Appropriation

>SJWs complain when a white artists acts distinctly "not-white"
>Doesn't complain when a bunch of black guys put on an eastern aesthetic

SJWs, explain.

Other urls found in this thread:

youtube.com/watch?v=RoZd3v8Y3UM
twitter.com/SFWRedditGifs

Well, you see, you're a faggot.

Found the SJW

black americans had their "own" culture stripped away from them when slavery began. they became separated from their heritage when they were transported from africa to america. thus they developed their own culture, and for them, part of that is borrowing from other cultures like parts of the east.

white americans already have a culture. many come from europe and have european traditions. or because they are the majority in the nation, they absorb the national culture.

the thing thats actuallly offensive (and a real sjw would argue against what im about to say) isnt white people appropriating from the east. if anything most people celebrate when their culture is embraced. white americans appropriating from black americans is different because black americans developed their culture in opposition to white culture and in place of a culture that was forcibly stripped from them. so when white people are like "look im black, im doing things black people do!" they're ignoring the context of "hey, a hundred years ago you couldnt own land or vote and i could, and now that you finally have your own thing im taking it for myself because i can and no one in history has ever stopped me"

thats whats up with appropriation. maybe in a post racial society it wont matter but for now it kinda does.

bump because i want OP to respond

off yourself
because sjw's are only filled with self hate not logic. white people with white guilt are literally the worst kind of people in the world and should all be killed

lol ok actual nazi

triggered

This, It's just a complicated topic to begin with and there isn't any right answer to it.

How's Grade 8 going?

To be fair it's fairly explainable. During the time the members of the wu-tang clan were growing up, particularly in New York, the cinemas in black neighborhoods would often be given shitty action movies. Think about Blaxploitation movies, they were at their peak in the 1970s, the RZA was born 1969 and GZA 1966. Another major provider of cheap action movies was China, movies that were quickly dubbed and thrown into these shitty theaters for black people to watch. As much is clearly evident considering 36 Chambers didn't use any vocal samples besides shitty kung-fu movies with a bad English dub.

In many ways this appropriation could be defended because it wasn't the RZA or GZA's fault that they grew up in shitty neighborhoods with bad action movies playing in the theaters. You could even go as far to say that this one interaction with foreign culture was their means of escape from the world they grew up in, resulting in the music they would go on to produce. Though that's likely a stretch.

In short, Wu-Tang had some justification and it wasn't their fault but a consequence of society. A white 20-something from Utah doing the same today would obviously not have the same history and emotional connection and therefore would be exploiting the foreign culture to appear quirky (see what Katy Perry did a few years back).

inb4 I get called a SJW or a cuck, you wanted a legitimate point and I provided it, I would genuinely like to hear people refute it

>black americans developed their culture in opposition to white culture
So your argument is that at the center of black culture is white people? That seems like an extremely simplistic interpretation, and honestly somewhat patronizing. Moreover, it equates this nebulous idea of "white people" with an actual person who happens to be white, which doesn't logically check out. They are two completely different entities. Your interpretation of the former might influence the latter, but a person born white isn't this hundreds-of-years-old transcendental entity (also: "race is a social construct"), and so pointing to a person who is white who happens to be working with things deemed part of "black culture" in a way simplifies the white person to just their skin color, which is pretty racist in itself.

Your argument is the best I've heard so far, but it doesn't really still deal with the fact that when people complain about "cultural appropriation", 1. the person "appropriating" is just another person who is more than his or her skin color, 2. the person in question doesn't have to explain to you why they chose to make a certain kind of work and you most likely don't even know, let alone understand them personally, 3. "culture" might exist, at best, as a transcendental notion but doesn't actually belong to any individual, from which you can show that culture itself doesn't "belong" to anyone, 4. ultimately any kind of argument that presupposes that cultures are even "real" in the way that actual people are real, and simplifies those cultures and privileges them over actual people, and uses "culture" as an excuse to simplify a group of people, whether it be a group of people with a common race, place of origin, etc., into a singular "real" entity that is more valid than the diverse sum of its "parts" that can be somehow exploited for a political narrative, just isn't right.

(this last bit is a bit rough since I'm spitballing here, but something like that)

nah you completely missed the long history of eastern cultural influence on black americans. has nothing to do with cheap kung fu movies played in "shitty theaters." try again.

