So...We Gonna Talk About This Speech?

[repoman]

I think that there are some nuggets of truth to cultural appropriation along with a lot of nonsense.

I think that the selective love that whites have for aspects of black performing arts while still being racist is the most galling aspect for blacks.

Also one part is that people here don't want to admit that insular cultures can be ok and them wanting to stay that way is also fine. Japan for example. I don't go to someone's house knock on the door and say let me in. Japan in some ways is like one big house.


This is the south park clip showing the slang arms race that blacks have to do to stay ahead of whites who co-opt it. I truly feel blacks are in the moral right from the thieving whites in this case and just want to have their own aesthetic and chic. If whites want to be chic, we should do it our own way!

A south park clip showing "I'm here" -> "I'm in da house" -> "in da hizzouse" -> "in da dizzy". Each time changing because whites copy the current term.

[video]http://southpark.cc.com/clips/154102/flippity-floppity-floop[/video]

Fuck, do your own thing, whites!

 

[dismal]

Fuck, do your own thing, whites!

Well, we did invent the English language.

Which is being appropriated there.

 

[Derec]

Fuck, do your own thing, whites!

Blacks, do your own thing. Do not culturally appropriate English but speak with clicks or something.

 

[Derec]

Of course they are. All are examples of people taking the effort or work or output of others for their own use - something Metaphor claims is not possible.

You misunderstood Metaphor. The whole point of human culture is that we use and build upon work done by others. Thus it is far from impossible; it is in fact inevitable.

The thing with so-called "cultural appropriation" is that it involves cultural artifacts that are old enough that no individual or group has ownership of it. Nobody owns the English language. Nobody owns the design of the guitar. Nobody owns Indian food. Or belly dance. And so on.

I have heard people complain about others appropriating Nordic culture.

I have never seen it played straight. The only times I have come across it it was as parody or response to the usual "whites steal everything" form of "cultural appropriation" accusations.
Take the idiotic "We are a culture, not a costume" campaign from a few years ago. The original posters had the usual suspects - blacks, Hispanics, Arabs, (feather) Indians. But there were a lot of parodies including these:

Of course I have. The fact you are failing to rebut it is direct evidence that claim is false.

Rebut what exactly? Yes, there is such a thing as plagiarism. And there is such a thing as copyright. None of these apply to "cultural appropriation" though and you have not shown they do. In fact, your second sentence is this post shows that you have missed the point completely.

Cultural appropriation is possible. I think it is a rather ill-defined concept and it is certainly too costly to enforce legally.

I think it is not a meaningful concept that is impossible to enforce legally as there is no ownership.

IMO, the arguments over cultural appropriation are based mostly on aesthetics and differing views on what is proper (or appropriate) behavior (what used to considered "good manners"). But in some instances, bigotry and racism play a motivating and perpetuating role in the discussion.

I thunk the bigotry and racism at work with regard to "cultural appropriation" is bigotry and racism against whites.

Frankly, it is derail to the actual OP topic. But then, some people just have to ride their hobby horses.

I think cultural appropriation was a legitimate part of the OP guy's position. This not a derail. More a refocusing. If you want to discuss other aspects of his speech you can still do so.

 

[fromderinside]

Why I know Derec is a Racist and not just a tribalist. First, this video. One example of a language different from his king's english (some King from the 18th century) is about tribe not about black, yet he uses it as an example of racial difference.

 

[AthenaAwakened]

 

[Derec]

Why I know Derec is a Racist and not just a tribalist. First, this video. One example of a language different from his king's english (some King from the 18th century) is about tribe not about black, yet he uses it as an example of racial difference.

- You are engaging in baseless insults. I am all for culture being shared freely, which means I am hardly "racist" or "tribalist"
- Your second sentence is incomprehensible.

 

[Ford]

So I guess nobody on the "there's no such thing as cultural appropriation" side has ever heard of Pat Boone.

 

[laughing dog]

You misunderstood Metaphor. The whole point of human culture is that we use and build upon work done by others. Thus it is far from impossible; it is in fact inevitable.

Seems to me you misunderstand Metaphor because he says cultural appropriation is impossible.

