Some racism-related questions

Started by Beorning, August 18, 2018, 11:27:31 AM

Previous topic - Next topic

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

The Lovely Tsaritsa

When people say “The Ukraine”, that sounds of its territory of Russia. Many in West think Ukraine, Georgia, Belarus, all are “just” part of Russia. When, they are own independent countries, with different languages and cultures. It doesn’t make me sad, or mad, only disappointed a little. It is like my calling someone from Philly, a New Yorker, just because they are close on map, and sometimes speak same language. ::)

KatieBower

QuoteSome days ago, I saw a rather heated argument on the Facebook page of Pugoffka, an Ukrainian cosplayer. She has cosplayed as many different characters and, recently, she released some photos with her cosplays from the Avatar: The Last Airbender universe. In these photos, she used some photomanipulation to give herself Asian and Indian skin colours - which caused many people to accuse her of racism, using blackface and disrespect. What's your opinion: is it okay for a white person to change skin colour for the purposes of cosplay or not?

Ultimately whether or not you believe it is wrong will boil down to whether or not you equate causing offence with wrongdoing. Personally I absolutely repudiate that concept. Actually you might even say I find it offensive  :P

I change my skin colour every summer. I've been asked to lighten people's skin and I've been asked to darken people's skin. Some people want features which are associated with their race to be minimised and some people want them enhanced. If an Asian girl wants a cut crease I don't tell her, "sorry, but your eyes don't have creases and it would be racist of me to draw them on," I draw them on. Same deal if a white girl wants to have fuller lips or if a black girl wants her nose contoured to look smaller. I've also done specialist courses in drag makeup, and frequently help men to look like women, but what is drag, if not a gender-based form of blackface? And yes, sometimes it can be about lampooning and demeaning. Though mostly it's a very sincere form of flattery.

Impersonation others to mock them is a very real thing and as anyone who has seen a kid shove a pillow under their shirt in order to pretend to be fat can tell you it it's not solely a race issue, and yes it's also used on an exclusionary basis. I mean some people would rather put a skinny actress in a fat suit than employ someone who is actually overweight. That's gross. Certainly it's horrible when these things happen, but I assume we should all be grown-up enough to know it when we see it, and object, and not be reduced to simply objecting to things that remind us of it because they make us uncomfortable on some level.

Impersonation and transformation are very legitimate forms of self-expression, even self-realisation.

QuoteA personal question (which, I hope, won't come off as disrespectul): I admit that when it comes to black women, I find it more appealing when they have straight hair. I'm absolutely not saying that natural black hair are somehow bad / ugly / unprofessional - I have no problem with them. It's just that, speaking purely of what appeals to me as a man, I find straight hair more attractive.  Heck, it's not limited to black women - I prefer straight hair on white women, too. Still, is it really okay? Or is it racist after all?

There are practical reasons why some women with textured hair will straighten it, or even shave it off and wear wigs. Different hairstyles can have a huge influence on your apparent face shape, and only a minority of women have the face shape to carry off any hairstyle they like. Textured hair allows for very limited styles and they just plain don't suit many face shapes. This isn't about Eurocentric beauty standards. The appeal of certain face shapes, and the relationship between certain face shapes and hair-styles as far as what makes people look more attractive is universal.

Though the idea that straight hair is more feminine or acceptable in and of itself seems to be an American phenomena. You see it very prominently in the modelling world for example. Many coloured models who hail from outside the US tend to default to their natural hair while those from the US will default to straight hair. For those who are big enough to have an international portfolio you can often split their body of work by hairstyle. I'm trying to think of a coloured model who walked in a VS fashion show without straightened hair for example, and I just can't, and VSFS is about as quintessentially American as it gets, but it's interesting to note that this preference actually doesn't sell well internationally. It's not seen as very high fashion.

As for whether or not a preference for certain features makes you racist that seems like a strange thing to worry about since most physical preferences reflect some form of prejudice. My experience is that a lot of it has to do with exposure. If most of the coloured women you meet don't have natural hair then the odds you'll meet many who you do find attractive get much smaller.

RedPhoenix

I agree with the rest of what you said but....

Quote from: KatieBower on August 25, 2018, 10:35:41 AM
but what is drag, if not a gender-based form of blackface?

