Sensitivity Writers. AKA: avoiding cultural appropriate in writing

[Janx]

FWIW, I do appreciate the feedback in this thread that was helpful. Especially the person who offered the Writing with Color blog; that was super helpful and I'll have a lot of value from that.

Glad I could help. Sorry the topic took a sideways turn. It happens on the writing channels I'm in as well. But if you're patient, you'll see a nugget of info (like that link) that'll help you.

Which, in reading your posts in here, I can see you are the parent buying child-rearing books. You're gonna be fine.

 

[Lanefan]

So what it all boils down to is this: if you're going to offend people - which in many forms of creativity can be and sometimes is an intentional goal - make sure you spread the offensiveness around fairly, such that everyone gets an equal share.

Hell, it worked out OK for punk rock...

 

[doctorbadwolf]

So what it all boils down to is this: if you're going to offend people - which in many forms of creativity can be and sometimes is an intentional goal - make sure you spread the offensiveness around fairly, such that everyone gets an equal share.

Hell, it worked out OK for punk rock...

Or, punch up, which really did work out well for punk rock while punk was still punk.

 

[Dannyalcatraz]

Yeah.

There is definitely a time and place for artists (of any discipline) to offend...and when not to. The best not only understand this, but also have a refined sense of how to do so constructively.*


* even when being destructive.

 

[Mercurius]

Or maybe the point of art is not to be confined by any specific set of rules. Art is creative expression - it is constant exploring new territory, and often beyond boundaries.

Further, not all art needs to appeal to everyone. What offends one person won't offend another. Every artist shouldn't need to try to dillute their form of expression to suit every possible person. Maybe the beauty of art is that it exists in diverse forms, and we all get to enjoy what we like. Why bother with stuff you don't like, whether because you don't find it aesthetically pleasing or find it offensive for whatever reason?

 

[Hussar]

/snip

{As an aside, when I lived in India for about a year, I was struck by how tourists were more likely to use the Indian names for cities (e.g. Mumbai), while most Indians used the colonial English names (e.g. Bombay). Similarly, I have found that it is generally white liberals who prefer the term "Native American" while many Native Americans/American Indians call themselves "Indians." Similarly with "African American" vs. "Black." The point being, everyone is different. There's no one-sized fits all way to refer to anyone, whether as a group or as an individual. Sometimes--often, even--the most offended parties are not even those who are being appropriated or refered to}
/snip"

Wow. Just wow. That's unbelievably offensive, as well as dismissive all wrapped up in one neat package. There just aren't any words.

 

[Mercurius]

Wow. Just wow. That's unbelievably offensive, as well as dismissive all wrapped up in one neat package. There just aren't any words.

Huh? How so?

 

[Hussar]

Its established by a very specific circle of people who demand that it is true as otherwise no one would pay attention to them.
Too bad that just because you demand that something is true doesn't make it so. Notice how you didn't respond to any to the points in my last post? Or how your last post started with a combat term "white colonialism" in an effort to silence everyone who thinks differently as this term leaves no room for any debate or discussion? And here you are continuing to use racist combat terms with "white privilege".

My points still stand. Feel free to respond to them constructively. Just don't bother with combat terms and "whites are bad" rethoric.
As for your "problem", I have written the solution in my last posts. Ignore cultural appropation as its only a concern for a small circle of people who want it to be a problem. And if those are your target group don't use non european cultures (and probably be accused of not being inclusive enough by the same people who errect barriers around cultures so that no one can use foreign ones, but that is a different can of worms).

I stand corrected. I thought that the other post was dismissive, but this? This right here takes the cake. Apparently not only is cultural appropriation not important enough to merit any attention, but, it's only getting attention because of "a specific circle of people" (must make your blood boil that you have to dance around certain epithets there @Derren) are pushing an agenda. Good grief.

Yes, this is the reason that climate change got ignored for forty years.

 

[Hussar]

Huh? How so?

Seriously?

You're basically saying that it's the "white liberals" who are pushing this and that it's a made up issue. Completely dismissing the harm and history of the issue and then pretending that it's only some ivory tower "liberal agenda" thing. That "many" First Nations people insist on calling themselves "Indian" (love to see some actual facts backing that one up rather than whatever notion you pulled out of your sphincter) instead of First Nations or Native American. So on and so forth.

Good grief, it's the standard "this is a non-issue" conservative talking point brief. Same ludicrous crap that's been spouted off on EVERY SINGLE SOCIAL ISSUE for the past century.

Replace "Native American" with ANY other minority in American history on any issue, and you can see your words repeated verbatim. It wasn't true when they wanted to prevent women from voting. It wasn't true when they wanted to stop blacks from going to schools with whites. It's NEVER been true.

Doesn't stop folks from repeating it every single time though.

You'd think people would get tired of being on the wrong side of history EVERY SINGLE TIME.

 

[Mercurius]

Seriously?

You're basically saying that it's the "white liberals" who are pushing this and that it's a made up issue. Completely dismissing the harm and history of the issue and then pretending that it's only some ivory tower "liberal agenda" thing. That "many" First Nations people insist on calling themselves "Indian" (love to see some actual facts backing that one up rather than whatever notion you pulled out of your sphincter) instead of First Nations or Native American. So on and so forth.

Good grief, it's the standard "this is a non-issue" conservative talking point brief. Same ludicrous crap that's been spouted off on EVERY SINGLE SOCIAL ISSUE for the past century.

Replace "Native American" with ANY other minority in American history on any issue, and you can see your words repeated verbatim. It wasn't true when they wanted to prevent women from voting. It wasn't true when they wanted to stop blacks from going to schools with whites. It's NEVER been true.

Doesn't stop folks from repeating it every single time though.

You'd think people would get tired of being on the wrong side of history EVERY SINGLE TIME.

OK, I see now. You twisted just about everything I said, that I don't know where to start, or if I should even bother. I could literally go through every single sentence and try to re-clarify what I actually said and meant, but maybe it is easier to just say that your outrage is based upon projection, misunderstanding, and mischaracterization. You consistently took a partially true version of what I actually said, then twisted it into the worst possible caricature to feed your outrage.

Know that what you're upset about is not what I actually said or meant. Feel better?

EDIT: A bit more. I'll tease out the Native American thing, because that seemed to especially get you riled. I didn't pull that out of my sphincter - a Native American acquaintance said that to me some years ago. Maybe he lied, who knows, but I've heard similar things multiple times. I can't remember the exact word phrasing, but I specifically said "many" because it doesn't give a sense of how many, although he might have said "most." If you want to take this up with him, I can see if I can find his contact info.

But I think you're missing the crucial point that I made, that you either bypassed or didn't see: There is no one-sized fits all. Everyone is different - including members of marginalized groups. If anything, it might be a tad offensive to assume that all members of X group are in agreement about such things. Some really don't care, at least not about the more trivial stuff.

In some cases, yes, it is white liberals and academics who care more about specific words than the actual people they are referring to. I tend to ask if I'm not sure. As a general rule, people care more about being treated as actual human beings, than the exact right word for the group you categorize them as.