Reason.com

Free Minds & Free Markets

Your Tattoos Are Problematic

Oscar is a white guy living in Austin, Texas, with a penchant for Japanese-style tattoos. A huge black and white dragon arcs over his left shoulder. The dragon's scales subtly change shape as he moves, and the beast's eyes are beady and glaring, nestled below spiked eyebrows and above bared fangs. The tattoo is lightly shaded, darker around the perimeter of the dragon, with a background of stylized leaves and waves that add depth and complexity to the piece.

What Oscar knows about the origins of Japanese tattooing, he likes: "It's associated with outlaws and outcasts—there were all these merchants and gangsters in Japan that were shunned from the societal hierarchy. Some people think the tradition began as a way for those merchants to show off their wealth privately, and for gangsters to mark themselves as part of a counterculture."

He delayed getting this particular tattoo for a long time, thinking that "it had to have a lot of meaning." But the more time he spent around tattoo artists, the more he "realized it's more about the art—you don't have to 100 percent understand the context to appreciate something."

Oscar asked that his real name not be used for this story, but says he's OK with the "risk" associated with his choice of tattoo. "People might be offended by it, people might be scared by it, and I like that—I like the fact that it can be polarizing or controversial. I ultimately got it because it was something I liked and I didn't feel like I had to justify it beyond that."

According to some figures on the activist left, hoop earrings should only be worn by black and Latina women. Don't even think about donning a feathered headdress at a music festival—those don't belong to you. And if your child wants to dress up as the Disney character Moana for Halloween, beware, unless she's of Polynesian descent. Cultural appropriation—co-opting specific elements of a culture that is not your own—is the term used to condemn these offenses. It has become a major battleground for the social justice movement.

But what happens when the ink embedded in your skin is unacceptable to polite society? As a form of public art and personal adornment, tattooing has a long history of cultural borrowing. Some popular tattoos have historical lineages so tangled it's hard to tell who is appropriating whose heritage. For tattoo artists and clients, it may not be easy to separate art from politics, the deeply personal from the public and political.

Every tattoo carries the risk of regret. But in the current ultra-sensitized atmosphere, that regret can set in quickly.

Hula Girls

Paul Smith at Bijou Studio in Austin, Texas, has been tattooing for 15 years, specializing in traditional American and Japanese-style tattoos. He's covered in ink, all the way down to his hands, with a large black scorpion reaching close to his fingers.

Sitting outside his clean and well-decorated East Austin shop, tucked between grungy dive bars and new-construction apartment buildings, Smith explains that copying and hybridization are deeply embedded in tattoo history. "Whatever tattoos someone got halfway around the world, that was copied in a sort of cross-pollination," he says. Sailors used to travel from port to port collecting evidence of their travels on their skin.

About 90 percent of sailors in the late 19th century sported tattoos, History Today estimates. Since seamen were among the rare commuters to distant lands, they were the ones who observed—and borrowed from—other cultures. Their tattoos were often nautical in theme: anchors, fully rigged ships, or swallows for every 5,000 miles traveled. Some sailors were adorned with gaudy, colorful Hula girls to remember trips to Hawaii or pin-up girls to remember ladies from back home. Others chose "hold fast" knuckle tattoos, a reference to staying steady—physically and mentally—while out at sea, or large, ornate beasts like dragons to represent trips to China.

Tattooing has leaked from the individualistic fringes to the mainstream over the last couple of decades. The first Playboy Playmate with a visible tattoo debuted her body art in 1993, and Mattel released an "inked" Barbie doll in 2011.

As tattoos become more common, they're giving the easily offended new fodder to rail against. But it also means the number of human canvases for the art form has grown.

iStockphotoiStockphotoJapanese tattooing flourished in the 17th and 18th centuries, although some still saw it as the mark of a criminal. In the 19th century, the Japanese government prohibited the practice, but white people still sought it out, and the industry thrived underground. Although the ban was lifted in 1948, many Japanese once again saw tattoos (irezumi) as reserved for yakuza—gangsters—not law-abiding citizens. Now the government classifies tattooing as a medical practice (since needles are inserted into skin) and has required artists to hold licenses since 2001.

Without fervent support from the West and a constant influx of foreign (and mostly white) customers, the intricate tattoos that developed during the Edo period might not have survived.

Dream Catchers

"When the ink was still bumpy on my skin, a good friend of mine with Cherokee heritage asked me, 'So what tribe exactly is your dream catcher from, Kathleen?' And that was the moment I felt my first pang of shame." A melodramatic 2015 xoJane confessional features a young woman explaining "what my ill-advised dream catcher tattoo taught me about youth, regret, and cultural appropriation." Her mistake is presented as a cautionary tale. Meanwhile the Tumblr blog Your Tattoo is Racist doles out bite-sized screeds against white people bearing Maya Angelou quotes, mandalas, Buddhas, and yin-yangs.

But diatribes against cultural appropriation—the idea that a specific practice is sacred and cannot be replicated, experimented with, or even made fun of—miss the mark. In the words of writer Salman Rushdie, "The idea of the sacred is quite simply one of the most conservative notions in any culture, because it seeks to turn other ideas—uncertainty, progress, change—into crimes."

Symbols evolve over time, and nothing is ever fully "authentic," since authenticity can mean something different depending on who you ask. Unfortunately, activists have condemned the borrowing and sharing of other cultures, instead of seeing it as something that preserves a symbol and guarantees its use for years to come. As the novelist Lionel Shriver put it at the Brisbane Writers Festival: "Those who embrace a vast range of 'identities'…are now encouraged to be possessive of their experience and to regard other people's attempts to participate in their lives and traditions, either actively or imaginatively, as a form of theft."

Nobody owns his or her culture. All practices are impure, borrowed from distant places at some point or another. To pretend otherwise is to ignore reality: The tradition of Japanese tattooing survived in the West after being banned in the East, skull decorations didn't even originate in Mexico, and sailors carried designs with abandon, from port to port all over the world.

Human beings have been repurposing stolen symbols for centuries, and breathing new life into them. As Bijou Studio's Smith put it,"People catch shit for having dreadlocks or braids, but you probably had Vikings that had matted-up hair. Are you gonna have to figure out where everything on the planet originated before you say it or listen to it or wear it?"

"I don't make moral judgments on the tattoos people bring to me. It's a personal thing," says Sarah Koopman of Mom's Tattoos, also in Austin. "I'm pretty libertarian when it comes to that: Do what you do. You're not messing with me, I don't care."

"People catch shit for having dreadlocks or braids," one tattoo artist notes, "but you probably had Vikings that had matted-up hair. Are you gonna have to figure out where everything on the planet originated before you say it or listen to it or wear it?"

"All art is forged from somewhere," she adds. "Everything in an Asian tattoo down to where it is on the body, what color it is, how many claws the dragon has…it all tells a story. Of course there are outliers, but I see it more as just a respect and admiration for the beauty of these art forms."

Asked if she thinks demand for controversial tattoos—dreamcatchers, kanji, headdresses—will decrease, Koopman says that even if they go out of vogue, "something new will pop up," borrowed from somewhere else. "That's how it's always been."

Sugar Skulls

Texas is a frontier in the appropriation debate because it's nestled between the U.S. and Mexico, sharing influences from both. Calaveras, or sugar skulls, are popular tattoos with customers of all races, yet the appropriation police would certainly deem them offensive, since they reference Dia de los Muertos and "belong" to Mexican culture. Brock University in Canada even banned Dia de los Muertos costumes, with one student group claiming that "vetting Halloween costumes isn't a matter of telling people what to wear. It's a matter of paying respect to the stories and experiences of marginalized groups who are depicted in these costumes."

But Dia de los Muertos itself is an example of how watery and untenable cultural appropriation arguments are: The holiday was created by the Aztecs, who believed heaven's gates opened one day a year for the deceased to briefly reunite with their families. Spanish conquistadors realized it was too popular to be stamped out, so they merged it with All Saints Day.

To celebrate, families make ornate altars, decorating them with sugar skulls and flowers. But even the widely recognized calaveras de azucar did not originate in the country: Skull decorations were brought to the New World by Italian missionaries. When Mexicans realized they couldn't afford fancy Italian imports, they fashioned facsimiles out of cheap and abundant sugar instead.

So Dia de los Muertos is about honoring the dead, something all cultures yearn for and many cultures wish they could do better. For white people—especially white people living in places like Texas, where culture bleeds freely back and forth across the invisible lines we call borders—it makes sense that they might want to commemorate a departed loved one with a calavera tattoo, too. Isn't that choice motivated by appreciation for these Mexican symbols?

Smith has "tattooed as many Dia de los Muertos skulls on white people as eagles and flags on Mexican people. Are they ripping it off?" His point is a good one: Our judgment of cultural appropriation should consider whether the act is rooted in hatred or appreciation. Should we really be attempting to police something as intimate as the way someone chooses to memorialize a dead loved one?

88s

Given concerns over appropriation, do tattooists worry they might start seeing new laws limiting what they can do with their needles? Roach Rude, another artist at Mom's, says that "would go against freedom of speech."

Legally speaking, Rude is probably right that a government crackdown on cultural appropriation would have a hard time passing muster. But the question of what artistry is covered by the First Amendment is central to a heated political and legal debate happening right now: If a state forces a baker to serve gay customers—going against the baker's beliefs—is that an infringement on the baker's freedom of expression?

In Masterpiece Cakeshop v. Colorado Civil Rights Commission, the Supreme Court is considering just such a case, and in State of Washington v. Arlene's Flowers, the Washington Supreme Court considered a similar controversy regarding a florist's right to decline to provide her services for a same-sex wedding. But tattooing, too, deserves protection.

Although tattoo artists, like bakers and florists, often take instruction from their clients, they have control over some aspects of the design and should not be forced to implicitly condone messages they are not comfortable with. Their portfolios, and the work they choose to study and create, say a lot about them.

"I don't express on other people unless I have the room to do so," says Smith. He sees tattoos primarily as his customers' speech. "It is speech in a way—any image you inscribe on your skin is your way of saying something."

He sees his role within the context of free association. "If it's something I associate as a hate symbol…I can choose freely not to associate," he says. But it also depends on the reason the person is there. "If they have hate symbols on them and they want to get [them] covered up, that's a possibility."

Hate symbols could include swastikas, 88s (code for the letters HH, or "Heil Hitler"), S.S. bolts, Odin's crosses, 14s (a reference to 14 words associated with white supremacists: "We must secure the existence of our people and a future for white children"), or A.B. tattoos (referencing the Aryan Brotherhood). Smith has personally done cover-ups on ex-skinheads, he says, provided they're trying to turn over a new leaf.

Taz

"Years and years ago, I worked at a shop, and everyone probably did 10 Tasmanian Devil tattoos a week. There was a whole thing among tattooers in the community about how no one was gonna do Taz again," says Debi Obregon, owner of Mom's Tattoos. "So a couple of days later"—after the staff instituted an informal boycott on what they saw as a stupid, cliched cartoon not worthy of their time—"in comes a guy. He wants a Taz. There were six artists in the shop, including me." Since no one else would take the job, Obregon agreed to do it.

"So I'm tattooing the guy and I ask, 'What made you decide to get a Taz today?' And he said, 'Well, my dad just died, and he had a Tasmanian devil tattoo, and he got it when his dad died,'" she recalls. "And it just really brought home: Who am I to judge what somebody gets on their body? It's not just a stupid cartoon to this guy, you know…Even something that seems as silly as a Taz can hold a deep meaning—and who are we, the police, the government?"

As an outsider, you can never tell what someone's story is. You don't even know for sure what ethnicity people are.

"What greater honor can you give to anyone [than] to put something permanent on your body?" asks Obregon. "It's not up to us to police the motives behind that—whether it's an infinity, or whether it's a kanji, or whether it's a Maori design, or whatever."

"Lots of ink is commemorative and timeless," says Bijou's Smith. "Lots of ink tells a story: where you've been, what you've seen, what you're into."

My own Japanese-style tattoo, created by Smith, runs down my hip and the top of my leg. It's covered except when I'm wearing shorts. Since other people rarely see it, the harm can't be very far-reaching. But even when it's exposed, is it a minor annoyance or a major transgression?

To me, the image—of a tiger slinking through flowers—is a symbol of strength and fierceness, and an homage to a tradition of tattooing that I find beautiful and want to survive. My blue eyes and blonde hair don't come into it, and they shouldn't be a reason for me to turn my back on this art form and cultural mode of expression.

"If being interested in a Maori tattoo or a Japanese tattoo sparks you to learn more about that culture," asks Obregon, "how could it be a bad thing?"

Photo Credit: iStockphoto

Editor's Note: We invite comments and request that they be civil and on-topic. We do not moderate or assume any responsibility for comments, which are owned by the readers who post them. Comments do not represent the views of Reason.com or Reason Foundation. We reserve the right to delete any comment for any reason at any time. Report abuses.

  • Neanderthal||

    I wouldn't really worry about it. I think you're overstating the problem. I can't imagine someone seriously confronting you about a tattoo, but if they did then you could easily turn it around and confront them for appropriating. The Japanese famously appropriated western industry so you could point that out.

