From whom in the Black community should Kylie Jenner have sought permission to braid her hair?

[whichphilosophy]

When Kylie Jenner, famous for being famous, decided to tweet a selfie of her new hairstyle, someone called Amandla Stenberg and every person on feministing.com called her out for 'cultural appropriation'.

Since Jenner was accused of 'appropriation', I wanted to check my understanding of the term.

tr.v. (-āt′) ap·pro·pri·at·ed, ap·pro·pri·at·ing, ap·pro·pri·ates
1. To set apart for a specific use: appropriating funds for education.
2. To take possession of or make use of exclusively for oneself, often without permission: My coworker appropriated my unread newspaper.

So, I have to wonder. From whom did Jenner steal cornrows (thus depriving that person of them), and from whom should she have asked permission to wear cornrows?

If she wants to be Afro-American then she has to be honest that she is not but wishes to be as one.

 

[Playball40]

Why does a person need a 'real' 'connection' to a culture in order to use aspects of (or even the whole kit and kaboodle of) that culture?

If I am completely white but my cousin is half Eskimo, can I wear mukluks? What if my cousin isn't an Eskimo but I went to Alaska, hunted and skinned a seal myself, tanned the leather and crafted them with bone tools myself making a museum quality example of Mukluks, but I never once actually talked to an Eskimo person?

What if I am genetically 100% Inuit but was adopted and raised by white people living in Florida and have never even read a Wikipedia article about Eskimos Alaska, Canada, or even Siberia? Can I wear Mukluks without someone accusing me of cultural appropriation?

There is no such thing as a cultural ownership. There can be no authority on who gets to use what. People who are upset that I am using things that they think are special to them in the wrong way are out of line. If it is cold outside and I want to have warm feet I will put on my mukluks. If I feel selfconscious about my small head and I want to style my hair into an afro, then I will head on down to the salon. It doesn't matter what my apparent or actual connection to either of these cultures may be, I don't deserve any criticism.

If I squint my eyes and mockingly interchange my R's and L's when I talk to an Asian looking person I am being a rude, disrespectful, racist, ass and I deserve a great deal of criticism.

Like I said before, there are cultural appreciation, cultural exchange, and cultural appropriation. There is also Cultural assimilation. These things overlap and people get confused and make mistakes. These things exist inside of a certain history, they exist within the societal hierarchy. If people want to understand or discuss or debate this issue but they want to ignore history, ignore the hierarchy, all that will be had is a shouting match.

BTW, if you think that simply buying or wearing Mukluks is what would anger Eskimos, you don't understand the situation.

Can you define them for me and give me an example because clearly I'm not getting it.

 

[Metaphor]

When Kylie Jenner, famous for being famous, decided to tweet a selfie of her new hairstyle, someone called Amandla Stenberg and every person on feministing.com called her out for 'cultural appropriation'.

Since Jenner was accused of 'appropriation', I wanted to check my understanding of the term.

tr.v. (-āt′) ap·pro·pri·at·ed, ap·pro·pri·at·ing, ap·pro·pri·ates
1. To set apart for a specific use: appropriating funds for education.
2. To take possession of or make use of exclusively for oneself, often without permission: My coworker appropriated my unread newspaper.

So, I have to wonder. From whom did Jenner steal cornrows (thus depriving that person of them), and from whom should she have asked permission to wear cornrows?

If she wants to be Afro-American then she has to be honest that she is not but wishes to be as one.

She doesn't want to be black. She wanted to braid her hair.

- - - Updated - - -

If I don't care what Japanese martial artists think of me, though, then my not having any connection to Japanese culture isn't a problem; I'm just an asshole in a costume for reasons all my own.

Why would wearing it make you an asshole?

 

[AthenaAwakened]

Like I said before, there are cultural appreciation, cultural exchange, and cultural appropriation. There is also Cultural assimilation. These things overlap and people get confused and make mistakes. These things exist inside of a certain history, they exist within the societal hierarchy. If people want to understand or discuss or debate this issue but they want to ignore history, ignore the hierarchy, all that will be had is a shouting match.

BTW, if you think that simply buying or wearing Mukluks is what would anger Eskimos, you don't understand the situation.

Can you define them for me and give me an example because clearly I'm not getting it.

I already did, with the exception of assimilation.

I've been reading this discussion with interest because I think both sides of the argument have good points, and I really don't know where I stand on the issue.

