Oberlin student worried she's appropriating her own culture

[Metaphor]

I think Fosters was taking the piss.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Shrimp_on_the_barbie
https://www.outback.com/lunch/starters/aussie-tizers-to-share/new-fosters-beer-cheese-fondue

Australians don't use the word 'shrimp' much; that was specifically to appeal to an American audience.

But we're more fond of meat -- red meat -- at barbecues, than prawns.

 

[Arctish]

So was Paul Hogan's cultural appropriation of Aussie slang for a beer commercial featuring inauthentic Australian cuisine a bad thing?

 

[Metaphor]

So was Paul Hogan's cultural appropriation of Aussie slang for a beer commercial featuring inauthentic Australian cuisine a bad thing?

Whom are you asking?

Paul Hogan is Australian, so he'd escape the accusation of appropriation anyway.

But no: it isn't a bad thing. Paul Hogan can do whatever he likes. He doesn't own Australian culture, I don't own it, nobody owns it.

 

[Tom Sawyer]

I thought Disney owned Australian culture. Didn't they buy it back in the 90s?

 

[Toni]

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Shrimp_on_the_barbie
https://www.outback.com/lunch/starters/aussie-tizers-to-share/new-fosters-beer-cheese-fondue

It's a source of never-ending amusement since Aussies call those prawns, not shrimp, and barbeque prawns is actually fairly uncommon. Nevertheless, Yanks love the "shrimp on the barbie" line, and so Fosters must have been getting in on the fun.

Maybe the shrimp on the barbie thing started with Fosters......

 

[dismal]

It seems to me that the nature of culture is each new generation appropriates the culture from the previous one or it wouldn't be a culture. It would be something fresh and new.

 

[AthenaAwakened]

So a College student is confused about her identity and over thinking about it ...

In other news, water is discovered to be wet.

 

[Tom Sawyer]

So a College student is confused about her identity and over thinking about it ...

In other news, water is discovered to be wet.

But there's not much humour value in water's wetness. The results of this woman's overthinking, however, are pretty damn funny.

 

[AthenaAwakened]

So a College student is confused about her identity and over thinking about it ...

In other news, water is discovered to be wet.

But there's not much humour value in water's wetness. The results of this woman's overthinking, however, are pretty damn funny.

Funny yes, but outside of that, you are kinda left with, ... eh.

 

[Tom Sawyer]

But there's not much humour value in water's wetness. The results of this woman's overthinking, however, are pretty damn funny.

Funny yes, but outside of that, you are kinda left with, ... eh.

Well ya, that's the point. It's worth a chuckle and not much else. Intellectual vapidity can be funny just in and of itself.

 

[AthenaAwakened]

Funny yes, but outside of that, you are kinda left with, ... eh.

Well ya, that's the point. It's worth a chuckle and not much else. Intellectual vapidity can be funny just in and of itself.

Oh no doubt. And if i had heard this woman when I was in college say some of the things in the piece, I would have cracked on her HARD! Not to be mean (well, to be a little mean) but to get her see things in a little more perspective.

 

[ronburgundy]

To sum up the thread: Toni and Athena are trying to minimize and marginalize this students' article in order to distance it from the larger culture of whiny, victimhood, and manufactured outrage polluting college campuses that they more generally support and partake in.

But the reality is that the reason the article is funny is because it does reflect and expose the idiocy and absurdity of most of the "appropriation" rhetoric and policies like "trigger warnings" and "safe spaces", and calls for firings the moment a random person anywhere near campus says something offensive.

 

[AthenaAwakened]

To sum up the thread: Toni and Athena are trying to minimize and marginalize this students' article in order to distance it from the larger culture of whiny, victimhood, and manufactured outrage polluting college campuses that they more generally support and partake in.

So you think most people in college (and in many if not most cases living out of mommy and daddy's pockets with few if any real world worries) between the ages of 17 and 22 are whiny, see themselves as victims and are outraged over stupid stuff?

Gee I wonder why that is?

Between the ages of 10 and 25, the brain undergoes changes that have important implications for behavior (see Cognitive development below). The brain reaches 90% of its adult size by the time a person is six years of age.[58] Thus, the brain does not grow in size much during adolescence. However, the creases in the brain continue to become more complex until the late teens. The biggest changes in the folds of the brain during this time occur in the parts of the cortex that process cognitive and emotional information​

 Adolescence

But the reality is that the reason the article is funny is because it does reflect and expose the idiocy and absurdity of most of the "appropriation" rhetoric and policies like "trigger warnings" and "safe spaces", and calls for firings the moment a random person anywhere near campus says something offensive.

And you have proof this is a major problem on college campuses? I know it gets press, but then again so did flag pole sitting and cramming people into phone booths.