Lol what? No. They're not even close to the same thing. Beyond both involving putting on costumes these things have nothing in common.

Most important, drag performers don't dress up to make fun of (wo)men or use femininity/masculinity as the punchline of every joke. For many it's a form of self-expression and breaking out of social constraints, for others its just sheer performance. Historically many were also trans and expressing themselves the only way they knew how. But none of them do it because the idea of a (wo)man is by itself so hilarious that it serves as the punchline of a joke. Blackface is nothing but mocking the existence of black people and the idea that they could ever be anything but animals. You'll never see a drag performance where the act is '(wo)man tries to get a job but gets distracted by thoughts of rape and fried chicken' for example.

Drag Kings are the same, they don't mock the idea of what a man is or use being a man as the punchline, or imply that men are uncivilized brutes that have no place in civilized society. The fact that drag goes both ways like this sort of cuts against the idea of the artform being inherently sexist. In contrast, blackface artists weren't followed up on stage by whiteface artists who returned the favor, it was purely entertainment for racists.

For blackface performers - being black was the joke. It was the punchline. There wasn't a single one that didn't demean and mock the idea of black culture or black people as the core portion of their performance - or use being black as an equivalent for being stupid or rapey. Drag performers don't do that with gender, not even in the same zip code as that.

You could make a better argument that some drag shows are "gayface" but that's not part of the general culture of the artform and it tends to get criticized within the performance community when it happens.

Quote from: The Lovely Tsarina on August 25, 2018, 08:40:18 AM
When people say “The Ukraine”, that sounds of its territory of Russia. Many in West think Ukraine, Georgia, Belarus, all are “just” part of Russia. When, they are own independent countries, with different languages and cultures. It doesn’t make me sad, or mad, only disappointed a little. It is like my calling someone from Philly, a New Yorker, just because they are close on map, and sometimes speak same language. ::)

This was new to me. I did some internet reading, and yes it turns out "The Ukraine" is actually what the Soviet Union called it and that's where Americans picked it up from. Same with saying "Kiev" instead of "Kyiv" which, correct me if I'm wrong but the internet is telling me is how we should spell it.

Thanks for explaining this to us. =)

And your example is funny to me because I met some German tourists once who asked for directions to Central Park in New York. New York is over 2,000 miles away from me lol. They assumed that all of America is close to each other and thought they could see all the sights in America over a weekend. :D
Apologies & Absences | Ons & Offs
I move the stars for no one.

The Lovely Tsaritsa

Quote from: RedPhoenix on August 25, 2018, 11:14:26 AM
This was new to me. I did some internet reading, and yes it turns out "The Ukraine" is actually what the Soviet Union called it and that's where Americans picked it up from. Same with saying "Kiev" instead of "Kyiv" which, correct me if I'm wrong but the internet is telling me is how we should spell it.

Kyiv is proper, that’s Ukrainian translation in English, for their city, Київ. Kiev is how Russian translation of city name, goes to English. Russian and Ukrainian, they’re different, though we use common alphabet.

RedPhoenix

Quote from: The Lovely Tsarina on August 25, 2018, 01:14:49 PM
Kyiv is proper, that’s Ukrainian translation in English, for their city, Київ. Kiev is how Russian translation of city name, goes to English. Russian and Ukrainian, they’re different, though we use common alphabet.

Thank you, it's always nice learning the proper versions of things I was taught wrong. :)
Apologies & Absences | Ons & Offs
I move the stars for no one.

RedRose

Ukraine-Wise it is also news to me. But again I'd never think those are all parts of Russia. My old relatives who still speak of Rhodesia, French Congo, Ceylan and Indochina, that's another topic.


As for natural vs straightened hair, I'd say, not only black women but also white women outside of (what I read from) USA seem more comfortable with their own texture and all. It might go hand in hand with hair removal/lack thereof, or epilation as "hygiene" as opposed to cosmetic/a choice, barring the stereotypes of the unshaved Euro.
O/O and ideas - write if you'd be a good Aaron Warner (Juliette) [Shatter me], Tarkin (Leia), Wilkins (Faith) [Buffy the VS]
[what she reading: 50 TALES A YEAR]



KatieBower

QuoteLol what? No. They're not even close to the same thing. Beyond both involving putting on costumes these things have nothing in common.

