This part entails that culture is a distinct feature that distinguishes a community, individual, or group of individuals from others. Cultural traits or elements have been conveyed from one group to another due to people’s interaction and socialization. However, four critical ways of transmission can be identified: cultural appropriation, cultural assimilation, acculturation, and, lastly, the cultural interchange(The Editors of Encyclopaedia Britannica). The other three ways, unlike cultural appropriation, entail mutual permission and understanding, and as a result, they are widely accepted. The use of ideas, artifacts, expressions, and intellectual property rights without authorization has been termed cultural appropriation(Balint et al., 2020).
Nguyen and Strohl’s Perspective on Cultural Appropriation
What is an ‘expressive’ charge of appointment? From the start, the distinguishing feature of ‘expressive’ allotment claims appears to be that they stand without the need for explanation,’ are ‘not commonly open to coordinate contestation,’ and are not ‘accessible for contention’ (Nguyen and Strohl, 2019, p. 984). Nguyen and Strohl contrast ‘freely grounded’ allotment claims with those that admit to supporting the (putative) approach of realities free of actual cases and that can be conjured to give comprehensively consequentialist reasoning to not participating in the kind of style appointment in question.
Indeed, even articulations given immediate gathering concerns are ‘freely moored,’ as Nguyen and Strohl put it (2019, p. 984): they are established in realities about bunch closeness that are autonomous of our perspectives about them. Subsequently, a gathering might be misguided about where the limits of its gathering closeness lay. Consequently, it is wrong to accept that a confirmed break of such correspondence has happened because of a style allocation act.
Why may Black women wear straight and light weaves, but non-Black women cannot wear cornrows or braids? What appears to be a complicated subject of cultural allocation and beauty is simpler than you might think. The Tignon Laws of the eighteenth century are arguably the earliest known examples of legal oppression of Black hair, but it did not end there (Strohl et al., 2019). You’d be surprised to learn that legal victimization of ordinary hair continues today, with the most recent examples standing out as truly newsworthy in 2021.
Cultural appropriation in Natural Hair
The presentation of splendor through haircuts has always been associated with people of color. Black women use their haircuts to address the shift of Black culture over time, from the “afro” to hair wraps and twists. As a result of this evolution, an increasing number of Black women embrace the natural beauty of their hair. Whatever the case may be, it isn’t without its share of banter. Excellence, particularly hair, has long been a source of contention in Black culture, dating back to the Civil Rights Movement and beyond (Williams 2019).
The Kardashians are an example of cultural appropriation. They exploit black culture (and other cultures) as accessories to look nice in front of the camera and the public. Big lips, a tiny waist, a fat butt, dreadlocks, hairstyles, and clothes are all factors(Ibarra 2017). In our generation, we also regard it as a fad or “new style.” When we see a black lady with dreadlocks, we immediately think “filthy,” “disrespectful,” “ugly,” and “crazy.” Kyle Kardashian, on the other hand, has dreadlocks and is described as “pretty,” “goals,” “sexy,” “queen,” and “clean” by the public(“The Cultural Appropriation of Natural Hair” 2016).
.Kylie Jenner was credited with spearheading a ‘tense’ new hair pattern, while Zendaya, a black actress, was chastised for doing likewise. Interestingly Zendaya’s normal hair was seen as a defect. In any case, Kylie Jenner, who has no connections to the people of color, was credited with taking something that wasn’t hers.
Natural hair is attractive not because another culture has sanctioned it. It’s stunning because black ladies who choose to wear their hair naturally are stunning. We have a responsibility to call out cultural appropriation when we witness it. This is about more than just hair; it’s also about history. We should praise black women’s efforts to break away from the time-consuming techniques involved in making their hair look more like the images of beauty forcefully conveyed in the media. Now that black women are beginning to reflect the ideas of powerful black heroines from the past, I believe it is a time to rejoice.
Matthes’s Perspective on Cultural Appropriation
Contra to Erich Hatala Matthes, I do not believe that appropriations regarding group closeness can provide regularizing avocations to style allocation. Matthes (2019, pp. 1007, 1009) argues that group closeness can make such justifications unconvincing. Thus, he prefers a record of expressive appointment guarantees with a different standardizing force source (2019, p. 1007); as indicated by Matthes, “what bases expressive apportionment claims” is “verifiable and continuous abuse persevered by certain networks, autonomous of contemplations of closeness” (2019, p. 1009). ‘The way they come from abused groups is the regularizing ground for expressive apportionment claims,’ he proceeds.
The way that it ‘seems to infer that any culture can have an honor of intimacy, as indicated by Matthes, grounds such contemplations (2019, p. 1009). On the off chance that this entailment holds, when we acknowledge that there are conditions where a groups intimacy gives ace tanto regularizing motivations to keep its allotment claims, we have no other option except to perceive that the Ku Klux Klan’s gathering closeness accomplishes the same thing (2019, p. 1009)
We agree with Nguyen and Strohl that we should not consider group members obligated to litigate justification concerns when making appropriation claims. This is self-evident or impolite to ask for one. The practice of cultural appropriation is damaging and dangerous. It is not a path to cross-cultural understanding. This isn’t to suggest that we shouldn’t be cautious about adopting activities from other cultures or altering prejudices and learning about disadvantaged people.
Ibarra, Rosa. 2017. “Beyoncé and Coldplay Found Guilty for Using Cultural Appropriation in Their Music Video.” Medium. March 28, 2017. https://medium.com/applied-intersectionality/beyonc%C3%A9-and-coldplay-found-guilty-for-using-cultural-appropriation-in-their-music-video-89da9a8c7ac8.
Lenard, P. T., & Balint, P. (2020). What is (the wrong of) cultural appropriation?. Ethnicities, 20(2), 331-352.
Nguyen, C. T., & Strohl, M. (2019). Cultural appropriation and the intimacy of groups. Philosophical Studies, 176(4), 981-1002.
“The Cultural Appropriation of Natural Hair.” 2016. HuffPost. September 7, 2016. https://www.huffpost.com/entry/the-cultural-appropriation-of-natural-hair_b_57cf2cb3e4b0273330ab127e.
The Editors of Encyclopaedia Britannica. n.d. “What Is Cultural Appropriation? | Britannica.” Www.britannica.com. https://www.britannica.com/story/what-is-cultural-appropriation#:~:text=Cultural%20appropriation%20takes%20place%20when.
Williams, Ashleigh. 2019. “The Connection between Hair and Identity in Black Culture.” C+R Research. 2019. https://www.crresearch.com/blog/connection-between-hair-and-identity-black-culture.