  • Chip Woodier||

    Cultural appropriation of Japanese styling doesn't seem to be a problem with the Japanese. In fact, they seem to like it.

  • IceTrey||

    Europeans (whites) seem to be the only ones who want others to appropriate our culture. We want it so much we'll force it on them.

  • GamerFromJump||

    Like the whole "not burning widows" thing.

  • Fancylad||

    I wonder what logical knots 21st century progs will twist themselves into to try and justify suttee.
    Where's Tony?

  • mtrueman||

    "I think you're overstating the problem. "

    There is no problem. The author apparently can't find even one of these leftist activists. We're left with a load of hot air and hand wringing.

  • soldiermedic76||

    She actually provided an example in the dreamcatcher reference. Wow, do you just make stuff up as you go along?

  • mtrueman||

    Something she read on a blog. That's as far as she went. There is no problem, I assure you.

  • p3orion||

    "But what happens when the ink embedded in your skin is unacceptable to polite society?"

    Polite society doesn't give a fuck. Only the perpetually indignant get worked up about this.

    In any case, if someone from a "disenfranchised culture" wants to complain about American "cultural appropriation," they should have the intellectual consistency NOT to do so in English, nor on a computer that their culture was completely incapable of developing.

  • Jalestra||

    I couldn't imagine someone seriously confronting someone over a hairstyle, but there you have it.

  • Number 2||

    "Cultural appropriation—co-opting specific elements of a culture that is not your own—is the term used to condemn these offenses. It has become a major battleground for the social justice movement."

    No doubt, the SJWs prepare their anti-cultural appropriation screeds while munching down pizza and burritos, guzzling cups of coffee, and then smoking marijuana.

  • damikesc||

    As I've always said, I'll happily give up tacos when others give up cars, electricity, etc.

    It's either bad to "use" the "culture" of others or it is not.

  • soldiermedic76||

    Or trial by jury. Representative democracy.

  • JeremyR||

    Oh, the left would be happy to give those up in favor of a dictatorship. See all their drooling over communist countries.

  • damikesc||

    Isn't Communism also part of "white" culture? Not all parts of "culture" are positive, after all.

  • soldiermedic76||

    Pretty sure Marx was German and Engels English.

  • Res ipsa loquitur||

    Racist !

  • Earth Skeptic||

    That's "raciss", you racist!

  • Neanderthal||

    I guarantee you the people who would complain about your tattoo have culturally appropriated more shit then you have. And for every person who would complain about your tattoo from a appropriation angle there's probably 10,000 losers who would take the other angle and complain that you're too different from the mainstream culture. Anyway Europeans have been culturally appropriating shit forever so you're just doing what your ancestors have been doing and if someone has a problem with that then they're confused.

  • Muzzled Woodchipper||

    There's no such thing as "cultural appropriation."

  • dave b.||

    Cultural appropriation certainly exists, but tattoos aren't the best examples.

  • Ecoli||

    No, cultural appropriation does not exist, at least with any implication of theft or malice. The concept of "cultural appropriation" is a statement of hatred and contempt for "others", and it is rooted in simple racism mostly.

    If you see something you like and incorporate it into your own life, that is a good thing.

    I like the Japanese esthetic of minimalism, for example. I am not Japanese as far as I know.

    I enjoy woodworking. Japanese hand tool woodworkers do every thing "backwards" from European woodworkers: Hand saws cut on the pull stroke and their hand planes do too. European saws and planes cut on the push stroke. Japanese woodworkers are masterful, as are Europeans. Many European woodworkers have abandoned western style saws in favor of Japanese style saws. Those European woodworkers did not "appropriate" Japanese tools, they simply saw that in some respects they are superior.

  • dave b.||

    White people don't get to tell minorities that it doesn't exist, and apparently you don't know what racism means. Rachel Dolezal is an example of cultural appropriation, not using woodworking techniques.

  • Ecoli||

    You are free to be a racist asshole. It's a free country after all.

  • dave b.||

    I'm not racist nor do I have the power to be.

  • Ecoli||

    Yeah, you are pure as the driven snow. That is obvious. Clean and articulate too.

  • John C. Randolph||

    Two lies in one line!

    -jcr

  • TLBD||

    I'm not racist nor do I have the power to be.

    Jesus. A certified pajama-boy. Get some self-respect.

  • damikesc||

    I'm not racist nor do I have the power to be.

    Let's go ahead and tee it up here, dave:

    WHY do you not have the power to be racist? In what way are you UNABLE to be a racist?

  • John C. Randolph||

    White people don't get to

    Fuck you, you racist piece of shit. My freedom of speech isn't contingent on the group you sort me into in your tiny little mind.

    -jcr

  • dave b.||

    You're free to say whatever you want, and I'm free to call bullshit on it.

  • TLBD||

    Yes, you're free to be a racist and an insufferable douche-bag that blames all of his problems on the "other".

    Fuck off.

  • dave b.||

    Yawn

  • Fuck you, Shikha (Nunya)||

    And you're free to be a racist, oblivious asshole.

  • dave b.||

    The white people in this thread are completely triggered based on the amount of racism accusations. Isn't this what you people complain that the left does all the time to shut down conversation?

  • TLBD||

    What do you mean "you people"?

  • John C. Randolph||

    Did it ever occur to you that the number of times someone calls you a racist might correlate to the prevalence of your pig-ignorant, racist blatherings?

    -jcr

  • dave b.||

    You don't even know what racism is, and then you're using the left's favorite tactic to shut down discourse. When you have no argument, everyone is RAAAAYYYCISSSSS!!!!!!!!

  • TLBD||

    I think we are all very clear on what your definition of racist is. The rest of us live in reality.

    I'm not sure what color your skin is, nor do I care, but you seem to think you get to go around and disparage and make broad generalizations of other people based on the color of their skin and then be immune from criticism.

  • John C. Randolph||

    When you have no argument, everyone is RAAAAYYYCISSSSS!!!!!!!!

    You're the only one I see here, sparky. Nice try, though.

    -jcr

  • damikesc||

    You don't even know what racism is, and then you're using the left's favorite tactic to shut down discourse. When you have no argument, everyone is RAAAAYYYCISSSSS!!!!!!!!

    In their defense, you didn't really present an argument. You made an idiotic utterance.

    I don't think you're a racist. I also don't think you're terribly intelligent or interesting.

  • Ecoli||

    What white people? We are all bit-people.

  • Fancylad||

    "You people"
    "White people"
    "I'm not racist"
    LOL

  • Chip Woodier||

    I self-identify as race fluid.

  • dave b.||

    Except on job descriptions and census forms where you happily tick the box that says 'white'

  • Ecoli||

    Not me. I tick the black box. I never miss an opportunity to fuck up government statistics.

  • John C. Randolph||

    you happily tick the box that says 'white'

    I refuse to check any of those boxes.

    -jcr

  • Vernon Depner||

    If you're trying to get a job, the last thing you want to do is check the "white" box.

  • BigT||

    Don't worry dave b, we won't appropriate your gig of writing stupid stuff on the internet. You OWN it.

  • dave b.||

    I miss the days when this place wasn't filled with the Breitbart Junior Cadets

  • Fuck you, Shikha (Nunya)||

    Never visited Breitbart. Please, tell me what's on it.

  • dave b.||

    People like you

  • VinniUSMC||

    And apparently you. So, "people like you" must actually be people like dave b. How unfortunate. Sounds like a terrible place. Why don't you stay there?

  • damikesc||

    White people don't get to tell minorities that it doesn't exist

    Watch me do it.

    It. Does. Not. Exist.

    It wasn't even difficult.

  • dave b.||

    Cool story bro. I can prove that it does but you don't exactly have a compelling argument that it doesn't

  • Jim C.||

    Ok, let's see your proof.

  • dave b.||

    I already provided one - Rachel Dolezal but we can go further than that. Iron Eyes Cody aka the Crying Indian was a man of 100% Italian descent, yet managed to milk a 50 year acting career being a Native stereotype. Margaret Seltzer got a book deal due to allegedly being a half-native member of the Bloods gang until she was found out, but she had already made her money by then. Or the thousands of $5 Indians who got millions of acres of free land while the real Natives were forced to classify as black. Or Jamake Highwater who wrote over 30 books before he was discovered.

    Appropriation isn't when your white co-worker has a bonsai tree in his cube or that your favorite sushi restaurant has a hispanic chef. It's deliberate misrepresentation of another culture for material benefit. It's when you get all of the advantages whether it be cool points, book deals, casinos and parts in films. But without the disadvantages, like having no money, not enough heat or food, poor schooling, poor health, being thrown in prison and substance abuse.

  • soldiermedic76||

    Is it an African-American playing a Norse good on the Thor movies?

  • dave b.||

    Why limit yourself to fiction? You can go with Ben Affleck as Antonio Mendez, Johnny Depp as Tonto, Elizabeth Taylor as Cleopatra, John Wayne as Genghis Khan, Jake Gyllenhaal as the Prince of Persia, Jack Black as Nacho Libre, or Tom Cruise as the Last Samurai. I have a movie script I'm working on. It's called The Last Nigger on Earth starring Tom Hanks.

  • soldiermedic76||

    My point is that it is only considered cultural appropriation of it is a white person doing it. If it is the other direction (as iny example) it is applauded as being brave.

  • soldiermedic76||

    And in every one of your examples peoe complained and pointed out the stupidity of the casting however, no one batted an eye at African American or Asain American actors playing Norse gods. And the few times I've seen people point out the irony they were promptly labelled racists.

  • dave b.||

    no one batted an eye at African American or Asain American actors playing Norse gods.

    If you really believe that 'no one batted an eye' at Idris Elba playing Heimdall, then you weren't paying attention.

  • soldiermedic76||

    Yes, because the media ran multiple stories on how it was disrespectful for Elba to play Heimdall? Can you provide examples.

  • soldiermedic76||

    Or who remembers HBO being praised in the late 90s for redoing fairy tales with "ethnic" characters.

  • dave b.||

    Did you miss where he had to defend his own casting?

    "This PC crap has gone too far!" wailed one. "Norse deities are not of an African ethnicity! … It's the principle of the matter. It's about respecting the integrity of the source material, both comics and Norse mythologies."

    "At the risk of sounding like a bigot, I think this is nuts!" said another. "Asgard is home to the Norse Gods!!! Not too many un-fair complexion types roaming the frigid waste lands up there."

    RACISTS TOTALLY FREAK OUT OVER IDRIS ELBA PLAYING NORSE GOD IN "THOR"

    Marvel has "declared war on Norse mythology" with "an insulting multi-cultural makeover."

    "Keep social engineering out of European mythology."

  • soldiermedic76||

    You just proved my point. I said anyone who did complain was labelled a racists. Thank you for proving my point.

  • dave b.||

    Yes, because the media ran multiple stories on how it was disrespectful for Elba to play Heimdall? Can you provide examples.

    You asked for examples. Examples provided.

  • soldiermedic76||

    And in a previous post I had made the statement that those few who did critisized it were labelled racists. So your example proved my overall point. That it is only labelled cultural appropriation when done by white people. However, if white people complain about their culture being misrepresented they are labelled racists. So, by trying to disprove me, you actually strengthened my argument.

  • soldiermedic76||

    Besides you didn't provide an example of the media calling it disrespectful. The examples either just reported on how some we're upset by it (in a snide reference) or outright labelled them racists. Ergo you didn't provide the example requested.

  • markm23||

    To be fair, most of the time the Norse were the color of the dirt they lived in.

  • soldiermedic76||

    Actually the Vikings we're an extremely clean people. Bathed at least weekly. Washed their hands and faces daily. Combed the hair and beards daily. Changed the clothes frequently. Compared to the contemporaries their were facetious about rheir cleanliness.

  • damikesc||

    Why limit yourself to fiction? You can go with Ben Affleck as Antonio Mendez, Johnny Depp as Tonto, Elizabeth Taylor as Cleopatra, John Wayne as Genghis Khan, Jake Gyllenhaal as the Prince of Persia, Jack Black as Nacho Libre, or Tom Cruise as the Last Samurai. I have a movie script I'm working on. It's called The Last Nigger on Earth starring Tom Hanks.

    1) How, exactly, is this "appropriation"? Did Jake CLAIM to be a video game character? Did Depp CLAIM to be a Native? Seemed like they were playing roles.

    Hell, the original "Prince of Persia" was the younger brother of the game designer (Jordan Mechner) who did the motion-capture. Technically, that character was white from the get-go.

    2) How, exactly, is this "negative"? Well, "Nacho Libre" was hot garbage, but how is it "bad"?

    3) What is the difference between "appropriation" and "integration"? Are you arguing that there is nothing of any benefit from other societies that Western culture cannot learn from? Sure, most other societies suck something fierce, but even the worst of them have SOME beneficial things.

    What you call "cultural appropriation" is what was called "culture" for centuries beforehand. It's just that you seem to believe that nobody white has anything to possibly learn from anybody of a darker skin tone. So be it.

