We need to think very seriously about how we level an accusation like "cultural appropriation."
It is a legitimate concern if the cultural element in question has a negative consequence or cost of some kind.
By that I mean it has been glaringly recontextualised, trivialised, mocked and/or -- probably most importantly -- leveraged to make a profit to benefit someone not of that culture.
To be clear, cooking and appreciating food from a different culture does *not* qualify as appropriation.
@sumpnlikefaith Speaking as a white male of privilege, while I moslty agree with you... there is a lot of cooks out there who will claim ownership of ethnic cuisine without acknowledging where it came from and its associations. I see it on TV all the time. In fact, on TV the chefs will be glib about it. Clearly not you, you are good people. I am saying "cultural appropriation" over food is a real thing and can be subtle. (that last point is my very slight disagreement with your definition)
@sumpnlikefaith Oh for sure. I guess I just didn't understand so thanks for clarifying. There is tons of that micromanagement of thoughtspeak online. I've blocked plenty of my fellow social liberals bc of this. Like, dude, I like masala. I know I aint Indian. Dont at me for liking masala and stay out of my lane. Not YOU specifically, you are a good egg.
@jackge Yeah, I was a little cryptic because I didn't want to add to much attention to an uncomfortable situation.
But I sincerely appreciate your input!
@jackge Yes, I agree: it takes on a different level when there is money being made. There are lots of complicated factors to consider with stuff like this.
But what I'm "subtooting" is an accusation made about something someone made in the privacy of their own home for their partner.
Let's normalise unpacking the oversimplified messages we get from (for example) TV chefs.
Let's also recognise hypervigilance when it calls out problems that don't exist.
That's my point.