blowfish posted:yes how dare people have fun on the something awful dot com internet comedy forum, the place where serious discussion steers our ship of state lmao this is a 43 page thread and you have a whole page of posts in it  : hurr whats cultral appration lol
|
|
#
?
Apr 12, 2015 20:16
|
|
|
|
| # ? Jun 5, 2024 01:49 |
|
|
blowfish posted:yes how dare people have fun on the something awful dot com internet comedy forum, the place where serious discussion steers our ship of state I've made it already, but you can't see it.
|
|
#
?
Apr 12, 2015 20:16
|
|
|
Morkyz posted:it's just that he has no shame about it, like, at all  I identify as a proud black man on the internet.Morkyz posted:lmao this is a 43 page thread and you have a whole page of posts in it mostly filled with posts calling effectronica a dumb after like page 40 you mean but seriously, at which point was there an actual argument against ~appropriation~ that didn't break down to "well this is already bad even without considering appropriation" or "i derive my sense of self from others" (USER WAS PUT ON PROBATION FOR THIS POST)
|
|
#
?
Apr 12, 2015 20:23
|
|
I CANNOT EJACULATE WITHOUT SEEING NATIVE AMERICANS BRUTALISED!|
LMAO as always at the GBS inability to understand the existence of light-skinned black people. It's the perfect storm of ignorance and racism against blacks and whites.
|
|
|
#
?
Apr 12, 2015 20:28
|
|
SedanChair posted:I've made it already, but you can't see it. The Emperor's New Posts
|
|
|
#
?
Apr 12, 2015 20:29
|
|
blowfish posted:mostly filled with posts calling effectronica a dumb after like page 40 you mean i haven't read all 43 pages of this thread, so i couldn't tell you for stuff like this i like to just read the wikipedia page and if i dont get it then i dont get it
|
|
|
#
?
Apr 12, 2015 20:29
|
|
|
ok i actually clicked the "?" button next to sedanchair's name and read all his posts in the thread  and at no point does he make an argument beyond the ones i just mentioned (well there's "thing bad because i say so" but come on)oh, come now, surely you can do better than that Clipperton posted:The Emperor's New Posts indeed Effectronica posted:LMAO as always at the GBS inability to understand the existence of light-skinned black people. It's the perfect storm of ignorance and racism against blacks and whites.  write 99 times:I Must Respect People On Internet Forums And Will Not Take Cheap Shots At Them I Must Respect People On Internet Forums And Will Not Take Cheap Shots At Them I Must Respect People On Internet Forums And Will Not Take Cheap Shots At Them [...] I Must Respect People On Internet Forums And Will Not Take Cheap Shots At Them
|
|
#
?
Apr 12, 2015 20:31
|
|
Effectronica posted:LMAO as always at the GBS inability to understand the existence of light-skinned black people. It's the perfect storm of ignorance and racism against blacks and whites. i find it hard to believe that that is a picture of a black man, unless hes literally albinistic
|
|
|
#
?
Apr 12, 2015 20:32
|
|
|
This is good, normally it would be the pointless drama I have to keep dealing with in most situations but let's get into it a little bit. What sort of things have I posted about in this forum that have lead people to conclude that I identify as a black person? Well, I've made reference to it any number of times. I am biracial; my mother is white and my father was black. I have often mentioned "passing," or being light enough that many white people assume I am white. Sometimes I have made reference to the fact that because I can pass, I hear and see many things that are only brought up in the company of other whites. But as every racist poster rediscovers the fact that my skin is light, they treat it all at once as a revelation, and one undermining any point I may have made. Why is this? It's because they attribute mystical qualities to black men. They pictured me in their heads as the guy who played Wee Bay and felt intimidated. Likewise, they assumed that the only reason people put up with me is because I possess these mystical qualities; the qualities, in fact, that so permeate the phenomenon of cultural appropriation and lead to the transferral of creative authority from minorities to white people. Black men have natural, magical artistic and creative qualities; but under no circumstances are they to be credited for these qualities, they flow naturally from their race. When a white person masters their forms, that white person is to be congratulated as a synthesist and pioneer. They are to gain more wealth, more recognition, more of a place in the pages of history than the minorities they learned from. That's what cultural appropriation is. That's why the racism that perpetuates is unthinking. That's what has led to the amusing situation of the people who have pretended to come asking honest if naïve questions about the nature of cultural appropriation posting pictures of my skin.
|
|
#
?
