They aren’t thongs unless they come from the Thong region of Australia, otherwise they are just sparkling flip-flops
Don’t be silly, thongs have nothing to do with Australia, they were invented in the 19th Century by Frenchman Philippe Follope.
Correct. And if they don’t come from the Sandalé region in France, they’re not thongs. They’re just sparkling toe slippers.
I’ve never heard about “cultural appropriation” outside of jokes making fun of it. And it’s one of the right’s favourite strawmen. Maybe it’s time to let it go?
The counterexample to Mexicans and their Sombreros is Plains Indians and their War bonnet (those feather crowns they used to sell as “Indian kids costumes”), whenever cultural appropriation is mentioned this comes up, so I’d be rather surprised if you hadn’t heard of it before.
Any spicy takes on that one, or have you really just never heard of it?
Idk if I’m just old now and it’s not the parties I go to but I’m sure glad that “sexy native american” isn’t really a Halloween costume anymore.
It’s not a strawmen in that it doesn’t ever happen but it’s just that those who get upset about it aren’t very numerous so it gets drowned out by those making fun of them. And then others see all those jokes and get the sense it happens a lot more than it does.
Cultural appropriation is when you take something sacred or special and don’t treat it with respect. Sombreros and parkas are just clothes.
To an extent, like (as a Mexican) I don’t give a shit if people wear sombreros or ponchos as a form of clothing, but I see them wearing specifically as a costume especially on days like Cinco de Mayo (which is not a sacred holiday) and it pisses me right off.
My culture is not a costume, and that’s where I draw the line at appropriation. If you want to wear a sombrero or poncho cause you think it looks cool and you wear it as a part of your daily wear, that’s fuckin weird bro, but you do you.
It’s also when someone takes from other cultures and then claim it as their own without acknowledging the origin. Like how Elvis covered songs from black artists and didn’t credited the original artists and now white people think they solely invented rock n roll.
He didn’t credit the white artists he covered either. But the fact that he gets the credit for inventing rock and roll when you had black people like Sister Rosetta Tharpe doing the crazy shit with guitar that Chuck Berry would later emulate all the way back in the 1930s. By the 1940s, she was playing what I think you could arguably say was as much rock and roll as what Elvis was doing.
Here in the Netherlands it was brown immigrants from the former Dutch Indies who introduced rock n roll to the Dutch audience. Like the Blue Diamonds And at the time people, even politicians, would call them heathens and such. But now that historic fact is mostly forgotten. And people think it was British bands like the Beatles who brought rock to the Netherlands, even though these immigrant bands paved the way for rock acceptance and for bands like the Beatles.
This kind of erasure happens everywhere.
I’d say this goes a little deeper than that, because American black people literally invented the art form while being actively segregated from white audiences (and much of society in general) and then all the credit goes to a white Southerner.
According to you.
I think the more important factor is taking ownership over something that originated elsewhere.
Even though it isn’t sacred, I would argue that the association between Great Britain and tea comes from appropriation. It wasn’t necessarily appropriation for the Portuguese to bring tea back to Europe, but it certainly was when the British used Chinese seeds and cultivation techniques in India to push China out of the trade.
I think the more important factor is taking ownership over something that originated elsewhere.
This describes virtually every tool, food, piece of clothing, etc you have ever used that was invented before the 20th century. Most of them originating somewhere else and being copied, rebranded, and modified over and over for decades or centuries until they reached their current forms. The only real difference is how recently it happened and if you can wedge it into a power hierarchy in such a way as to be able to blame someone who’s an acceptable target for that blame.
Thanks for explaining. I never understood the American outrage about cultural appropriation but it’s just about respecting sacred symbols from other cultures? Sounds about right, please feel free to dress as a Frenchman with beret and baguette as long as you respect our no-tipping policy.
Next item to discover on my list: why are Americans so upset about “black face”. And that’s what I witnessed in Sevilla (Spain) recently which did not seem racist to me at all: https://cnnespanol.cnn.com/2023/01/05/polemica-espana-blackface-reyes-magos-trax/
Next item to discover on my list: why are Americans so upset about “black face”.
That’s because of minstrel shows. They were American comedy acts where actors would paint their faces black and act out racist stereotypes. The premise was “look at me! I’m a black person!” and then they’d do something stupid and everyone would laugh. Note that black people were slaves at the time. When slavery was (mostly) abolished after the civil war, the shows and makeup became symbols of racism.
