Cultural Appropriation - Yay or Nay?

[Blaithin]

So in perusing a number of different threads on here I've noticed a theme. There seems to be a great semi silent battle waging about whether using aspects of different cultures is acceptable or not.

I have to admit, I've never really thought much about this myself. There's the couple different cultures that I'm attracted to and I research and I try to incorporate into my life. To me it's always been a matter of what feels right to me and what helps me fell connected to Mother Earth. I am hesitant to try new things and hence tend to ask many ridiculous questions if given the chance but still.... I'd like to know other people's opinions on this.



Is cultural appropriation acceptable, sometimes acceptable, never acceptable? What do you think

[Aubrey_Rose]

So in perusing a number of different threads on here I've noticed a theme. There seems to be a great semi silent battle waging about whether using aspects of different cultures is acceptable or not.

I have to admit, I've never really thought much about this myself. There's the couple different cultures that I'm attracted to and I research and I try to incorporate into my life. To me it's always been a matter of what feels right to me and what helps me fell connected to Mother Earth. I am hesitant to try new things and hence tend to ask many ridiculous questions if given the chance but still.... I'd like to know other people's opinions on this.

Is cultural appropriation acceptable, sometimes acceptable, never acceptable? What do you think

I don't see any reason its not acceptable. I use christian and pagan cultural aspects in my life. I think it all depends on the person, if you feel wrong taking, and meshing together different cultures, then you probably shouldn't do it. But if you feel more spiritually connected by meshing them, then I say go for it.

[Garm]

Is cultural appropriation acceptable, sometimes acceptable, never acceptable?

Sometimes

Some practices are freely taught, yoga perhaps being the best example

It is a contentious issue with first nations spirituality. A lot of them feel their beleifs are a part of what gives them group identity and there isn't much else they have been left with. As a part native XGF said to me "They taken everything else, do they have to take the religion too?" Now if some one is authentically godsmacked by Manitou I might understand that persons situation, but otherwise I would say leave the native corpus alone.

OTOH I have seen claims of appropriation that are just patently ridiculous. Among the adherents of Northern Euorpean spiritualities the recons have laid claim to the word "Heathen" which is fair enough, words do take on more specialized meanings over time. But this is a fairly recent development. Some one might be accused of being pigheaded for continuing to use, against the current definition, the older and more inclusive meaning of the word which equates heathen being anything associated with the the Norse deities . But to add the charge of appropriation because they are not using a definition the norse recons have foisted upon the rest of us is downright dishonest.

[Unmutual]

Sometimes

Some practices are freely taught, yoga perhaps being the best example

How does Vodou fit into this? We've talked about First Nations spirituality, and I think a lot of the same rules must apply.

(Context: I've been reading into it and sorely attracted, but painfully aware that I'm a white Brit and not even remotely connected to the culture. So I'm pretty sure I know the answer here...)

[Jabberwocky]

How does Vodou fit into this? We've talked about First Nations spirituality, and I think a lot of the same rules must apply.

(Context: I've been reading into it and sorely attracted, but painfully aware that I'm a white Brit and not even remotely connected to the culture. So I'm pretty sure I know the answer here...)

The first step is probably to politely ask a respected practioner. I'd think that they're better qualified to talk you through the issues involved and if it's something that they think is acceptable in the first place.

You should possibly ask yourself how far you're prepared to go to immerse yourself in the associated culture as well.

[Unmutual]

The first step is probably to politely ask a respected practioner. I'd think that they're better qualified to talk you through the issues involved and if it's something that they think is acceptable in the first place.

You should possibly ask yourself how far you're prepared to go to immerse yourself in the associated culture as well.

Cheers for the reply - good sober advice, enthusiasm quenched accordingly. Curiosity still present, though. I guess I'll read more books, then seek proper help if I'm still interested in a few months time

[Liadine (dragonflyeyes)]

Is cultural appropriation acceptable, sometimes acceptable, never acceptable? What do you think

Cultural appreciation is acceptable, trading between cultures where the power balance is even is acceptable, and learning what is freely taught/buying what is freely sold is acceptable. Cultural appropriation, however, is never acceptable. From my perspective, the differences between 'borrowing from a culture' and 'cultural appropriation' are power and the feelings of the culture being 'borrowed' from.

If a culture has been systematically exploited and destroyed, and part of that ongoing abuse included being told they couldn't take part in their own culture anymore, then there's a lot of not-okay power-over stuff when someone from the dominant culture waltzes in and cherry-picks bits of their culture (especially if they then turn around and profit from it in some way). That person might have all the best intentions, but they're functioning in a framework that tells them that it is totally okay (even their right) to cherry-pick those pieces of culture, to get them wrong, and that just because they feel a connection, somehow it is okay.

As a rule, I don't take claims of cultural appropriation from dominant groups seriously. Racists might claim they're oppressed, but... no, they're not, and the 'what heathen means' sorts have no ground to stand on. Their culture hasn't been systemically stripped away, then suddenly repackaged and sold.

