5 ms·

The fact that there are a not-insignificant number of Americans who feel like any sort of cultural exchange is an appropriation that promotes division bewilders

The fact that there are a not-insignificant number of Americans who feel like any sort of cultural exchange is an appropriation that promotes division bewilders me. The idea that this cross pollination of culture, art, fashion, etc. somehow drives these cultures apart rather than bringing them together doesn't seem to be any sort of logical sense. Honestly, in this sort of situation, it seems racist on the part of the people protesting. Outside of the outright division it promotes, it assumes a patriarchal arrogance, that they (Middle class Americans in America) know better than the Japanese in Japan. Are the Japanese so dumb as to be "duped" by these museums? Is the rich history of the kimono actually so weak that it will be destroyed by non-Japanese wearing them? Of course, they, as Americans, understand the dangers of American culture and the effects it has on the world, so they must protect other countries that don't understand American culture and the danger it poses! They'll look out for you, <Insert Other Country X That They Are Not From>, so don't you worry your pretty little head about this. They know best. What a bizarre and hypocritical stance to take.

venomsnake 11y ago
There is a zealotry strain in the american psyche. Zealotry as a word is also cultural appropriation. I have not died on Masada so freely expect SJW to storm me. So when diversity and political sensitivity becomes religion - we get zealots. I am actually all for cultural appropriation for couple of reasons. 1) Even if it is just dumb fun for the masses, some people of the other culture want to get the real deal and genuinely help in developing and preserving. 2) Even if your culture is appropriated - you have insane amounts of culture to appropriate yourself. 3) People are not easily offended - no matter what the twitter age shows, so most of the time you don't care 4) Sometimes you strike gold - like with blues/hard-rock/heavy-metal (politely leaving hair metal out). We have something that traversed the world, left deep cultural marks everywhere and helped bring the iron curtain down.
wodenokoto 11y ago
The closest I've come to an explanation that makes sense (though it is full of flawed assumptions) is the following: 1) Dreadlocks are a natural hairstyle for black people. Black people are not allowed to have dreadlocks for most types of jobs, since that is simply not considered an appropriate hairstyle for a bank cashier or what ever. 2) when a white celebrity gets dreadlocks she is rubbing it in, so to say, that inherently white-privilege of said celebrity. That is "I can wear your culture because I'm white, you can't wear yours because you are black" The flaws are plenty of course. White middle class can't get white collar jobs wearing dreadlocks, either. The fact that any celebrity can wear funky hairstyles and get away with it isn't attributed to their race, but to their celebrity status. A further argument for cultural appropriation is that the hairstyles required for white-collar jobs are based on "natural white" hairstyles, though I hardly find that to be true either. That is as far as I can extract something resembling a logical argument, I hope this has helped you understand what is going on in the minds of these anti-appropriators. I of course don't expect you to be anymore convinced by their stance.
- cthalupa 11y ago
  I've heard the dreadlocks thing before, but the whole thing falls apart at point 1 - the natural hairstyle for anyone with long hair who doesn't comb/brush it is dreadlocks, and it's been "independently discovered" in a dozen regions around the world. (Not saying you're arguing that they're correct, as you do point out it's full of flawed assumptions) I roughly get an idea of what the beliefs behind their argument are, but they still seem absurd, and at times it certainly seems like they've "culturally appropriated" white European arrogance themselves.
  - BazHK 11y ago
    While dreadlocks aren't literally a black-exclusive hairstyle, that's very clearly the standard in popular US culture. It's important to remember that people with afro-textured hair have an extremely short list of what could be considered even moderately 'low effort' hairstyles. Of these, most of them are considered to be black haristyles. You've mostly got afros, cornrows, braids, twists/twist outs, dreads, and a bunch of super-short cuts. That's a pretty short and inflexible list, and a few of those aren't what you'd usually see on guys. Most styles you see are combinations of the above, a product of (expensive and really bad-for-your-hair) chemical and heat treatments, or simply artificial (!). As a property of being considered black hairstyles, dreads/box braids/cornrows are often considered unprofessional. Lots of people will call them 'ghetto' and you'll probably get comments when wearing them for events/school/whatever if you're not in a very black community. Dreads in particular get criticized for being 'dirty' (though this is not an exclusively black phenomenon). Hair can be an incredible sore spot for black people. Black girls spend a huge amount of time and effort trying to make their hair look 'acceptable' (aka white) because mainstream culture tells them their hair, isn't and can't be beautiful. Black people are often verbally and physically harassed on the street by white people who think it's a novelty. It's not possible to honestly talk about perceived 'cultural appropriation' without acknowledging the power dynamics there. When dreads are one of the few ways to manage your hair that don't involve a lot of hair-pulling and time, it's really obnoxious to see white celebs get praised for them when you can't even go through any predominantly white area with ANY black hairstyle without getting unwanted comments, hair touching/pulling, whatever. It just comes off as arrogant white tourism.
