While slavery is extremely shitty, but a lot of people don't know that slavery was practiced by African people centuries before whites started importing them. Also, the first american slaveOWNER was black, which is weird
Less than 13% of the black population were slaves. Only 1.5% of Americans were eligible slave owners. Less than that owned slaves. There were White irish slaves, Asian slaves, and Indian slaves. Slavery was awful, yes. But it was not as huge as people think. Also, Abraham Lincoln blatantly stated that he did not care for the plight of the slaves. They were released as a byproduct of his actions, not the result. After slavery was abolished, hundreds of people were kicked out of their homes and forced to wander. I am not justifying slavery, but people over react.
Appropriation is when it's used disrespectfully, or without full acknowledgement of the background. So many white people just want the dreads to be like Bob Marley, but they don't realize that black people have been judged for their dreads. Amenities, tools, and other such objects that don't hold meaning can't be appropriated. Religious and cultural items can be.
Also dreadlocks were used by the Celtics before they even knew of the existence of black people. Dreadlocks are thus not cultural appropriation. Also, nothing is cultural appropriation. Cultural appropriation doesn't exist. It's just another excused made by pussies to get butthurt about everything.
It's different then. Chinese food is just food. It's not religious or heavily cultural. It's another thing if the white guy decides to call himself Chinese. I'm sure even you can see the problems with being disrespectful towards someone's culture or religion, like if you made a Jesus-themed gay porno, blackface, or weaboos in general.
@undercover I agree with you it's just the way you presented your information sounded a little "fuck off" at the end where the beginning was very well constructed. Where I agree with you I think America an example as it is considered a melting pot, and being part of that melting pot means that you share your culture and heritage with others, you aren't giving up your history, you're just seeing it utilized in a different manner. It shouldn't be about who has ownership over the history of a particular thing. Hell I don't think it's important to understand where it came from unless you're interested. My family is German Mennonite it's part of my history, but I have no ownership of it, and it has no ownership of me.
You can't just modify my metaphors. And the KKK and Nazis at least would be okay with eachother. This "transracial" group has little to no support from those who dislike cultural appropriation. In fact, all this "transracial" junk is entirely contrary to such ideas. It is anathema to them.
But kkk and nazi fit in the extreme racist group, and cultural apropriation ppl (who think dreadlocks are racist) and transracial fit into extreme pc group.
I can group Hitler and the Pope together, as they're both Catholic. I could group Nicki Minaj with Rosa Parks, as they are both black women. Would that be right? You can make your groups include whatever you want, as long as they are broad enough. But would it be correct?
Hitler is defined by being a genocidal maniac. The Pope is defined by being religious. Rosa Parks is defined by being a key member of the civil rights movement. Nicki Minaj is defined by being a stupid whore. None of these people can be logically grouped with each other. Nazis are defined by being extreme racists and so are kkk members. So they can be grouped together. Extreme PC people who call everything a case of cultural appropriation are defined by being extreme PC people. Extreme PC people who believe you can identify as so many things that transracial are a real thing are defined by being extreme pc people. So they can be grouped together. Note: I'm using their main traits as what 'defines' them. So just because bill gates and adolph Hitler are humans, they can't logically be placed in a specific group.
It's not a matter of calling everything cultural appropriation. But there are instances in which it should be called out. It's not so much extreme as it is polite.
Nah, but it dates back to the Incas and Aztecs. Then a white guy patented it some time later. But George Washington Carver did come up with a ton of uses for peanuts, as well as his innovations with farming.
You keep acting like such an insipid pc bastard. You probably think rulers are offensive because they are straight, meaning that they prevent gay representation in math.
I know I'm going to get downvotes for this, but undercover, please chill. This is a website for funny images, not attacking sjws. On the internet, just try to be respectful of others' points of view. Would it really hurt so much to not belittle others without knowing their circumstances or past experiences?