On the one hand, I do think there is something obnoxious and insulting about the wholesale parody of cultural icons - the debate over "redskins" for a sports team, or the "sexy geisha" Halloween costume. There was the discussion (don't remember if it was this board) about the Palm Beach, Florida group that had a "Florida Cracker" themed fundraiser, and the jackasses showed up in costumes that included western cowboy clothing with baby dolls pinned to them or blackface or Mexican costumes - generally showing their utter ignorance of and disdain for the genuine historic culture of "Florida Cracker".

On the other hand, there was a recent flap about Katy Perry wearing "gelled baby hair" which didn't make any sense to me because the style - however much it may have recently been "borrowed" by black women - was one of the popular hairstyles in the Roaring Twenties. I think there is very little in fashion and cultures that haven't already been "borrowed" from elsewhere so I am not sure how anyone is supposed to draw the line, particularly if such "borrowing" is done from a position of respect or admiration.

Well I think of it like this. 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 culture 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.

 

[AthenaAwakened]

If she wants to be Afro-American then she has to be honest that she is not but wishes to be as one.

She doesn't want to be black.

I agree with you 100%

She wanted to braid her hair.

She wanted to get people talking about her. If all she wanted was to braid her hair, then that is all she would have done. But she tweeted it. And she got another 15 minutes.

 

[RavenSky]

She wanted to braid her hair.

She wanted to get people talking about her. If all she wanted was to braid her hair, then that is all she would have done. But she tweeted it. And she got another 15 minutes.

yep

I guess The Donald has been monopolizing the media's attention and the poor girl just had to do something

 

[laughing dog]

Does this mean we should expect the Donald to get corn rows during a slow news cycle?

 

[Playball40]

So I thought of what I would consider 'appropriation'. When Constantine wanted to convert the Pagans to Christianity, he appropriated their traditions and celebrations into "Christian" celebrations. But his intent was not to respect the Pagans but to do away with them completely.

 

[whichphilosophy]

If she wants to be Afro-American then she has to be honest that she is not but wishes to be as one.

She doesn't want to be black. She wanted to braid her hair.

- - - Updated - - -

If I don't care what Japanese martial artists think of me, though, then my not having any connection to Japanese culture isn't a problem; I'm just an asshole in a costume for reasons all my own.

Why would wearing it make you an asshole?

There's nothing wrong with women wanting to braid their hair. Women of all nationalities do this.

 

[zorq]

Why does a person need a 'real' 'connection' to a culture in order to use aspects of (or even the whole kit and kaboodle of) that culture?

If I am completely white but my cousin is half Eskimo, can I wear mukluks? What if my cousin isn't an Eskimo but I went to Alaska, hunted and skinned a seal myself, tanned the leather and crafted them with bone tools myself making a museum quality example of Mukluks, but I never once actually talked to an Eskimo person?

What if I am genetically 100% Inuit but was adopted and raised by white people living in Florida and have never even read a Wikipedia article about Eskimos Alaska, Canada, or even Siberia? Can I wear Mukluks without someone accusing me of cultural appropriation?

There is no such thing as a cultural ownership. There can be no authority on who gets to use what. People who are upset that I am using things that they think are special to them in the wrong way are out of line. If it is cold outside and I want to have warm feet I will put on my mukluks. If I feel selfconscious about my small head and I want to style my hair into an afro, then I will head on down to the salon. It doesn't matter what my apparent or actual connection to either of these cultures may be, I don't deserve any criticism.

If I squint my eyes and mockingly interchange my R's and L's when I talk to an Asian looking person I am being a rude, disrespectful, racist, ass and I deserve a great deal of criticism.

Like I said before, there are cultural appreciation, cultural exchange, and cultural appropriation. There is also Cultural assimilation. These things overlap and people get confused and make mistakes. These things exist inside of a certain history, they exist within the societal hierarchy. If people want to understand or discuss or debate this issue but they want to ignore history, ignore the hierarchy, all that will be had is a shouting match.

BTW, if you think that simply buying or wearing Mukluks is what would anger Eskimos, you don't understand the situation.

I clearly don't understand the situation then. I was just told that I can't wear samurai outfits, but you are telling me that I CAN wear mukluks. Why does wearing a samurai outfit cause offence but wearing mukluks not? Maybe YOU don't understand the situation. Because an article of clothing is an article of clothing. If it is closely associated with a particular culture it should either cause offence when worn by someone without a "real connection" to that culture or it should not. So which is it? Can I wear mukluks and samurai outfits or can I not?

