Cultural appropriation

Cultural appropriation is the adoption of cultural elements by members of another identity. This process is often perceived as inappropriate or unacknowledged by the originating group. It typically involves a dominant culture borrowing from a minority culture. These elements can include religious traditions, customs, dance steps, and fashion. It also extends to symbols, language, history, and music.

Scholars and activists study this to understand how power affects cultural sharing.

The mechanism of appropriation involves moving a cultural element from its original context. This movement can result in the element being used as a fashion accessory or a toy. For example, a sacred Native American headdress might be worn as a costume.

This process can lead to the distortion of the original meaning. Critics argue that when elements are removed from their context, they lose their true significance. This differs from acculturation, assimilation, or diffusion, which are other ways cultures change.

Some researchers identify three specific harms caused by appropriation, known as EED. The first is erasure, where the original context and voices are hidden. The second is exploitation, where people gain money or social status from a culture. This happens without returning value to the marginalized group. The third is denigration, where cultural elements are treated as trivial or exotic.

Julia Serano distinguishes these from non-EED appropriation, which may actually support a minority community.

History shows that these tensions have existed for centuries. The term "cultural appropriation" first appeared in a 1945 essay by Arthur E. Christy. It became much more widespread during the 1980s. This growth coincided with post-colonial critiques of Western expansionism. Earlier, in 1976, Kenneth Coutts-Smith explored similar ideas regarding cultural colonialism. Even in ancient times, architectural traditions in the Ottoman Empire or Egypt were sometimes falsely attributed to Persian or Arab cultures.

Many indigenous groups have taken formal action to protect their collective intellectual property. In 1993, about 500 representatives from 40 different tribes met at Lakota Summit V. They unanimously passed a "Declaration of War Against Exploiters of Lakota Spirituality." This protected the Lakota, Dakota, and Nakota Nations.

Other groups work through the United Nations to establish rights for indigenous peoples. These actions highlight the scale of the effort to preserve cultural heritage.

Modern debates often focus on specific, high-profile examples. In the United States, the representation of Native Americans in sports has caused great controversy. A major example was the Washington Redskins football team.

Such cases show how symbols can impact social perceptions. Anthropologists like Jason Jackson note that these appropriations can cause deep pain or feelings of violation. These instances demonstrate the real-world impact of cultural borrowing.

The concept of appropriation connects to broader ideas of power and freedom. Opponents of the concept argue it can set arbitrary limits on artistic expression. They worry it might reinforce group divisions or promote grievance instead of liberation. However, others argue that true mutual exchange requires an "even playing field." This means both groups share with respect and equal social or economic power. Understanding these nuances helps us navigate the complex relationship between different global cultures.