It’s kind of like how a swastika in a Buddhist temple is fine but a swastika tattoo on a white American isn’t. The swastika doesn’t have to be racist symbol, but there are few places you could display one without it being interpreted as a racist symbol.
Great explanation, thank you very much!
To add to that explanation, dressing as a French person in a mocking way is not the same because the French were not enslaved people in the Americas. In fact, they were taking part in the enslaving. It is basically continuing to show that you are the superior party in the power dynamic in an extremely hurtful way.
I may be mistaken but I don’t think I’ve ever seen a French guy painted in black. However I don’t think it’s in anyway related to historical reasons, it’s mostly because it looks dumb and out of place.
Transferring your argument to the Sevilla parade where black faces were the norm last week, I believe they played a relatively minor role in the slave trade. And I have not seen a single black guy in the street the duration I was there, apart from one frenchman.
I believe they played a relatively minor role in the slave trade.
Are you fucking kidding me?
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Slavery_in_Cuba
Only abolished by Spanish royal decree in 1887. One of the last European colonies in the Americas to abolish slavery. Only Brazil came afterward two years later.
Well I can be quite clueless you know 😂 No need for hyperbole there, we’re not on Twitter
The other comment explains most of it, but when it comes to acting specifically there’s also some level of “why didn’t you just get an actual black person”
Fair enough!
I wouldn’t say it offends me, but it is a bit annoying when someone wears a weirdly modernized/made-sexy version of the traditional clothes of my region, when they’re from somewhere else and don’t give a shit about the history. Like, it’s not problematic or anything, like it would be with religious items or clothing of marginalized groups, but I’d still prefer they don’t.
Yeah this comic is just for snowflakes trying to feel better.
Remember the Frito Bandito? (Voiced by Mel Blanc)
No, I remember Speedy Gonzalez though.
Yeah generally dress up is fine, I think people shouldn’t be barred from wearing a costume just because their race doesn’t match. And for children especially, if they dress up to be a hero of a certain race, I think that is more representation of diversity in a good light.
However, IMO there is some due respect for that culture and it would be better to understand the significance of a dress one may wear, but if it’s intended well most should be fine with it. Using casual stereotypes and jokes cheapen the outfit which I think can be in bad taste.
Like as long as they don’t accompany it with racial slurs, I don’t think it’s a hate crime, just a bit cringey. It would be about the same level as if someone were to dress up as the Catholic Pope, a cardinal or a bishop and give people silly blessings.
I agree mostly with your general point, but I want to talk a bit about your example. I think it’s okay to mock the Pope because I think religion is silly and ought to be mocked a bit. Of course, if you’re Catholic, you might disagree. It’s a good example for that reason. However, Catholics have a lot of power in society. They are not as marginalized as many other groups. So the example might not hit for everyone because intuitively, they don’t think mocking Christianity or Catholicism is going to cause much harm in a western country where these groups are incredibly powerful.
Appropriation, and/or, as you said, stereotypes and jokes, are often mocking a culture or a people too. If they are a marginalized group, which often they are if they’re being mocked, then it can add insult to injury
To clarify, here’s a good example: As another commenter pointed out; appropriation is actually about making fun of things that other cultures hold sacred. An example I have heard of (but am pretty ignorant about myself) is wearing a native american feathered headdress.
I have heard it’s reserved for specific people that indigenous Americans want to honor with it. It’s like wearing a medal as a general. So, wearing a feathered headeess and cosplaying as native is belittling something they hold sacred.
I agree with you the main faux pas is trivializing things others hold sacred. Using costume to mock and make fun of any race or faith is different than wanting to embody it, which is where I think some cultural sensitivity policies sometimes mistakenly conflate. There is some nuance when it comes to historical and current power dynamics, certain costumes rooted in racism (e.g. blackface), which would be suitable justification to allow or bar certain specific costumes. However on the whole, I think ethnic cultures should be able to be expressed by anyone, when done in a positive, respectful manner.
It’s real simple; is the group in general okay with you wearing doing thwir traditions? If yes, then it’s okay.
So Kimonos, mostly okay, Native American Headdresses, mostly not okay.