>i can't argue with user's opinion so i'm just gonna tell him to kill himself. boy that'll tell him.

Go on, what is this long history of eastern cultural influence on black americans? Did it in any way influence the fact that 36 Chambers exclusively featured samples from cheap kung fu movies played in shitty theaters? If there is a long history why would the album feature samples from the English dub?

>In many ways this appropriation could be defended because it wasn't the RZA or GZA's fault that they grew up in shitty neighborhoods with bad action movies playing in the theaters.
But you're just making excuses for them. The same kind of logic applies to, "white kid makes smooth R&B a la The Weeknd and other "black" music without actually trying to be part of the "black community" because that was on the radio around him"
The logical form is the same. Also,
>A white 20-something from Utah doing the same today would obviously not have the same history and emotional connection
>implying you know so much about a person's life from their race, age, and state of origin
Do you not just realize you're making caricatures? If I made a statement like that to describe how some black kid wasn't somehow valid enough to make scandinavian folk metal, you'd call me a racist. It's the same sort of argument. It's the same logic.

this guy gets it at least in Wu Tang's context.

Wu tang was never about Chinese culture or acting Chinese, it was a bunch of rappers that liked shitty kung-fu movies and wanted to sample them in their tracks.

>new movement dealing with current issues
>don't complain about someone people did in the early 90s
Really doesn't make me think.

Oh yeah I don't deny that I was "making excuses for them", note how I said their appropriation "could be defended", not that it was completely off the hook. I'm just saying to an SJW there is a direct correlation between their shitty upbringing and the media they consumed with the music they would produce. Anyone can say they watched kung-fu movies growing up, but due to their particular situation and up-bringing it is arguable that the RZA and GZA had no other choice. That sounds overly dramatic but you catch the drift, in a white neighborhood around that time cinemas were showing Star Wars, Ghostbusters, Woody Allen films, the whole kung-fu movie dichotomy is just another representation of the differing of cultures between black and white people.

>>implying you know so much about a person's life from their race, age, and state of origin
Well unless they were a black youth in large urbanized cities from the 1960s-1990s it is very unlikely their local cinemas would exclusively be playing blaxploitation and kung-fu movies. They could seek out chinese movies and watch them in their free time, super easy in the current internet age, but an SJW would call that appropriation because they've gone out of their way to borrow from other cultures.

> the center of black culture is white people? That seems like an extremely simplistic interpretation
that's your interpretation, not mine. that's one possible reading of what i wrote, but definitely not the entirety of black culture. part of being black is not being white. that doesnt mean ALL of being black is based around being "not white".

i cant speak for black culture because im not black. but a black person who does believe in appropriation explained it to me as this: that its upsetting to see a white person do a "black" thing because historically, black people and black culture have been reviled by the majority americans (historically, white people)

black people have a separate culture than white people because the experience of being black in america is different than the experience of being white. white people have all these different cultures among themselves, obviously, because they make up the racial majority. that there is such a thing as black culture? it has a lot to do with the fact that black people are treated as being black, by white people. which is how it's been for all of americas history.

lastly, it seems like you're trying to argue that we already live in a post racial society. and we dont, in my opinion

I think the general idea is that the negro-loving SJW's over at twitter, tumblr and p4k are ultimately harmful for both blacks and whites alike. For whites since they're ultimately sabotaging their own kind, and for blacks since they're basically spitting in the face of their fathers.

you know what would be really cool? racial harmony. i'm all about that racial harmony.

But some black people consider their culture to be stolen and diluted by white people who borrow so heavily from it. Everyone can want racial harmony but black people in the united states in many ways (beyond cultural appropriation) feel wronged. Whether anyone agrees with them moot, the fact that they feel this way is self-evident through recent rioting.

no shit they feel wronged. and maybe when racism is gone white people can make all the hip hop they want and black people wont care. but their culture WAS stolen, historically, which is why they are sensitive about it being stolen TODAY

and it this point im speaking for a race that isnt my own so this is my last post

kek I like that you responded to me just too echo literally what I just said

Hope you're samefagging if not the normies and liberal cucks have invaded 4chin awesome

>had no other choice
>no other choice to produce gritty hip-hop with Chinese samples
>anything they did that was innovative was simply a matter of their circumstance, not actual brilliance

See, there's an undercurrent of racism in those kinds of arguments that are supposed to be "for minorities".