calibraxis 11y ago
If you're curious as to real reasons, perhaps you should look for the more articulate people who took a stand against this cultural appropriation. Not what Shaun O'dwyer warns you about "sophomoric manifestos". It says something that this article against anti-racism protestors, which has nothing serious to do with "hacking" is #2 now on HN. (Or hey, let's have more articles about pop singers wearing kimonos, to pore over and learn hacking techniques.) At least these protestors actually used tech to "disrupt" something, unlike the startups which use the term as doublethink.
- deciplex 11y ago
  > At least these protestors actually used tech to "disrupt" something, unlike the startups which use the term as doublethink. Yeah, they disrupted a totally harmless event put on by the Museum of Fine Arts in Boston and the Japan Broadcasting Corporation (NHK).
- mikekchar 11y ago
  Honestly, I don't get it. If you have something that is understandable, I wouldn't mind a link to it (don't want to start a flame war, though). I'm Canadian and live in Japan. I wear Japanese clothes very frequently, especially in the summer (jinbei, yukata, geta). I like them. They are comfortable. I live in the country side and nobody bats an eyelid. The one time I wore a jinbei to a baseball game in Tokyo, I got many compliments from people on the street. Like I said. I don't get it. They are clothes. Wouldn't it be racist to say I can't wear them because I'm not Japanese? Similarly, I can't actually think of any class/race implications for women wearing a kimono. It's not different from a suit or dress (other than it is really complicated to get on ;-) ). This just seems bizarre to me. I wonder if the people involved just don't understand what a kimono is?
  - wobbleblob 11y ago
    I wonder if it's preferable for the entire world to dress like late 19th century Englishmen at work (business suit) or like mid 20th century Americans at home (jeans, t-shirt).
wobbleblob 11y ago
One of the perks of living in a diverse capital is that you can pick and choose the various foreign influences that you like (try Turkish or Indonesian cuisine!), while ignoring the ones you don't care for (I'm not going to fast for a month each year, forget it) The thing is, you can't tell other people they should or shouldn't be offended by something just because you are or aren't. It just doesn't work that way. If someone's feelings are hurt, their feelings are hurt, even if they shouldn't be. If someone feels offended by a westerner wearing a kimono, you are going to have to deal with that fact. You might conclude that you don't care about offending them, but telling them they shouldn't be offended will only make it worse.
- cthalupa 11y ago
  If it was simply a matter of their feelings being hurt, it would be one thing - but they are actively telling people what they can and cannot do. In this case it was even more absurd, because the people who created the kimono, the Japanese, were fine with it. Even the ultra nationalistic Japanese that dislike foreigners thought the protesting against this was absurd. Why should any of the people in America be in a position where they can tell westerners they're not allowed to wear a kimono, when the people who invented it, whom actually live in Japanese culture every day of their life, do not feel that any harm is done to Japanese culture by westerners wearing the kimono? It's an extremely arrogant stance to take. I of course cannot tell people what they can and can't be offended by. But you cannot create concessions for every single person who gets offended by every single thing. My rights are not restricted just because it might offend you
- robwilliams 11y ago
  >The thing is, you can't tell other people they should or shouldn't be offended by something just because you are or aren't. It just doesn't work that way. If someone's feelings are hurt, their feelings are hurt, even if they shouldn't be. If someone feels offended by a westerner wearing a kimono, you are going to have to deal with that fact. Why do I have to deal with it? So anyone can be upset by anything, so matter how absurd, and I'm obligated to deal with their perspective? Closing out the other side by claiming offense is childish.
OverlordXenu 11y ago
There's a real difference between actually working with a Kimono and adapting it or remixing it or whatever, and just trying it on like a costume. The latter relegates it to the role of some weird prop, where the main draw is its outsiderness. Like, they're not trying on the Kimono to mix cultures and make something new. They're treating a garment with a long history as a prop. It leaves as bad a taste in my mouth as people who jokingly wear sombreros… like, they're just not treating it in a respectful manner. And I say this as someone who owns one of Naked and Famous's kimono shirts, but for me it's a real wardrobe item and not a joke costume to try on and look wacky in for social media.