Native American Headdresses, mostly not okay.
funny how no one ever comments on using native words for our apache helicopters and tomahawk cruise missiles, among others
You’ll love this example of using native language. During the meeting where federal officials proposed the creation of an Indian Territory, the Choctaw tribe delegate Rev. Allen Wright suggested naming it “Oklahumma”. In the Choctaw language “okla” means “people” and “humma” means “red.” As a result, the area would be named Oklahoma Territory, or literally “Territory of the Red People.”
There are some arguments that “Homma” can also be a war title given for not retreating, but within the context of our racial history I don’t think that’s what they were going for.
And then of course, they named the main university’s mascots/fight song/etc after the “Boomers” and “Sooners” - people so eager to steal indigenous land that they couldn’t bother waiting for the government to make it legal.
There was a group that tried to get them to change it, but culture wars crowd absolutely pissed and shit themselves - they were already pissed after the chemistry building stopped being named after a Klan member.
I found this after a quick-ish google. Looks like occasionally people do, but they mostly get laughed at as the native cultures seemed to find it a sign of respect. And actually felt hurt when a helicopter dropped the naming convention.
Building an attack helicopter and naming it after a group of people who absolutely fucked your shit up seems like a sign of respect to me.
Like how WB quietly shelved Speedy Gonzalez and the Latin community was like “No, fuck you. He was OUR GUY, we had representation! Now his cousin, the lazy slow one… yeah that shit can go.”
Just not a football team I guess.
Just imagine a football team using the quaker oats guy as a mascot and calling them “The crackers.”
This is an exact copy of a YouTube video from years ago
Are you saying this is content appropriation?
Are moccasins allowed?
Only if they are snakes.
So no land moccasins? What about air moccasins?
Then, everything changed when the Fire Moccasins attacked.
I’ve had so many people claim I’m racist online for saying stuff about China. Even after I point out that I’m Chinese, it still doesn’t help for some reason.
It seems like literally every Chinese person I’ve talked to is absolutely delighted when a westerner is interested in Chinese culture. I remember being assigned a trip to a buffet for a high school Chinese class, and my atonal 你好 got about as much praise as a baby sputtering out “da-da” for the first time. I posted some calligraphy on 小红书 a couple days ago and I am getting gassed up for it.
You can say the most basic phrase in mandarin and completely screw it up both grammatically and pronunciation-wise and they’d absolutely love it and applaud you for it
Provided you’re white
Although the Chinese on XHS are actually quite annoyed at the waiguoren invasion right now
This reminds me of a comic, which obviously should be taken playfully with a pinch of salt:
- Two Italian men are joined by a visitor trying to ask a question in Italian. “Ah, they’re trying to speak Italian!” and so they turn to the visitor and welcome them in Italian.
- Two German men are joined by a visitor trying to ask a question in German. “Ah, they’re trying to speak German!” and so they turn to the visitor and welcome them in English.
- Two Parisian men are joined by a visitor trying to ask a question in French. “Ah, they’re trying to speak French!” and so they turn away and ignore them.
This is a loud wake-up call that the internet is not reality.
I think it’s NIMBYism in a way. Sure, they like to talk to Laowai and like it when they do something Chinese, but they don’t really want them intruding on their social media network. The Great Firewall exists for a reason- Chinese culture and attitudes are vastly different to that of the west. There was a joke going around that watching Chinese short-form videos “is like tuning into interdimensional cable”
Although the Chinese on XHS are actually quite annoyed at the waiguoren invasion right now
My feed is mostly english speakers, but every post I saw to the effect of “gtfo this is a chinese space” was getting mocked by chinese people pointing out IP indicated it was posted from America.
You’re speaking english on the internet. Not only are you white, you are American and Male by default.
I’m from a time where it was accepted there were no girls on the internet. Only kids and FBI agents. So yes, I’m male :)
Nah dude we’re all 16/f/cali for reals
Whats your ICQ?
i remember it started with an 8
You can say racist stuff about a group whether you belong in the group or not.
What is this absurdity of thinking that you get a free pass to say crap?
“Black people should have remained slaves. But it’s ok, I can say it because I’m black”
Nonsense.
black people are still slaves but now whites are too
This is just completely tone-deaf bullshit. Equating modern working conditions (in western countries) to slavery is like comparing a contemporary Scandinavian prison to Auschwitz. It’s by very far not the same.
There’s a far cry between me criticising the CCP for things like the Uyghur genocide and other political issues, and your made up strawman argument. Anybody should be free to criticise any country in the first place, without having to worry about skin colour.