If you've never seen men dressing up as women solely to make fun of and or demean them via caricature then I'm not surprised you'd make such an absolute statement, but that doesn't mean it doesn't happen. Nor does it magically erase the experience of those who have seen it, particularly in places where it is a cultural fixture.

QuoteMost important, drag performers don't dress up to make fun of (wo)men or use femininity/masculinity as the punchline of every joke.

We're not talking about drag as a performance art (though that doesn't mean it never happens there by any means) and I would have thought that would be quite clear from the context. Like I said "sometimes it can be about lampooning and demeaning. Though mostly it's a very sincere form of flattery."

To that extent I probably should have said drag can be a gender-based form of blackface, but you can't edit posts here, and since I'm repeating the context in which that statement appeared verbatim from my last post I'm not sure what else to tell you.

As for the rest of your post I can only tell you again you're proceeding from a misapprehension, and it doesn't appear you've even read my comment in full either way since you repeat things to me which I clearly said myself as if I didn't know them.

Blythe

There was quite the controversy a few years ago when Mary Cheney compared drag to blackface

There is a difference between harmful caricature and a cultural practice meant to empower. Historical context, intent, and effect. Blackface is the former. Drag is the latter.

Yes, there are drag practitioners who sometimes give in to unpleasant actions that are sexist--they are not the norm. But even idly comparing drag to blackface requires ignoring a lot of cultural and historical context that I think showcases why the two are not the same thing, at least in my opinion. I don't consider the comparison even particularly relevant in a racism-related discussion, in all honesty.

RedPhoenix

Okay so rather than comparing the completely malicious and racist art of blackface to the largely benevolent artform of drag as performance you were comparing it to a completely neutral term of drag used to mean dressing up in clothes, but only in the context of it being done maliciously.

If you had said specifically one of these cultures where men dressing up like women is solely to demean women, then sure that's maybe something similar. But that's not what you said and its not what drag as a performance art or simply as a neutral term means or even implies. Saying blackface is the same thing is just watering down and minimizing what blackface is - a specifically malicious and racist act.

And the context of what you said was pretty evident, you were saying it in the context of things you've helped people do. "I've done specialist courses in drag makeup." So unless you go around helping people dress as women to mock women and we're supposed to know that about you nobody would have gathered that context from what you said.
Apologies & Absences | Ons & Offs
I move the stars for no one.

KatieBower

QuoteThere is a difference between harmful caricature and a cultural practice meant to empower. Historical context, intent, and effect. Blackface is the former. Drag is the latter.

Again, I'm not talking about drag or blackface as a form of performance. You're focusing on what happens after the makeup goes on. I'm referring to the act of putting it on.

My belief is there is nothing inherently bad about either style of makeup. Drawing a crease on an Asian girls eyes could be considered a form of whiteface for example, but I can say with certainty that none of the people I've done this for were trying to make fun of white people. Just as none of the men I've helped "drag up," were looking to demean women, and the fact that many men do clearly do this shouldn't be used to stifle their self-expression.

Imagine being in a situation where a child wanted to be made to look like someone they idolised from a different race, and you have to somehow explain to them that we can't do this. I've been in that situation on several occasions, and I've never been able to explain it to a child in a way that made me feel less than dirty because it always comes back to explaining why distinctions which they place no special importance in are important even though they really shouldn't be.

QuoteOkay so rather than comparing the completely malicious and racist art of blackface to the largely benevolent artform of drag as performance you were comparing it to a completely neutral term of drag used to mean dressing up in clothes, but only in the context of it being done maliciously.

I refer you to my response to Oniya.

QuoteIf you had said specifically one of these cultures where men dressing up like women is solely to demean women, then sure that's maybe something similar. But that's not what you said and its not what drag as a performance art or simply as a neutral term means or even implies. Saying blackface is the same thing is just watering down and minimizing what blackface is - a specifically malicious and racist act.

I've already clarified that the statement was imprecise, and pointed out that I would edit it if I could. Are you even reading what I'm writing?

QuoteAnd the context of what you said was pretty evident, you were saying it in the context of things you've helped people do.