 

[Toni]

To sum up the thread: Toni and Athena are trying to minimize and marginalize this students' article in order to distance it from the larger culture of whiny, victimhood, and manufactured outrage polluting college campuses that they more generally support and partake in.

But the reality is that the reason the article is funny is because it does reflect and expose the idiocy and absurdity of most of the "appropriation" rhetoric and policies like "trigger warnings" and "safe spaces", and calls for firings the moment a random person anywhere near campus says something offensive.

To sum up this post: ronburgundy once again displays a significant lack of comprehension of other posters posts and of life in general.

 

[Toni]

Have you misunderstood what a trigger warning is? Trigger warnings aren't integral to a story, they're not even part of the story.

No, I totally get the idea of trigger warnings. Also of what is integral to a piece of writing or other creative work.

No, it was not being presented as 'authentic'. She complained that it wasn't authentic. But whether it's 'authentic' or not is irrelevant. The people copying the tradition made it their own tradition.

Unless they present it as authentique.

Why would I care what you assume? Hell, I couldn't care if you threw a party specifically satirising Australians. If that's what blows air up your jock strap, go ahead!

You might care if you were young, thousands of miles away from home, on your own for the first time and were confronted with the dominant culture attempting to impose whatever cultural stereotypes they had on YOU.

It's a bit bizarre to find what people absorb from your culture and take as truth and truth that can be applied with a broad brush to anyone rom that general area.

 

[Don2 (Don1 Revised)]

Celebrate whatever holiday you want, however you want to, you're not harming anybody by doing it.

...unless the way you want to celebrate is harming somebody by doing it...

Trivial counter-example: the other thread about the Egyptian Copts in Germany on New Years Day.

 

[Metaphor]

Celebrate whatever holiday you want, however you want to, you're not harming anybody by doing it.

...unless the way you want to celebrate is harming somebody by doing it...

Trivial counter-example: the other thread about the Egyptian Copts in Germany on New Years Day.

You know, I half-expected a deliberate reading against the text response but I decided to leave my sentence unqualified. I ought to be more pessimistic.

Of course, you and I both know that assaulting somebody is harming them, and if your holiday celebration is assaulting somebody, then you are harming them by assaulting them.

But if you want to celebrate The Day of the Dead by building an altar to your dead pet, go ahead. It's your time and resources, not mine. It does me no harm if you see a tradition, copy it, and make it your own -- just like every single person in Mexico has done since the festival was invented.

Also, how did you so successfully identify the Cologne group of assaulters? Do you have access to information the rest of us do not?

 

[Metaphor]

You might care if you were young, thousands of miles away from home, on your own for the first time and were confronted with the dominant culture attempting to impose whatever cultural stereotypes they had on YOU.

In what way was she imposed on? Is having to see something, 'imposing' it? This reminds me of homophobes saying they're not homophobes but do those nasty gays have to rub it in their face all the time, by, you know, holding hands and being secondary characters on tv shows?

 

[Don2 (Don1 Revised)]

...unless the way you want to celebrate is harming somebody by doing it...

Trivial counter-example: the other thread about the Egyptian Copts in Germany on New Years Day.

You know, I half-expected a deliberate reading against the text response but I decided to leave my sentence unqualified. I ought to be more pessimistic.

Of course, you and I both know that assaulting somebody is harming them, and if your holiday celebration is assaulting somebody, then you are harming them by assaulting them.

Yes, of course, we know that. A single counter-example to a claim, though, can disprove it.

Therefore you cannot give carte blanche authorization to do whatever you want to express your holiday (religion).

But if you want to celebrate The Day of the Dead by building an altar to your dead pet, go ahead. It's your time and resources, not mine.

A single example of something that is okay does not prove a claim.

It does me no harm if you see a tradition, copy it, and make it your own -- just like every single person in Mexico has done since the festival was invented.

Whether or not you can extrapolate to general rules based on these kinds of single examples is at least questionable.

What you're trying to say is that "appropriation doesn't harm anyone ever," but at least in your op you haven't given any convincing argument for that claim.

 

[Tom Sawyer]

You might care if you were young, thousands of miles away from home, on your own for the first time and were confronted with the dominant culture attempting to impose whatever cultural stereotypes they had on YOU.

In what way was she imposed on? Is having to see something, 'imposing' it? This reminds me of homophobes saying they're not homophobes but do those nasty gays have to rub it in their face all the time, by, you know, holding hands and being secondary characters on tv shows?

Well, holding hands and acting in secondary roles on TV is something straight people were doing first. If teh gheys want to appropriate straight culture and steal their stuff, they can't then turn around and complain about others getting pissed off at them because of it.