Both of you are right.
Nah fam only one of them is really, the other one is your standard racist disguised as a progressive
Keep saying it, you’re only offending reactionaries and tankies - and it is not even their goal to be happy, as near as anyone can tell.
Oh yeah, I’ve been banned multiple times for a Chinese who’s racist against China. I plan to keep being racist by that particular definition.
I know someone who said that America is racist for siding with Taiwan on things and then I pointed out to them that (except a minority) Taiwan is predominantly Han Chinese
You implied that being Chinese is a counterpoint to people calling you racist. That’s what I was commenting on.
Whether what you said to those people was racist or not is out of the point. I was criticizing the fact that you consider that being Chinese would prevent you from being racist, which is absurd.
I think pretty much everybody can agree that being of a certain race gives you a lot more leeway and defense against accusations of racism against that race. It would take an extremely radical statement to go beyond that.
… at least, that’s what my black friends tell me when they call each other ‘nigga’.
Most americans maybe, I’ve never seen this idea anywhere else.
And funnily enough people don’t have the same logic with, for example, sexism.
I don’t think it’s offensive, but if you’re wearing that just to make a point then maybe you’re just looking to offend people. This is less directed to the comic and more directed to the YouTube clips I have seen of similar scenario.
Usually it is the Yankees who take offense at the expense of us Latinos. We will always love to see others enjoy a part of our culture (as long as it is not in an exploitative and fetishistic way).
We will always love to see others enjoy a part of our culture (as long as it is not in an exploitative and fetishistic way).
I think this is a big part of the reason why some people get all white-knight about cultural appropriation. It can be quite difficult to know, as a cultural outsider, and from a glance, when something is being done in an exploitative and/or fetishistic way.
You know what? you’re right.
Usually, to solve that, what I do is look at who did it and ask (the person directly or myself) why they did it.
A practical example: You know that new DC animated series? I think it’s called Creature Commandos. I haven’t seen it, but I hear it’s very good. Mind you, if you have seen it, can you tell me if anything happens, anything at all, related to Venezuela?
What happens is that they used as intro a very famous and beloved Venezuelan song: “Moliendo Café” (grinding coffee). All the other Venezuelans I’ve seen have loved it, but I remain skeptical, because I can’t help wondering: Did they chose that song because it’s somehow related to what is told in the story? Because Gunn just wanted to? Or because it sounded “very Latin” and different enough from the Mexican songs they always reuse? If it’s the first, great; if it’s the second, no problem; but the third…?
And the thing is, if I happen to come across the Youtube channel of some Swiss guy doing a electric guitar cover of “Moliendo Café”, I wouldn’t even go to his comments and yell “Cultural Appropriation!”, because he’s just an individual and what he does is harmless (and pretty neat). But a big company like Warner/Discovery…?
Unless the main people responsible are from or have roots in the country where the cultural expression comes from, it can’t be anything but exploitation and, of course, cultural appropriation.
I’m unfamiliar with the show, but thank you so much for engaging with the nuance of the situation, here. I agree with what you have to say regarding context surrounding “Moliendo Café”. Context matters. OP’s comic is a bit too “strawman” for my tastes.
There’s discussion to be had, for sure, but this comic squeezes all the nuance out of a complex topic just to score an easy gotcha.
Well, is just a Small comic, it hasto be this way or else it would not be funny. But yeah, the real world is a lot more complex that any piece of entertainment could ever portrait.
Agreed. The humor of the comic is in the hyperbole.
If it’s difficult to know, people probably should be given the benefit of the doubt
fetishistic way>
I guess it was only a matter of time before I was called out on what I do with queso.
You mean I cannot wear a sombrero while having sex? That’s sad. But okay.
I mean “fetish” in the pretentious and boring way.
I was just joking. Imagine me having sex.
I know you were joking, I just wanted to avoid to imagine anybody else having sex.
The way I tend to feel about this is that it’s a jerk move if you’re mocking some other group, or reasonably could be seen as mocking them, or try to claim that you/your group invented the thing you’re using, but otherwise, borrowing stuff people like from other cultures is just one of the ways cultures evolve.
I can see some people objecting on the grounds that imitating something distinctive makes that thing less unique to the original group, or that an imitation by outsiders won’t include some aspect important to the original and then that people that see the imitation won’t get that aspect.