I don't see samurais trained in Kendo causing offence when they wear suits and ties, but maybe Suit and tie culture has been assimilated into all asian cultures now. I simply can't think of another applicable parallel except maybe for bikini's (Or all modern manufactured clothing types) which have also been assimilated into Asian cultures now too. Which brings up another question: Not everybody in Asia wears bikinis or business suits, so how many people who "look like me" walking around in Samurai outfits does it take before it becomes acceptable for me to wear samurai outfits and not be misappropriating the outfit?

 

[EricK]

I clearly don't understand the situation then. I was just told that I can't wear samurai outfits, but you are telling me that I CAN wear mukluks. Why does wearing a samurai outfit cause offence but wearing mukluks not? Maybe YOU don't understand the situation. Because an article of clothing is an article of clothing. If it is closely associated with a particular culture it should either cause offence when worn by someone without a "real connection" to that culture or it should not. So which is it? Can I wear mukluks and samurai outfits or can I not?

I don't see samurais trained in Kendo causing offence when they wear suits and ties, but maybe Suit and tie culture has been assimilated into all asian cultures now. I simply can't think of another applicable parallel except maybe for bikini's (Or all modern manufactured clothing types) which have also been assimilated into Asian cultures now too. Which brings up another question: Not everybody in Asia wears bikinis or business suits, so how many people who "look like me" walking around in Samurai outfits does it take before it becomes acceptable for me to wear samurai outfits and not be misappropriating the outfit?

You need a handy cut-out-and-keep guide to identity politics which will help you (and Metaphor, and Axulus etc) understand not only this thread but dozens of others here.

People are not to be considered as individuals but as members of groups.

These groups can be divided into two sorts: oppressors and victims.

Whether you are an oppressor or a victim depends not on whether you, yourself, have ever oppressed anyone or been victimised, but on what group(s) you are a member of.

Some of these groups are as follows: men oppress women; whites oppress non-whites; heterosexual people oppress gay people; employers oppress employees; the rich oppress the poor.

In an interaction between an oppressor (O) and a victim (V), any good which results (whether to O or V) is not due to O; and any bad which results (whether to O or V) is not V's fault.

Even if there is no direct interaction, O is not to be credited for any good things which happen in his life, and V is not to blame for any bad things which happen in his. Both are down to "society". Although V is allowed to claim credit for good things which happen, and O can be considered responsible for bad things which happen to him.

The morality or offensiveness of an action is not based on the action itself but on the group identities of any participants.
​

Here are a few questions to see if you have grasped the idea:
Why is obesity rising among both rich and poor?

Show

The rich are growing fat off their exploitation of the poor. The poor can not afford to eat healthily.

A western government, a Middle Eastern government and an African government are found to be cracking down on a minority ethnic group. Who or what is to blame in each case?

Show

The western government; US Imperialism; European colonialism

Person A adopts the hairstyle or clothing of culture B. Should I be offended?

Show

Technically the correct answer is it depends on the identity of A and B. But in reality you might as well get offended. The only reason to get involved in identity politics in the first place is so you can be permanently offended by something or other.

 

[zorq]

You need a handy cut-out-and-keep guide to identity politics which will help you (and Metaphor, and Axulus etc) understand not only this thread but dozens of others here.

I am hoping it isn't as simple as that.

 

[zorq]

I did think of a better example of European/North American-ish culture that has been appropriated by Asians. Wedding ceremony culture. I have been to two western style weddings here in Korea because they are popular among the younger generation now. Fully traditional Korean style weddings are obviously still available as are beautiful, colorful, traditional Korean wedding gowns. But many brides are choosing to have western style wedding ceremonies with or without western style wedding gowns instead of or sometimes in addition to a traditional Korean wedding ceremony.

There are differences between the western style ceremonies that Koreans perform and "authentic" western ceremonies that you might encounter in most of North America and Europe but there is no mistaking the distinction between western and Korean. As for wedding gowns, Vera Wang is just as popular an influence in brides opting for a western gown as she is in the West. The style preferences on average aren't exactly the same but anyone can see that a Korean wedding hanbok looks nothing like a Western white wedding gown.

Are most of these young brides and grooms using the artifacts and ceremonies of a foreign culture to which they have no "real connection" and may not really understand for their own selfish ends?
Yes.

Should Westerners be upset by this? Upset that Koreans who have access to wonderful traditional ceremonies and who know very little about Western wedding culture are running around performing bastardised versions of something so sacred to English speaking people who use Google that when I type in the word 'sanctity' into google 'of marriage' is the number 2 autofill suggestion right behind 'of life'?
No. We should have no right to publicly condemn the merits of any other person's (non criminal) pursuit of happiness.

