Quote:
Originally posted by Sazare
You're clearly not grasping the subject of cultural appropriation at all. Really the only things you are grasping here are STRAWMEN in an attempt to defend your favorite singer.
Technological advances aren't "culture." Language (unrelated to dialect) isn't "culture." The natural way white people's hair often lays isn't "culture." Acting and lipstick and "using the printing press" (still laughing at that one ![too funny](images/smilies/images/smilies/priceless.gif) ) are not exclusive to a any culture. Nothing she does in the video is cultural appropriation.
The number of people " ![clap3](http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v232/korn0818/67d90ee8.gif) "ing and "this"ing this post here is just mind-boggling and just goes to show how much progress is still necessary here.
|
Technological advances are not culture? Language are not culture? You clearly remain clueless. Technology is the use of tools to perform certain tasks. One person invents a method/tool and this is copied by other people. These people adopt the method if it is practical and such methods become common within the locale before spreading between regions. Basic technology like the wheel, stirrups, crop rotation. These spread between different groups of people. Anthropologists distinguish ancient civilisations by their types of pottery, architecture, metal-working and food gathering techniques. Technology clearly is part of culture no matter the ignorant bleatings of atrlers.
Language is just a practical way of communicating ideas. Names for items are devised and this only becomes a language if a lot of people adopt this naming schema. Languages become languages because the specific naming schema is copied (you would complain appropriated) by other people. Language is often used to define a group of people who share the common naming schema. Language is widely regarded as one of the signifiers of a group identity.
Technology and language spreads. It does this because it is adopted and copied by other people. Spare us your hypocritcal outrage about cultural appropriation when a hairstyle is used in a music video while you take personally take benefit from the creation efforts of other cultures everyday.
The meal you last ate. You didn't invent that recipe. You didn't devise the means to cultivate and grow and harvest those food ingredients. You didn't invent the metalworking and mining techniques than went into creating your food utensils. You didn't create the pottery and glazing techniques to create the plate you used. You didn't derive the method to create fire to heat that food. You didn't develop the woodworking and carpentry skills to craft the table and chairs you use. Everytime you eat a meal, you are gaining benefit from the invention and genius of others.
So keep on whining with how terrible it is that people can benefit from something created by someone else via cultural appropriation while being a hypocrite everytime you sit down for a meal.
The only thing mind-boggling is how people have no idea how the world actually works and has always worked. Nothing can be claimed to be exclusive to a culture and immune from adoption. Pretending otherwise just shows an ignorance of cross-cultural adoption that history shows always happens because that is how people actually work.
The last thing a 16yr old should be is applauded for her simplistic musings about how people should be excluded from types of art because of the tone of their skin. The 20th Century had situations where in some countries people were legally excluded from sporting activities and other opportunities due to the colour of their skin. Those systems were abolished because they were wrong. Let's not cheer on a misguided notion to bring back a return to limiting of opportunities due to skin tone.