Apr 12, 2015 20:43
|
|
Morkyz posted:i find it hard to believe that that is a picture of a black man, unless hes literally albinistic My old optometrist is lighter-skinned than that. I can believe it.
|
|
|
#
?
Apr 12, 2015 20:53
|
|
|
SedanChair posted:
loving lol, you went "white people are retarded" so obviously i will post a picture of your flabby goony pasty hands holding a gun like a good 'merican because it is physically impossible for you to provide a better setup for a cheap shot also i will generously assume "whites appropriated things from blacks and got more recognition from it than the blacks they got it from" is some sort of argument and i will point out that racism and discrimination are bad things on their own so again complaining about ~appropriation~ is redundant (i suppose it could be more grating to your personally for reasons so be my guest)
|
|
#
?
Apr 12, 2015 20:55
|
|
containing a good mixture of 
and 
(stirred, not shaken)
Effectronica posted:My old optometrist is lighter-skinned than that. I can believe it. Well, I'll be open minded for once and accept it. sorry SedanChair
|
|
|
#
?
Apr 12, 2015 20:55
|
|
|
blowfish posted:loving lol, you went "white people are retarded" so obviously i will post a picture of your flabby goony pasty hands holding a gun like a good 'merican because it is physically impossible for you to provide a better setup for a cheap shot Now hang on, where did I say "white people are retarded"? In addition to not seeing things that are there, do you see things that are not there?
|
|
#
?
Apr 12, 2015 20:57
|
|
|
SedanChair posted:Now hang on, where did I say "white people are retarded"? In addition to not seeing things that are there, do you see things that are not there? SedanChair posted:This, now, is what you've taken away from all this. This is your question. At this point it seems apparent to me that a certain type of white lived experience is literally a developmental disability. Or brain damage; it's like one of Oliver Sacks' patients who couldn't see the right side of their dinner plate. There are some things you'll never see.
|
|
#
?
Apr 12, 2015 20:58
|
|
|
So again, where did I say that?
|
|
#
?
Apr 12, 2015 20:59
|
|
|
ok let me amend that statement to "you said 'ur white living experience is retarded lol' [...]" happy? e: I honestly can't believe the last two pages raised this thread from 1.6 to 1.7 rating by the way, I must be a quality poster~ suck my woke dick fucked around with this message at 21:15 on Apr 12, 2015 |
|
#
?
Apr 12, 2015 21:02
|
|
|
Effectronica posted:LMAO as always at the GBS inability to understand the existence of light-skinned black people. It's the perfect storm of ignorance and racism against blacks and whites. Not even sedanchair is willing to embarrass himself by making this argument, Effectronica. Not even sedanchair. This is what rock bottom looks like.
|
|
#
?
Apr 13, 2015 01:36
|
|
|
sedanchair has a brain disabling developmental disorder by his own admission, but the rest of
|
|
|
#
?
Apr 13, 2015 02:38
|
|
|
Effectronica, do you believe that cultures must, by their nature, have no elements in common? Because the example you have to me, of C2 gaining C must imply that C1 loses C, only works under that assumption. If so, I do not know how that assumption can hold up under reality. If not, then your definition is wrong. Under your definition, none of the examples given are cultural appropriation, not even your example of plastic shamans: the loss of C from C1 is separate from the gain of C by C2. The answer you've given to others suggests that you don't believe that this is so, but that you believe that any interacting cultures must eventually share no elements in common. Is that correct? Firstly, when I asked you why does it matter, why should I care, I mean it in this sense: I couldn't give 2 shits about cultures as 'things'. Whether they live or die, they are just tools people use. What I care about is making sure people are happy, able to be passionate about things, able to find self-actualization. If, for some, they want to be passionate about preserving their own culture, then that is fine. They should do that. But the culture will live so long as they live and practice it. If a culture can die in the way you describe, without it being imposed by force, then it must have been by choice. I do not care about that. Secondly, there is an inequality here: you are assuming that the loss is an eventuality that cannot be countered, but the gain is something that can be countered, by fighting against the CA as you see it. Why do you see one as unstoppable, and the one you do not attack, and one as preventable? Without that inequality, either they should both be preventable, and then you just attack the loss (because that is what is actually 'destroying' the culture), or neither are preventable, and you are just swimming upstream. My point on sovereignty is that the obligation you want is already there: I expect everyone to have the obligation to respect that a culture must be able to define itself. Why is the right to define others part of the right to define the self? You define yourself how you want, how is that constrained by how others define themselves? That is what you must elaborate on. On tolerance, if a policy cannot achieve its stated goals it be abandoned for one that can. Maybe you are one of those people who thinks that war would be avoided if people could just 'get along', "Imagine if they declared a war, and no one showed up?". This is the shift of blame from policy to people: the people were not 'pure' enough to implement some policy, an 'evil' has countered it. I'm not interested in policy for pure people, or other fantastical creatures, I want something that can be used here in the real world. Do you see where I'm going with this? Those external factors you blame, unless you have direct control over them, simply assigning blame to them is pointless. Either it can defeat them, or it cannot.