>it is very unlikely their local cinemas would exclusively be playing blaxploitation and kung-fu movies
>only in this very specific circumstance can you make the kind of music Wu-Tang did, anything else is oppressive and evil
>an SJW would call that appropriation because they've gone out of their way to borrow from other cultures
Which is stupid.

There's also this weird confusion/conflation between perceived inauthenticity and immorality. Just because something seems "fake", just because it might make you feel queasy, for whatever reason, doesn't mean it's "immoral" or evil. For example, a lot of Westerners freaked the fuck out about Scarlett Johansson playing Major Kusanagi and there were some very upset Asian-Americans bitching about it as though they owned it (I believe I came across an article once which was ironically enough, written by a Chinese-American; of course, there's a tendency for liberals to let that shit slide) when in fact a lot of ACTUAL Japanese people were really cool with the fact that GITS was getting a Hollywood portrayal, or at least, having Kusanagi played by ScarJo. I bring up this example because it's a very blatant case of taking groups for granted (eg. "this is an offense to Asians! Asian-Americans!" vs. "yeah no we're actual Japanese and we're totally cool with it" and the fact that nobody seemed to really care what the actual CREATOR OF GITS thought, which might be the most ironic part since he's actually personally relevant to the work, unlike some random asian on the street). It's easy for people to find some "cultural appropriation", feel queasy about it, take for granted that it's correct to feel queasy about it, and from their feelings just assume that they have the ethical and moral high ground, when in fact it's just completely bullheaded and stupid.

Wu-Tang are the only people that can do whatever they want, because no one can fuck with them.

>that's your interpretation, not mine
Except your whole claim and description of what black culture is like stems on that sort of assumption—that on one hand, white culture can exist on its own, but black culture was built around white culture. When you say things like
>black americans developed their culture in opposition to white culture
that's fine, but either that's an essential part of the culture, or it isn't. If it is an essential part, you basically have to concede black culture can't exist without white people and being opposed to them as though they were some kind of (real and/or imagined) boogeyman, and if that's not an essential part of black culture, I don't see how it would really be a problem at all.

(Not the same guy)

What's so important or useful about prescribing cultural barriers that way? Why should we do it?

Because when whitey does it, it's "cultural appropriation," and that's bad, but when blackey does it, it's 100% a-okay. Not that I give a shit if a black guy makes Asian-inspired music or if a white guy starts a funk band (I don't give a shit), but holy fuck are these progressive retards idiotic and annoying.

homage to kung fu films =/= 'cultural appropriation' (for lack of a better term)

So all you have to do is to call it an homage and the SJWs will be fine? Because one man's homage is another man's rip-off. These things aren't really set in stone nearly as much as you'd think it is, especially when there's an extra layer of free interpretation by the audience that's involved.

bump for actual discussion on Sup Forums

A big part of the problem is that until recently, cultural appropriation as an academic term was mostly descriptive without having a moral imperative attached to it. It's only once it fell into the hands of teenagers het up on hormones and budding political awareness that it became regarded as bad bad evil wrong. You could say that of a lot of 'SJW buzzwords', really.

>It's only once it fell into the hands of teenagers het up on hormones and budding political awareness that it became regarded as bad bad evil wrong.
Well I mean the past is a much more racist society, so I don't think they'd even considered cultural appropriation as a demeaning thing to people who weren't originally from America. Especially since the earliest settlers, from around various countries, celebrated their cultures when coming here as America was supposed to be a place for that; immigrants coming together to form their own nation.

/muthafuckin thread

Japan hates black people tho

>SJW

back2/v/ little nigger

>Extreme, moronic oversimplification
okay buddy

No they don't nigga

youtube.com/watch?v=RoZd3v8Y3UM

newfag detected

>demands moderate intelligent nuanced evidence of Japan's modern xenophobia and racism
>anecdotal retort

>so when white people are like "look im black, im doing things black people do!" they're ignoring the context of "hey, a hundred years ago you couldnt own land or vote and i could, and now that you finally have your own thing im taking it for myself because i can and no one in history has ever stopped me"
So what should white people do, act guilty with every black person they meet until everyone hates themselves?

assuming everyone is the same person

this nigga here

Oh look, an actual SJW.

