4 ms·

I think this is a deep misunderstanding of cultural appropriation, but it is the misunderstanding that has gained traction in twitter circles. Cultural appropri

I think this is a deep misunderstanding of cultural appropriation, but it is the misunderstanding that has gained traction in twitter circles. Cultural appropriation is a denunciation of exploitative oppression, not "anything where someone copies something that his culture (??) didn't come up with". The problem is when corporations make facade copies of cultural heritage to profit from them, while the cultures that originated them not only get nothing out of it, but are actively oppressed in the meantime. That is your typical Taco Bell phenomenon (notice how Taco Bell almost never comes up in the public discussion?) The public discussion is full of examples where some kid makes a Native American hairdress from feathers they found. No corporation profit, nothing is taken, and as long as it's not part of some roleplay where the natives are the bad guys to be killed by the good cowboys, it's also not necessarily reproductive of oppressive structures. The fact that the debate is skewed this way is already a misrepresentation. Now, a corporation that got billions in tax credits and research from the government, making software off the labor of underpaid and overworked developers, deprived of their revenue model because someone copied it? Not cultural appropriation in the least. A deeper point: The public-facing version of cultural appropriation is also low-key ethnic nationalist, because it objectifies ethnicities and the belonging to them, and holds them eternally stable at that. It reinforces "natural" ideas od being a member of any ethnic group, which is the exact opposite of any emancipatory discourse on race and ethnicity.

aembleton 5y ago
Tonight I'm cooking Mushroom Risotto. I'm British. I guess the act of cooking it isn't cultural appropriation because I'm not making a profit from it. But is the seller of the risotto rice appropriating from Italians? This extends to other things; like I eat potatoes; which were domesticated by Native Americans. I purchased mine from Lidl which probably makes a profit from them. Is that cultural appropriation?
- blihp 5y ago
  I think a lot of it depends on how a given product is branded/marketed. Mrs. Buttersworth's is a good recent example here in the U.S. Had this brand actually been originally founded by a kindly grandmother who happened to be black and started bottling up her favorite syrup recipe, there would be no issue. (or anything that even remotely related to how it was branded) Another example are current stories about things like Russian Vodkas are rebranding (to distance themselves from the current situation) when the reality is that the only thing Russian about them is the brand name. We do this all the time with consumer brands from foods to restaurant chains claiming, directly or indirectly, some level of authenticity that isn't even remotely there either in terms of the product itself or those involved in producing it... often neither. It's even worse when said brand is actively harming the group they are profiting from the association with.
- bigger_inside 5y ago
  I should have probably extended the final paragraph of my answer, rather than limiting it to the "public-facing" version. And I guess I invited this with the Taco Bell example. Culture isn't proprietary to a group, and these groups aren't objectively demarcated in any way. To even say "Risotto belongs to the Italians!" is to make statements on who Italians are, and pretend that this is some immutable, objective group, and that for some reason, there is this magical doorstep that if you carry Risotto over it turns it bad. It's when the corporation pretends to "take" this cultural heritage as a marketing facade that they're appropriation something nobody owns, to then turn a profit from it. SO, I apologize for my mangled point. Culture isn't proprietary. Languages and food and customs and songs and stories travel. This is what makes human dynamism. Cultural appropriation is the act of trying to take possession of it. The very act of copyrighting something communal is the problem.
  - aembleton 5y ago
    > The very act of copyrighting something communal is the problem. I love that line and it makes perfect sense.

aembleton 5y ago

Tonight I'm cooking Mushroom Risotto. I'm British. I guess the act of cooking it isn't cultural appropriation because I'm not making a profit from it. But is the seller of the risotto rice appropriating from Italians? This extends to other things; like I eat potatoes; which were domesticated by Native Americans. I purchased mine from Lidl which probably makes a profit from them. Is that cultural appropriation?

blihp 5y ago
I think a lot of it depends on how a given product is branded/marketed. Mrs. Buttersworth's is a good recent example here in the U.S. Had this brand actually been originally founded by a kindly grandmother who happened to be black and started bottling up her favorite syrup recipe, there would be no issue. (or anything that even remotely related to how it was branded) Another example are current stories about things like Russian Vodkas are rebranding (to distance themselves from the current situation) when the reality is that the only thing Russian about them is the brand name. We do this all the time with consumer brands from foods to restaurant chains claiming, directly or indirectly, some level of authenticity that isn't even remotely there either in terms of the product itself or those involved in producing it... often neither. It's even worse when said brand is actively harming the group they are profiting from the association with.
bigger_inside 5y ago
I should have probably extended the final paragraph of my answer, rather than limiting it to the "public-facing" version. And I guess I invited this with the Taco Bell example. Culture isn't proprietary to a group, and these groups aren't objectively demarcated in any way. To even say "Risotto belongs to the Italians!" is to make statements on who Italians are, and pretend that this is some immutable, objective group, and that for some reason, there is this magical doorstep that if you carry Risotto over it turns it bad. It's when the corporation pretends to "take" this cultural heritage as a marketing facade that they're appropriation something nobody owns, to then turn a profit from it. SO, I apologize for my mangled point. Culture isn't proprietary. Languages and food and customs and songs and stories travel. This is what makes human dynamism. Cultural appropriation is the act of trying to take possession of it. The very act of copyrighting something communal is the problem.
- aembleton 5y ago
  > The very act of copyrighting something communal is the problem. I love that line and it makes perfect sense.