You contending that this, "I've also done specialist courses in drag makeup, and frequently help men to look like women, but what is drag, if not a gender-based form of blackface?" is the extent of my comment? And that all of this:

QuoteUltimately whether or not you believe it is wrong will boil down to whether or not you equate causing offence with wrongdoing. Personally I absolutely repudiate that concept. Actually you might even say I find it offensive  :P

I change my skin colour every summer. I've been asked to lighten people's skin and I've been asked to darken people's skin. Some people want features which are associated with their race to be minimised and some people want them enhanced. If an Asian girl wants a cut crease I don't tell her, "sorry, but your eyes don't have creases and it would be racist of me to draw them on," I draw them on. Same deal if a white girl wants to have fuller lips or if a black girl wants her nose contoured to look smaller. I've also done specialist courses in drag makeup, and frequently help men to look like women, but what is drag, if not a gender-based form of blackface? And yes, sometimes it can be about lampooning and demeaning. Though mostly it's a very sincere form of flattery.

Impersonation others to mock them is a very real thing and as anyone who has seen a kid shove a pillow under their shirt in order to pretend to be fat can tell you it it's not solely a race issue, and yes it's also used on an exclusionary basis. I mean some people would rather put a skinny actress in a fat suit than employ someone who is actually overweight. That's gross. Certainly it's horrible when these things happen, but I assume we should all be grown-up enough to know it when we see it, and object, and not be reduced to simply objecting to things that remind us of it because they make us uncomfortable on some level.

Impersonation and transformation are very legitimate forms of self-expression, even self-realisation.

Doesn't exist? As I mentioned earlier I certainly do get the impression you haven't read it, but that doesn't actually mean it doesn't exist. Nor does it mean you get to act as if this isn't somehow the context in which the statement was made simply because you prefer to ignore it, and zoom in on one particular sentence.

That is the very definition of what it means to take something out of context.

RedPhoenix

Quote from: KatieBower on August 25, 2018, 10:50:47 PM
Again, I'm not talking about drag or blackface as a form of performance. You're focusing on what happens after the makeup goes on.

Then you're not actually talking about drag, blackface or anything relevant to the topic of the conversation. Making up your own definitions of things and then comparing them to each other really serves no purpose at all here especially when your end conclusion is that drag and blackface somehow operate on the same level, which you keep ignoring how people are pointing out how wrong you are. Quoting yourself again and acting like you're not the one completely ignoring context here won't change that.

Quote from: Blythe on August 25, 2018, 09:21:43 PM
even idly comparing drag to blackface requires ignoring a lot of cultural and historical context

This. You can't use terms and then declare you're ignoring the context and way that they're actually used so that they end up completely irrelevant to the conversation at hand. Well I mean you can, but what's the point?
Apologies & Absences | Ons & Offs
I move the stars for no one.

Blythe

Quote from: KatieBower on August 25, 2018, 10:50:47 PM
Again, I'm not talking about drag or blackface as a form of performance. You're focusing on what happens after the makeup goes on. I'm referring to the act of putting it on.

I'm not sure what distinction you are trying to draw by divorcing the act from the aftereffect in this instance. Based on your earlier descriptions, there seems to be no meaningful difference for the purposes of this discussion. Seems to be splitting hairs.

For what it's worth, I'm not judging you or anything, but I don't think you are necessarily communicating whatever it is you are trying to say effectively.

RedPhoenix

Quote from: Blythe on August 25, 2018, 11:37:39 PM
For what it's worth, I'm not judging you or anything, but I don't think you are necessarily communicating whatever it is you are trying to say effectively.

Sorry I should have said this or something similar up front too. I don't mean to be rude or aggressive. I just sort of am by nature when I start caring lol. Sorry for being bitchy.

I'm being confrontational because I don't like the idea that blackface and drag are in any way the same, because blackface is an embarrassing evil that I would like to condemn to the ash heap of history and drag is, well, not.

I share my wine and chocolate with all. <3
Apologies & Absences | Ons & Offs
I move the stars for no one.

KatieBower

Quote from: RedPhoenixThen you're not actually talking about drag, blackface or anything relevant to the topic of the conversation...