  • soldiermedic76||

    However, I can see the British were justified in being pissed off about U-571. On top of being a bad movie, giving the US Navy credit for what the Royal Navy did was just insulting (and there were plenty of daring dos by the US Navy's silent service during WWII to have made good movie without stealing the glory of the Royal Navy).

  • sparkstable||

    You have described fraud, not cultural appropriation.

  • soldiermedic76||

    Potatoe potatoh. it was actually a sad attempt at a joke

  • soldiermedic76||

    So whites don't also have issues with poverty, poor schooling, drug abuse etc. Someone tell rural whites, especially in Appalachia that they don't have problems with these issues.

  • Iheartskeet||

    So was Barack Obama guilty of posing as a black man when he was really 50/50 ?

    The examples you provide aren't so much appropriation as outright fraud and lying. We don't need a new set of ambiguous jargon for that.

  • The Last American Hero||

    What if you falsely appropriated a culture to get a teaching gig at Harvard?

  • epsilon given||

    Ah, so Elizabeth Warren is a cultural appropriator, then.

  • dave b.||

    So far in this thread, I have not called anyone a racist or insinuated that anyone is owed anything at all. I have only said that cultural appropriation exists and why I believe it does. I am more than willing to debate these (like we used to do around here) but there's no point in continuing if everyone's going to take the leftist tactic of whining about racism and pleading innocent to things you weren't even accused of. Methinks you doth protest too much

  • sparkstable||

    You are the only person I've seen make a statement that is true dependant on someone's skin color. That is a racist thing to do. Someone calling you out for it doesn't equate to the left's misuse of the term racism. One was correct, the other is emotional blathering.

  • BigT||

    So Hamilton is cultural appropriation at its zenith!!

    Shut it down!

  • damikesc||

    I note you can...yet i also note you did not,

    Odd,

    See, i was told we needed integration and all because it was important to be involved with other cultures. Now i am learning that exposure to other cultures is basically racism.

    So, do you have issues with approoriating "white culture"? Or do whites have no culture? Enlighten us.

  • MarkLastname||

    White people do get to tell minorities it doesn't exist, just like we get to tell them grass is green and the sky is blue - because it's true.

    Is it cultural appropriation when blacks people pretend to be white?

  • dave b.||

    Whites determine who's black, not the other way around. The one drop rule was created by whites. What black people are passing as white and actually getting away with it? Certainly not Meghan Markle. Maybe Halsey?

  • damikesc||

    Isn't it odd, dave, that the "purity" tests for blacks NOW are done...by other blacks?

    "Acting white" and all...

  • dave b.||

    Blacks don't get to dole out benefits or mete prison sentences based on who's defined as black on some alleged black-specific purity test. It amounts to nothing more than shit talking.

  • sparkstable||

    Unless they are a judge, President, or congressman. Or some other favored job in our broken system. Then they do. Minority status only holds if you draw the circle around the right group of people. Draw that circle in parts of where I live and whites are a HUGE minority and treated as such.

  • damikesc||

    There was a President for 8 years who was not white. He did shit for blacks.

    Also, what sentences are meted out over how black you are? Is, say, black murder a longer semtence than white murder?

  • dave b.||

    He did nothing for blacks. He did much more for Hispanics and the LGBT community.

    Also, what sentences are meted out over how black you are? Is, say, black murder a longer semtence than white murder?

    Do you really not know the answer to this?

    Or are you just trolling?

  • soldiermedic76||

    What exactly did he do for the Hispanic community?

  • MasterThief||

    He tried making it easier for latin and south american violators of our immigration laws to continue doing so. Beyond that... I couldn't say what was done to intentionally "help" them.

  • creefer||

    Fuck you. It doesn't exist. It's bullshit made up by those who only know identity politics and aren't worth a shit anyway.

  • soldiermedic76||

    Define minority? I remember a book that once claimed Americans of German descent (and no it wasn't a white supremacists tome) were the largest minority group in America (they are a minority compared to Americans of English descent). The Scots-Irish, especially in Appalachia could also be described as an underserved minority group. They have the highest rate of poverty in the USA and we're (and still are) an outside group that had largely been shunned by the majority.

  • soldiermedic76||

    Were not we are. Fucking autocorrect. It doesn't catch typos but does fuck up words that we're correctly spelled (however, my mom's dad was part Scots-Irish and his family was from East Tennessee so I guess both were applicable).

  • dave b.||

    Scots-Irish is not a race. White is a race. They are white.

  • soldiermedic76||

    Scots-Irish isn't a race. Define race then. Why is a Brazilian of Portuguese heritage considered white in Brazil but not white in America. And if you know the history of Europe you know that not all "whites" were rated equal. Slavic, Celtic etc were often considered inferior "races" by Germanic "races".

  • soldiermedic76||

    Or Latin Races, which looked down on Germanic, Slavic and Celtic "races". They actually used the word races in their literature. So your definition of race is completely arbitrary.

  • dave b.||

    My definition is the definition imposed on all races by the US government and is standard on any job application and census form. The fact that Europeans and Hispanics are classified as white isn't an accident.

    For blacks, the One Drop rule still exists, so any amount of Black blood makes one black. Homer Plessy was 1/8th black, but was still subject to segregation at the time.

    For whites - Irish, Italians, Jews, and Greeks were once not classified as white. They were called "alien races". Madison Grant said they bring crime and poverty, and have too many children. "As you go south from Britain, people become less intelligent, more ruled by their passions, more given to crime and drink. These are inborn differences: Jews and Italians will always be stuck at the bottom." In the 1930, enough white 'ethnics' could vote, so Franklin Roosevelt saw them as an important part of the white working-class vote. His New Deal policies made them the same as other white people, which is why all Europeans are classified as white to this day.

    Hispanics petitioned the government to be classified as white so they could gain citizenship and this was made law by the Roosevelt administration.

  • soldiermedic76||

    So you admit it is a completely arbitrary designation because it is not static and changes over time?
    Also, does anyone still enforce the one drop rule? And on government forms isn't it a) voluntary to fill it out and b) doesn't it say which one do you identify with (and generally allows you to make multiple selections).
    Therefore, since it isn't a static definition, is completely voluntary and allows you to choose the one you identify with (and allows multiple selections) it is a completely meaningless designation.

  • dave b.||

    How is it not static when it was mandated by the goddamn government? You're embarrassing yourself. Blacks of any ancestry are still niggers in the US. Sorry you didn't get the memo.

  • soldiermedic76||

    How is it mandated? Those questions are completely voluntary. You can opt not to answer them. It also allows you to self identify and to identify more than one group. To quote the Princess Bride: you keep using that word. I do not think it means what you think it means.

  • dave b.||

    It's not ONLY used for job applications, dumbass. Is it voluntary when someone is arrested and their race is added to the arrest statistics? Go look at the race of Nikolas Cruz or Tsarnaev or any of the Muslim terrorists. It goes into crime stats, it's used for districting your representatives, used for appropriating funds, getting government grants, etc. It's also mandatory on mortgage loans which show blacks are still getting redlined. The government definition doesn't change, so it doesn't matter what you self-identify as.

  • soldiermedic76||

    Actually municipalities can voluntarily not report the race of convicts. In fact, some police departments no longer release the race of suspects they are looking for as part of their deacription. You still haven't provided any evidence it is mandated. Furthermore by your own admission, the fact that Greeks and Italians once we're not classified as white but FDR changed that completely destroys your assertion that the government definition doesn't change.
    And Tsarnaev was classified as white. He's European, Chechen. Wow, you can't even get your "facts" straight.

  • soldiermedic76||

    And also your constant reference to the one drop rule, which was once law, but no longer is also proves the definition of race changes over time.

  • dave b.||

    Actually municipalities can voluntarily not report the race of convicts. In fact, some police departments no longer release the race of suspects they are looking for as part of their deacription.

    Cool story bro. Suspect != convict. Your state and the FBI keep track of the race of state and federal convicts.

    the fact that Greeks and Italians once we're not classified as white but FDR changed that completely destroys your assertion that the government definition doesn't change.

    They were 'ethnic' and had no classification until they got voting rights, after which they became white. Once they were officially classified by the Federal government as white, that classification has not changed to this day. This shouldn't be so difficult to comprehend.

    And Tsarnaev was classified as white. He's European, Chechen. Wow, you can't even get your "facts" straight.

    I know he's white, the point was to point out the absurdity of having Scots-Irish as a race. If that's a race then Chechen is a race. But we both know neither are. Both are white, so my point stands. You have yet to provide any links or any other support other than opinion. You're trying to argue semantics when I have proven the basis for all racial classification in the US, which was used to determine who could vote, get bank loans, qualify for the GI Bill, which water fountain you could drink out of, and where you could sit on the bus.

  • soldiermedic76||

    Was used. And arguing semantics is extremely important, especially when you continue to assert that these conditions continue to this day yet the vast majority of your examples are historical and longer in force.
    For example, when I applied for my GI bill benefits I didn't have to prove my race.
    And I never said suspect equals convict. If you notice they are two completely different, complete sentences.
    And you have yet to prove a single thing. You have however, completely contradicted yourself multiple times, have misrepresented what I have stated, have made numerous historical references that are no longer true yet maintain they are current. You have also moved the goal posts, e.g. you first spoke of census forms and employment forms, but when it was pointed out those questions are voluntary you then mentioned criminal statistics. However, the DoJ statistics are based upon voluntary reporting by individual municipalities. Again, there is that word voluntary, there is no mandate. And municipalities are not required to submit the information, nor are they required to state the race of convicta, your point about the DoJ records still doesn't prove a mandate.
    Additionally, you mentioned race originally, however the very definition of the word race has changed and remains controversial among sociologists and anthropologists, therefore stating one definition of race is the correct one is intellectually dishonest.

  • soldiermedic76||

    I however was speaking about minorities. And stated originally that the Scots-Irish could be labelled a disadvantaged minority. You then brought up race. However, race is not the only criteria for minority status as I have pointed out in other posts.

  • soldiermedic76||

    And no longer in force not longer in force.

  • soldiermedic76||

    The most popular definition among scholars currently, is that race is 100% social construct as changes as society evolves. Therefore, there is no true definition of race.

  • soldiermedic76||

    It changes not as changes.

  • soldiermedic76||

    And for your information static means not moving, not changing. However, by your own admission the definition changes with time. Ergo it is not static.

  • soldiermedic76||

    And how is it imposed? Especially when you can opt not to answer the question. Mark multiple selections and self identify.

  • soldiermedic76||

    Also, does minority only refer to race? I thought sexual preference could also make one a minority.

  • soldiermedic76||

    And religion.

  • Eidde||

    And "Vietnam era veteran status."

  • soldiermedic76||

    Or wartime era veteran (I get to mark this one because I was deployed in support of OIF/OEF).

  • soldiermedic76||

    And you can bet I use it to my advantage when applying for a job.

  • Eidde||

    "I like the Japanese esthetic of minimalism, for example. I am not Japanese as far as I know."

    Are you sure?

  • mtrueman||

    "No, cultural appropriation does not exist,"

    Get your forehead tattooed with an eye-popping, lip-smacking, dice throwing fuzzy headed little black sambo, and then tell me cultural appropriation doesn't exist.

  • soldiermedic76||

    That's not cultural appropriation. That is just being purposely insulting. Try again.

  • mtrueman||

    "That is just being purposely insulting. "

    That's what gets people upset. People, like our self-styled Libertarians here, also get upset over Elizabeth Warren's cultural appropriation and find it unacceptable.

  • soldiermedic76||

    No, they got upset at her being a socialist pig who claimed a heritage that she has no proof that she belongs to for her own benefit. They also are upset at the idea that the government provides justification for using this assumed identity for personal gain that others are not allowed to avail themselves of.

  • mtrueman||

    Haven't Libertarians more important things to do than wringing their hands over this non-existent 'problem' of cultural appropriation?

  • sparkstable||

    The problem libertarians wring their hamds pver isnt the existance of cultural appropriatipn or not. It's the mindset of those who promote it as a means to undermine the human value of some disfavored group out of revenge rather than justice. It is based on an idea of collective guilt rather than individual justice. It is a symptom, not the problem in and of itself.

    And the actual problem is very much worth spending our time and energy on.

  • mtrueman||

    "And the actual problem is very much worth spending our time and energy on."

    By all means, knock yourself out. Personally, I think the war on Christmas is the culture war I want to fight.

  • John C. Randolph||

    Cultural appropriation certainly exists

    Bullshit. Culture isn't property.

    -jcr

  • dave b.||

    Culture is property when it's convenient

  • Ecoli||

    The new racist mantra!

  • Fuck you, Shikha (Nunya)||

    Tartan plaid isn't property because white people. Dreadlocks are property.

  • John C. Randolph||

    Wishing doesn't make it so.

    -jcr

  • Res ipsa loquitur||

    Funny you didn't mention Elizabeth Warren as a case of cultural appropriation. She lied, took the place of a Native American and got a gig at Harvard.

  • JeremyR||

    Elizabeth Warren is pretty much an example of cultural appropriation, by her pretending to be an American Indian, despite not growing up on a reservation and being blonde and blue eyed.