The thing with so-called "cultural appropriation" is that it involves cultural artifacts that are old enough that no individual or group has ownership of it. Nobody owns the English language. Nobody owns the design of the guitar. Nobody owns Indian food. Or belly dance. And so on.

So what? It is not about ownership.

Rebut what exactly? Yes, there is such a thing as plagiarism. And there is such a thing as copyright. None of these apply to "cultural appropriation" though and you have not shown they do. In fact, your second sentence is this post shows that you have missed the point completely.

No, your responses show you miss the point. I did not say plagiarism or copyright are cultural appropriation. Metaphor claims that it is okay to embellish and build upon other's ideas. Plagiarism and copyright are indications that it is not okay. Moreover, your claim that if something is the public domain means its use is not plagiarism is false. Try attributing quotes from Shakespeare or the Bible to yourself in an academic paper.

The point is that for centuries the notion that using other's ideas for gain is not necessarily accepted as appropriate behavior.

I think it is not a meaningful concept that is impossible to enforce legally as there is no ownership.

No one to my knowledge is claiming this is a legal concept.

I thunk the bigotry and racism at work with regard to "cultural appropriation" is bigotry and racism against whites.

Of course you do. Because you think any topic is really about oppressing whites or males. But you are wrong.

I think cultural appropriation was a legitimate part of the OP guy's position. This not a derail. More a refocusing. If you want to discuss other aspects of his speech you can still do so.

Of course you think one of your boring and irrelevant hobby horses is relevant. Just like the bark of the tree is relevant when one is discussing the forest. But you are wrong.

- - - Updated - - -

Fuck, do your own thing, whites!

Blacks, do your own thing. Do not culturally appropriate English but speak with clicks or something.

Since it is generally accepted that "whites" came from Africa originally, it would seem your observation is rather racist or ignorant.

 

[Trausti]

The point is that for centuries the notion that using other's ideas for gain is not necessarily accepted as appropriate behavior.

Well that's shit nonsense. The spreading and use of ideas is part and parcel of human culture. Indians created written numbers, which were taken up by the Arabs, then adopted by and made the global standard by Europeans. If an idea is good, then it's good. Whodafuk cares where it comes from?

 

[dismal]

The point is that for centuries the notion that using other's ideas for gain is not necessarily accepted as appropriate behavior.

Well that's shit nonsense. The spreading and use of ideas is part and parcel of human culture. Indians created written numbers, which were taken up by the Arabs, then adopted by and made the global standard by Europeans. If an idea is good, then it's good. Whodafuk cares where it comes from?

Tip: When you make up words like "Whodafuk" you should footnote what race you are so people know whether or not they are allowed to use them.

 

[laughing dog]

The point is that for centuries the notion that using other's ideas for gain is not necessarily accepted as appropriate behavior.

Well that's shit nonsense. The spreading and use of ideas is part and parcel of human culture. Indians created written numbers, which were taken up by the Arabs, then adopted by and made the global standard by Europeans. If an idea is good, then it's good. Whodafuk cares where it comes from?

It is not nonsense that for centuries, plagiarism has not been accepted as appropriate behavior: it is a fact. It is not nonsense that violations of copyrights or patents have not been considered acceptable behavior: it is a fact.

 

[Metaphor]

Appropriate means "to take as one's own", so it only requires existence not prior ownership. Hence your argument is based on a false premise.

We've been through this; you are begging the question. In what sense can a culture be 'taken'? If a culture can be 'taken', how is it that the people raised in a particular culture are not indeed appropriating that culture from their parents and community?

It academia it is considered bad form to appropriate the ideas of others without giving them credit. In business, taking someone else's idea or product and "embellishing, re-imagining, reinventing and crafting anew" may result in civil damages. So, your argument runs counter to reality.

laughing dog, I know you like to play devil's advocate, but I cannot believe you believe this.

When black women twerk, do they 'give credit' to the people they learned it from? How is this credit given? When black women appropriate the idea of twerking and don't particularly 'give credit', what is the correct level of outrage we should express?

Is there a hard barrier to the whiteness of one's skin before we can no longer forgive 'uncredited' twerking? Perhaps a reintroduction of the paper bag test?