|
|
#
?
Apr 13, 2015 02:38
|
|
|
rudatron posted:Effectronica, do you believe that cultures must, by their nature, have no elements in common? Because the example you have to me, of C2 gaining C must imply that C1 loses C, only works under that assumption. If so, I do not know how that assumption can hold up under reality. If not, then your definition is wrong. Under your definition, none of the examples given are cultural appropriation, not even your example of plastic shamans: the loss of C from C1 is separate from the gain of C by C2. hosed up if true (Culture is appropriation). e: huh, that was actually a pithy summary of rudatron's point, who knew sebmojo fucked around with this message at 02:47 on Apr 13, 2015 |
|
#
?
Apr 13, 2015 02:43
|
|
rudatron posted:Effectronica, do you believe that cultures must, by their nature, have no elements in common? Because the example you have to me, of C2 gaining C must imply that C1 loses C, only works under that assumption. If so, I do not know how that assumption can hold up under reality. If not, then your definition is wrong. Under your definition, none of the examples given are cultural appropriation, not even your example of plastic shamans: the loss of C from C1 is separate from the gain of C by C2. i can't wait for Effectronica to own your massive wall of autistic semantic sophistry by just call you a gbs or something
|
|
|
#
?
Apr 13, 2015 02:46
|
|
|
I enjoy debating and discussing. I guess you could say I'm really hosed up.
|
|
#
?
Apr 13, 2015 02:55
|
|
|
http://www.usatoday.com/story/news/nation/2014/03/07/daughter-defends-headdress-photo/6170915/ this is a lolworthy appropriation example because of who it is doing it
|
|
|
#
?
Apr 13, 2015 02:59
|
|
|
Hello Cultural Appropriation thread. I have a friend who is an old white dude. He hand crafts birch-bark canoes using authentic native american methods. He like, sews them together with plant fiber and mystery forest-made glue because they didn't have nails. I have ridden in them and they are p. cool. How many appropriations has he committed?
|
|
#
?
Apr 13, 2015 03:19
|
|
|
blowfish posted:
That's not surprising, nobody actually gives a poo poo about CA in the real world; it makes sense that no intelligent person is going to bother with thread. Pavlov posted:Hello Cultural Appropriation thread. I have a friend who is an old white dude. He hand crafts birch-bark canoes using authentic native american methods. He like, sews them together with plant fiber and mystery forest-made glue because they didn't have nails. I have ridden in them and they are p. cool. How many appropriations has he committed? At least 17 mega-hitlers, Native Americans are deeply concerned with things like this and not the rampant alcoholism and crippling lack of opportunities present.
|
|
#
?
Apr 13, 2015 03:44
|
|
|
tsa posted:At least 17 mega-hitlers, Native Americans are deeply concerned with things like this and not the rampant alcoholism and crippling lack of opportunities present. Oh no I had no idea! I'll make sure to contact the school he works at so they can remove them from display to be burned. Maybe he can stage a public apology to the gradeschool children he unknowingly made racists by having them paint the things. What about the 20 ft long west-coast dugout style canoe he carved from a single tree? I'm assuming that one is extra bad.
|
|
#
?
Apr 13, 2015 03:59
|
|
|
Pavlov posted:Hello Cultural Appropriation thread. I have a friend who is an old white dude. He hand crafts birch-bark canoes using authentic native american methods. He like, sews them together with plant fiber and mystery forest-made glue because they didn't have nails. I have ridden in them and they are p. cool. How many appropriations has he committed? Does he turn a profit?
|
|
#
?