I can certainly understand why those feelings could lead to frustration, but applied strictly, the idea that certain things belong exclusively to the cultures that invented them both requires forcing people into precise boxes as to which culture they belong to, and sort of resembles a type of socially enforced intellectual property, which, being against IP as a concept, is something I feel like I’d be hypocritical agreeing with.
Well said.
The only reason im replying is
being against IP as a concept
Has me hella curious. Can you elaborate? Is it the capitalist aspect of patents/trademarks and licensing or something else? I believe that people who invent a concept/character/world should have ownership to develop it into what their grander vision may be before someone else can come and write the story/use of their tool. Id love to hear your side of this though because I don’t know anyone thats ever told me their against IP as a concept
This is a great read on the IP topic. I highly recommend it:
This is the co-author’s site and it does contain the full text, although physical copies are available directly from the Cambridge University Press.
Here’s a summary:
“Intellectual property” – patents and copyrights – have become controversial. We witness teenagers being sued for “pirating” music – and we observe AIDS patients in Africa dying due to lack of ability to pay for drugs that are high priced to satisfy patent holders. Are patents and copyrights essential to thriving creation and innovation – do we need them so that we all may enjoy fine music and good health? Across time and space the resounding answer is: No. So-called intellectual property is in fact an “intellectual monopoly” that hinders rather than helps the competitive free market regime that has delivered wealth and innovation to our doorsteps. This book has broad coverage of both copyrights and patents and is designed for a general audience, focusing on simple examples. The authors conclude that the only sensible policy to follow is to eliminate the patents and copyright systems as they currently exist.
ETA: It’s written from the perspective of believers in the broad capitalist structure. The authors are serious economists that support the free market in no uncertain terms.
I would argue that IP doesnt need to be purly capitalistic though. Yea i agree that if we have a life saving drug, dont let 1 company monopolize the shit out of it and let people die for an extra dollar, but i dont know that ill say IP shouldnt exist.
If someone writes a story, creates a character or world, i want that content creator to be able to develop it without people infringing. If someone created a great game, i dont want a bunch of shit companies racing to put out the next title in the interest of making a buck off someone elses idea. I want who ever created that game to own the franchise long enough that they can make a second, third, or 4th game (or what ever media they adapt) to continue telling their story before other people put out low quality content that spoils the franchise
i dont know that ill say IP shouldnt exist.
And the authors aren’t really saying that, either.
To be clear, I don’t agree with all of the authors’ positions. I also think it’s worth noting that the authors are not advocating for an elimination of the patent and copyright systems without replacing them with systems better suited to ensuring creator prosperity while also allowing for speedier human innovation.
It’s worth a read, if you’re interested in the subject matter. It challenged my opinions on intellectual property, but didn’t change them entirely. Things they discuss, such as patent trolling and patent squatting, are worth contemplation. How can we change IP law to disincentivize such antisocial intellectual property law use by bad-faith actors?
ETA:
The economic burden of today’s patent lawsuits is, in fact, historically unprecedented. Research shows that patent trolls cost defendant firms $29 billion per year in direct out-of-pocket costs; in aggregate, patent litigation destroys over $60 billion in firm wealth each year.
(From the above article… and that was in 2014!)
It’s mainly just that, since information can be copied without removing access to the original from the current possessor of that information, I don’t see a good justification to restrict use of it. If you steal something, the original owner loses while you benefit. Since the unexpected loss is probably felt worse, this is a net negative and therefore a bad thing. But, if you copy information (which IP by nature is), you can give it to an arbitrarily large number of people without even taking it from the original, enough benefit to in my opinion outweigh the frustration that loss of control causes. Capitalism adds another element given it also ties monopoly over a given bit of information to artist compensation, but even without capitalism, I don’t think information should be seen as property
Boomer humor
A lot of these types of people are just segregationists in a different tone.
Yep. Turns out progressives and racists shared segregation in common
What’s next, an individual’s racism identity is the most important thing and everything should be seen through the lens of race?
Cultural appropriation is a broad enough term to functionally be meaningless, but I’ve found it helpful to think through 4 distinct interests at play, that I think are legitimate:
Proper attribution/credit. We don’t like plagiarism or unattributed copying in most art. Remixes, homages, reinterpretations, and even satire/parody are acceptable but we expect proper treatment of the original author and the original work. Some accusations of cultural appropriation take on this flavor, where there’s a perceived unfairness in how the originator of an idea is ignored and some copier is given credit. For a real world example of this, think of the times the fans of a particular musical artist get annoyed when a cover of one of that artist’s song becomes bigger than the original.