  • soldiermedic76||

    I did grow up on the Rez. Not a drop of Native blood that I know of. However, I do have a friend with red hair and green eyes who is half native.
    The funniest thing is that Warren just doubled down on it recently.

  • Ken Shultz||

    "People catch shit for having dreadlocks or braids, but you probably had Vikings that had matted-up hair."

    Rastafarians appropriated dreadlocks and ganja from the Hindu adherents of Shiva, who were brought to Jamaica in the aftermath of the abolition of slavery.

    Shaiva sadhus in India and elsewhere, still gather at a Shiva religious festival called Maha Shivarti to smoke hashish and connect with Shiva. Shiva always wears dreadlocks, and so do his devotees. Shiva consumed cannabis and so do his devotees.

    https://tinyurl.com/ycbnkrfb

    I appreciate that there are other cultures that also had dreadlocks and also consumed cannabis--but that's not where the Rastafarians got it. No question that Rastafari is its own thing, but those two aspects, dreadlocks and ganja, were appropriated from Hinduism, specifically from Shiva worship.

  • dave b.||

    Rastafarians appropriated dreadlocks and ganja from the Hindu adherents of Shiva, who were brought to Jamaica in the aftermath of the abolition of slavery

    This is the dumbest shit I have ever read. Literally zero percent of this is true. Rastafarianism is all about throwing off the chains of colonialism and re-appropriating traditional African heritage.

  • Ken Shultz||

    Excuse me, are you saying that Rastafarianism has no connection to dreadlocks and ganja (an Urdu word)?

    Or are you saying that Rastafarians weren't influenced by the cultures that connected with them?

  • dave b.||

    How many goddamn Indians have you seen with deadlocks in your entire life? They don't even have the grade of hair for it. It's inspired by the book of Samson in the Bible. Marijuana was introduced into Africa from the Middle East. Ganja is an americanized word, it doesn't have roots in Rastafarianism.

  • Ken Shultz||

    Yeah, and the calendar date of Christmas was on the Winter Solstice and shared a festival date for Mithra. Still, they had their own rationalizations for celebrating that day, and they weren't celebrating some other God's birthday. They were celebrating Jesus . . .

    You went off half-cocked--because you don't know what you're talking about. You don't have the foggiest clue. I suppose this is the first time you've ever seen the term "religious syncretism".

    "Religious syncretism exhibits blending of two or more religious belief systems into a new system, or the incorporation into a religious tradition of beliefs from unrelated traditions."

    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Religious_syncretism

    You're certainly behaving as if you've never been exposed to the idea before.

    Meanwhile, are we supposed to think that because I personally don't know a lot of Shaiva sadhus with dreadlocks here in the U.S., that means that the tens of thousands of Indians who were brought to Jamaica after the abolition of slavery had no cultural influence on the people of Jamaica in the 1930s?

  • Ken Shultz||

    From that same link:

    "The Rastafari movement, founded in Jamaica, syncretizes vigorously, mixing elements from the Bible, Marcus Garvey's Pan Africanism movement, a text from the European grimoire tradition, the Sixth and Seventh Books of Moses, Hinduism, and Caribbean culture.

    ----Ibidem

    I'd love to be the singular genius who first noticed that Rastafari was influenced by Shiva worship, but I'm not. This has been known and written about for decades and decades.

  • dave b.||

    It's not. Rastafarians don't worship Shiva. The biggest elements are Haile Selassie and Marcus Garvey. You are really stretching to somehow equate that with Shiva. There are 100 times more Indians in Trinidad than Jamaica yet somehow it didn't take root there either.

  • Ken Shultz||

    I didn't say Rastafarians worship Shiva.

    I didn't say Christians worship Mithra either.

    You're being willfully obtuse.

  • VinniUSMC||

    He't not willfully obtuse, he seems to just be stupid. Every comment he's made in this thread has been completely ignorant and sorely lacking in anything remotely resembling thought.

  • Res ipsa loquitur||

    Yea, but.....I know you are but what is he ?

  • Gaear Grimsrud||

    Took about 45 seconds of googling to find this

    " Hindu yogis and holy men, along with their dreadlocks, escaped to the Caribbean Islands, and began appearing in places like Jamaica, where their knotty hairstyle and religious piety were noted and followed by the burgeoning Rastafarians and holy men of the islands. Dreadlocks have their roots (again, no pun intended) in spiritual circles. The Hindu holy men of the east, Rastafarians, which are essentially Judeo-Christians of the Caribbean Islands wore dreads as part of their religious lifestyle."

    http://www.dreadlocks.org/the-.....readlocks/

  • MarkLastname||

    Dave.b is trying to put-moron mtrueman; he may well be succeeding.

  • John C. Randolph||

    How many goddamn Indians have you seen with deadlocks in your entire life?

    Probably around a dozen or so in my case, but I live in northern California where that kind of hippie shit still enjoys some popularity.

    A more important question is: what do you have against Indians, and what made you into the racist asshole you are today?

    -jcr

  • dave b.||

    I have nothing against Indians, just the willful stupidity that would lead one to think Rastafarianism was cribbed from Indian tradition when it's 100% about Africanism and for the slave diaspora to return to its roots. You might also want to familiarize yourself with the definition of racism, since printed words on the internet aren't racism, in case you were wondering.

  • Ken Shultz||

    Incidentally, Rastafarians don't use the word "Rastafarianism".

    It's "Rastafari".

    See "-ism schism".

  • John C. Randolph||

    I have nothing against Indians,

    Oh really? So you didn't say "goddamned Indians", you sleazy little liar?

    -jcr

  • dave b.||

    This guy is fucking triggered. You forgot the R word, leftist.

  • Ken Shultz||

    You mean "retard"?

    You come here wanting someone to call you a retard?

  • Jim C.||

    He seems to be trying really hard for that, yes.

  • John C. Randolph||

    wanting someone to call you a retard?

    I wouldn't give him that much credit.

    -jcr

  • damikesc||

    I have nothing against Indians, just the willful stupidity that would lead one to think Rastafarianism was cribbed from Indian tradition when it's 100% about Africanism and for the slave diaspora to return to its roots.

    Evidence was provided to bolster the claim. None was provided to dispute the claim. Do you think the suffering of blacks is unique in human history?

  • damikesc||

    I have nothing against Indians, just the willful stupidity that would lead one to think Rastafarianism was cribbed from Indian tradition when it's 100% about Africanism and for the slave diaspora to return to its roots.

    Evidence was provided to bolster the claim. None was provided to dispute the claim. Do you think the suffering of blacks is unique in human history?

  • dave b.||

    It did last 450 years and spanned multiple continents and the Caribbean.

  • soldiermedic76||

    Yes because no other group was subjagated and mistreated for centuries. In multiple different locations.

  • dave b.||

    Were they shipped here and stripped of their names and native language? Was it a death sentence for them to learn to read? Were their families broken and sold off at will? Were their children born into chattel slavery? Were they subject to rape for their entire lives starting as a pre-teen? Was it completely legal to kill them in the act of correcting them? Did kidnapping clubs exist to sell them back into slavery? Were they forced to breed with each other in an attempt to make a race of super slaves? Do you want me to go on?

  • BigT||

    Some of my ancestors faced similar treatment in Europe. BFD.

  • soldiermedic76||

    Study how white Christians slaves were treated by the Moors and Barbars in North Africa.

  • soldiermedic76||

    Including a raid we're Barbara pirates enslaved whole Irish villages during the 18th century.
    Also, study how the Scottish and Irish were treated by the English. Or slavs by Prussians.

  • soldiermedic76||

    In fact, the very word Slavic comes from the word slave.

  • Res ipsa loquitur||

    Yea, but none of those count.

  • Mickey Rat||

    "In fact, the very word Slavic comes from the word slave."

    The point is valid but it was the other way around. "Slave" derives from "slav".

  • soldiermedic76||

    Or you can ask the Koreans how the Japanese treated them.

  • soldiermedic76||

    Or the Armenians how the Turks treated them.

  • soldiermedic76||

    Or ask the Hopi how the Apache and Navajo treated them. Or any of the tribes conquered by the Commanche.

  • dave b.||

    All these happened over a period of 400 years? And then another 50 years of Black Codes which disproportionately forced blacks in jail which still has effects to this day? And then another 50 years of Jim Crow? Can you please provide proof? I'll wait.

  • soldiermedic76||

    Some of the examples I provided lasted quite a bit longer. The babars, the enslavement of slavs, the English occupation of Ireland etc.

  • MarkLastname||

    Have you never heard of serfdom?

    It's clear you have no chance of getting over your persecution complex so I don't see any point in engaging with you.

  • damikesc||

    Welcome to humanity. Virtually all people have been discriminated against. Usually for very long times. And utterly suppressing their native culture was part of it. Yes, they broke up families. Yes, they didnt allow education. The only thing "special" about the African trade is that, due to guilt, it is portrayed as an outlier historically.

  • dave b.||

    Totally guilt. That's what it is. JFC. Quick question - when these other groups were being enslaved, killed, and raped for 450 years, was their ancestral homeland looted and pillaged via the Berlin Conference ensuring they could never return? Asking for a friend.

  • soldiermedic76||

    Could never return? Liberia didn't exist?

  • dave b.||

    Let's totally take people from all over the continent and then drop them back off in this one place that has nothing whatsoever to do where you came from where they speak a totally different language. Oh, and the rest of your family was killed. That should work great! Next time we'll do it with Israel.

  • soldiermedic76||

    Are they currently forbidden from returning as well?
    Was the removal of people from their Homeland and barring them from returning unique to Africans?

  • dave b.||

    This question is too fucking stupid to be dignified with a response

  • soldiermedic76||

    No, it is more likely that you realized you were wrong so you resorted to ad hominem attacks. If this is not the case, show how the question was not intelligent, and not pertinent to your assertions?

  • Get To Da Chippah||

    You're right. The Berlin Conference never addressed the historical incidents mentioned by other people in this thread. Does that conference, to you, have special significance that negates the horrors inflicted by the Turks on the Armenians, the horrors inflicted by the Comanche on other native American tribes, the abuses suffered by Koreans under Japanese rule, etc.? If so, you're a pretty horrible person If not, why did you mention it?

  • soldiermedic76||

    He mentions it because his entire premise is based upon the easily falsified idea that what White America and Europeans did to Africans was unique in history.

  • soldiermedic76||

    Or was somehow worse then ritually castrating male slaves, who where then worked to death chained up in their own filth as galley slaves or as farm slaves. And the ritualistic raping of female slaves starting at the age of 9 or so. Until they reached the age of 15 or so, when they would be strangled to death. This is how the Barbars treated white Christian slaves they took.

  • sparkstable||

    For the British taking of Ireland, you could say so. For the Japanese takings on mainland Asia you could say yes (it's the reason they did it in the first place... along with straight up racism).

    The Spanish treatment of central and South Americans wasn't a picnic either, lasted hundreds of years, included over writing native culture, extraction of resources, forced servitude, etc. They also had a very different One-drop rule. If you had one drop European you were better than pure native. If you were a Peninsulare you were the best... But everyone who had at least one European parent, even if they were born in the New World, was allowed access to some privelaged. You had to be a full-blood native to be left out.

  • Ken Shultz||

    P.S. If I told you that Christmas trees, mistletoe, etc. came from sources that predate Christianity and that Christianity was influenced by cultures, traditions, and practices that surrounded it, would that also be the dumbest shit you've ever read?

  • Ken Shultz||

    "This is the dumbest shit I have ever read. Literally zero percent of this is true."

    I don't know if there's a specific name for this fallacy. It might not even be a fallacy. Maybe it's just a cognitive bias. Maybe it's simple psychological projection.

    How often do we see people say, "You must be ignorant because I don't know what you're talking about"?

    If I don't understand something, actually, that means that I'm ignorant--not that the person who said it is ignorant.

    From a psychological standpoint, maybe they want to project their own feelings of ignorance onto other people.

    From a cognitive bias standpoint, maybe people have a hard time telling the difference between those who are saying things they don't understand and those who are speaking nonsense.

    From a logical standpoint, accusing others of being wrong because you don't understand them doe not follow--that last bit's for sure.

  • Ecoli||

    Dreadlocks are nasty. Matted, unkempt hair is unclean. Smelly.

  • Ken Shultz||

    You probably don't like Reggae either.

  • Ecoli||

    Not much. "All my axes don't pay taxes".

  • Ken Shultz||

    SoCal has its own . . . authentic surfer culture that was partly influenced by reggae and ska.

    It still survives in greater San Diego.

    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=83DyqBMsVzE

  • Ecoli||

    Yeah, but dreadlocks are just nasty, whether on blonde haired surfers or Jamaicans, or those just pretending to be.

    By the way, I don't much like country music either. I am more into classical, although I like some in every genre, as is my right.

    I like corn bread and red beans and rice, and I know how to make it. I like Ray Charles and Louis Armstrong. I sometimes eat quiche. I like Chinese food generally, and I don't generally like Vietnamese food.