venomsnake 11y ago

There is a zealotry strain in the american psyche. Zealotry as a word is also cultural appropriation. I have not died on Masada so freely expect SJW to storm me. So when diversity and political sensitivity becomes religion - we get zealots. I am actually all for cultural appropriation for couple of reasons. 1) Even if it is just dumb fun for the masses, some people of the other culture want to get the real deal and genuinely help in developing and preserving. 2) Even if your culture is appropriated - you have insane amounts of culture to appropriate yourself. 3) People are not easily offended - no matter what the twitter age shows, so most of the time you don't care 4) Sometimes you strike gold - like with blues/hard-rock/heavy-metal (politely leaving hair metal out). We have something that traversed the world, left deep cultural marks everywhere and helped bring the iron curtain down.

wodenokoto 11y ago

The closest I've come to an explanation that makes sense (though it is full of flawed assumptions) is the following: 1) Dreadlocks are a natural hairstyle for black people. Black people are not allowed to have dreadlocks for most types of jobs, since that is simply not considered an appropriate hairstyle for a bank cashier or what ever. 2) when a white celebrity gets dreadlocks she is rubbing it in, so to say, that inherently white-privilege of said celebrity. That is "I can wear your culture because I'm white, you can't wear yours because you are black" The flaws are plenty of course. White middle class can't get white collar jobs wearing dreadlocks, either. The fact that any celebrity can wear funky hairstyles and get away with it isn't attributed to their race, but to their celebrity status. A further argument for cultural appropriation is that the hairstyles required for white-collar jobs are based on "natural white" hairstyles, though I hardly find that to be true either. That is as far as I can extract something resembling a logical argument, I hope this has helped you understand what is going on in the minds of these anti-appropriators. I of course don't expect you to be anymore convinced by their stance.

cthalupa 11y ago
I've heard the dreadlocks thing before, but the whole thing falls apart at point 1 - the natural hairstyle for anyone with long hair who doesn't comb/brush it is dreadlocks, and it's been "independently discovered" in a dozen regions around the world. (Not saying you're arguing that they're correct, as you do point out it's full of flawed assumptions) I roughly get an idea of what the beliefs behind their argument are, but they still seem absurd, and at times it certainly seems like they've "culturally appropriated" white European arrogance themselves.
- BazHK 11y ago
  While dreadlocks aren't literally a black-exclusive hairstyle, that's very clearly the standard in popular US culture. It's important to remember that people with afro-textured hair have an extremely short list of what could be considered even moderately 'low effort' hairstyles. Of these, most of them are considered to be black haristyles. You've mostly got afros, cornrows, braids, twists/twist outs, dreads, and a bunch of super-short cuts. That's a pretty short and inflexible list, and a few of those aren't what you'd usually see on guys. Most styles you see are combinations of the above, a product of (expensive and really bad-for-your-hair) chemical and heat treatments, or simply artificial (!). As a property of being considered black hairstyles, dreads/box braids/cornrows are often considered unprofessional. Lots of people will call them 'ghetto' and you'll probably get comments when wearing them for events/school/whatever if you're not in a very black community. Dreads in particular get criticized for being 'dirty' (though this is not an exclusively black phenomenon). Hair can be an incredible sore spot for black people. Black girls spend a huge amount of time and effort trying to make their hair look 'acceptable' (aka white) because mainstream culture tells them their hair, isn't and can't be beautiful. Black people are often verbally and physically harassed on the street by white people who think it's a novelty. It's not possible to honestly talk about perceived 'cultural appropriation' without acknowledging the power dynamics there. When dreads are one of the few ways to manage your hair that don't involve a lot of hair-pulling and time, it's really obnoxious to see white celebs get praised for them when you can't even go through any predominantly white area with ANY black hairstyle without getting unwanted comments, hair touching/pulling, whatever. It just comes off as arrogant white tourism.