No, I'm not talking about drag as a performance art, or blackface as a performance art, but that doesn't mean I'm not talking about drag or blackface. Drag is generally understood to refer to donning the clothes of the opposite sex. If you want to conflate drag and drag shows that's fine, but I don't have to play along. Blackface is a form of theatrical makeup (sometimes used as short-hand to refer to all similar forms of makeup, like yellowface, whiteface, and so on) that as far as I'm aware (I'm not a historian, but I do know something about the history of makeup) dates back to at least the 1600's, and while it was predominantly used to create caricatures (it should be noted that most theatrical makeup is a form of caricature) this was not its sole purpose. You're conflating this with a very specific, and grotesque style of performance which takes it name from this makeup style. Again you can do that, but I don't have to play along.

Further you can say that these definitions aren't relevant, but when the topic of the conversation is someone using that style (and then only if you use blackface as a catch-all, because this wasn't even blackface per se, but rather a form of yellowface) without engaging in that style of performance art I can only beg to differ.

Quote from: RedPhoenixMaking up your own definitions of things



https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Blackface

These are the definitions I refer to. Though it's worth pointing out Pugoffka wasn't using blackface however people use the term blackface as a "catch-all," for makeup that involves impersonating someone of a different race and I don't see the point of swimming against the tide there.

Quote from: BlytheI'm not sure what distinction you are trying to draw by divorcing the act from the aftereffect in this instance. Based on your earlier descriptions, there seems to be no meaningful difference for the purposes of this discussion. Seems to be splitting hairs.

What aftereffect? Are you saying that impersonating someone can have only one? Because that seems like a self-evidently false conclusion, and I think there might be a certain amount of cultural imperialism involved. My point is that simply saying, "She made herself look Asian/Indian," is as meaningful a statement in regards to implying wrongdoing as saying, "he made himself look like a woman," is, which is to say neither implies wrongdoing on their own. That's not the same as saying there aren't people who might find either offensive, but I refer back to this "Ultimately whether or not you believe it is wrong will boil down to whether or not you equate causing offence with wrongdoing. Personally I absolutely repudiate that concept."

Of course in both cases people can do this for the purposes of mockery but there are also many other motivations. The effect they have on those around them will depend on how they do it, where they do it and why they do it. Those questions are far more important to me than simply establishing whether or not they did do it.

Quote from: RedPhoenixI'm being confrontational because I don't like the idea that blackface and drag are in any way the same, because blackface is an embarrassing evil that I would like to condemn to the ash heap of history and drag is, well, not.

I'll refer back to the fact that drag was a feature of most minstrel shows. So if you think drag was perfectly harmless how could it have also been a feature of something you (rightly) call an embarrassing evil?

But you'll get no argument from me if you think that impersonating others for the purposes of mocking them is bad, and you'll get no argument from me that something like a minstrel show should is utterly grotesque, and an offence against the sensibilities of any thinking person. But it's not grotesque because it involves people impersonating others. It's grotesque because it involves a calculated attempt to demean and vilify.

What I find strange is that you can recognise that drag can be harmless, even positive, yet you must know that it is also used as a form of emasculation and mockery, and that it has been and is used to demean and vilify. In other words you have it within yourself to distinguish between the positive and negative examples.

Can you not extend that same sense of moral discrimination to the act of impersonating someone of another race? Bearing in mind that people mimic attributes associated with other races all the time, and their motive is usually admiration, even envy. I know for example when I get lip fillers or a spray-tan it's not to look more like a white girl.

Blythe

I think I'm going to bow out of this one, thanks.

RedPhoenix

Quote from: KatieBower on August 26, 2018, 02:17:47 AMyou'll get no argument from me that something like a minstrel show should is utterly grotesque, and an offence against the sensibilities of any thinking person.

Then stop arguing it.
Apologies & Absences | Ons & Offs
I move the stars for no one.

KatieBower

Quote from: BlytheI think I'm going to bow out of this one, thanks.

I'm used to platforms where professions of good faith are generally ignored but for the record if I've given you the impression that you can't dialogue with me I'm sorry.

If it helps please try not to picture someone glowering behind their keyboard. This is not who I am. I say the same thing to RedPheonix.

Quote from: RedPheonixThen stop arguing it.

If you think that's what I'm here to say then I can see why we disagree. I've already told you that's not my position. So maybe you think I'm arguing in bad faith, I've failed to communicate my position effectively, you've misunderstood me, or there's some combination of these things going on here.