    I admire Japanese culture generally, though I find it hard to reconcile the atrocities committed by the Japanese during world war 2. Ditto for Germany.

    If I like it, I appropriate it.

    I find it amusing to read trolls like Dave. I think they are cute. It's fun to tell him he is silly and mean spirited.

  • TLBD||

    If I like it, I appropriate it.

    I've always thought that this was one of the major keys to America's success.

    Which is why the left doesn't like it.

  • Ecoli||

    The left is laser focused on destroying America, and American ideals. They have appropriated the culture of their Marxist brothers.

  • Ken Shultz||

    What I meant to suggest is that it's kind of like country music to people in Texas.

  • soldiermedic76||

    When I was stationed at Ft. Sam Houston in the late 90s I remember there was a type of music that was extremely popular at the time which was a blend of polka from German and Swiss immigrants around Brownsville and more traditional Mexican music. I don't recall the name but it was really popular among the Hispanic community.

  • Ken Shultz||

    I think the music you're talking about is probably "Tejano", which is a Spanish word for the Spanish speaking people of Texas. Tejano was extremely popular in Mexico.

    All that brass, the accordions, etc., the tuba, etc., that all came from "Alemanian" influences, as well as girls named Gertruda, etc. Mexicans got beer from German immigration, as well. There's a big German influence on Mexican culture.

    Middle Eastern influences in Mexico, as well, especially from Lebanon. In some parts of Mexico, you'd think "Al pastor" were a native dish from Mexico. It came to Mexico by way of Lebanon.

    I lived in southern Mexico for a couple of years. Before I left the US, one of my Mexican friends was explaining to me that in Mexico, Mexican food doesn't have cheese all over it. That's an American thing. We were sitting in a sit down Americanized Mexican restaurant at the time in front of giant burritos covered with sour cream and cheese. I said, "Ernesto, technically speaking, everything you eat is by definition Mexican food".

    There were a lot Mennonites in Mexico. They'd walk the streets trying to sell their homemade "queso" or cheese. Not a lot of buyers in the Yucatan--but there's more German influence.

    The Italian influence on Argentine culture is so profound, they speak Spanish with an Italian accent.

  • soldiermedic76||

    I thought tejano was the name but couldn't remember. I also remember it was a thing to serve barbucued kebalsas wrapped in tortillas.

  • AlmightyJB||

    I like Reggae. Reggae has a nice groove to it. Seems like a lot of lyrics have a commie vibe though. I'm not really much if a lyrics guy though. I'm not all that interested in what musicians have to say, I just want to hear good jams.

  • damikesc||

    Reggae songs sound very similar to me.

  • damikesc||

    Reggae songs sound very similar to me.

  • soldiermedic76||

    This post sounds very similar to me.

  • soldiermedic76||

    Iove the myth that Vikings we're dirty. The combed their hair and beards daily. Bathed at least weekly and wash hands, face and teeth daily. The owned multiple different outfits, changed their clothes frequently and laundered them frequently. This was very different from the majority of Europe at the times. Viking burials, along with weapons, are filled with personal hygeine items. Contemporary writing at the time even ridiculed the Vikings cleanliness routines. Actually, their enemies such as the Franks and Anglo-Saxons we're extremely dirty, maybe bathing once or twice a year, rarely changing their clothes or laundering them. I am not offended but it does amuse me that people continue to believe this myth.

  • Res ipsa loquitur||

    You are worse than Hitler for saying anything positive about a white culture.

  • soldiermedic76||

    You're assuming cleanliness is a good thing. But soap destroys the Earth and this harms women and minorities the most. Therefore your a misogynistic, racist for assuming cleanliness is a good thing.

  • soldiermedic76||

    Iove the myth that Vikings we're dirty. The combed their hair and beards daily. Bathed at least weekly and wash hands, face and teeth daily. The owned multiple different outfits, changed their clothes frequently and laundered them frequently. This was very different from the majority of Europe at the times. Viking burials, along with weapons, are filled with personal hygeine items. Contemporary writing at the time even ridiculed the Vikings cleanliness routines. Actually, their enemies such as the Franks and Anglo-Saxons we're extremely dirty, maybe bathing once or twice a year, rarely changing their clothes or laundering them. I am not offended but it does amuse me that people continue to believe this myth.

  • soldiermedic76||

    Iove the myth that Vikings we're dirty. The combed their hair and beards daily. Bathed at least weekly and wash hands, face and teeth daily. The owned multiple different outfits, changed their clothes frequently and laundered them frequently. This was very different from the majority of Europe at the times. Viking burials, along with weapons, are filled with personal hygeine items. Contemporary writing at the time even ridiculed the Vikings cleanliness routines. Actually, their enemies such as the Franks and Anglo-Saxons we're extremely dirty, maybe bathing once or twice a year, rarely changing their clothes or laundering them. I am not offended but it does amuse me that people continue to believe this myth.

  • soldiermedic76||

    Iove the myth that Vikings we're dirty. The combed their hair and beards daily. Bathed at least weekly and wash hands, face and teeth daily. The owned multiple different outfits, changed their clothes frequently and laundered them frequently. This was very different from the majority of Europe at the times. Viking burials, along with weapons, are filled with personal hygeine items. Contemporary writing at the time even ridiculed the Vikings cleanliness routines. Actually, their enemies such as the Franks and Anglo-Saxons we're extremely dirty, maybe bathing once or twice a year, rarely changing their clothes or laundering them. I am not offended but it does amuse me that people continue to believe this myth.

  • soldiermedic76||

    Iove the myth that Vikings we're dirty. The combed their hair and beards daily. Bathed at least weekly and wash hands, face and teeth daily. The owned multiple different outfits, changed their clothes frequently and laundered them frequently. This was very different from the majority of Europe at the times. Viking burials, along with weapons, are filled with personal hygeine items. Contemporary writing at the time even ridiculed the Vikings cleanliness routines. Actually, their enemies such as the Franks and Anglo-Saxons we're extremely dirty, maybe bathing once or twice a year, rarely changing their clothes or laundering them. I am not offended but it does amuse me that people continue to believe this myth.

  • soldiermedic76||

    Iove the myth that Vikings we're dirty. The combed their hair and beards daily. Bathed at least weekly and wash hands, face and teeth daily. The owned multiple different outfits, changed their clothes frequently and laundered them frequently. This was very different from the majority of Europe at the times. Viking burials, along with weapons, are filled with personal hygeine items. Contemporary writing at the time even ridiculed the Vikings cleanliness routines. Actually, their enemies such as the Franks and Anglo-Saxons we're extremely dirty, maybe bathing once or twice a year, rarely changing their clothes or laundering them. I am not offended but it does amuse me that people continue to believe this myth.

  • soldiermedic76||

    Obviously, Vikings also are associated with squirrels.

  • mtrueman||

    "were appropriated from Hinduism"

    And where did Hinduism come from? It was a creation of the British. While the British Empire was nation building in India, scholars wanting to increase unity on the subcontinent managed to extract something they called Hinduism from a rich mixture of beliefs and practices that had gone without a name for centuries until the British came up with one.

  • Ken Shultz||

    The vedic tradition goes back to at least 1500 BCE, before the emergence of Zoroastrianism.

    Indra goes back a good 500 years before that.

    You're taking that observation about the British waaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaay too far.

  • mtrueman||

    "The vedic tradition goes back to at least 1500 BCE,"

    Hinduism goes back to the British Empire. That was my point. I didn't mean to imply that British were responsible for vedic traditions.

  • Ken Shultz||

    I don't think you seem to understand the implications.

    The Vedic tradition goes back thousands of years before the Britons even knew that India existed.

    Hinduism was not a creation of the British.

    There are indications that Indra and the devas go back thousands of years, and the ideas around those gods may vary, but they vary within a certain range.

    Native Americans started to think of themselves as a unified people when they were forced into what is now Oklahoma, but I wouldn't say that white Americans created Native American culture. Those cultures and their religions may have existed for thousands of years before the colonists even came to America--never mind the Trail of Tears.

  • mtrueman||

    "I don't think you seem to understand the implications."

    I do. Hinduism is an amalgamation of thousands of ancient and not so ancient local practices, beliefs and scriptures. British nation building scholars played a pivotal role in its creation.

    "Those cultures and their religions may have existed for thousands of years before the colonists even came to America--never mind the Trail of Tears."

    But cultures are constantly changing. The notorious sun ceremony was only practiced by a small number of peoples until the mid 1800s, if I recall correctly, when it became all the rage and spread from tribe to tribe across the west.

  • Ken Shultz||

    "British nation building scholars played a pivotal role in its creation."

    Zoroastrianism emerged as a reaction to the worship of Indra and what they called the devas, and that happened approximately 3,500 years ago. We have inscriptions of and about Indra dated to 4,000 years ago. He may be older than that.

    The various traditions that developed from that did so without British knowledge or involvement for thousands of years before the British even heard of India.

    If you think the traditions that followed Rudra, Indra, Shiva, Rama, Krishna, Kali, or any of the other gods of the Hindu pantheon are unrelated--and were only unified as a single tradition by the British--then you're crazy. Because Shiva acolytes saw Krishna as an avatar of Shiva, but Krishna acolytes saw Shiva as a lesser manifestation of Krishna is beside the point.

    Christianity is divergent, with sects that contradict each other and hold conflicting beliefs, too. To suggest that they're not related because they're so different from each other, however, would be a mistake. Different sects of Hinduism may have had more in common with each other than the Amish and the Russian Orthodox do today; after all, these divergent and apparently unrelated Hindu adherents worshiped in each others' temples. They read from the same holy books! They reverenced the same pantheon.

    . . . for thousands of years before the British arrived.

  • mtrueman||

    "for thousands of years before the British arrived."

    My point is about the actions of the British nation building scholars after they arrived in India.

  • Azathoth!!||

    But your point is invalid.

    You're taking the British trying to describe something that already existed as the British creating that thing.

  • Toots shor||

    Better stick to smoking joints in your basement. Otherwise, you might get attacked with canes by geriatric hippies.

  • loveconstitution1789||

    If you want to work in the corporate world and make some serious money, visible tattoos are a quick way to not be taken seriously.

    Keep them off your hands, neck, and face.

    Customers might not want to smell you being dirty, see that you're a reformed convict, or that you're proud how much weed you can smoke. Be professional.

  • Ken Shultz||

    It used to be that it was looked down on by conservative mainstream culture.

    Now if you've got the wrong style of tattoo, you're a culturally appropriating racist according to the left, too.

    Not many ways to win with this.

  • loveconstitution1789||

    Yeah, its weird that the reason for people hating tattoos changed to that cultural appropriation stuff from tattoos mark you are non-conformist and therefore trouble.

    Now tattoos are kind of mainstream but you're a racist if you get one.

    Even the military regulations restricts tattoos now. IIRC, tattoos now cannot extend past your elbow toward your hands.

  • Ken Shultz||

    Eventually, they turn on their own--like the Red Guard humiliating their own professors during the Cultural Revolution.

    To borrow from Thatcher.

    The thing about SJWs is that eventually they always run out of other people to hate.

  • soldiermedic76||

    This has already begun on our university campuses.

  • BigT||

    "Yeah, its weird that the reason for people hating tattoos changed to that cultural appropriation stuff from tattoos mark you are non-conformist and therefore trouble."

    I'm getting a tattoo to show my unique individuality - just like everyone else!!

  • Ecoli||

    Yeah, tattoos are the ultimate display of conformity, just like ninja costumes for antifettes.

  • soldiermedic76||

    This is very true. In ancient cultures tattoos were generally done as a way to show your acceptance into a group, e.g. as a warrior celebrating your prowess in battle, or as a religious devotional.

  • BillBrennan||

    Is speaking English a cultural appropriation?

  • dave b.||

    Not when it was forced on you at gunpoint

  • sparkstable||

    So since I have ancestry from Africa, the Middle East, the Pacific Islands, Great Britain, Western Europe, Eastern Europe, and North America... am I permitted to do everything save South and Central American stuff?

    And since there is no pure element of those (you can thank the Europeans who wrote over all the pre existing culture) remaining does that mean I can do anything?

    And since Simon Bolivar brought the Enlightenment ideals of revolution to South America can I demand that those countries give up democratic ideals (Enlightenment is mainly British and French in origin... based on Greco-Roman)? And can we demand that they also give up socialism since that is German via Russia? I suppose they can have kings or warlords... those systems seem to have developed independently around the globe.

    Also... non-white are now free to give up industrial technologies. No one is holding a gun to them over it anymore. Same with Latin and Germanic languages.

    Mexico has to give the taco back to the Lebanese which is a shame. I love the taco truck by my work, not-quite-fully-white devil that I am.

    OR... can we just say "Cool tat, bruh!" and stop being self-aggrandizing buttholes?

  • Ecoli||

    English is a difficult language to master. Sometimes a recalcitrant student needs external motivation.

  • Chip Woodier||

    It's best to have it beat into you during infancy, so you don't recall the trauma as you grow up.

  • Ecoli||

    Agreed.

    Circumcision too! Light the fuse.

  • MarkLastname||

    Someone is pointing a gun at you telling you to speak English?

