What do you mean
@Ed Norton ?
If I can make a guess - I'm confident, but can never be certain.
I introduced the tangent of "cultural appropriation", with the video of the woman who was of, errr, let's just say a very milky coffee hue, objecting to a crusty, who appeared to have even less of a coffee hue; wearing crusty dreadlocks.
That raises a whole string of questions, such as:
- what is "culture"?
- who is entitled to use it?
- why are they entitled or not entitled to use it?
- Who gets to say?
- are we each limited to only one "culture" or can we claim bits of many "cultures" - and why?
- are there time constraints, like 12 years of unopposed occupation to gain ownership via squatter's rights?
- Would my wearing my own hair in dreadlocks, by the rivers of Babylon - in anyway interfere with, for example a Rasta wearing their hair in dreadlocks?
- and, if you are using the labour of your own body and reasoning of your own mind, along with the posessions which you have created from un-owned or justly acquired* - then anyone else trying to say what you can or can't do with those - is asserting a greater claim of ownership over you, your body, your mind and your justly obtained posessions - than you have - on WTF basis?
in 1) if culture = ancestry, and the answer to 5) is many, Then Ed has claims to many "cultures" including use of Roman alphabet, Arabic numerals, study of Newtonian (but perhaps not Einsteinian - that's Jewish) mechanics...
But as far as I know, Ed does not have any Chinese or Japanese ancestry (regardless of any similarity or lack of similarity in skin, hair and eye colour).
Therefore, to a person of Chinese or Japanese "culture" Ed's hobby of making fireworks, might (or might not...) be seen as "cultural appropriation"
Ed's sharing of vids of very beautiful Japanese fireworks might also be "cultural appropriation" ;-)
__________________________
* pretty much John Locke's property theory