Apr 13, 2015 04:19
|
|
|
SedanChair posted:Does he turn a profit? No. He is just a teacher who likes boats. Also trees. I think the school lets him use the wood-shop.
|
|
#
?
Apr 13, 2015 04:22
|
|
|
SedanChair posted:Does he turn a profit? A worthless distinction if ever there was one.
|
|
#
?
Apr 13, 2015 04:29
|
|
rudatron posted:Effectronica, do you believe that cultures must, by their nature, have no elements in common? Because the example you have to me, of C2 gaining C must imply that C1 loses C, only works under that assumption. If so, I do not know how that assumption can hold up under reality. If not, then your definition is wrong. Under your definition, none of the examples given are cultural appropriation, not even your example of plastic shamans: the loss of C from C1 is separate from the gain of C by C2. Okay, so the only circumstances in which you would accept that cultural appropriation as I define it can exist is if all interactions where one culture gains means one loses. Either that, or you simply assumed I was arguing that. I really think that your entire post is founded on this faulty premise, probably derived from the assumption that because I disagree with you, I hold all the relevant beliefs you dislike. So there's really not much point in arguing against this straw premise, because I argue that there are certain interactions which cause this to happen, but that these are not all the interactions possible. In fact, I provided a more thorough example. Effectronica posted:So let's say you have a ritual with a particular meaning, where people exchange gifts on a particular day to show generosity and love for one another. Now let's say that this ritual is practiced by a particular group within a broader culture, and the broader culture starts exchanging gifts on that day to show off how great consumption and spending money are, but with the same trappings of the original ritual- that is, they practice the basic ritual but with the meaning completely changed. Now, assuming that the subgroup isn't segregated completely, their ability to practice this ritual is minimal because people from the outside culture will engage in their version of the ritual and the people in the subgroup will be reciprocating under the new meaning, and the broader culture will be attempting to enculture everyone with its meaning. In other words, except among members of the subgroup that withdraw from the broader society, they will be unable to maintain the old meaning because the new meaning is more pervasive and everyone they interact with will judge their actions under this meaning. Or to generalize, one example of interactions that appropriate are ones that import the concept while altering the meaning, either completely preserving the trappings like in this case, or preserving enough of the trappings to be confused with the original by lay persons, and all this must happen in an environment where the culture being appropriated from is contiguous to and in an inferior position with regards to the appropriating culture in terms of power (the mods didn't damage the prestige of tailored suits, after all). And the solution, as I outlined it, is to either import the meaning or alter the concept to distinguish it. So your question should be answered by all this, but the answer is no, that's a ridiculous oversimplification and relies on ignoring a lot of what I've said because it doesn't fit the box you've stuffed me in. But you're no Procrustes. Okay, so what if someone's culture is an important thing to them? Please don't faint. But the real issue here is that you, and the majority of people arguing against CA, have this incredibly loving racist idea, which boils down to this: if you believe something is unimportant, obviously minorities, saintly figures that they be, also agree that it isn't important. Therefore, the Declaration of War Against Exploiters of Lakota Spirituality must have been written by white people, because, you, tsa, and a bunch of other people figure that since you don't consider culture important, Native Americans must not consider culture important. This is less racist than demanding minorities change their views to befit yours outright, but it is more insane, more delusional. And it also has led to this idea that SedanChair is white, because he doesn't care about what you "know" black people really care about and since he's light-skinned, he's therefore an easy target. So, in other words, you hold some very racist ideas in the name of fighting racism. Not the first time this has happened. Then we have more stuff that relies on your misapprehension, but will no doubt reemerge. Well, I'll burn that one down in due time. Then we have this little bit of obscurism where you admit that cultures should be able to define themselves but demanding that people refrain from imposition or extermination is unjustifiable. I think that if you applied this to human beings, you would quickly see how it falls apart. Finally, do you know why the idea of tolerance was implemented and what the policy was aimed at doing? Because you don't seem to, and yet you're claiming it's failed. Well, what hasn't failed, if we can define what policies were aimed at achieving whenever we like? The Insect Court posted:Not even sedanchair is willing to embarrass himself by making this argument, Effectronica. I don't know, your entire existence, as far as anyone can tell, consists of obliquely accusing people of hating Jews like some kind of paranoid parrot. It's encouraging to see you come out of your shell to insist that someone can't be black, they can't, largely because it makes it clear just how white your circle of friends is. Pavlov posted:Hello Cultural Appropriation thread. I have a friend who is an old white dude. He hand crafts birch-bark canoes using authentic native american methods. He like, sews them together with plant fiber and mystery forest-made glue because they didn't have nails. I have ridden in them and they are p. cool. How many appropriations has he committed? Your friend sounds cool but I hope he gets better people to hang out with, especially at his age. Pavlov posted:Oh no I had no idea! I'll make sure to contact the school he works at so they can remove them from display to be burned. Maybe he can stage a public apology to the gradeschool children he unknowingly made racists by having them paint the things. Actually, he should probably see if he can make a little dugout from your corpse.
|
|
|
#
?
