LogFAQs > #945672439

I think it's ridiculous -- not to mention racist -- to believe that somebody simply by virtue of birth is more able to perform certain functions associated with the culture of that group than somebody who spent an extensive period of time studying it. While there are certain elements that may not necessarily be internalized unless you grew up in the culture, there's a certain amount of variation within any given culture that at least partly defrays that impact (ie, people will have very different experiences depending on upbringing, education, etc). However, I also believe in the adage "good for the goose, good for the gander" -- anybody protesting the cultural appropriation of one group should object to it happening to ANY culture.

InfestedAdam posted...

I recalled my younger self used to think only Japanese chefs are capable sushi chefs but now I feel so long as one has the dedication and skills, one's ethnicity should not matter.

I think that also ties into the implicit bias towards people looking the part and, for better or worse, uncontrollable characteristics factor into it. If somebody is absolutely phenomenal at something, they also have a reputation to fall back on. In the absence of that, people look for visual cues.

So unfortunately when it comes to sushi chefs, a white or black orphaned child could have been raised from an early age by a Japanese family who owns a sushi shop going back generations but, because of visual cues, a Japanese man with little or no background will seem more like an authority on the subject. (A fact that's sometimes poked fun at in comedies.)

When it comes to using an instrument or cooking food, everything feels like it should be fair game. By contrast, something like folklore should have a greater adherence to tradition no matter who's doing it.

---

(\/)(\/)|-|