw a line for anyone else. If it’s what you want, even if you look dumb, it’s your choice.

15

I don’t think anyone needs to offer any rationalisation for such a tattoo other than “I like it”.
That should suffice.

16

So my friend’s tattoo of a zombie nun masturbating with a crucifix would be a no-no? (It’s a really nicely done work of art)

17

It would be nice if they lived in a world where they could, but they don’t.

From the TED Talk When is it OK to wear an item from another culture, and when is it appropriation? How to tell

But as non-Black and -brown celebrities, they have the privilege to wear the looks associated with another person’s culture when that person can’t necessarily wear looks from her own culture without suffering some type of fallout. Sometimes I wish I could wear those “Bo Derek” cornrow braids because I just want my hair off my face.

But what does it signal when I wear them as a Black woman? It denotes that I’m ghetto or that I’m likely not educated. Maybe I’m into rappers and I smoke weed. I don’t have the license to wear this particular hairstyle as I want to. Kim Kardashian, however, can wear it any day of the week and walk into an office or a business meeting, and no one is going to think she uses drugs or lacks sophistication. No one is going to fire her or Miley, or kick them out of school for wearing these hairstyles.

18

I find it interesting that the meaning of the phrase ‘cultural appropriation’ seems to have changed over the years. The first time I encountered the phrase was in connection with an anthropology class I took in the early 80’s. The class watched a film called “Trobriand Cricket.” The filmmakers documented how the indigenous peoples on this isolated Pacific Island appropriated the game of cricket, which their colonial overlords brought had to the island, and adapted (read changed the rules) the game to their own purposes reinforcing their own cultural institutions, such as as importance of intertribal relationships. The game ultimately became a form of ritualized non-violent tribal warfare to the indigenous peoples.

Cultural appropriation, as I learned the phrase, was a neutral term that simply meant appropriating something from one culture and adapting it for another culture’s use. It could occur both ways, or on either side of a power imbalance.

Trobriand Cricket: The Sport Catches on in New Guinea (Enhanced DVD) (madisonartshop.com)

19

In general, I think cultural appropriation is the price you pay for desegregation. If Tiger Woods is allowed to play golf, then Justin Timberlake is allowed to rap. People don’t appropriate stuff they hate.

My complaint about white people with dreadlocks is that thin, straight, stringy hair makes for really ugly dreadlocks. People with such dreads look more like homeless people than Rastafarians.

I will make an exception for stuff with genuine religious significance. But it is a 2-way street. Someone who doesn’t want Religion A disrespected, had better not disrespect Religion B.

20

I draw the line somewhere like the OP - eagle feathers at Coachella bad, white dreads fine.

Well, no, they’re frequently horrible, but that’s because they’re usually a dirty crusty, not because they’re White. Also, saying dreads are exclusively African is historically ignorant and I can’t be having with that.

Bindi is one where I’m a bit middle-groundy, because I’ve heard very strong opinions either way from actual Indian ladies.