  • Chip Woodier||

    I think everyone can agree...it's a gutter language.

  • Chip Woodier||

    I think everyone can agree...it's a gutter language.

  • Chip Woodier||

    How do you say "Goddam sqwerlz!" in English?

  • Ecoli||

    In the south we just say "dinner".

  • soldiermedic76||

    English could be described as the most culturally inclusive language. You have influences from multiple cultures. It's a Germanic language (Saxon with Anglo, Jute and Gottlander influences, later Old Norse and Dane, and is closely related to old Frisian) has Celtic influences, Latin influences (and old Norman French). Not to mention all the words, phrases etc that bled into the language from across the world. And it's owned spontaneous developed words.

  • PlaystoomuchHALO||

    I have a single response for anyone that wants to play the "cultural appropriation" game with me, or anyone else; "go fuck yourself to death with a sharp stick"

    In reality "cultural appropriation" isn't a thing, and even if it was it wouldn't matter.

  • dave b.||

    Just because you don't like it doesn't mean that it doesn't exist.

  • sparkstable||

    And just because someone made it up doesn't mean it does.

  • dave b.||

    I've provided examples, not to mention the numerous other examples throughout history.

  • Fuck you, Shikha (Nunya)||

    And you evaded every piece of evidence that debased every attempt to delude.

  • dave b.||

    No one on this thread understands appropriation, so it's not even worth it. Apparently everyone thinks the leftist definition what appropriation is.

  • TLBD||

    I understand the concept. I just think the entire concept is bullshit.

    In fact, it looks specifically designed to isolate minorities.

  • John C. Randolph||

    No one on this thread understands appropriation,

    We understand it perfectly, and that's why we reject your idiotic guilt-peddling premise.

    Let me give you a little tip, sunshine: you clearly seek the ego gratification of getting people to grovel to you, so try it over on Daily Kos or some shit like that. You'll find plenty of simps there ready to beg your forgiveness.

    Here on Reason's H&R, we don't have a lot of patience for that kind of shit.

    -jcr

  • dave b.||

    I've been here longer than you and everyone else, so please spare me on what we allegedly do here. The libertarians are long gone, replaced by the right wing Breitbots. Enjoy your triggering

  • TLBD||

    Our trolls really need to step it up. They are probably the weakest on the internet.

  • Jim C.||

    "I've been here longer than you and everyone else,"

    No chance.

  • dave b.||

    Do you want to see my emails from Thoreau and Shannon Love from 2004?

  • Jim C.||

    "2004"

    That wouldn't be good enough, by many years.

  • John C. Randolph||

    The libertarians are long gone,

    What's your next guess? I've been a Libertarian since my high school days handing out literature for the Ed Clark campaign.

    -jcr

  • dave b.||

    I'm sure that sounds good while you're watching Fox News. Neal Boortz pretends to be a libertarian also, so the litmus test is a complete and utter fucking failure. Not to mention drug warrior extraordinaire Bob Fucking Barr as the Libertarian presidential candidate. You can't make this shit up.

  • MarkLastname||

    The only people here who seem to watch Fix or read breitbart are leftist trolls like yourself.

    Guess what bud. If you think a culture can be owned, you're not a libertarian: you're just another collectivist.

  • John C. Randolph||

    Fox News.

    When did you leftards get the notion in your pea-brains that invoking the name "fox news" is a magic incantation that somehow backs up whatever bullshit you're trying to sell?

    -jcr

  • Fancylad||

    "Russian Trolls" "racists" Free Space "Brietbots" "Fox News"
    BINGO!

  • Texasmotiv||

    Just because you DO like it doesn't mean it DOES exist.

  • Fist of Etiquette||

    Smith has personally done cover-ups on ex-skinheads, he says, provided they're trying to turn over a new leaf.

    Or trying to find gainful employment? Forced Nazi wedding cakes but no white supremacy tat mandate? I don't like it.

    I also don't like tattoos. For those of you inked up, you have graffitied the temple that is your body. I will not abide body art, and it is the one prohibition that I will allow.

  • Crusty Juggler||

  • Fist of Etiquette||

    All those tattoos read "I'm a POS" to my eye.

  • John C. Randolph||

    Tats are trashy, but not as trashy as guilt-peddlers.

    -jcr

  • AlmightyJB||

    "But what happens when the ink embedded in your skin is unacceptable to polite society? "

    That's just a bonus.

  • Rockabilly||

    Illinois governor drinks chocolate milk to demonstrate his commitment to diversity

    http://www.sacbee.com/news/pol.....89004.html

  • Ecoli||

    So woke.

  • Juice||

    He got woke and had breakfast.

  • Ecoli||

    He should have guzzled some orange drank too.

  • AlmightyJB||

    + Red Cream Soda.

  • AlmightyJB||

    Not good enough. Until he gets a Jheri Curl, I will continue to doubt his commitment.

  • Ecoli||

    I had to look it up. Lionel Richie leapt from the page, and I burst into a rendition of.... "Lady..."

    You have temporarily damaged my culture. The only way to recover is to eat a white bread sandwich with extra mayo on mayo. And a side of mayo.

  • AlmightyJB||

    I'd tell you to add cottage cheese on the side but you can't eat cottage cheese without black pepper.

  • Crusty Juggler||

    I had to look it up

    Just let your soul glo, racist.

  • TLBD||

    Wow, I've been spelling that wrong in my mind for my entire life.

  • AlmightyJB||

    I have a compromise. I'll do whatever I want. The left are free to act like whiney little bitches about it as long as they don't get in my face with their childish nonsense.

  • BigT||

    That's not very libertarian of you - restricting where whiny little bitch leftists can spout their childish nonsense to places other than your face.

  • AlmightyJB||

    Oh they CAN do it. It's just not going to work out all that well for them.

  • BigT||

    Imitation is the sincerest form of flattery.

  • BigT||

    And this is why we must abandon Chief Wahoo!!

  • soldiermedic76||

    I grew up on the Rez. Have plenty of Native American fans. Most could give a fuck. In fact one of my Native friends was really pissed a couple weeks ago because her sons' school replaced the Native American "warrior" mascot with a generic warrior mascot (not sure what that is). She and her sons were proud of the old mascot. She had even spoke out against changing it, but the school board (Western Oregon so you can guess) told her it was the right thing to do to not offend anyone.

  • soldiermedic76||

    She told them she was offended by their decision. And they told her they were sorry but this was the right thing to do. Mind you she said the school board doesn't have a single native American on it and she told them she was Native American.

  • damikesc||

    The school board might have no Natives...but they are likely markedly more "woke".

    So they know better.

    Silly darker skinned people, thinking they know more than their pasty white but woke betters...

  • soldiermedic76||

    This

  • Sevo||

    Front page "news" in the SF Chron:

    "Bay Area student organizers are in vanguard in wake of Florida slayings"
    [...]
    "...And then, as if someone hit a switch, everything changed...."
    https://www.sfchronicle.com
    /bayarea/article/Bay-Area-student
    -organizers-are-in-vanguard-in-12704835.php

    Nope, nothing changed other than bragging about using kids as political props on the front page.

  • Ken Shultz||

    One of the things you need to remember is that as an English speaking Caucasian in America, you have no culture. Culture is defined as something that isn't English speaking, isn't Caucasian, and isn't American--at least for the purposes of appropriation. Your culture is vanilla ice cream without the vanilla--it only seems like something in contrast to some other authentic culture, which is why you try to appropriate from other cultures.

    So, obviously, because you belong to the only group of people in the world without any culture of their own, your culture can't be appropriated.

    Pioneer spirit, self-sufficiency, resourcefulness, the protestant work ethic, frugality, rugged individualism, perseverance, personal responsibility: these things aren't the attributes of an authentic culture with its own stories, legends, symbols, art forms, knowledge, history, values, traditions, etc. passed down through the ages. That stuff just boils down to selfishness and racism--you should be ashamed of yourself.

    P.S. Yeah, I know, Poe's Law--there are people who really believe precisely that, and there's no way to tell I'm just kidding if I don't tip my hand. It's supposed to be parody and I wish it were an exaggeration--but people really believe that shit.

  • soldiermedic76||

    That reminds me of a meme I saw on a Viking themed tattoo page:
    SJW: oh you have a tribal tattoo, what tribe DO YOU belong to?
    "Viking"

  • mtrueman||

    "Viking"

    Viking is such a weakass culture. They established themselves in North America long before the British, Spanish etc, yet their culture was utterly assimilated and absorbed without leaving a trace in the practices of the local aboriginals, aka Indians.

  • soldiermedic76||

    Obviously you are trolling. However, a dozen or so families at the very edge of the cultural sphere does not constitute establishing themselves. When they invaded England, their armies numbered in the teens of thousands. How long would the locals have held out if the Vikings had chosen to invade North America with something along the line of the Grand Heathen Army that invaded England during the 9th century?
    Better yet:, how much of the Vikings culture remains today? Their influence is seen in everything from the English Parliament, to the Icelandic Parliament, to our own Constitution and juris prudent. The jury system is a direct descendant of the Viking Thing. This is just a single example. Our language is riddled with Viking words.
    In fact, during the Renessaince England was considered part of Scandinavia. The Norman's were descendants of the Vikings. The Scottish Highlanders were descendants of the Vikings. Dublin, Kiev and numerous other cities were founded by the Vikings.

  • mtrueman||

    The British are notorious copy cats and will go out of their way to adopt the cultures of others. It's hardly surprising they would ape the vikings. They did it with everyone else they encountered. America's native population found nothing they thought worth copying in the viking. They found it too weakass to use as their own.

  • soldiermedic76||

    Only a small bunch was exposed to it for a very short time. And even that exposure was very limited. So this statement is completely stupid. And the measure of how much or little influence is difficult to guage. Anthropologists continue to argue about it to this day.
    However, I doubt if given the chance Native Americans would have rejected Viking methods of steel production, ship design, navigation, etc. Considering most of the cultures that encountered the Vikings in North America we're still in existence when the English landed in North America, we will have no idea how much cultural exchange actually happened.
    Additionally, it could also be argued that Native American cultures was weakass, since the Vikings felt no need to addopt any of it. That is a pretty illogical argument on your part.

  • soldiermedic76||

    Only a small bunch was exposed to it for a very short time. And even that exposure was very limited. So this statement is completely stupid. And the measure of how much or little influence is difficult to guage. Anthropologists continue to argue about it to this day.
    However, I doubt if given the chance Native Americans would have rejected Viking methods of steel production, ship design, navigation, etc. Considering most of the cultures that encountered the Vikings in North America we're still in existence when the English landed in North America, we will have no idea how much cultural exchange actually happened.
    Additionally, it could also be argued that Native American cultures was weakass, since the Vikings felt no need to addopt any of it. That is a pretty illogical argument on your part.

  • soldiermedic76||

    Not, once acquiring Viking weapons technology, would they have rejected Viking fighting styles, which were developed to utilize those weapons to their utmost advantage?
    I know you are an unthinking troll if you maintain that Viking martial arts and tactics were not exemplary for their time.

  • mtrueman||

    "we will have no idea how much cultural exchange actually happened."

    We do know that viking influence on North America was minimal or non-existent.

  • soldiermedic76||

    Again, this is not a given. Unless you are maintaining that you know more than experts in the field.

  • mtrueman||

    The field of viking influence over North American culture doesn't exist.

  • MarkLastname||

    Haha, lead paint apparently makes you an angry little creature in addition to feeble minded.

  • Azathoth!!||

    America's native population couldn't figure out a use for the wheel. It's hardly surprising that they were utterly dumbstruck by the Vikings

    Dumbstruck seems to be their default position as today many of them demand the right to speak the language of their conquerors with a vehemence that even the descendents of those conquerors abjure.

  • soldiermedic76||

    And they were not absorbed, they abandoned their single colony because it was more trouble then it was worth.

  • Earth Skeptic||

    "Pioneer spirit, self-sufficiency, resourcefulness, the protestant work ethic, frugality, rugged individualism, perseverance, personal responsibility: these things aren't the attributes of an authentic culture with its own stories, legends, symbols, art forms, knowledge, history, values, traditions, etc. passed down through the ages."

    Whatever, but dude, these ethics and associated behaviors are HARD. I would much rather appropriate some lazy bullshit like sitting around in drum circles or braiding my hut-mate's hair while stoned.

  • Juice||

    Yes, your tattoos are problematic, not because of cultural appropriation, but because tattoos are dumb.

  • soldiermedic76||

    There are multiple reasons to get tattoos. My wife had a large surgical scar from a childhood surgery she had always felt self conscious about on her abdomen. She got a tattoo over it and now feels much better. If it makes her less self conscious than who an I to judge it.

  • Ecoli||

    So, you openly admit that your wife culturally appropriated life saving surgery. Just horrible.

  • soldiermedic76||

    Yes, damn her, she just should have died.
    In all truthfulness, it was so serious the priest was giving her last rights before she was medavaved to Seattle's Children's from Spokane.

  • soldiermedic76||

    God, can't type today. This is what I get for posting on my phone.

