ughghghgh i hate when anything offensive happens ever and people be like OH STOP OVERREACTING IT’S NOT A BIG DEAL like omg shut the fuck up you ignorant shitlords it is a big deal
ohhhhhhhh my god it physically hurts to read the comments on this fucking thing
when you see his dick for the first time
things i’ve discovered about myself as a student: i’ll only answer a teacher’s questions if nobody else answers it before me and the answer is painfully obvious
|—||Assata Shakur (via pakiswagger)|
In principle, generally no, as it is good to learn about other people and their cultures and heritages, especially when it is taught in their own framework through their own voices (if it is a white person teaching about cultures they are not a part of, I would avoid the class). However, others feel that yes it is invasive and please respect their opinions on that. Keep in mind that many white students in said classes often make those classes very uncomfortable and even unsafe spaces for people of those heritages, hence why people may feel it is invasive for white people to take those classes.
Some examples of how white students create an uncomfortable and unsafe space from my own experience of having white classmates in Asian and Asian American studies classes: dominating discussions, pushing racial and ethnic stereotypes (including making comments that the Chinese, Korean, and Japanese and diaspora students in class were supposed to disagree with each other, especially when we supported each other in addressing problems of racism, Western militarism, anglophone linguistic imperialism, etc.; pushing the model minority myth), derailing discussions to make it about them, acting like they were an expert because they once traveled to a country in that region, talking about how they want to “help those people” and other such white savior crap, etc. And many white folks after taking such class(es) will try to use that as if it makes them an authority to speak for and over those of us who have lived experience.
Waluigi just wants to say, he believes that cultural appropriation is when you take a part of someone’s heritage/culture and make a mockery of it.
Not when you dread your hair, not when you wear a bindi, not when you get a dream catcher tattoo.
Dressing up in traditional African garb to make fun of African culture? That’s cultural appropriation. Saying “hella” in a sentence? Not cultural appropriation.
Do-a you see the difference?
You clearly don’t understand appropriation at all. Make sure to read the last paragraph.
Cultural appropriation is a anthropological concept. It’s studied, researched and discussed in academic journals. Tumblr’s probably the first place you’ve come across it though, so I can understand your confusion.
No one who is against cultural appropriation is against participating or involving in other cultures. The problem with appropriation is that it is the misrepresentation, misuse, and/or decontextualization of traditions from already marginalized/oppressed groups. It’s a concept from the social sciences, particularly anthropology and specifically describes a harmful/exploitative colonialist power dynamic. It reinforces stereotypes, Eurocentric beauty standards, racist colonial/imperial power dynamics, and in many cases can be a form of visual/symbolic dehumanization.
If you want to participate and involve yourself in other cultures, you have to do it on their terms, and not feel entitled to their cultural practices. It’s not that hard to respect another culture by acknowledging and respecting their boundaries. Interested in Native American cultures? Awesome. Go to a powwow, don’t desecrate a warbonnet. Interested in South Indian culture? Go to a bharatanatyam performance, don’t slap a bindi on your forehead.
Additionally you need to understand that intention is irrelevant. Even if people do things because they like them or think they’re pretty, they can still be racists. “… people will frequently argue that a particular statement or action doesn’t constitute racism because racism wasn’t intended. As noted elsewhere, in Human Rights law and anti-racism education, intentionality is irrelevant. It is the effect/impact of the action on the target person/group that is to be considered and takes precedence.” [source] ” “The other way I think white people avoid an honest account in discussion of racism is when we reduce racism only to overtly prejudiced or racist kinds of intentions. Most white people I know, and I’m not just talking about, you know, radicals or liberals or whatever, but most white people in the United States today do not go into situations with the intention of being overtly racist. And therefore, people say, white people often say, “Well, if there was a problem it wasn’t my fault because I didn’t intend to be a racist in the way that Bull Connor or George Wallace — pick your favorite overtly white supremacist, Southern bigot from the 1950s acted. But racism, again, just is not about simply people being treated badly. It’s not simply about intentions. One can act in a way that reinforces a white-supremacist system, even though one doesn’t have the intention of being a racist." [source]