calibraxis 11y ago

If you're curious as to real reasons, perhaps you should look for the more articulate people who took a stand against this cultural appropriation. Not what Shaun O'dwyer warns you about "sophomoric manifestos". It says something that this article against anti-racism protestors, which has nothing serious to do with "hacking" is #2 now on HN. (Or hey, let's have more articles about pop singers wearing kimonos, to pore over and learn hacking techniques.) At least these protestors actually used tech to "disrupt" something, unlike the startups which use the term as doublethink.

deciplex 11y ago
> At least these protestors actually used tech to "disrupt" something, unlike the startups which use the term as doublethink. Yeah, they disrupted a totally harmless event put on by the Museum of Fine Arts in Boston and the Japan Broadcasting Corporation (NHK).
mikekchar 11y ago
Honestly, I don't get it. If you have something that is understandable, I wouldn't mind a link to it (don't want to start a flame war, though). I'm Canadian and live in Japan. I wear Japanese clothes very frequently, especially in the summer (jinbei, yukata, geta). I like them. They are comfortable. I live in the country side and nobody bats an eyelid. The one time I wore a jinbei to a baseball game in Tokyo, I got many compliments from people on the street. Like I said. I don't get it. They are clothes. Wouldn't it be racist to say I can't wear them because I'm not Japanese? Similarly, I can't actually think of any class/race implications for women wearing a kimono. It's not different from a suit or dress (other than it is really complicated to get on ;-) ). This just seems bizarre to me. I wonder if the people involved just don't understand what a kimono is?
- wobbleblob 11y ago
  I wonder if it's preferable for the entire world to dress like late 19th century Englishmen at work (business suit) or like mid 20th century Americans at home (jeans, t-shirt).

wobbleblob 11y ago

One of the perks of living in a diverse capital is that you can pick and choose the various foreign influences that you like (try Turkish or Indonesian cuisine!), while ignoring the ones you don't care for (I'm not going to fast for a month each year, forget it) The thing is, you can't tell other people they should or shouldn't be offended by something just because you are or aren't. It just doesn't work that way. If someone's feelings are hurt, their feelings are hurt, even if they shouldn't be. If someone feels offended by a westerner wearing a kimono, you are going to have to deal with that fact. You might conclude that you don't care about offending them, but telling them they shouldn't be offended will only make it worse.

cthalupa 11y ago
If it was simply a matter of their feelings being hurt, it would be one thing - but they are actively telling people what they can and cannot do. In this case it was even more absurd, because the people who created the kimono, the Japanese, were fine with it. Even the ultra nationalistic Japanese that dislike foreigners thought the protesting against this was absurd. Why should any of the people in America be in a position where they can tell westerners they're not allowed to wear a kimono, when the people who invented it, whom actually live in Japanese culture every day of their life, do not feel that any harm is done to Japanese culture by westerners wearing the kimono? It's an extremely arrogant stance to take. I of course cannot tell people what they can and can't be offended by. But you cannot create concessions for every single person who gets offended by every single thing. My rights are not restricted just because it might offend you
robwilliams 11y ago
>The thing is, you can't tell other people they should or shouldn't be offended by something just because you are or aren't. It just doesn't work that way. If someone's feelings are hurt, their feelings are hurt, even if they shouldn't be. If someone feels offended by a westerner wearing a kimono, you are going to have to deal with that fact. Why do I have to deal with it? So anyone can be upset by anything, so matter how absurd, and I'm obligated to deal with their perspective? Closing out the other side by claiming offense is childish.

OverlordXenu 11y ago

There's a real difference between actually working with a Kimono and adapting it or remixing it or whatever, and just trying it on like a costume. The latter relegates it to the role of some weird prop, where the main draw is its outsiderness. Like, they're not trying on the Kimono to mix cultures and make something new. They're treating a garment with a long history as a prop. It leaves as bad a taste in my mouth as people who jokingly wear sombreros… like, they're just not treating it in a respectful manner. And I say this as someone who owns one of Naked and Famous's kimono shirts, but for me it's a real wardrobe item and not a joke costume to try on and look wacky in for social media.