I don't care about 100 years ago. I wasn't alive then, nor were the black people alive today who get offended about this sort of thing (though let's be honest, typically when someone throws a shitfit over white people culturally appropriating something from a brown culture, that someone is white and upper-middle class). I wasn't born with the knowledge that my ancestors were oppressed 80 years ago, I was told. Blacks weren't born with the knowledge that they were oppressed 150 years ago, it's been told to them. They adopted the mindset of being an oppressed class, the mindset of perpetual, unsolvable victimhood. And since the entire concept of wrongful cultural appropriation is a literal social construct, I choose to excuse myself from giving a shit about it. I appropriate whatever I feel like without guilt.

>act black
>act guilty
>there are only two options

True, but we don't live a vacuum. Today is a product of the past and history repeats itself. The same people might not be alive, but the same norms live on through time.

not the same guy but

>the same norms live on through time
No they don't—or at least, if they do, that's on you and your life.

Anyway I get you read Foucault in college, and this is the sort of argument that the somewhat more well-read SJW's make, but it just misses the point of the fact that so-called "minorities" have just as much freedom as "non-minorities". Acting like the past—and when I say past, I especially mean that glorified "cultural past", in which you lump yourself with some arbitrary others and claim you are all one and the same—ties you down is stupid. Sure, you are born with thrownness, but on the other hand, the facts of your life which you are thrown into, while it may have some causal chain to very specific individuals hundred years or whatever into the past, does not mean that they are relevant. To use a rather extreme example, perhaps you were lied to by your family and told your ancestors were slaves, when in fact your parents are just first-generation immigrants who have no history of being enslaved, etc. And yet, you might act like this "collective history" of slavery bears upon you—and with this sort of example, I point out that these stories you tell yourselves are fiction. Not just because they are actually irrelevant to you (or relevant only if you decide to make it so, which is your choice and responsibility, not part of your thrownness), but because there is a distinct need for imagination to add color to this so-called "history" of yours that lasts for hundreds of years, and imagination simply does not engender truth. Or to ridiculously simplify, since you've read Foucault, go on and read Sartre.

I feel what you're saying, but damn you are a shitty writer.

Cut me some slack, I'm falling asleep and I'm writing on Sup Forums

I don't know what you've found so shitty though, if it's that you don't know what I mean by transcendental or whatever I'm gonna laugh.

Exactly. The only people that should be leading the conversation of cultural appropriation are the people of the culture that is supposedly being appropriated. I've noticed that East Asians are generally pretty chill about all this stuff, such as non-Japanese people donning kiminos and whatnot.

Somewhat related story, when I was a kid I used to get henna from my mom, and sometimes I'd wear it to school. I was pretty proud of it myself but I was made fun of and shit, like "ew don't touch me" or "ew she draws all over her hands." Fast forward a few years and henna is starting to catch on a bit more. Soon enough I started seeing booths advertising henna tattoos from amusement parks to my high school.

I was pretty ecstatic that it was catching on, I still remember my reaction seeing a booth at Great America for it. I still kinda am for the most part. But I find it, I dunno, sad? Ironic? I was being insulted over something I loved, something part of my culture for years and now it's popular for all to wear. I'm not saying they shouldn't be allowed, but when it comes to trying something new from another culture, appreciate the people who brought it first, you know?

>I was being insulted over something I loved, something part of my culture for years
No, you were mocked because of your social ineptitude which allowed yourself to be a subject of mockery.

Kids tease kids about anything if they let them, it's not about what they tease you about directly, it's about who you are and what your dynamic with other kids is.

I wasn't really an consistent object of ridicule in school, though. I got along with my classmates pretty well. The henna was just something they thought was weird and thus made fun of me for.

My point was to not completely disregard the origin of an aspect of another culture. Not saying that one needs to be an expert, just show some decency or respect is all.

dude joes goes tattoo lmao

capitalist societies don't acknowledge people unless they can juice them for profit.

Fair enough.

But it doesn't seem like they actually owe you anything. If they claim it's a European invention, that would just be obviously false. They might like the henna tattoos, but it doesn't mean they have to like or respect your culture or whatever. You can not care about Spanish people and still play a classical guitar. You might not like it, but they don't owe you or your "people" anything of the sort; indifference is the standard and anything else is a positive. I've enjoyed Ethiopian food, for example; I don't care about Ethiopia. Eating delicious finger food a few times doesn't suddenly make me want to research the history of the country it originated from. I just pay the bill and get on with it. And that's fine.

privilege plus power, shitlord