Among the people that care about cultural appropriation, there are so many different interpretations of which acts are offensive that it is a minefield of uncertainty. A lot of it feels to me like a vocal minority trying to railroad the discussion.

people without power trying to flex that power. often people with tenuous connections to their culture.

and then bougie middle-class white people getting upset about stuff they don't really understand

Most ryokan did not want foreigners. The government had to crack down as part of their big tourism campaign.

Who gets to decide if it's disrespectful? Making fun of religious practices is a god given right!

Making fun of dominant religions, that are in no danger of being wiped out because people find them ridiculous, is fine.

Making fun of marginalized religions, which are already frequently ridiculed because they're different from what the dominant culture does, and which are under threat, either overall or within a given area, is a very different matter.

The problem with cultural appropriation is specifically that it exacerbates marginalization and discrimination against already-marginalized groups.

>Making fun of dominant religions, that are in no danger of being wiped out because people find them ridiculous, is fine.

Making fun of any religion is fine. No religion is above reproach, no religion is beyond mockery. None of them.

>Making fun of marginalized religions

Here's a newspeak term. There is no such thing as a "marginalized religion". This is a fictitious concept.

>which are already frequently ridiculed because they're different from what the dominant culture does, and which are under threat, either overall or within a given area, is a very different matter.

Good, every religion should be ridiculed. There's no culture that's beyond ridicule.

You're trying to create an illogical concept where hatred of White people is a reasonable thing. You can't come straight out and say it, so you launder the idea through a luxury belief and magically the hatred is tolerable.

>The problem with cultural appropriation is specifically that it exacerbates marginalization and discrimination against already-marginalized groups.

No it doesn't, because "cultural appropriation" doesn't exist. Upholding cultures even if they're backwards because it's politically fruitful breeds resentment. This is "baizou" behavior.

> If I, a white man living in upstate NY, were to don Haudenosaunee ritual gear and record myself performing a traditional dance of theirs, that would be cultural appropriation.

This is insufficient to be cultural appropriation. The context in which you wear the ritual gear and do the dances matter, the same as with the Japanese example.

True. I should have added "without the permission or invitation of the Haudenosaunee."

Thanks for making HN more entertaining. I do feel sorry for those cultures that didn't come up with computers, they can't read your comments, because that would be cultural appropriation.

Maybe a better example would be if you donned that ritual gear and started a tourism company that taught traditional ceremonies to rich tourists. And having no idea what the actual ceremonies are you just copied it off a Hollywood movie.

Yes, I can see how that could be perceived as demeaning.

See also: Häagen-Dazs. Foreign people speak funny and can't write. Very funny.

>If I, a white man living in upstate NY, were to don Haudenosaunee ritual gear and record myself performing a traditional dance of theirs, that would be cultural appropriation.

No it wouldn't. It wouldn't be because cultural appropriation doesn't exist. Culture is not a zero sum game. You doing that takes away nothing from the originating culture.

>It refers to a dominant culture taking the trappings of a colonized or otherwise marginalized culture and using them for entertainment, for clout, or otherwise for our own purposes.

Ah yes, White original sin and The Protocols of the Elders of Zion-tier rhetoric about the international White conspiracy. Conspiracy theories about some "dominance" and hierarchy of cultures on some fabricated scale is what the Nazis used to justify cleansing Europe of the Jews.

>On the other hand, if I were to travel to Japan, stay at a ryokan (traditional Japanese inn), and wear the simple kimono they provide for guests, or go to a kimono rental shop and rent a kimono from them for the day, that would be cultural appreciation, because that is something that the Japanese offer openly as a way for foreigners to connect with and understand their culture.

Japanese offer openly people to wear kimonos anywhere. It's often a gift given so others can wear them outside of Japan. You can appreciate culture anywhere.

>In general, cooking and eating food of another culture in your own home cannot be cultural appropriation. (The only exception I can think of offhand is if the food is part of a closed religious practice of some sort.) Similarly with music—it's very unlikely to be cultural appropriation unless the music is part of a religious practice or being used disrespectfully. Hairstyles and clothing require a bit more nuance and can depend on the situation.

Not in general, in totality: none of the aforementioned things are "cultural appropriation". The concept is an illusion.