 

[laughing dog]

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.

This is a clear explanation of the differences. Not every use of another culture is culture appropriation. Not every use of another culture is an act of disrespect to that culture. And not every claim of cultural appropriation is accurate or necessarily reasonable.

Frankly, I don't see how hard it is to assimilate those differences into the discussion.

 

[AthenaAwakened]

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.

This is a clear explanation of the differences. Not every use of another culture is culture appropriation. Not every use of another culture is an act of disrespect to that culture. And not every claim of cultural appropriation is accurate or necessarily reasonable.

Frankly, I don't see how hard it is to assimilate those differences into the discussion.

First, thank you for actually reading what I posted.

I think what is hard is leaving a place of comfort in order to see things from another point of view.

 

[EricK]

You need a handy cut-out-and-keep guide to identity politics which will help you (and Metaphor, and Axulus etc) understand not only this thread but dozens of others here.

I am hoping it isn't as simple as that.

Well of course it isn't quite as simple as that. I gave you the "Identity Politics 101" outline. For instance, people can be members of both oppressor groups and victim groups at the same time. If a black man interacts with a white woman then who is the oppressor and who is the victim? ie When does race outrank gender and when does gender outrank race? And what of the Jews? They are in a state of flux - sometimes they are oppressors and sometimes they are victims. These are complex questions. But thankfully it doesn't matter how you answer them, or even whether you answer them consistently, as long as you remember to take offense at whatever happens.

If you want to learn more I advise you read The Guardian website. Here, for instance, is an article pointing out how ridiculous getting offended about Kylie Jenner's hairstyle is:
http://www.theguardian.com/commenti...-woman-black-hairstyle-cultural-appropriation

But note that the main reason it is wrong to get offended about that, according to the author, is that it is playing into the hands of the patriarchy and helping them in their victimization of women - which presumably is the thing we should really be offended about.

Politicising the issue of hair is wrong. Women have fought for the freedom to make their own choices for centuries. Why do some women now want to take over the role of men in dictating to us how we should or shouldn’t look? It is important a woman’s conception of beauty isn’t dictated by society, black or white, female or male. All that will do is to undermine the self-confidence of some women and build walls between us.

 

[Crazy Eddie]

You need a handy cut-out-and-keep guide to identity politics which will help you (and Metaphor, and Axulus etc) understand not only this thread but dozens of others here.

I am hoping it isn't as simple as that.

Identity politics certainly is.

Actual person-to-person intercommunal race relations is ALOT more complicated, but is not generally the arena of politicians.

 

[Metaphor]

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 culture archetype, ritual or artifact in a incorrect or even deliberately disrespectful way.

I still don't understand the difference.

In recent years in Australia, there's been a cultural shift from no real recognition or ceremony associated with Hallowe'en towards American-style decoration and even children knocking doors for candy.

I've also noticed an increase in use of symbols and imagery from Day of the Dead celebrations, especially calaveras. I'm certain the people who consume these sugar skulls are using them 'incorrectly' (that is, they're not doing it to honour dead relatives, but because they like the aesthetic associated with it).

Are they cultural appropriationists? Is what they're doing morally wrong?

 

[AthenaAwakened]

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 culture archetype, ritual or artifact in a incorrect or even deliberately disrespectful way.

I still don't understand the difference.

Then I can't help you, son.

Some people will always get it, will always understand; and some people just can't or just won't.

BTW I noticed how you just left cultural exchange out of the quote. For someone who just can't understand, you sure know how to quote mine.

Jessayin'

 

[laughing dog]

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 culture archetype, ritual or artifact in a incorrect or even deliberately disrespectful way.

I still don't understand the difference.

In recent years in Australia, there's been a cultural shift from no real recognition or ceremony associated with Hallowe'en towards American-style decoration and even children knocking doors for candy.

As an US citizen, I don't think the celebration of Halloween is much of a cultural event. If it is as you describe, if it is anything it is an example of cultural assimilation, since there does not appear to be any lack of respect in its adoption.

I've also noticed an increase in use of symbols and imagery from Day of the Dead celebrations, especially calaveras. I'm certain the people who consume these sugar skulls are using them 'incorrectly' (that is, they're not doing it to honour dead relatives, but because they like the aesthetic associated with it).

Are they cultural appropriationists? Is what they're doing morally wrong?

In the 2nd case, I doubt they are cultural appropriationists. At worst, they are simply being ignorant.

So, in neither case are they doing anything morally wrong in my view.