If you think I'm arguing in bad faith, is there any gesture I can make to convince you otherwise? And if I've made myself unclear point to where and how and I'll do my best to explain.

Blythe

Quote from: KatieBower on August 26, 2018, 04:12:13 AM
I'm used to platforms where professions of good faith are generally ignored but for the record if I've given you the impression that you can't dialogue with me I'm sorry.

If it helps please try not to picture someone glowering behind their keyboard. This is not who I am. I say the same thing to RedPheonix.

It's moreso that I think we're talking around each other rather than with each other, and it doesn't seem to be moving to any area where we mutually understand each other.

Plus...the topic of drag and gender expression is pretty personal to me. I'm a transman. People accuse me of the gender equivalent of blackface for merely existing, and drag is one way a lot of trans individuals get a toe in the water being able to express themselves in a positive and healthy way for the first time. So rather than let my personal feelings or frustration influence me unduly, I do tend to bow out while I feel I'm still on good terms with people in-thread, y'know?

It's a practice that's generally served me well anywhere on the internet & helps me always put my best foot forward with anyone I interact with. And since drag isn't really the topic of this thread, I'd rather not derail it further, personally-speaking.

Anyways, thanks for your time, and all the best.

Beorning

Regarding definitions: I noticed that, in the discussion on Pugoffka's FB page, people were saying that she was doing blackface by the simple fact of changing the skin tone of her models (yup, a bit of correction here: she wasn't a model in these images, she was a photographer) - even though she didn't intend malice. IIRC, some people said that she used makeup and filter to make white people look black / Indian, so she was using blackface, so she did wrong, because blackface had been used to demean black people in the past.

RedRose

I suppose people who grew up with it being malicious will see it as such, and people who didn't, won't.
O/O and ideas - write if you'd be a good Aaron Warner (Juliette) [Shatter me], Tarkin (Leia), Wilkins (Faith) [Buffy the VS]
[what she reading: 50 TALES A YEAR]



KatieBower

QuoteIt's moreso that I think we're talking around each other rather than with each other, and it doesn't seem to be moving to any area where we mutually understand each other.

I would like to understand you.

QuotePlus...the topic of drag and gender expression is pretty personal to me. I'm a transman. People accuse me of the gender equivalent of blackface for merely existing, and drag is one way a lot of trans individuals get a toe in the water being able to express themselves in a positive and healthy way for the first time. So rather than let my personal feelings or frustration influence me unduly, I do tend to bow out while I feel I'm still on good terms with people in-thread, y'know?

I'm not such a person. As far as I'm concerned if you identify as a man then you are a man and if you chose to present as a man that's no more drag to me than it is for me to dress like a woman.

QuoteRegarding definitions: I noticed that, in the discussion on Pugoffka's FB page, people were saying that she was doing blackface by the simple fact of changing the skin tone of her models (yup, a bit of correction here: she wasn't a model in these images, she was a photographer) - even though she didn't intend malice. IIRC, some people said that she used makeup and filter to make white people look black / Indian, so she was using blackface, so she did wrong, because blackface had been used to demean black people in the past.

Thank you for the correction. It seems like a very clear-cut example of an association fallacy if what you're saying is correct, but that's not to say I can't understand why many minorities would be touchy about having their identity appropriated. Personally though I wonder who was objecting, and I wonder how they were objecting. I haven't seem the comments myself. But I can't picture any of the Asian or Indian people I know reacting with outrage to such a thing. I can easily see that they might view it as good opportunity to discuss that these things have an ugly history (not one that is entirely in the past either) of which people should be mindful.

That may just be my experience.

It's worth bearing in mind that the right-wing have their own outrage machine and they love to blow these things out of all proportion. Could this have all been a storm in a teacup?

Mirrah

I'm not contesting your view point but I don't like your example, KatieBower. I think people can change their looks as they like, but please do refrain from generalizing when trying to make your points. Sure, you mostly see Asians born with monolids; but there are also Asians who are born with double eyelids. Double eyelids and curly hair aren't features that are exclusive to any one race, nor are Asians naturally unable to be born with those features. (But this is derailing the original topic.)




People chase their ideas of beauty, whether or not it is similar to those outside of their race. That has no bearings on anything besides personal preferences. It's not wrong to prefer straight hair on a woman. Calling it offensive would be like saying having a preference for curly hair over straight hair is also offensive. It's not.