Proper labeling/consumer disclosure/trademark. Some people don’t like taking an established name and applying it outside of that original context. European nations can be pretty aggressive at preserving the names of certain wines (champagne versus sparkling wine) or cheeses (parmigiano reggiano versus parmesan) or other products. American producers are less aggressive about those types of geographic protected labels but have a much more aggressive system of trademarks generally: Coca Cola, Nike, Starbucks. In a sense, there’s literal ownership of a name and the owner should be entitled to decide what does or doesn’t get the label.
Cheapening of something special or disrespect for something sacred. For certain types of ceremonial clothing, wearing that clothing outside of the context of that ceremony seems disrespectful. Military types sometimes get offended by stolen valor when people wear ranks/ribbons/uniforms they haven’t personally earned, and want to gatekeep who gets to wear those things. In Wedding Crashers there’s a scene where Will Ferrell puts on a fake purple heart to try to get laid, and it’s widely understood by the audience to be a scummy move. Or, one could imagine the backlash if someone were to host some kind of drinking contest styled after some Christian communion rituals, complete with a host wearing stuff that looks like clergy attire.
Mockery of a group. Blackface, fake accents, and things of that nature are often in bad taste when used to mock people. It’s hard to pull this off without a lot of people catching strays, so it’s best to just avoid these practices. With costumes in general, there are things to look out for, especially if you’re going out and getting smashed.
I might suggest a fifth item for your list, which has to do with whether you, as a non-minority, are appropriating something that a minority has been given a hard time for. For instance, a number of Black hairstyles have been denigrated for generations, leading to people having to deal with damaging, toxic, expensive, time consuming chemical treatments to achieve more culturally acceptable hair. So when non-minority people wear cornrows or dreadlocks to be trendy, especially while Black people are still being made to feel uncomfortable (or being discriminated against) for wearing the same styles, that can sting in a different way. This isn’t limited to cultural characteristics, but it’s a sensitive aspect of appropriation that includes cultural stuff.
I take issue with this.
Main point being that, no matter how respectful the appropriating individual is, they are now being judged for actions that they themselves may have never taken.
Secondary point, and I know this is a nitpick, you say “minority” and “non-minority”, but those terms can always flip when you change view points. I doubt you would give white people from African Countries a pass on their cornrows for being minorities in their country, and if you did, what if they move to the US?
I think people should be free to enjoy whatever hairstyle no matter the actions of unrelated other people. But what do I know, I’m just a person from a culture nobody wants to appropriate anyway.
I respect your opinion. I do want to clarify that if, let’s say, a white German living in Ghana were broadly discriminated against or mocked for wearing lederhosen (I won’t pretend to be able to think of an up-to-date cultural tradition specifically associated with white people, please bear with), then it would be hurtful for their Ghanaian neighbors to start “discovering” lederhosen-inspired fashions while denying the impacts of the ill treatment endured by these oppressed German transplants. It’s not about race or hairstyles, but mistreatment at the hands of people who (usually) don’t recognize the power or perceived power inherent to their social position.
I will give some more thought to your comment about white people from African countries. My initial reaction is that cornrows may or may not be part of their own culture, and they may not be living in a context where white people have the social power to harm or harass other Africans on a racial basis. If we’re talking about South Africa, of course, that’s not the case, so it still seems like it comes down to who’s in control. But I will reflect on it. Thanks.
The chapters and labeling makes me think of AI. It always does that in replies
Maybe you should try actually reading the content of the paragraphs next time. ChatGPT and the like do not write like that. It’s too judgmental (rightfully so to be clear) and idiomatic (“catching strays.”)
Putting a header on your points is just a way to make things clear. Not everything is AI just because it’s organized.
I just said that the formatting reminded me of AI. I didn’t talk about the content
There was definitely an implied accusation
Not my intention
This is probably the best most level-headed and respectful take I’ve seen regarding cultural appropriation. Thank you!
Yeah this is “bestof” on the shit hole site material. But it’s legitimately excellent
LandedGentry
As, you must have been a mod from that “shit hole site”, I heard they were landed gentry!
;)
