Quote:
Originally posted by inspiration4
I had my Iggy video's mixed up, and was thinking of another one. My mistake.
Second, I don't think that way about India at all. I'm actually hoping to go there next year. And yes, many if not most westerners do view India exactly as I described, in the same way they view Africa as a giant rural slum with starving kids everywhere and exotic animals running rampant. Uncomfortable truths my friend.
|
And what's wrong with that? India IS hectic, busy, overpopulated and full of poverty and pollution (and you can see it in the video). The only strange thing is someone who knows those things exist, but then the other things in the video don't exist? It's a huge shock that there are a country has clothes from ancient times, movies, celebrities/models and holidays? It seems like something really intuitive and I wouldn't worry about anyone who don't realize those things exist. There probably one of those types who think India is in the Middle East like Selena Gomez did.
Quote:
Where did I imply anything of the sort? I made absolutely no mention of their inherent motives, because unlike SJW's, I can't read other's minds or gauge their motives based on nothing. What I said was that it DID shine a positive light on the beauty of Indian culture, and that you didn't argue. Nor can you.
|
That's exactly what you implied. You made it seem as if if it's something South Asians should be thankful about because the average, uneducated western don't realize that India has movies, clothes, models and holidays, but the video made them see otherwise
Again, I wouldn't be concerned about what these type of people think.
Moreover, you also implied that renting out "exotic" themes in pop culture to be interesting is not some trendy thing to do because India is seen as poor, dirty and unattractive to the average person. That doesn't make any sense nor contradict what I said. India or sub-Saharan African countries being perceived that way hasn't stopped western pop stars from doing that. Black American "urban" culture is also perceived negatively by most people, but it hasn't stopped other Americans from doing the same. Your argument is illogical here.
Quote:
For starters, jeans as we know them today are of American origin.
Second, this entire argument is rather nonsensical. You're essentially making the claim that because a culture is marketed to another foreign culture, their adoption of it is not "appropriation"?
Do you think India doesn't try and push it's culture outside of it's borders? There's an Indian store not far from where I live selling Sari's, and I can assure you that when I've visited with my non-Indian friend they were more than happy to guide us and make a sell. And the store is owned by Indians, from India. It's the same exact situation all around, just that American corporations have been more successful, and therefore the culture more popularly "appropriated".
|
Nope, that's not true. Denim pants existed way back in the 1600s in southern Europe. It's not an American invention. The marketing and push for globally is American. It doesn't matter anyway.
And you keep calling my arguments nonsensical, but that's a more appropriate label for your responses.
India does not actively try to push any culture outside, especially not for profit. That "Indian"* store that sells saris is catered to South Asian families in the area, not mainstream Americans, but obviously anyone can come in and buy whatever they want. Even if those Asian stores gained mainstream popularity (it definitely will NOT unless styles were appropriated by western manufacturers like peasant shirts/tunic tops were and sold by western people), it wouldn't be appropriation because it happened naturally just like in Anglo-Caribbean countries. South Asian food and music is completely penetrated into the culture of Trinidad & Tobago, Guyana, Jamaica, Barbados, etc. and it's not appropriation. Likewise, South Asian spiritual/religious practices like yoga and meditation has penetrated western culture and it doesn't qualify as appropriation. Neither does wearing jeans or eating McDonald's in Asia when American corporations have completely penetrated every single area in the world. How does that qualify as appropriation when it's practically pushed onto people? I think you should look up the literal definition of the verb "appropriate." It's basically to hijack something for your own use and agenda. Did you really think those Indians and other Asians are going into American-owned stores to hijack something for some agenda they're pushing?
*FYI most sari shops and "Indian" restaurants in the west are not Indian-owned. It's usually Bangladeshi. Also, India doesn't have
a culture. One Indian's culture would differ from another Indian's would be dependent on their background.