Starting today August 7th, 2024, in order to post in the Married Couples, Courting Couples, or Singles forums, you will not be allowed to post if you have your Marital status designated as private. Announcements will be made in the respective forums as well but please note that if yours is currently listed as Private, you will need to submit a ticket in the Support Area to have yours changed.
Now we're being told that dressing up in your favorite Halloween custume may offend someone.
Oh, obviously because they regard symbols as purely relative and want to engage in historical revisionism. They might try to compare the rainbow flag for LGBTQ as somehow taking away from the Bible's use for "God's promise", but if all things are fair play, you can't selectively complain about one symbol changing and then claim all other symbols are purely relative rather than changing by cultural memesis.No idea why anyone would want to tote that flag anyway. It's the flag of a bunch of absolute losers, lol
Ninjas in that depiction are not only historically accurate, but it's like assuming anyone of South Asian descent knows martial arts or similar stereotypes.Cultural appropriation seems to be one of those ideas that starts out sensibly but quickly veers off into what seems to be a competition on how offended people can be.
Yes - I'm pretty sure Native Americans are all sick of Pocahontas costumes, and no, poking some chopsticks in your hair isn't impressing anyone.
But now ninjas are bad? And we're supposed to be offended at people dressing up as ancient Egyptians because of a "violent history"? Come on. If we're going there, then I don't want to see any Romans or Vikings either. And Italy - we're still waiting for you to givepastanoodles back to the Chinese
And you don't get to willfully ignore historical meaning in a historical negationist fashion to endorse this ridiculous Lost Cause of the Confederacy nonsense. Does history matter to you only when its' convenient versus being consistent and applying that idea overall even if it means you can't invoke one symbol for Southern pride?Umm..so? That's not it's meaning to many people. You don't get to decide what it means to them.
No, we are one species, homo sapiens, race is a description based on physical characteristics and reflects cultural and sociological ideas. It is not racist to acknowledge race as a thing, your attempt to be colorblind only encourages more racism in the sense that it actually encourages the status quo that has, demonstrably, a bias in favor of white people over minorities.Race does not exist IMO... we are all one race. That's why racism is stupid. That's why it should never be black lives matter or white lives or green lives but all lives.
What of it, and how is this relevant?
The Confederate flag is still being displayed in the same states that initially used it. Not really comparable to the example you raised, where a symbol is being used in a totally different context.
They don't call it a swastika, at least not exclusively, but it also has a very distinct cultural context and there are meanings to the right and left facing ones in Hindu, because the term originates in Sanskrit.
No one says that remotely and to suggest that a kneejerk reaction with historical ignorance is valid is only shooting yourself in the foot to try and suggest the Confederate flag is remotely comparable to the swastika, when the swastika long predated the 3rd Reich in Germany and was repurposed for repugnant ideas with the occult bizarre Aryan mentality Hitler had.
The Confederate battle flag was capitalized on by white supremacists in the 60s to suggest they were about state rights instead of being honest and saying they didn't like the federal government pointing out that they were being discriminatory and racist to black people and resisting integration based on the idea that they can do whatever they want because the constitution "protects" states' rights if it's not made explicit as a government power
I was responding to the idea that a symbol that can be offensive in some contexts is always offensive, regardless of the intentions behind its use.
Ad populum does not make something appropriate, especially when the people using it are likely falling prey to historical negationism, trying to basically treat that part of history like it doesn't matter, even if they acknowledge it. Not quite historical revisionism, but equally dangerous culturally.I don't like or display that flag. But there are a lot of people who associate it with things other than racism.
Ninjas in that depiction are not only historically accurate, but it's like assuming anyone of South Asian descent knows martial arts or similar stereotypes.
The problem is fundamentally encouraging stereotypes that are not just a joke in general, but marginalizing or otherwise treating an ethnic or racial group like a joke to be utilized like it's mere performance, when culture is not merely performative.
But there's also the concern about colonialism, since white people have this idea that they can just use any other culture and it's fine (not that other people don't do it as well, but white people kind of started that trend of pillaging from any other culture nearby, even as far back as the Vikings or Romans)
Is it though? How is someone wearing a costume from a particular Asian country equating to stereotyping all Asians? Doesn't it come down to intent rather than just the act of wearing a costume?
One can do this unintentionally, belittling is part of marginalization, particularly in systemic racism and internalized racism of black people thinking they have to adhere to stereotypes or they won't be accepted by the majority white culture, it's a whole problem I can't even begin to explain or even understand fully as a white person.I can agree if you're setting out to merely do something to belittle others - that's offensive, but it would be offensive even if culture or race weren't involved.
I think you will find that it wasn't just white people. *People* have been pillaging from any culture nearby. The Persians were doing it hundreds of years before the Romans, the Moors were in Europe at the same time as the Vikings, and the Khmers held most of SE Asia for a good portion of 500 years.
Colonialism is just associated with white people because of recent history. Well, excluding Japan of course, but lots of people seem to forget that.
And tomatoes back to the "new world".....And Italy - we're still waiting for you to givepastanoodles back to the Chinese
Have you ever seen a black person dress up as a cowboy? The cowboys of the Old West were typically white, and the cowboy is stereotypically white. Should a black person dressing up as a cowboy be deemed as being offensive to white people?
Woman is not sex, get with the program, it's a social construct versus the scientific description for female, which is sex, like how we use to even describe plants, let alone animals.
But I never said I agreed race was something you could just identify with at a whim, you're strawmanning me, not to mention the NAACP
Yeah, it's a disqualification in the same way you can't be a part of any organization that has constraints regarding membership, but it doesn't mean you can't support them nonetheless.
Who says they hate white people? You? How do you know this? Sure you aren't generalizing based on your own perceived sense of superiority in a society that I can demonstrate pretty easily favors white people over black people, giving the former the benefit of the doubt in situations they would almost never give black people.
Because I think you could do better if you had remote humility instead of, ironically, finding any excuse to deflect responsibility from yourself and consider that society may not be as great as you want to think it is because you're not significantly inconvenienced in any way that black people or other people of color are. One word: privilege, 2 if we want to frame it more precisely as societal privilege
Same way people try to make being gay something that people just choose so it can be rendered as different from race, dishonestly ignoring the basic facts and even scientific research that suggests that, while sexuality is not the same as phenotypal traits for race, it doesn't appear to be nearly as mutable as, say, your sense of fashion or taste in food.
Ninjas in that depiction are not only historically accurate, but it's like assuming anyone of South Asian descent knows martial arts or similar stereotypes.
I'm going to meekly suggest that its actually ok to be a ninja for Halloween. Plus the ninja face cover is extra covid safety.
Heck even Halloween itself is a completely commercialized appropriation of a terrific Celtic tradition.
Yeah commercial Halloween is great. But you sure as heck wont find me dressing up as an "Indian chief" although I might go as a "Viking". I definitely will drink beer tho.At least the kids get to enjoy dressing up and walking around the neighborhood getting candy. They aren't concerned with "cultural appropriation" or the origin of a tradition.
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?