  • Ecoli||

    Glad to hear it worked out for her.

  • soldiermedic76||

    Well if working out means married to me. Not sure if that was worth it. I tend to be a pendantic asshole at times.

  • Slumbrew||

    I tend to be a pendantic asshole at times.

    You're commenting on a libertarian site - adding that part wasn't necessary.

    One of us! One of us! One of us! One of us!

  • soldiermedic76||

    But it was true to character.

  • soldiermedic76||

    And since it is likely I am high functioning autistic, according to some testing I recently did, even though I wasn't diagnosed as a child, I also am probably compelled to be as exactly precise as possible.

  • soldiermedic76||

    There are multiple reasons to get tattoos. My wife had a large surgical scar from a childhood surgery she had always felt self conscious about on her abdomen. She got a tattoo over it and now feels much better. If it makes her less self conscious than who an I to judge it.

  • Juice||

    Multiple reasons? Covering a scar is one reason. What are the others?

  • soldiermedic76||

    Honoring a person, commemorating a special event, religion, etc.

  • AlmightyJB||

    Today in things that are actually problems

  • Crusty Juggler||

    In the words of writer Salman Rushdie, "The idea of the sacred is quite simply one of the most conservative notions in any culture, because it seeks to turn other ideas—uncertainty, progress, change—into crimes."

    Awesome quote!

  • Crusty Juggler||

    Today in things that are actually problems

  • AlmightyJB||

    I want a sexy Batgirl. Not a frumpy, gross batgirl. If batgirl is not a natural redhead, I'm going to be disappointed.

  • Crusty Juggler||

    Yvonne Craig was sexy af cuz

  • AlmightyJB||

    I liked Julie Newmar better. But would both.

  • Crusty Juggler||

    Today in things that are actually problems

  • Crusty Juggler||

  • Inigo Montoya||

    I keep on saying it, to anyone who mentions cultural appropriation, that it easily wins as the most vapid and ill-informed concept the left has come up with in at least the past 50 years.

    Now, if you want to talk to me about why it's wrong to disrespect other cultures, I'm willing to listen. It's not all that funny to have someone pull at the corners of their eyes and pretend to speak with a Chinese accent. I think the last time a friend of mine did that, we were under 10 years old.

    But getting an Asian dragon tattoo? Learning to cook in a wok? Practicing yoga, etc., etc.? Those things seem to me to show RESPECT for a different culture. It's an acknowledgement that Europeans can learn things from and celebrate the practices of other cultures. Wasn't that one of the big arguments FOR "multiculturalism" in the first place?

    And then there's the fact that most of the people who complain about cultural appropriation know zero about history anyway. They have their heads so far up their asses, they wouldn't know a Japanese dragon from a Javanese statue anyway. They just want to make themselves feel important -- especially the ones who jump in to "defend" a culture that's not their own. I would be more apt to at least listen to a Native American talk about dream catchers than some dumb blonde college student who speaks with a rising intonation.

  • soldiermedic76||

    Many Americans are culturally illiterate. I remember in high school I was in the library when a girl pulled out a biography on Martin Luther. She said "I thought Martin Luther was a black guy"

  • AlmightyJB||

    "I thought Martin Luther was a black guy"

    That's what the pope wants you to believe.

  • soldiermedic76||

    I thought we settled this back during the 30 years war. Damnit now I have to call up Sweden and nothern Germany and resurrect the Northern Alliance. To arms all my fellow Lutheran's.

  • AlmightyJB||

    "easily wins as the most vapid and ill-informed concept the left has come up with in at least the past 50 years."

    Agreed. It's all just parroting at this point. It like a 5 year yelling "Don't copy me!" It completely ignores all of human history.

  • Ben of Houston||

    That's what I don't get about the whole "cultural appropriation" thing. It's just unnecessary. We already have a word for the bad part: "Rudeness". You can copy aspects of other cultures politely. In fact, that's how cultures evolve, typically for the better.

    That being said, some things (Chief Wahoo comes to mind) HAVE been copied in a rude way. We should eliminate the rude ones without affecting the regular ones.

  • gormadoc||

    Does anybody have a citation for the claim that calaveras de azucar were appropriated from Italian missionaries? I have to say I doubt it, given that skulls and skeletons were popular iconography in the pre Columbian period. I find it more likely that they used skulls from Europe when they were cheaper than making their own, and then made their own after that.

  • Crusty Juggler||

    ^ Nerd.

  • gormadoc||

    I grant you that, but I just want to know so that I can annoy some members of my wife's family who whine about cultural appropriation. They're Mexican.

  • Ecoli||

    Ask them why they make flour tortillas.

  • gormadoc||

    They don't. Flour tortillas are a travesty in our world.

  • AlmightyJB||

    Naan on the other hand.

  • Crusty Juggler||

  • Crusty Juggler||

  • soldiermedic76||

    As a person of Scandinavian and German heritage, if I get a tattoo associated with another culture I am labeled as a cultural appropriation. However, getting a tattoo associated with my heritage could end up being labeled racist (many Viking related designs have been corrupted by actual racists, and many don't know the difference and associate any rune or pagan god/dess as racist). Guess white people just can't get tattoos right?

  • Crusty Juggler||

  • soldiermedic76||

    I thought white people dating African Americans was racist.

  • soldiermedic76||

    Or is it only a problem when a white guy dates a black girl, but okay for a white girl to date a black man?

  • AlmightyJB||

    Not according to black girls.

  • soldiermedic76||

    How about white lesbians and black lesbians?

  • AlmightyJB||

    Well if porn selection is any indicator that activity is pretty limited. From what I hear. Perhaps homosexuality is a narcissistic endeavor where one wants to be with someone exactly like themselves. Lol.

  • soldiermedic76||

    I don't know. The first guy I fucked (consider myself heteroflexible, I love all these new labels, it is so much cooler than saying I was a horny fuck who would fuck just about anything with a hole when i was younger) was Korean.

  • AlmightyJB||

    If I had a nickle for everytime I've heard that.

  • soldiermedic76||

    Well, it's because even us heteroflexible guys like Asians.

  • AlmightyJB||

    Well their females are pretty hot. That's why all the sex robots are Asian.

  • soldiermedic76||

    I prefer their females, too.

  • Crusty Juggler||

    (consider myself heteroflexible,

    I consider myself anysexual, prude.

  • soldiermedic76||

    Is that part of the LGBTQ etc alphabet?

  • AlmightyJB||

    I think it's from the splinter group, QTBGL. LGBTQ not angry enough.

  • soldiermedic76||

    Well prior to my entering the Army I was an angry asexual. I was mainly angry because my asexuality was completely involuntary.

  • Eidde||

    So you're saying you signed up for the Army so you could rape and pillage?

    Talk about cultural appropriation!

    /joke

  • soldiermedic76||

    Considering I descended from Vikings, becoming a warrior and raping and pillaging was living my culture.

  • Otis B. Driftwood||

    OT: Check out Harvard Professor of Constitutional Law, Laurence Tribe:

    The R in NRA stands for RIFLE. The AR-15 is a semi-automatic RIFLE. Its bullets fly at over 2,000 mph. It easily fires over 10 rounds PER SECOND. Its only purpose is to rip human beings apart and leave them dead. Nobody needs it for defense or for sport. It should be BANNED.

    "10 rounds PER SECOND"!

  • AlmightyJB||

    "Nobody needs it for defense or for sport."

    Well the 2nd Amendment has nothing to do with either of those things. And WTF does "need" have to do with anything? This is the USA, not Russia bitch.

  • soldiermedic76||

    Love how he says semi-automatic then quotes the firing rate for the fully automatic M-16

  • OpenBordersLiberal-tarian||

    Tribe is a dedicated member of #TheResistance. His Twitter is absolutely worth following for its well-reasoned posts like This @MaxBoot op-ed is a MUST READ. He nails it with his unnerving comparison of Russia's war on our democracy with the 9/11 attack on the Twin Towers. Imagine if Bush 43 had done NOTHING to punish al Qaeda but had embraced Osama bin Laden. . .

    We need to go beyond speaking of Russia merely "meddling" in our election, and start using language like "act of war" while making 9 / 11 comparisons.

  • soldiermedic76||

    It also completely ignores the fact that the Army and Marine Corps want to replace the 5.56 mm with the 6.5 because the 5.56 is not powerful enough.

  • Agammamon||

    '2,000 miles per hour'?

    So an AR-15 can throw bullets faster THAN A TANK GUN?

  • soldiermedic76||

    This is like when people mention high velocity rounds cause wound cavitation. And imply only the AR-15 causes wound cavitation. Completely ignoring that all modern rounds cause wound cavitation.

  • Entropy Drehmaschine Void||

    It is completely AMAZING what that nasty little black rifle can do in the imagination of a Progtard.

  • sparkstable||

    So in other words... Armalite engineered something that works. Hot damn and praise Jebus.

    Did he also know that Bughatti males a car that can reach 200mph? Or that Nike males shoes that can be laced up? Or that Louisville Slugger has formed wood into an instrument that hurts like hell (I have the scar over my eye to prove it!).

  • Mickey Rat||

    Remember, Tribe was a couple of decades ago the Left's wet dream candidate for a SCOTUS seat.

  • Agammamon||

    Our judgment of cultural appropriation should consider whether the act is rooted in hatred or appreciation

    wat?

    Look guys, nobody 'appropriates' things they don't like. Blackface is not cultural appropriation. Wearing thick glasses, faking and underbite, and confusing 'r' and 'l' is not cultural appropriation.

    That's *mocking*.

  • Eidde||

    This is something people worry about?

    Oy, gevalt. Oops!

  • Eidde||

    Suggested methods of driving progs crazier than they already are, if they go after you for doing something that's supposedly wrong for your race.

    "How do you know my race? What evidence do you have?"

    Or even better,

    "You're so full of phobias, I identify as (other race)."

  • soldiermedic76||

    Not according to daveb. Race definition is mandated by the government, we all must live by their definition, which never changes. But it has changed but it remains static. Well, at least that is what he maintains.

  • dave b.||

    we all must live by their definition

    You can live by whatever definition you want, until someone else is doing the classifying. Tiger Woods identified himself as 'cablinasian'. Until he got arrested

  • soldiermedic76||

    No, if you maintain it is mandated by the government, by the very definition of the word mandated, it is not entirely up to me. Words have meanings. If that isn't what you meant than don't use that word (and continue to insist on using that word).

  • dave b.||

    You can't be this stupid. The classification is set by the government. You can still identify as whatever you want, until they have to classify you. As Tiger Woods found out the hard way.

  • soldiermedic76||

    Again, there is no law requiring classification, nor one that sets the criteria by which you classify. I notice you love to impune other people's intelligence when you can't defend your position. I've seen you do it both to myself and multiple other people in this thread.Generally speaking, that is usually taken as a sign of your own insecurity regarding your percieved intelligence.
    Rather than dispute a position, you seem more comfortable launching ad hominem attacks. This shows a complete lack of intellectual honesty. It may be that you realized you have argued yourself into a corner and can no longer defend your positions so therefore resort to cheap, petty personal attacks.

  • soldiermedic76||

    Again, there is no law requiring classification, nor one that sets the criteria by which you classify. I notice you love to impune other people's intelligence when you can't defend your position. I've seen you do it both to myself and multiple other people in this thread.Generally speaking, that is usually taken as a sign of your own insecurity regarding your percieved intelligence.
    Rather than dispute a position, you seem more comfortable launching ad hominem attacks. This shows a complete lack of intellectual honesty. It may be that you realized you have argued yourself into a corner and can no longer defend your positions so therefore resort to cheap, petty personal attacks.

  • dave b.||

    I've provided proof with links attached. You have refuted precisely zero of these. Your entire 'argument' is goalpost moving and being pedantic. You're just trolling at this point.

  • soldiermedic76||

    Your links don't prove a thing, other than that historically there was government sponsored segregation. However, you have yet to prove this remains the case. I have not once moved the goal posts, however, you are constantly changing your argument. What you call being pendantic is simply the result of you using a word incorrectly and then insisting on continuing to use it even after it's been pointed out you are not using it correctly.
    I have not once resorted to personal attacks, and have offered cognitive logical arguments that you have chosen to respond to by inpuning my intelligence. Yet you call me a troll? You definitely like to project don't you?

  • soldiermedic76||

    And I see no reason to refute what is a matter of historical fact (I never denied that this was the case at one time, in fact I stated multiple times that the fact that these occurred buy no longer due proves my point that the definition of race is not static but changes over time). You can't accept the fact that race is not static, nor does it even have a single, unified definition. Your entire personal identification seems to be tied up with the idea that what you identify as white people have been unique on their treatments of other cultures. However multiple people have provided you numerous examples that this is not historically accurate. Instead of admitting you were wrong, you called us stupid. This seems to be your modus operandi.

  • soldiermedic76||

    You have also resorted to the True Scotsman argument, by labelling those who disagrees with you as not being true libertarians and stating that they must have come here from Breitbart and Fox News. Maybe you actually believe this is an effective debating style.