Apr 13, 2015 04:45
|
|
|
Pavlov posted:No. He is just a teacher who likes boats. Also trees. I think the school lets him use the wood-shop. I don't think so then. Maybe if he named it the "Geronimo" and sold it in stores. Miltank posted:A worthless distinction if ever there was one. A lot of this discussion has been about who makes money and who stays poor. But true to form, you can't see it, or at least are pretending not to see it.
|
|
#
?
Apr 13, 2015 04:52
|
|
|
Effectronica posted:Your friend sounds cool but I hope he gets better people to hang out with, especially at his age. You are right he should. Unfortunately he can't get people interested in sewing canoes or raising trout or making maple syrup these days. The school mostly keeps him around as a novelty and students don't care about the woods anymore, so he's mostly stuck with rear end in a top hat former students like me. 
|
|
#
?
Apr 13, 2015 04:57
|
|
Pavlov posted:You are right he should. Unfortunately he can't get people interested in sewing canoes or raising trout or making maple syrup these days. The school mostly keeps him around as a novelty and students don't care about the woods anymore, so he's mostly stuck with rear end in a top hat former students like me. Does he do any knapping?
|
|
|
#
?
Apr 13, 2015 04:59
|
|
|
I detect the makings of a future meet-up.
|
|
#
?
Apr 13, 2015 05:02
|
|
|
Effectronica posted:Does he do any knapping? If you mean like this Wikipedia article I just read, then not that I know of. I think he might have found a maybe-arrowhead once though?
|
|
#
?
Apr 13, 2015 05:06
|
|
Pavlov posted:If you mean like this Wikipedia article I just read, then not that I know of. I think he might have found a maybe-arrowhead once though? Man, too bad. That poo poo is cool and it's amazing how quickly you can work with good stone. I met an archaeologist once who could turn out arrowheads like crazy.
|
|
|
#
?
Apr 13, 2015 05:08
|
|
|
Effectronica posted:Man, too bad. That poo poo is cool and it's amazing how quickly you can work with good stone. I met an archaeologist once who could turn out arrowheads like crazy. Maybe I should suggest that to him. He likes rocks almost as much as he likes trees. Ok now that I'm done shitposting here's an actual question: When would doing something like knapping be considered appropriation? Here in the states that's historically like entirely the domain of native americans.
|
|
#
?
Apr 13, 2015 05:21
|
|
Pavlov posted:Maybe I should suggest that to him. He likes rocks almost as much as he likes trees. I mean, it's not something that anyone cares about now, unless you're doing something like carving sacred relics or whatever. So I don't think anyone has an opinion, and even if they did, it's unlikely that there's anyone that invested the kind of symbolic weight that you'd need to be able to rob it of meaning.
|
|
|
#
?
Apr 13, 2015 05:24
|
|
|
Effectronica posted:I mean, it's not something that anyone cares about now, unless you're doing something like carving sacred relics or whatever. So I don't think anyone has an opinion, and even if they did, it's unlikely that there's anyone that invested the kind of symbolic weight that you'd need to be able to rob it of meaning. Ok that makes sense. But what if someone was like, selling them at a park gift-shop as 'authentic replica arrowheads'. I feel like that would miff someone at least.
|
|
#
?
Apr 13, 2015 05:32
|
|
|
|
| # ? Jun 5, 2024 01:49 |
|
Pavlov posted:Ok that makes sense. But what if someone was like, selling them at a park gift-shop as 'authentic replica arrowheads'. I feel like that would miff someone at least. Well, that would depend on how they sold it, I think. If they weren't attempting to deceive people as to them being actual archaeological arrowheads or being made by Natives, I'm guessing there wouldn't be much of a problem.
|
|
|
#
?
Apr 13, 2015 05:36
|
|