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”
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!
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!
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.
According to you.