Sensitivity Writers. AKA: avoiding cultural appropriate in writing

[Bedrockgames]

Yes, a lot of very fine people bring up Piss Christ as their go-to example for everything, which is weird only in that this was a controversy over THIRTY YEARS ago and it is likely that many people reading this were not even alive when it happened.

What is the NEA equivalent of get off my lawn?

Anyway, it should probably be mentioned that a Catholic artist making a commentary about Christian iconography in popular culture should probably not be the go-to example for everything, let alone cultural appropriation.

I realize it is an imperfect example. I used it because everyone knows it, and most people understand how offensive it could be. Also, I realize people younger than me are on here, but understand I am in my forties, my cultural reference points are going to be slightly out of date.

I did think about the issue of him being Catholic makes the example not perfect. But I also think it doesn't matter if he is Catholic, Jewish, Muslim or Atheist. I think any artist from any culture should feel free to explore that kind of artist concept.

I mean, sure, that's terribly convenient.

But, as is usual when someone invokes rights... the fact that every right comes with responsibility kind of gets forgotten. Try this - this isn't an argument over whether you have the right to do a thing. Imagine, for the moment, that we stipulate that you have the right.

Then, the argument is over whether (and how) as an outsider to a culture, you have the understanding to exercise this right responsibly. This puts it in the realm of ethics. Whether you can do it isn't the functional bit. We are talking about whether (and/or how) you should do it.

Alternatively - let us say you have the right to use ideas, music, and other cultural elements. Every right we have ever recognized in the world has limits! Where are the limits?

Speaking broadly, you don't have the right to harm people, and you admit that you have no desire to harm people.

So, here's the ticket - cultural appropriation is very often harmful to the people you take from. As a very simple item - it often leads to trivialization and formation and perpetuation of stereotypes, as the majority view of the culture becomes dominated with the elements that have been appropriated, rather than the reality and fullness of the culture you borrow from.

Thus, again, we come around to the same basic point - just because you can do a thing, doesn't mean you should. Repeated assertion of your rights, without attendant acceptance of the responsibilities.. is not a good look. Exercise of rights without attending to responsibilities has a name - "abuse".

I think you are inflating the idea of harm here though. You are treating a persons right to express themselves using things they see in their environment (including culture) with the same degree of caution and concern as you would treat the right to carry arms. Equating someone who freely borrows to 'abuse' to me just doesn't pass the smell test. Again, it feels like you are sermonizing because you are so sure these moral principles are true. I don't believe they are. I think this concept causes more harm than good.

 

[Kaodi]

I think I forgot to clarify: what counts as appropriation is obviously different for different peoples. Historically powerful cultures like those in Europe and many in Asia are kinda just more in the "international sphere" than others. But there are nevertheless ways in which you can go wrong: a lot of the lesser known aspects of regional cultures, for instance. Fairies are ubiquitous, but Celtic mythology not that much better known to the world than was Slavic folklore before the Witcher series. Historical fiction can also easily go wrong even when set amongst history's great powers.

 

[Bedrockgames]

Thus, again, we come around to the same basic point - just because you can do a thing, doesn't mean you should. Repeated assertion of your rights, without attendant acceptance of the responsibilities.. is not a good look. Exercise of rights without attending to responsibilities has a name - "abuse".

You keep saying this. I don't think it is true. I don't accept your premise. I think you are laying out a flawed foundation, that asserts this causes harm and therefore we have a multitude of responsibilities when we cross cultural boundaries. I don't think that is how real human connections are formed with people from other cultures. You don't get their by assuming they are this fragile, or by assuming they are so different from you cannot even touch their culture without ruining it. I am not advocating spreading negative stereotypes. But I don't need cultural appropriation as a concept to avoid that. I just need to not be a jerk. And I do not think it is a bad look or makes me a bad person. I can have a different point of view than you on this topic. I accept you think you have good reasons for believing what you believe about cultural appropriation. I believe you when you say that. I also think I have very good reasons for being critical of it. And I do genuinely think it is a harmful concept.

 

[billd91]

I did think about the issue of him being Catholic makes the example not perfect. But I also think it doesn't matter if he is Catholic, Jewish, Muslim or Atheist. I think any artist from any culture should feel free to explore that kind of artist concept.

I don't think I would call criticism from outside cultural appropriation. It isn't cultural appropriation if I tell the NFL that the term "Redskins" is racist. It isn't cultural appropriation to make a political cartoon of Mohammed despite Islam's restrictions from depicting their prophet.

Cultural appropriation would be wearing a stereotypical war headdress at a Redskins game as a white dude - claiming to have the right to use something as mine without understanding it.

 

[Bedrockgames]

I think I forgot to clarify: what counts as appropriation is obviously different for different peoples. Historically powerful cultures like those in Europe and many in Asia are kinda just more in the "international sphere" than others. But there are nevertheless ways in which you can go wrong: a lot of the lesser known aspects of regional cultures, for instance. Fairies are ubiquitous, but Celtic mythology not that much better known to the world than was Slavic folklore before the Witcher series. Historical fiction can also easily go wrong even when set amongst history's great powers.