Also, the feelings of the culture being borrowed from trumps pretty much everything. If they say 'no, this is our culture, you aren't invited', you stay away. End of story. Of course, a cultural group isn't a monolith, and there might be some argument within it as to what can be shared with those outside the cultural group, but when you're told to back off, back off. Going 'but so-and-so said it should be shared!' runs dangerously close to 'I have a black friend'. With cases like this, the 'what is freely taught/what is freely sold' thing is important. If someone from the culture has invited you to learn, that's fine. If someone from the culture is selling jewelry or so on based on cultural designs, supporting them is fine.

I think anyone interested in aspects of a marginalized culture has to be careful, respectful, and should keep their mouth shut if told to back off. I work with Coyote, and I'm a Canadian of Irish heritage - he showed up one day when I was very young and hasn't backed off since. Working with him has meant walking a very fine line between what I'm called to do and what would be culturally appropriative. I have to remember that being interested in something, and finding it beautiful, does not mean I'm welcome to have it, even if I am called by Coyote.

Sorry if this went a bit long or ramble-y, I just have A Lot of Feelings about cultural appropriation.

[catja6]

:

I agree with everything you said, particularly the need to think carefully about institutionalized power structures and where you're coming from.

I don't think it's appropriative to be called by a god, and to act upon that: in most systems, gods are conceived of as having their own free wills to do as they damn well please. I also think that being inspired by particular philosophical perspectives and theology is also fine. Where it gets appropriative is when you decide that you're entitled to the *religion*. Religion is a social construct designed to meet human needs, and in the case of a tribal religion, the only people who get to decide who's in the religion are the members of the tribe. But people from Christian or culturally-Christian backgrounds often absorb the idea that religion is supposed to be universal and open to everyone, and that anyone trying to discourage or limit religious membership is meanly withholding stuff that everyone is entitled to.

The kind-of exception to this general cultural rule is Judaism, so I'll use that as an analogy. Most non-Jews, I think, would recognize things like lighting menorahs or calling oneself a rabbi as problematic when done by non-Jews. That's because, in the modern West, Judaism has the status of "real religion": it's a monotheism with a strong relationship to Christianity, its systems of training and accreditation of religious professionals is well-known and recognizable, and Jews in general are widely assimilated into society at large. I'm not playing Oppression Olympics here, just pointing out that Christian-dominant society is generally familiar and tolerant enough with Judaism to look askance at non-Jews laying claim to Jewish stuff, and is somewhat willing to listen when Jews point something out as appropriative.

But First Nations tribal religions often don't look a thing like Western monotheism, and they "belong" to people who aren't considered white, who aren't as widely assimilated into dominant society, whose processes for accrediting religious leaders are not well-known, and who are as a group enormously underprivileged. So there's not the same kind of widespread derision attached to white people who claim to be "Cherokee medicine men": First Nations religions aren't "really" religions -- they're just a mishmash of charmingly primitive spiritual practices by savages, after all, so everyone's entitled to them!

Indigenous religions in general are dogged by fantasies of "naturalness" -- as in, this is a more "natural" way for humans to relate to the universe -- so the very real social developments and integration with the tribe's cultural history get downplayed. You often see this in ev-psych bullshit about "natural human behavior," using the practices of modern hunter-gatherer tribes -- as if hunter-gatherer cultures that still exist today haven't changed one little bit in 20,000 years! It's just a repackaged Noble Savage story, and it's racist as hell.

Like you, I have the same impatience with modern Neopaganisms claiming analogy with First Nations tribal religions, and the like. Members of a religion get to define who belongs to that religion, of course, but a modern white Western jerryrig of a religious system out of historical fragments is NOT the same thing as a continuously existing tribal religion fighting for its survival in the face of systematic and ongoing oppression. I see no reason why modern Neopagans can't say, team up with members of indigenous religions to work on things that affect all members of religious minorities in the West, but it's another thing entirely for Neopagans to lay claim to the historic and ongoing disprivileging of indigenous religions, or to pretend that their relationship to dominant society is identical.

[Liadine (dragonflyeyes)]

I don't think it's appropriative to be called by a god, and to act upon that: in most systems, gods are conceived of as having their own free wills to do as they damn well please. I also think that being inspired by particular philosophical perspectives and theology is also fine. Where it gets appropriative is when you decide that you're entitled to the *religion*

This is a really important distinction, and thank you for making it. I agree, but I totally forgot to make the point myself, and you said it better than I could have. I do think that people who have been called by gods from a marginalized culture need to be careful to separate their experience of the god from the god of the culture; if someone from that culture is discussing the god, it's fine to briefly have your say (if the forum is appropriate for that), but then I think it's important to sit down and listen.

Thank you for the rest of the post as well, you brought up a lot of important points.

[Jenett]

I agree with everything you said, particularly the need to think carefully about institutionalized power structures and where you're coming from.

One of the guidelines I really like (though I can't remember for the life of me now where I found it) is "Don't go further into the religious practice than a lay person of that culture would be able to do, without additional training."

Because, generally, that solves some of the lines between the cultural practices (which, assuming you do them honestly, are not terribly likely to offend) and the stuff where people need specific experience/training/cultural recognition/whatever to do it.