  • ||

    "When the ink was still bumpy on my skin, a good friend of mine with Cherokee heritage asked me, 'So what tribe exactly is your dream catcher from, Kathleen?'"

    Some friend. A friend that makes you feel shame is acting like an asshole.

    I would have told that person to a) stop over rating themselves and b) fuck off.

  • I'm Not Sure||

    "When the ink was still bumpy on my skin, a good friend of mine with Cherokee heritage asked me, 'So what tribe exactly is your dream catcher from, Kathleen?'"

    Kathleen: "I don't know- I just like it. Why do you ask?"

  • Earth Skeptic||

    Or...

    Kathleen: "The Winners"

  • ||

    "The tribe the useless piece of shaman junk dream catcher didn't catch thus becoming your nightmare, bitch?"

  • crufus||

    Is it OK if I say that tattoos look look stupid?

    Or nor say it and just think it?

  • Get To Da Chippah||

    Get a tattoo that says it, so you don't have to.

  • Longtobefree||

    I humbly request that everyone appropriate the culture of Christianity. Find a several Christians and have them explain the basic precepts to you. You need to talk to more than one because Christianity is a personal relationship with Jesus. Read the Bible for yourself; reflect on what is there, accept it into your life. Attend a church regularly, find a small group Bible study group and learn from those who have an existing personal relationship with Jesus. Continue to read, study, and discuss with other Christians daily.

  • Fancylad||

    Christians do love being appropriated.

  • ||

    This whole 'cultural appropriation' thing is dumb. Made by and for the petty, parochial ignoramus with a misplaced sense of cultural nationalism.

    Imagine if say, Italians or French or Germans or English or whatever started to tell non-members of their respective tribes you couldn't eat their food, wear their clothes, drive their cars etc. I think it's mighty hypocritical of people who scream we appropriate their stuff while there's a high probability their 'appropriating' someone else's culture.

    Think about that the next time you make lasagne if you're the type to scream someone shouldn't be in a tattoo you object to or whatever.

    If you marvel at the Sistine Chapel and are so moved by it you pay homage to this human feat in whatever manner you choose, is that cultural appropriation?

    How about this? How about seeing things through the prism of humanity?

    Sure, nations have a cultural patrimony to protect and preserve but to cross over into 'this is ours, you can look but can't touch' mentality is not only déclassé but anti-humanist.

  • mtrueman||

    "Imagine if say, Italians or French or Germans or English or whatever started to tell non-members of their respective tribes you couldn't eat their food, wear their clothes, drive their cars etc. "

    They do this already. Imagine marketing a fizzy drink under the name 'champagne.' The Frinch would have the full force of the law on you in no time.

    "If you marvel at the Sistine Chapel and are so moved by it you pay homage to this human feat in whatever manner you choose, is that cultural appropriation?"

    If you consider yourself a part of the Western culture that is responsible for the chapel, then no, it's not cultural appropriation. If you're say Chinese, then it would be. Chinese artists like Ai Wei Wei have made a career out of appropriating western culture, and and ancient Chinese culture, too, for that matter. This whole 'problem' of cultural appropriation ginned up by Reason writers is just hot air. Don't take it seriously.

  • Sevo||

    "They do this already. Imagine marketing a fizzy drink under the name 'champagne.' The Frinch would have the full force of the law on you in no time."
    That is not a matter of culture, it is a matter of business 'copyright', you idiot.

    "This whole 'problem' of cultural appropriation ginned up by Reason writers is just hot air. Don't take it seriously."
    As is no surprise, you have no idea what you are posting about. A bing search yields 9,370,000 results and a look though the first three pages has no link to Reason.
    Are you here to prove how stupid people can be, or is that just a result of YOUR stupidity?

  • mtrueman||

    "A bing search yields 9,370,000 results and a look though the first three pages has no link to Reason."

    You mean you didn't check to 4th page? No. Because you studip.

  • Sevo||

    "You mean you didn't check to 4th page? No. Because you studip."
    You are a fucking ignoramus; do you think anyone but your mommy considered that to be a response worthy of a three-digit IQ.
    Fuck off, scumbag.

  • mtrueman||

    Good come back.

  • ||

    Let me be specific.

    If you're black or Native or any other minority who bark about CA, and have, for example, a love of Russian literature. You even have a tattoo of Dostoevsky. You even, whatever, wear Russian attire from his period once a year with friends who share an affinity for him.

    Is that CA? Because I've never hear Europeans - whose contribution to world history is almost immeasurable - shout, 'hey, Dostoevsky's writing is intricately part of the Russian soul, how dare you blah, blah."

    And the first part you said is ridiculous. Are the French telling people that they're *culturally appropriating" champagne? People are telling others not to wear fricken Black Panther costumes FFS because "culture appropriation'. So I say, fine, no champagne for you because I invoke CA.

    And if you play this game, you see the list of massive 'cultural assets' in countries like the aforementioned you have access to shrink considerably. No Canali suit for you. No Kraftwerk for you. No Bond for you. etc., etc..

  • mtrueman||

    "If you're black...."

    I don't see any problem in a black person or white person appreciating Dostoevsky. He's taught in non-Russian schools and universities around the world, even presumably in African and other 'minority' places, without any fuss being raised. I don't see the point you are trying to make.

    "Are the French telling people that they're *culturally appropriating" champagne?"

    Not in so many words, but it's clear the name champagne is important to the French identity, at least those French from the region itself, and they will take measures to defend what they see as its abuse by outsiders.

    "And if you play this game..."

    Nobody is playing this game. Don't believe everything you read here. It's not a problem. Find something more substantial to occupy yourself with.

  • ||

    Again, you're missing the point. All they're saying is 'this is unique to us and this is how it should be made' if you deviate, it's not champagne. Call it something else. They're not saying 'How dare you non-Frenchies take our champagne and mock our identity' and then move to shut you down.

    Or how Italians move to protect how to make parmiggiano. You can make the knock-off variation just don't call it 'parmiggiano-reggiano. Same with their rules to make pizza. Or Germans or Belgians with beer. They're not explicitly doing shit like these clowns from dreadlocks to Halloween costumes. HUGE difference. You have morons running around *protecting* an identity they think they know but in fact are ignorant of. For example, dreadlocks go back to ancient cultures in Greece and Northern Europe way before it became a 'religious' symbol of identity for modern blacks.

  • mtrueman||

    "They're not saying 'How dare you non-Frenchies take our champagne and mock our identity' and then move to shut you down."

    They will say it's not champagne and probably say it's inferior. They will move to shut you down, too. And they have the force of law behind them. Unlike this blogger you're wringing your hands over.

    "For example, dreadlocks go back to ancient cultures in Greece and Northern Europe way before it became a 'religious' symbol of identity for modern blacks."

    I'm not sure what you're driving at here. Dredlocks are an important symbol for rastafarians. No argument there. Are you saying this importance is misplaced or illegitimate because dredlocks have also been a part of ancient Greek cultural expression? If so, I disagree. Dredlocks are still an important feature of rastafarian culture even though rastafarians may be ignorant of the role of dredlocks in other, older cultures, like the Greeks for example.

  • sparkstable||

    The point re: dreadlocks is that of the originators were to claim CA the the rastas would be morally compelled to abandon them wholesale... at least if we were to accept the premise and warped concept of justice CA proponents are arguing for. BUT... the issue arrises when someone points out that rastas are CAign dreads yet the CA proponents defend the rastas. How can that be? The only conclusion is they are arbitrary and thus not arguing in good faith and thereby undermining the whole CA gambit.

  • mtrueman||

    Nobody is in a position to force rastafarians to change their choice of hair style. If a rastafarian wants to keep his dredlocks, he may. The whole thing is a non-issue. Haven't you found more substantive issues to wring your hands over?

    "The only conclusion is they are arbitrary and thus not arguing in good faith and thereby undermining the whole CA gambit."

    Cultural issues are arbitrary, and have been since cultures made their first appearance. If you want to get to the bottom of the issue, you have to insult a weak, even oppressed minority. Like try sporting a tattoo of a little black sambo on your forehead. You might learn something about sensitivity towards others. Never a bad lesson to assimilate.

  • ||

    What I'm saying rastafarians don't own it.

    As for your French example, sure. Now it's up to someone else to make it better.

  • mtrueman||

    "What I'm saying rastafarians don't own it."

    I agree. In addition I say if someone for any reason publicly burns a dummy head with a dredlock wig on it, we shouldn't be surprised if rastafarians take special notice, dredlocks beings a big thing with them. That's part of the sensitivity I mentioned earlier.

  • MarkLastname||

    Italians did that and called it Prosecco.

  • ||

    Or Asti.

  • Mark22||

    "If being interested in a Maori tattoo or a Japanese tattoo sparks you to learn more about that culture," asks Obregon, "how could it be a bad thing?"

    Because both cultures are best forgotten.

  • Gryph||

    Maori and Japanese cultures are best forgotten?!
    WHAT?!

  • Mark22||

    "When the ink was still bumpy on my skin, a good friend of mine with Cherokee heritage asked me, 'So what tribe exactly is your dream catcher from, Kathleen?' And that was the moment I felt my first pang of shame."

    Kathleen: "Well, you tell me. And if you can't, by what right do you claim to have 'Cherokee heritage'?"

  • Eidde||

    According to Wikipedia, "Dreamcatchers were adopted in the Pan-Indian Movement of the 1960s and 1970s and gained popularity as a widely marketed 'Native crafts items' in the 1980s."

  • Iheartskeet||

    Spot on, and indeed the list is endless. In fact I'd say "cultural appropriation" is one of the very essences of being human. It's how we've shared and amplified learning. It's why we are successful as a species.

    The shaming by the SJW left over this is not about righting historical wrongs. its about asserting power over who can be criticized and why. In typical leftist fashion it also denies people's very humanity.

  • MasterThief||

    The SJW left is also completely hypocritical when it comes to cultural appropriation. They are the people most likely to do yoga, love everything "eastern", idolize Marxist murderers from all over Asia and South America, and use the word "namaste" sincerely. This is the same crowd that actually does tend to appropriate the "spirituality" of Native American cultures in lieu of religion. They tend to conflate cultural exchange and cultural appreciation with appropriation. There is nothing wrong with exploring what other cultures have to offer and adapting the better parts to your own.

  • ||

    SHHHHHHH!

  • mtrueman||

    "Native Americans shamelessly appropriated everything they could get of European culture as fast as they could get it back in the pioneer days. "

    There is no reason for Native Americans to be ashamed of appropriating what they wanted. It's perfectly natural. Europeans likewise appropriated vast swaths of Native Culture; it's a perfectly natural, human thing to do and nothing shameful in it.

  • ||

    No one is saying that they should be.

    It's to point out exactly what you just said.

    Humans borrow from one another all the time from the beginning of time.

    The left prefer the more sinister term "appropriate" and seem to act and talk as if it's one way. IE White culture and privilege appropriate other cultures.

    Again, asinine as it is ignorant as it is repugnant a notion.

  • mtrueman||

    "The left prefer the more sinister term "appropriate" and seem to act and talk as if it's one way. IE White culture and privilege appropriate other cultures."

    It's not surprising. Europe and America expropriated their empires without let up for 100s of years. Marxism and other leftist thinkers were writing when imperialism was at its peak.

    Perhaps white culture, whatever that is has nothing left worth expropriating. Hence the resentment.

  • ||

    Riiiight. Because other cultures and countries not named America or Europe never conquered countries or colonized peoples.

    Please.

    Enough with this myopic and one-way view of history.

    It has had more than enough of its time and space.

  • mtrueman||

    "Riiiight. Because other cultures and countries not named America or Europe never conquered countries or colonized peoples."

    In the 19th century when modern leftism was being formulated, imperialism was very much a European thing. It was Britain that colonized India and a good deal of Africa, and not the other way around.

  • Mickey Rat||

    "What Oscar knows about the origins of Japanese tattooing, he likes: "It's associated with outlaws and outcasts—there were all these merchants and gangsters in Japan that were shunned from the societal hierarchy"

    If you use the symbols of a group that is shunned by society (especially ones that society has good reason to shun, like criminal organizations), should you be offended by being shunned yourself? Was that not the result you wanted?

  • Robert||

    But Dia de los Muertos itself is an example of how watery and untenable cultural appropriation arguments are: The holiday was created by the Aztecs, who believed heaven's gates opened one day a year for the deceased to briefly reunite with their families. Spanish conquistadors realized it was too popular to be stamped out, so they merged it with All Saints Day.


    Uh, don't you mean Samhain? (Though it also has aspects of Yule.)

  • Sanjuro Tsubaki||

    They're problematic whether you're unreasonably averse to them or not.

  • GamerFromJump||

    In actual Japan, he'd be unwelcome in pools, saunas or onsen.

  • Gryph||

    Actually that's changing for the better.
    Seems that alot of Gaijin with ink are frequenting onsen and the owners aren't willing to lose the tourism bucks lol.

  • Gryph||

    This is a non-issue.
    NO ONE has the right to dictate what kind of ink I get. I have しょうがない (sho ga nai) on my left forearm and I dare some soyboy waste of air to make noise about it.