Sensitivity Writers. AKA: avoiding cultural appropriate in writing

[Sacrosanct]

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.

 

[Derren]

Indians, Africans, Islanders, etc who fell under the rule of colonial Britain, and Native Americans who suffered genocide under the American government might disagree with your argument that that was a "natural process"...

Do you know what else has been going on for millennia when cultures interact and one take control over the other? Slavery. Does that mean that slavery isn't a bad thing? Or it's no big deal because it's been a "natural process over millennia"?

Also, I don't know why you're sticking to this logic of "I can find a Native American who doesn't have a problem with the Washington Redskins, so therefore it's not racist to Native Americans." It's not a good look, man.

You really need to broaden your horizon.
What you call appropation happens everywhere. There are several cultures in Europe which get appropiated and will likely die out in the next few decades or become some mangled mascot culture like what you complain about (bavarian comes to mind).
It happens in Europe, in Asia, Africa and also America no matter the skin colours involved. But most of the time no one complains because it is a natural process. Cultures have taken over things from others for millenia. Sometimes that was because of war and conquest including all the misery that causes, sometimes it was because of extensive trade which brought over new ideas which were then appropriated and sometimes just living close together resulted in a new culture being created by combining two or more existing ones.

 

[Dannyalcatraz]

As far as my use of white privilege, that's not a racist term either. I've actually given corporate presentations on this topic; it's something I feel I'm pretty well researched on. It's not a racist term, but also an actual thing we can observe. It's not just the big things, but also the little things like:

• being assured that whenever you turn on the TV or open a paper, you're going to see people who look just like you
• no one ever telling you you're a credit to your race/gender just because you did something good
• not being the only person of your race in a college classroom
• being assured that no matter what town you go in, you're going to find a place of worship that fits your religious beliefs
• not having the police called because you're having a BBQ in a public place, or just hanging out at your own apartment
• not having people stare at you the entire time you're in a store

Etc, etc.

Ugh, so much etc. etc.

Anyway...a thought popped up in my head. It occurred to me that some game books printed in the late 1980s & early 1990s had disclaimers in them that directly addressed the issues that had been raised during the Satanic Panic.

In addition to the proactive measures discussed at various points in this thread, a similar disclaimer or note from the author could be used to defuse some of the potential negative backlash. Like those disclaimers of last century, remind the reader that this is a work of fiction, note some of the steps you took to avoid offense, and say that any errors and offenses were unintentional.

As noted before, this won’t stop someone whose antenna on such matters is boosted to the max, but the average reader will know you at least tried to be respectful. And that means that- even if you did still manage to step in it- most people contacting you about it will initiate said discussion with a different mindset.

 

[Superbeast20]

I know this is a bit of a hot thread but I thought I would offer a different perspective on it.

I once heard someone say that historically cultural appropriation is the first step toward peace between two different groups.

They were saying that when two different groups met they would almost always go to war with each other, each trying to gain advantage over the other. But as time passed each group is exposed to the culture of the other and eventually they notice all the cool cultural stuff the other one has and starts to desire it. This eventually leads to people not wanting to wage war on the other because then how would they get the cool stuff?

For example: Not long ago America and Japan had a hardcore antagonistic relationship. Both sides did some absolutely awful stuff to each other. But now and days the idea of fighting with Japan is absurd to Americans. They make all of our anime. Anime, an idea they got from watching animations produced from America like Walt Disney. (The WW2 Emperor of Japan is rumored to have been buried with a Mickey Mouse watch)

 

[Gradine]

Of course! Not sure why you'd think I implied otherwise?

What I mean by "Academic Multiculturalism" is a particular school of thought promulgated in universities that gives rise to such concepts as "cultural appropriation." A lot of important, good stuff - but the problem is that there isn't a lot of openness or flexibility of thinking; they thump your proverbial bible on the table. They tend not to take too kindly to any kind of questioning, or diversity of thinking -- which, of course, is counter to the whole point of higher education.

That's a rather biased and uncharitable view of what is actually a fairly diverse field in both theory and practice. The fact that it impacts already marginalized folks can lead some people to dig in to their prescribed ideologies, but for the most part the field is engaged in very healthy debate along any number of issues.

What academics in the field don't tend to take too kindly to is folks who question the underlying basis of the field itself, of which there is plenty and of whose opinions on the subject are demonstrably not valid.

I'm guessing that some here wouldn't take too kindly to Dave Chappelle's latest Netflix special.

Well, I'm trans, so you can probably guess where I stand on that.

 

[Sacrosanct]

I know this is a bit of a hot thread but I thought I would offer a different perspective on it.

I once heard someone say that historically cultural appropriation is the first step toward peace between two different groups.

They were saying that when two different groups met they would almost always go to war with each other, each trying to gain advantage over the other. But as time passed each group is exposed to the culture of the other and eventually they notice all the cool cultural stuff the other one has and starts to desire it. This eventually leads to people not wanting to wage war on the other because then how would they get the cool stuff?

For example: Not long ago America and Japan had a hardcore antagonistic relationship. Both sides did some absolutely awful stuff to each other. But now and days the idea of fighting with Japan is absurd to Americans. They make all of our anime. Anime, an idea they got from watching animations produced from America like Walt Disney. (The WW2 Emperor of Japan is rumored to have been buried with a Mickey Mouse watch)

that's the difference between cultural exchange, and cultural appropriation. The latter is taking someone else's culture typically against the desires of the minority culture.

 

[Derren]

that's the difference between cultural exchange, and cultural appropriation. The latter is taking someone else's culture typically against the desires of the minority culture.

And you know the will of the minority culture how?

 

[Sacrosanct]

Well, I'm trans, so you can probably guess where I stand on that.

I'm a cis whtie guy, but my son is interracial (black) and I have many close friends who are LGBTQ, and I'm pretty active in equal rights (a member of my local PRIDE, active in parades and demonstrations, etc). So I will be the first to admit my biases and why I may have reacted like I have. Why? Because many of the arguments presented here ring almost exactly word for word of those used who are anti-trans (not accusing anyone here of being that, only pointing out the parallels of the arguments). I.e., "trans/gender fluidity is only a made up concept no one agrees on" despite the actual overwhelming evidence to the contrary. Or the unaffected majority denying the experiences of the impacted minority. Or "calling someone 'they' is just a recent thing that a tiny minority wants to impose on the majority and isn't a real thing, so I should be able to call someone what I want". I'm sure I'm probably preaching to the choir here.

 

[Dannyalcatraz]

And you know the will of the minority culture how?

No culture- majority or minority- is monolith.

But you can be sure that if someone is raising an issue, someone else is silently nodding in agreement.

 

[Sacrosanct]

And you know the will of the minority culture how?

Because I listen to their objections. Seriously, it's not that hard. You should try it sometime.

Either way, are you don't threadcapping in my thread? Or no?