Do you understand the following?

[AthenaAwakened]

Not asking if you agree or disagree,

do you understand it?

"There are, broadly speaking, cultural appropriation, cultural appreciation, and cultural exchange. Cultural exchange is when both sides enter into relationship as equals and both sides give and take, and both sides benefit. Ex. When trade routes first open between countries. Cultural appreciation is when one engages in the cultural practices traditional to another group of people not as parody or commodity but in deference and as an act of respect. Ex. A business associate from another country in having dinner in your home and you cook dishes from her native country or you perform a ritual custom like the Japanese tea ceremony. And then there is cultural appropriation, which includes such things as using native cultures as sports mascots, having ghetto themed black-face parties, or stereotypical representations of Arabs in action films. What appropriations have in common is that they use the cultural archetype, ritual or artifact in a incorrect or even deliberately disrespectful way.

Now any combination of those three classifications can occur at the same time and both the borrower and the borrowie can get their signals crossed. Hence the contention."

 

[untermensche]

It is an idiosyncratic use of the idea of appropriation.

Generally to appropriate something is just to take it. There is no negative connotation.

Adding a negative connotation is a specialized use of the word. To reduce it to jargon.

 

[Trausti]

It is an idiosyncratic use of the idea of appropriation.

Generally to appropriate something is just to take it. There is no negative connotation.

Adding a negative connotation is a specialized use of the word. To reduce it to jargon.

It's what stupid people do to sound intelligent.

 

[EricK]

The quote seems to miss out by far the most common type though: cultural borrowing. Where one culture uses something from another culture because they like it in some way, and they would be quite happy for the other culture to use anything or everything from their culture in exchange, but that other culture, for whatever reason, chooses not to. I.e it is exactly like cultural exchange but one side chooses not to avail themselves of the benefits they might obtain.

 

[Arctish]

Last week I was in a shop that sold handmade goods from Asia. I saw a very pretty pair of brass earrings in the shape of Tibetan prayer wheels. I think that's an example of what the author is calling cultural appropriation: the symbols, icons, and sacred objects of one culture being used in a completely different manner by members of another.

I don't think it's a bad thing, unless the use is intended to mock or denigrate the other culture.

 

[Cerberus]

I lost the will to live half-way through the third sentence.

 

[bilby]

I lost the will to live half-way through the third sentence.

Trade routes are a problem for you?

 

[Arctish]

I lost the will to live half-way through the third sentence.

Trade routes are a problem for you?

They're just like those miserable psalms, they're so depressing.

 

[dystopian]

Trade routes are a problem for you?

They're just like those miserable psalms, they're so depressing.

Especially when a trade route produces less gold than the maintenance spent on the tiles with roads or railroads on them that allow the trade route to exist in the first place, and someone else has already built machu picchu so you don't get that 25% bonus to trade route profits.

We're talking about Civ5, right?

 

[fast]

Not asking if you agree or disagree,

do you understand it?

"There are, broadly speaking, cultural appropriation, cultural appreciation, and cultural exchange. Cultural exchange is when both sides enter into relationship as equals and both sides give and take, and both sides benefit. Ex. When trade routes first open between countries. Cultural appreciation is when one engages in the cultural practices traditional to another group of people not as parody or commodity but in deference and as an act of respect. Ex. A business associate from another country in having dinner in your home and you cook dishes from her native country or you perform a ritual custom like the Japanese tea ceremony. And then there is cultural appropriation, which includes such things as using native cultures as sports mascots, having ghetto themed black-face parties, or stereotypical representations of Arabs in action films. What appropriations have in common is that they use the cultural archetype, ritual or artifact in a incorrect or even deliberately disrespectful way.

Now any combination of those three classifications can occur at the same time and both the borrower and the borrowie can get their signals crossed. Hence the contention."

Yeah, it sounds like one group doesn't quite grasp that the contention is a product of their wayward actions.

 

[Jayjay]

I suppose I understand what the author intended to say, but don't agree. What's wrong with engaging in practises of another culture as a commodity or "incorrectly"? Sometimes, that kind of appreciation creates a completely new and interesting mix that's worthy in its own right.

 

[James Brown]

"borrowie"??

 

[AthenaAwakened]

"borrowie"??

Yeah, goes back to when my folks were ripped off back when I was a kid. The metropolitan police were treating my father like he stole from himself. His quote, "You seem confused son. I am not the robber, I am the robbie."

 

[bilby]

"borrowie"??

Yeah, goes back to when my folks were ripped off back when I was a kid. The metropolitan police were treating my father like he stole from himself. His quote, "You seem confused son. I am not the robber, I am the robbie."

ee

 

[ronburgundy]

I suppose I understand what the author intended to say, but don't agree. What's wrong with engaging in practises of another culture as a commodity or "incorrectly"? Sometimes, that kind of appreciation creates a completely new and interesting mix that's worthy in its own right.

^^THIS^^ To expand on it, the OP wrongly presumes that culture is a stable thing and that their definitive boundaries of who and what is within and outside each culture. Every "culture" is fluid, fuzzy, changing, and practiced in highly variable ways. Only with top-down oppressive authoritarian control is it otherwise. Ei
IOW, appropriation is inherent to the culture. IT is analogous to genetic variation. Some of it is good, some bad, most neutral, but in the aggregate it is a positive thing and vital to cultural evolution.

 

[AthenaAwakened]

I suppose I understand what the author intended to say, but don't agree. What's wrong with engaging in practises of another culture as a commodity or "incorrectly"?

Ask the people involved, Personaly I have never seen the purpose in using something incorrectly, regardless of what it is. And as for commodification, Rome took the practices and artifacts of a small jewish sect and sold it to the rest of the world as Christianity. I think the damage done by that speaks for itself.

Sometimes, that kind of appreciation creates a completely new and interesting mix that's worthy in its own right.

And if you read the end of the quote, you will see this.

Now any combination of those three classifications can occur at the same time and both the borrower and the borrowie can get their signals crossed. Hence the contention."

If it is appreciation, then there is no problem. And yes i noticed the change in words.

- - - Updated - - -

I suppose I understand what the author intended to say, but don't agree. What's wrong with engaging in practises of another culture as a commodity or "incorrectly"? Sometimes, that kind of appreciation creates a completely new and interesting mix that's worthy in its own right.

^^THIS^^ To expand on it, the OP wrongly presumes that culture is a stable thing and that their definitive boundaries of who and what is within and outside each culture. Every "culture" is fluid, fuzzy, changing, and practiced in highly variable ways. Only with top-down oppressive authoritarian control is it otherwise. Ei
IOW, appropriation is inherent to the culture. IT is analogous to genetic variation. Some of it is good, some bad, most neutral, but in the aggregate it is a positive thing and vital to cultural evolution.

Where does the OP presume that culture is a stable thing?

 

[Toni]

It is an idiosyncratic use of the idea of appropriation.

Generally to appropriate something is just to take it. There is no negative connotation.

Adding a negative connotation is a specialized use of the word. To reduce it to jargon.

To appropriate (verb) can mean to set aside for a specific purpose such as when one appropriates funds for a project.

It can also mean to take or use something in a way that is unfair,or illegal.

One of those meanings is negative.

 

[braces_for_impact]

It's understandable to me. /shrug

 

[fromderinside]

Yeah, goes back to when my folks were ripped off back when I was a kid. The metropolitan police were treating my father like he stole from himself. His quote, "You seem confused son. I am not the robber, I am the robbie."

ee

, eh

 

[Loren Pechtel]

It's poorly written but certainly understandable. Since the poll is currently unanimous, I don't see the point.