What is cultural appropriation?

Cultural appropriation fails to include class

Question: What is cultural appropriation?
Position‹5 of 5: Cultural appropriation is a meaningless term
Argument1 of 3›: Cultural appropriation fails to include class

Class appropriation is as damaging as cultural appropriation but is not called out in the same way.

The argument

The term “cultural appropriation” fails to include class appropriation making it incomplete and inaccurate. Fashion is an excellent example of this, as high-end fashion brands often take the looks, fashion, or materials from the lower or middle classes and recreate these with a much higher price tag. High-end fashion brands commodify the lives of the lower class. The class appropriation within fashion shows us that rich people can afford to not only pay that higher price tag for similar items, but do not have to deal with the struggles of the middle or lower class. One example of this “commodification” of the experiences and fashion of the middle class can be items like tracksuits covered in the signature pattern of the designer brand. Despite there being only minimal differences between designer and average tracksuits, the prices are vastly different. Those who can afford luxury clothing still copy middle and lower class fashion, flaunting their wealth and power. Class appropriation can still be damaging much like cultural appropriation. It treats class and culture as a costume that can be taken off. It also romanticizes the experiences and lives of the idle class without recognizing the challenges or struggles that they face.

Context

It isn’t just a culture that can be appropriated. Class appropriation, where working-class culture is appropriated and adopted by the dominant classes, is just as damaging.

Premises

[P1]A coherent concept of appropriation must account for class, since high-end fashion routinely commodifies lower- and middle-class styles by reselling them at luxury prices. [P2] The term 'cultural appropriation' ignores this class dimension, treating appropriation as solely about culture rather than also about class. [C] Therefore, cultural appropriation is an incomplete and inaccurate concept, rendering it effectively meaningless as currently used.

Counter-arguments

Critics reply that pointing to a second phenomenon — class appropriation — does not show the first is incoherent. That "cultural appropriation" does not also describe class dynamics is no more damaging than noting that "theft" does not describe fraud; a concept can be narrow without being meaningless, and one can simply add "class appropriation" alongside it rather than discard it. They argue the examples given, such as luxury brands copying working-class styles, may in fact be a species of appropriation the existing concept can accommodate, so the case shows the term is incomplete at most, not that it fails to pick out a real pattern of taking cultural material across power imbalances.

Rejecting the premises

[Rejecting P1] That appropriation also has a class dimension is a reason to add a parallel concept, not to conclude the cultural concept is inaccurate. [Rejecting P2] A term can legitimately focus on culture without covering class; being limited in scope does not make "cultural appropriation" meaningless. [Rejecting C] At most the argument shows the concept is incomplete; it does not show that cultural appropriation fails to name a real and distinct phenomenon.

Proponents cited

Sandra Ojeaburu
“This notion is where class appropriation and cultural appropriation intersect: at the crossroads of legitimacy within a cultural group and authenticity. In an interview with the HPR, Ashley Akaeze ‘20, photographer and aspiring fashion designer, argued that “people can authentically want to look fake. Fashion has always garnered inspiration from marginalized bodies and has used that as a template to dilute and sanitize and sell it back to people and that’s what people respond to.”Upon further analysis of the high-fashion industry and the trend of dressing of a different class, Akaeze mentioned, “There is this new romanticism and fetishization of looking poor.” She continued, stating that people following designers that depict class in this way, “would only do that if that if poverty was not the reality of you or the people you know,” as consumers familiar with poverty would better understand “the possible impact” of these styles.”
Rachel Deeley
“But some now argue that what drives this phenomenon is an unhealthy preoccupation with socioeconomic class and poor social mobility in the British fashion industry. As a more sophisticated awareness of cultural appropriation and tokenistic diversity comes to the fore, it makes sense to look at meaningful representation in terms of socioeconomic class and to debate the notion of “class appropriation.””