1) Dreadlocks are a natural hairstyle for black people. Black people are not allowed to have dreadlocks for most types of jobs, since that is simply not considered an appropriate hairstyle for a bank cashier or what ever.
2) when a white celebrity gets dreadlocks she is rubbing it in, so to say, that inherently white-privilege of said celebrity. That is "I can wear your culture because I'm white, you can't wear yours because you are black"
The flaws are plenty of course. White middle class can't get white collar jobs wearing dreadlocks, either. The fact that any celebrity can wear funky hairstyles and get away with it isn't attributed to their race, but to their celebrity status.
A further argument for cultural appropriation is that the hairstyles required for white-collar jobs are based on "natural white" hairstyles, though I hardly find that to be true either.
That is as far as I can extract something resembling a logical argument, I hope this has helped you understand what is going on in the minds of these anti-appropriators. I of course don't expect you to be anymore convinced by their stance.
(Not saying you're arguing that they're correct, as you do point out it's full of flawed assumptions)
I roughly get an idea of what the beliefs behind their argument are, but they still seem absurd, and at times it certainly seems like they've "culturally appropriated" white European arrogance themselves.
It's important to remember that people with afro-textured hair have an extremely short list of what could be considered even moderately 'low effort' hairstyles. Of these, most of them are considered to be black haristyles.
You've mostly got afros, cornrows, braids, twists/twist outs, dreads, and a bunch of super-short cuts. That's a pretty short and inflexible list, and a few of those aren't what you'd usually see on guys. Most styles you see are combinations of the above, a product of (expensive and really bad-for-your-hair) chemical and heat treatments, or simply artificial (!).
As a property of being considered black hairstyles, dreads/box braids/cornrows are often considered unprofessional. Lots of people will call them 'ghetto' and you'll probably get comments when wearing them for events/school/whatever if you're not in a very black community. Dreads in particular get criticized for being 'dirty' (though this is not an exclusively black phenomenon).
Hair can be an incredible sore spot for black people. Black girls spend a huge amount of time and effort trying to make their hair look 'acceptable' (aka white) because mainstream culture tells them their hair, isn't and can't be beautiful. Black people are often verbally and physically harassed on the street by white people who think it's a novelty. It's not possible to honestly talk about perceived 'cultural appropriation' without acknowledging the power dynamics there.
When dreads are one of the few ways to manage your hair that don't involve a lot of hair-pulling and time, it's really obnoxious to see white celebs get praised for them when you can't even go through any predominantly white area with ANY black hairstyle without getting unwanted comments, hair touching/pulling, whatever. It just comes off as arrogant white tourism.
So when diversity and political sensitivity becomes religion - we get zealots. I am actually all for cultural appropriation for couple of reasons.
1) Even if it is just dumb fun for the masses, some people of the other culture want to get the real deal and genuinely help in developing and preserving.
2) Even if your culture is appropriated - you have insane amounts of culture to appropriate yourself.
3) People are not easily offended - no matter what the twitter age shows, so most of the time you don't care
4) Sometimes you strike gold - like with blues/hard-rock/heavy-metal (politely leaving hair metal out). We have something that traversed the world, left deep cultural marks everywhere and helped bring the iron curtain down.
The thing is, you can't tell other people they should or shouldn't be offended by something just because you are or aren't. It just doesn't work that way. If someone's feelings are hurt, their feelings are hurt, even if they shouldn't be. If someone feels offended by a westerner wearing a kimono, you are going to have to deal with that fact. You might conclude that you don't care about offending them, but telling them they shouldn't be offended will only make it worse.
In this case it was even more absurd, because the people who created the kimono, the Japanese, were fine with it. Even the ultra nationalistic Japanese that dislike foreigners thought the protesting against this was absurd.
Why should any of the people in America be in a position where they can tell westerners they're not allowed to wear a kimono, when the people who invented it, whom actually live in Japanese culture every day of their life, do not feel that any harm is done to Japanese culture by westerners wearing the kimono? It's an extremely arrogant stance to take.
I of course cannot tell people what they can and can't be offended by. But you cannot create concessions for every single person who gets offended by every single thing. My rights are not restricted just because it might offend you
Why do I have to deal with it? So anyone can be upset by anything, so matter how absurd, and I'm obligated to deal with their perspective? Closing out the other side by claiming offense is childish.
It says something that this article against anti-racism protestors, which has nothing serious to do with "hacking" is #2 now on HN. (Or hey, let's have more articles about pop singers wearing kimonos, to pore over and learn hacking techniques.)
At least these protestors actually used tech to "disrupt" something, unlike the startups which use the term as doublethink.
I'm Canadian and live in Japan. I wear Japanese clothes very frequently, especially in the summer (jinbei, yukata, geta). I like them. They are comfortable. I live in the country side and nobody bats an eyelid. The one time I wore a jinbei to a baseball game in Tokyo, I got many compliments from people on the street.
Like I said. I don't get it. They are clothes. Wouldn't it be racist to say I can't wear them because I'm not Japanese? Similarly, I can't actually think of any class/race implications for women wearing a kimono. It's not different from a suit or dress (other than it is really complicated to get on ;-) ). This just seems bizarre to me. I wonder if the people involved just don't understand what a kimono is?
It's telling that just about every article I've read about this that bothered to ask anyone in Japan about it mentions that Japanese people aren't offended at all by Westerners wearing a kimono. It's only Americans being offended on their behalf, which does seem a bit infantile. Especially when Japan wants the wider world to be interested in their culture and to buy into it.
Two words: "white guilt"
This comic rings true in more ways than one: https://moonmetropolis.files.wordpress.com/2014/11/sjw-comic...
When I went to Japan my language exchange partner often commented on foreigners wearing kimono. They commented how they enjoyed that other people liked the things Japan is known for. That for many tourists wearing a kimono in Japan is one of their greatest joys! And that joy others had made her happy, not upset.
In urban Japan for the current generation they are very much reaching the level of costume - reserved for special occasions, festivals, etc.
This thread really piqued my interest because when I first started wearing Japanese clothes I was a bit self conscious. But Japanese people always told me it was fine. Now, if I walk down to the izakaya in my jinbei and geta, I'm just like all the other old guys in the neighbourhood ;-)
I experienced quite a lot of racism from expats in Japan who thought it was unacceptable for me to have Japanese friends, watch Japanese TV shows and read Japanese books. They kept saying, "You will never be one of them. They will never accept you." Eventually I had to distance myself from that community.
The other day, one of the neighbourhood children was playing with their friend. The friend walked up to me and tried out their English. The neighbourhood girl said, "Oh don't bother. He's Japanese."
Home is not always where you were born.
Yeah, they disrupted a totally harmless event put on by the Museum of Fine Arts in Boston and the Japan Broadcasting Corporation (NHK).
Honestly, in this sort of situation, it seems racist on the part of the people protesting. Outside of the outright division it promotes, it assumes a patriarchal arrogance, that they (Middle class Americans in America) know better than the Japanese in Japan. Are the Japanese so dumb as to be "duped" by these museums? Is the rich history of the kimono actually so weak that it will be destroyed by non-Japanese wearing them?
Of course, they, as Americans, understand the dangers of American culture and the effects it has on the world, so they must protect other countries that don't understand American culture and the danger it poses! They'll look out for you, <Insert Other Country X That They Are Not From>, so don't you worry your pretty little head about this. They know best.
What a bizarre and hypocritical stance to take.