Personally, I don't find it offensive when someone lightens or darkens their skin. Appropriation, I don't see as offensive--rather, it makes me curious about why the person has chosen to dress that way. If they do a good job of it, I even stop to admire it.

I don't consider the aratist to be blackfacing when they took their pictures, unless they were mocking those cultures. If it's cosplaying and for cosplay, I highly doubt that was the intent of the artist. Yes, I do view cosplay as a form of artistic expression. Adoration, even, for the character that is being portrayed through their efforts. I do not see skin painting or anything like that for it to be wrong.

Who are the people who are saying it's bad? Even when it comes down to heated arguments about cultural appropriation, there are also people who say it's okay (from the cultures being appropriated).

Take this Washington Post article about a girl who decided to wear a Cheongsam to her Prom, for example: https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/morning-mix/wp/2018/05/01/its-just-a-dress-teens-chinese-prom-attire-stirs-cultural-appropriation-debate/?noredirect=on&utm_term=.33bb8c08fd34

Or, this debate over a little girl having a Japanese themed tea party: https://www.indy100.com/article/japanese-tea-party-cultural-appropriation-tumblr-post-outrage-japan-culture-respect-hate-racism-7874681
"Dream... not of what you are... but of what you want to be." - Margulis
Status: Closed. Semi Hiatus. | Have you taken care of yourself today?

Beorning

You know, it makes me wonder: where does appropriation end and normal cultural osmosis begin? I mean... this cheongsam dress thing. Yes, these dresses come from China. But they are beautiful - if I were a woman, I'd wear one. Is it really inappropriate for a white woman to wear such a dress?

Cultures do exchange ideas, fashions etc. It's natural...

Twisted Crow

^ That is the gist of what I often wonder about the subject. I sometimes think that the lines might be very blurry to some.

This makes me think of a Japanese Youtuber that I like by the name of 'Yuta' (or perhaps 'Yuuta'?). He does these little surveys with fellow people in his country about what might be controversial or acceptible in Japan. I remember one was "How do you feel about foreigners wearing kimono?" And a lot of answers seemed very accepting (stuff like "That might be cool" or "I might appreciate and feel their love for Japan").

Not to imply that Japan should be the "be-all; end-all" standard, for the record. There are other variables even with their own culture to consider. One example would be discerning truth between their "Private" demeanor and feeling as opposed to their "Public" demeanor/feeling. Another would be that this also only speaks for Japanese culture, and shouldn't be taken as a standard to impose on every other culture that may or may not readily accept it.

But I do see that cultural osmosis to be somewhat natural over a given period of time. :-)

KatieBower

Quote from: MirrahI'm not contesting your view point but I don't like your example, KatieBower. I think people can change their looks as they like, but please do refrain from generalizing when trying to make your points. Sure, you mostly see Asians born with monolids; but there are also Asians who are born with double eyelids. Double eyelids and curly hair aren't features that are exclusive to any one race, nor are Asians naturally unable to be born with those features. (But this is derailing the original topic.)

I wasn't trying to suggest these qualities are universal or exclusive. Though I do want to point out there is a difference between curly/wavy hair, and textured (as in afro-textured) hair, which I think stylists refer to as kinky. It has a very distinctive, tight helix shaped curl. I don't know if it's an exclusive trait. I just know it's way harder to straighten than curly hair.

Quote from: MirrahTake this Washington Post article about a girl who decided to wear a Cheongsam to her Prom, for example: https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/morning-mix/wp/2018/05/01/its-just-a-dress-teens-chinese-prom-attire-stirs-cultural-appropriation-debate/?noredirect=on&utm_term=.33bb8c08fd34

I think this was a storm in a teacup perpetuated mostly by college kids and a media that's obsessed with controversy. The feeling in Asia was overwhelmingly that this was a triumph of Chinese culture. I don't know anyone who don't thinks this sort of stuff (sharing cultural traditions) isn't a good thing. As for the original critic there's a reason why his entire tweet wasn't being replicated by his supporters. It was piffle, like his racist tweets about black people.

Quote from: BeorningIs it really inappropriate for a white woman to wear such a dress?

The only reason I wouldn't wear one is they're a pain to walk in.