Actually, you won't get downvoted for that. I understand your sentiments but the thing is, I I feel like people like ctlt are fucking up the entire internet. A few years ago, people like her didn't even exist
Oh yeah i'm sure people weren't upset about racism and just general white naivete about certain things a couple years ago. There has always been people who dislike racist bs in whatever form it exists in, just in recent years they have become more prevalent. Sorry it upsets your little brain undercover that not all people think underhand racially charged comments and ideas are as funny now as they were in 2009.
Guest. You and all other SJWs need to focus on bigger issues, such as everything in third world countries. Oh, that won't benefit you? Oh, that's too HARD?! FUCK OFF. You cunts don't care about changing the world, you just like to complain and show everyone how progressive and smart you are.
its funny when 'feminists' talk about a non-existent wage gap (consitently been disproven, feminists jsut ignore facts), and complain about the media sexualizing women (even though every 'sexualized' woman in media is being sexualized voluntarily, in return for payment, menaign that they are sexualizing themselves), yet completely ignore real problems such as the fact that women are basically livestock in Saudi Arabia.
It's funny how anti-feminists never give a shit about "the fact that women are basically livestock in Saudi Arabia" unless they can use those women and women like them as a prop in an argument against feminists.
its funny because im not an anti-feminist, im anti-thirdwave feminism. i actually genuinedly care about REAL social issues, and hate people who abuse this once-noble cause for thei r own benefit
The 'freethenipple' idiots aren't fighting against a real social issue. Those people who think that we need plus size models are not fighting against a real issue. Those people just want something to be butthurt about and for the world to conform to their views.
because theyre trivial as fuck. instead of trying to make humanity think fat people are sexy (humans have found morbid obesity ugly for millenia, because it's a sign of unhealthiness and perhaps genetic problems), why not go on a fuckign diet. why change millions of years of evolution just cuz you're too lazy to not eat that fifth whopper?! see how fuckign stupid this shit is?
Not really, no. You trivialize things because they're not important to /you/, but given how quick you are to dehumanize and belittle people that you don't even know, you don't really seem like the best authority on what is or is not a "real" issue.
i'm certainly not near being an authority on what is a real issue or not, i'm just a guy who thinks all this modern activism is directed to problems which are far less significant than some others which stay ignored because they require some self sacrifice in order to actually combat. it's so much easier to whine on the internet that barbies are sexist than it is to protest the fact that 75% of nigerian girls are married before 18. also, fighting for the rights of some poor opressed person in africa brings far less benefits to you then fighting for some contrived bullshit about social media or whatever does, right?
It's almost like people can focus on more than one issue at a time, whether they be in first world or third world countries. Just because you see people advocating for issues that you don't think are important enough, doesn't mean that those other issues are being ignored.
no but the thing is the people who focus on those real issues, and the people like YOU are completely different people. There are the extremely admirable people like Malala Yousefzai, and then there are people like you, Zoe Quinn, and Anita Sarkeesian.
@rwby_rose theoretically, infinite. @calmthelovelytits that is all you have shown yourself to be: an illogical SJW. stop disgracing yourself and admit defeat.
by the way, quick word of advice. if you want people to stop seeing you as annoying sjw scum, and more like a logical person with simply different opinions, try presenting yourself in a better way. I know downvotes are not really indicative of much, but on a site where I am one of the MOST hated people, you still were the one who got the dislikes in this argument. I hope you have the mental capacity to understand what that means. (hint: you're acting like a complete tard, and by comparison, i am even LIKEABLE)
its not just your image that gets ruined, its people who have the same ideology as you who end up lookign bad. by representing your cause like that, you're being very selfish.
So - to say black people weren't involved in modern inventions is exactly as insulting as saying a stay-at-home contributes nothing to the household. We. Got. Here. Together. And you? You personally have invented not one of our modern conveniences. So they don't 'belong' to you. Get on board, loser.
*Gets popcorn*
That's racist.
http://i58.tinypic.com/egoahc.jpg