But there is a difference between historical fiction and historical romance. Historical fiction demands much greater fidelity to the true history, and to avoid things like anachronisms or mixing up cultures. Historical Romance is much more free, and allows for things like anachronisms and mixing cultural details. The former is great, but it is also a lot more work, a lot less open to creative freedom. The later is also a lot of fun, but less rigorous and allows for more inventiveness and creativity with the facts on the part of the writer.

 

[Bedrockgames]

Of all forms of sacredness? Or just the ones you know?

I think like most people, I have a good understanding of the sacredness I grew up with, but I've also been fortunate enough to be exposed to the sacredness of other cultures. I am not saying I am some great scholar or have this deep knowledge of things, but I do think I know a fair amount. My wife was born in another culture so I've learned a lot about her cultural taboos and what is sacred to her. But I was also visiting a lot of different kinds of temples to learn when I was younger and that taught me a great deal (I almost converted to Buddhism at one point for example). I also grew up in a multi-religious household and had a Jewish side of the family (and grew up with lots of Jewish friends and worked in a Jewish bakery). My dad had things like Mezuzahs and a menorah in the house. So I had plenty of exposure to that. When I was in college I learned Arabic for two years. And as a language it has a lot of things like pious utterances, so you need to learn quite a bit about Islam as well.

But I don't know that any of this is all that important to be honest. I think people understand what sacredness is. And they can still make a judgement call themselves about when someone is being reasonable or not.

 

[Sacrosanct]

Cultural appropriation would be wearing a stereotypical war headdress at a Redskins game as a white dude - claiming to have the right to use something as mine without understanding it.

On a basic level, that's what it comes down to. Using something of another culture other than yours for a personal gain (whether that be profit, the feeling you get from doing it, etc). And as explained in the articles I presented earlier, it is more harmful than just "I may have hurt someone's feelings about it." including but not limited to perpetuation of negative stereotypes, profiteering, and elimination of said culture.

I suspect a few folks here never bothered to read the articles I posted because they are arguing points that are directly rebuked within the articles. Cultural appropriation is not cultural exchange. It does in fact exist as a thing. Most of the push back I'm seeing is basically from a position "I want to keep doing what I've always done and don't care about how it negatively impacts others because that makes it inconvenient to me." I.e., arguments against cultural appropriate sure seem to be coming from a position of privilege.

 

[Bedrockgames]

I suspect a few folks here never bothered to read the articles I posted because they are arguing points that are directly rebuked within the articles. Cultural appropriation is not cultural exchange. It does in fact exist as a thing. Most of the push back I'm seeing is basically from a position "I want to keep doing what I've always done and don't care about how it negatively impacts others because that makes it inconvenient to me." I.e., arguments against cultural appropriate sure seem to be coming from a position of privilege.

We read the article, we've seen the arguments before as well. We just don't find the arguments convincing. And we are making the case that while cultural appropriation isn't a synonym for cultural exchange it does in fact limit it. Again, I would point to the level of certainty you are expression. Consider the possibility you are wrong. Consider the possibility that cultural appropriation isn't really the problem. That it isn't what perpetuates negative stereotypes or that it doesn't lead to the elimination of a culture (this really is an astounding claim that hasn't been supported by any substantial evidence at all). You make it sound like someone borrowing an aesthetic is going into a local village and stealing an artifact then selling it. Ideas are infinite. Creative expression isn't zero sum game. Things can move beyond the culture they are in, and take on new meaning in the context of another culture. And that is fine. And in many ways it is the first step for people understanding a culture. What you guys are doing is making it harder for people to interact with and empathize with the cultures you want to protect. Again, consider the possibility you are wrong.

 

[Sacrosanct]

We read the article, we've seen the arguments before as well. We just don't find the arguments convincing.

Cultural appropriation has an actual definition. When something meets the literal definition of what that is, it's not up for debate any more than what is defined as gravity is up for debate. You can't just ignore or disagree with how things are defined just because you don't like them. That second article I linked to explains it in very clear terms. I honestly don't know how one could disagree with it on any basis of logic.

Again, consider the possibility you are wrong.

Yeah, maybe you should.

 

[Bedrockgames]

Cultural appropriation has an actual definition. When something meets the literal definition of what that is, it's not up for debate any more than what is defined as gravity is up for debate. You can't just ignore or disagree with how things are defined just because you don't like them. That second article I linked to explains it in very clear terms. I honestly don't know how one could disagree with it on any basis of logic.

It is definitely up for debate because it is a concept not a physical law like gravity. If you don't know how someone would agree, then I think you are not seriously entertaining the arguments advanced by the other side. I can understand how you would agree with it. I get the arguments. You should be able to understand the appeal the arguments of the opposing side as well.

Yeah, maybe you should.

I ask myself this all the time.