When Mexicans make sugar skulls on the Day of the Dead, why is nobody outraged at their copying of previous generations?

To summarize, your argument that the impossibility of cultural appropriation is based on a faulty premise (misunderstanding of the term appropriation) and a faulty understanding of how the "creative" process is generally viewed.

No, you want my argument to be based on that because you are sympathetic to the mythicists. You also appear to have extremely strange ideas on intellectual property law.

 

[Metaphor]

Well that's shit nonsense. The spreading and use of ideas is part and parcel of human culture. Indians created written numbers, which were taken up by the Arabs, then adopted by and made the global standard by Europeans. If an idea is good, then it's good. Whodafuk cares where it comes from?

It is not nonsense that for centuries, plagiarism has not been accepted as appropriate behavior: it is a fact. It is not nonsense that violations of copyrights or patents have not been considered acceptable behavior: it is a fact.

It is nonsense.

Twerking exists. Somebody (or somebodies) invented it. Who has the moral right to twerk, and why them and not others?

 

[Trausti]

Well that's shit nonsense. The spreading and use of ideas is part and parcel of human culture. Indians created written numbers, which were taken up by the Arabs, then adopted by and made the global standard by Europeans. If an idea is good, then it's good. Whodafuk cares where it comes from?

It is not nonsense that for centuries, plagiarism has not been accepted as appropriate behavior: it is a fact. It is not nonsense that violations of copyrights or patents have not been considered acceptable behavior: it is a fact.

Plagiarism can only exist between individuals. There has never been a prohibition of group plagiarism. Don't even know how that'd work.

 

[Metaphor]

'Cultural appropriation', as a concept, is incoherent and impossible.

You really need to educate yourself.

I'm afraid a link to a music video where you presumably believe cultural appropriation to have taken place does not educate me. You'll need to explain what is happening and why it is wrong.

 

[laughing dog]

It is not nonsense that for centuries, plagiarism has not been accepted as appropriate behavior: it is a fact. It is not nonsense that violations of copyrights or patents have not been considered acceptable behavior: it is a fact.

Plagiarism can only exist between individuals. There has never been a prohibition of group plagiarism. Don't even know how that'd work.

For some reason you think is rebuts the idea that it is nonsense that plagiarism has been considered inappropriate. For some reason you seem unaware that individuals are accused of cultural appropriation by other individuals.

 

[laughing dog]

It is not nonsense that for centuries, plagiarism has not been accepted as appropriate behavior: it is a fact. It is not nonsense that violations of copyrights or patents have not been considered acceptable behavior: it is a fact.

It is nonsense.

Twerking exists. Somebody (or somebodies) invented it. Who has the moral right to twerk, and why them and not others?

I have no idea what you are talking about, why you are droning about "moral rights" or why you think this is relevant.

 

[repoman]

We need to have a twerking compilation derail!

 

[laughing dog]

We've been through this; you are begging the question.

Nope.

In what sense can a culture be 'taken'? If a culture can be 'taken', how is it that the people raised in a particular culture are not indeed appropriating hhat culture from their parents and community?

It is a myster: how does one appropriate what one already has? Hmmm.

laughing dog, I know you like to play devil's advocate, but I cannot believe you believe this.

Believe what? That is not necessarily the case that appropriating ideas is considered appropriate? That is reality. Apparently you have a hard time accepting reality. That is not my problem.

When black women twerk, do they 'give credit' to the people they learned it from? How is this credit given? When black women appropriate the idea of twerking and don't particularly 'give credit', what is the correct level of outrage we should express?

I simply said that it is not neccessarily the case that appropriating is considered appropriate. For some obscure reason, you seem to think that means is "not necessarily" means "always".

When Mexicans make sugar skulls on the Day of the Dead, why is nobody outraged at their copying of previous generations?

I don't know.

No, you want my argument to be based on that because you are sympathetic to the mythicists.

Your argument is faulty. For some reason, you feel you have to justify your irrational hissy fits over aesthetics with counterfactual and illogical claims.

You also appear to have extremely strange ideas on intellectual property law.

Like what?