Forum adverts like this one are shown to any user who is not logged in. Join us by filling out a tiny 3 field form and you will get your own, free, dakka user account which gives a good range of benefits to you: No adverts like this in the forums anymore. Times and dates in your local timezone. Full tracking of what you have read so you can skip to your first unread post, easily see what has changed since you last logged in, and easily see what is new at a glance. Email notifications for threads you want to watch closely. Being a part of the oldest wargaming community on the net. If you are already a member then feel free to login now.

 Ouze wrote:
Man, the white christian straight man sure is oppressed in America.

I'm confused. Who in this thread has even said that?

 jasper76 wrote:

 Hybrid Son Of Oxayotl wrote:

 Peregrine wrote:
It's a bad term because it stereotypes the inappropriate behavior in question as "man" thing and ignores the fact that women can do it too, but the basic concept is a relevant one. Way too many people think that their opinion as an outside observer is more important than the opinions of the people who are actually involved in a given situation, and so you get awkward "let me tell you how I'm an expert on your life" conversations. At best it is an awkward eyeroll moment where you just wish the person would STFU and stop digging their hole even deeper, at worst it drives the people with direct experience of a problem out of the discussion and lets it be dominated by uninformed outsiders. So we shouldn't stereotype it as a "man" thing, but we shouldn't pretend that it isn't bad behavior or a legitimate problem.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

 jasper76 wrote:
I long for a day when "mansplaining" and "check your priviledge" are just a bad memory.

And I long for the day when people stop dismissing relevant concepts because the words are "silly" and/or they have the privilege of dismissing it as "tumblr feminiazis" or "SJWs" or whatever other ridiculous cliche is popular these days.

Nothing to add, and nothing to subtract to this message. The thread should have ended here.

The irony here should be apparent. Dismissing relevant concepts because of silly parrot phrases goes both ways. "Tumblr feminazis" or "SJWs" (I honestly don't know what that means) are ridiculous cliches that lead people to dismiss the fact that there is a segment in the feminist community that takes things way, way overboard, and would prefer a neutered male populous with no opinion and no voice, because of what boils down to an accident of birth. You'd have to have blinders on not to notice that, and I am a pretty liberal type of guy.

SJW = Social Justice Warrior at least that's been my experience there's so many abreviations and acronyms on twitter and txt and whatnot that it's hard to be sure I don't partake in social media much so I'm not up to speed on it all


Automatically Appended Next Post:

 Shadow Captain Edithae wrote:

 Ouze wrote:
Man, the white christian straight man sure is oppressed in America.

I'm confused. Who in this thread has even said that?

I think he was being sarcastic. Clearly you need to check your privilege and do a better job of tone policing. <-- sarcasm

I see your "Check your Privilege" and raise you a "I have 1/8 Irish blood!"

If black people today can claim they're oppressed because their ancestors were enslaved 2 centuries ago, can I complain I'm being oppressed because I just maybe have some ancestors who died in the Irish potato famine?

 Shadow Captain Edithae wrote:
I see your "Check your Privilege" and raise you a "I have 1/8 Irish blood!"

If black people today can claim they're oppressed because their ancestors were enslaved 2 centuries ago, can I complain I'm being oppressed because I just maybe have some ancestors who died in the Irish potato famine?

Nope you're excercising even more privilege by trying to compare your whiteness to others' blackness.

 Shadow Captain Edithae wrote:
I see your "Check your Privilege" and raise you a "I have 1/8 Irish blood!"

If black people today can claim they're oppressed because their ancestors were enslaved 2 centuries ago, can I complain I'm being oppressed because I just maybe have some ancestors who died in the Irish potato famine?

It depends. Are you 1/8 Black Irish?

 jasper76 wrote:

 Shadow Captain Edithae wrote:
I see your "Check your Privilege" and raise you a "I have 1/8 Irish blood!"

If black people today can claim they're oppressed because their ancestors were enslaved 2 centuries ago, can I complain I'm being oppressed because I just maybe have some ancestors who died in the Irish potato famine?

It depends. Are you 1/8 Black Irish?

Dude... I'm 1/8th American Indian.

If you want to talk about a "chip on your shoulders"... get the off my land!

 jasper76 wrote:

 Shadow Captain Edithae wrote:
I see your "Check your Privilege" and raise you a "I have 1/8 Irish blood!"

If black people today can claim they're oppressed because their ancestors were enslaved 2 centuries ago, can I complain I'm being oppressed because I just maybe have some ancestors who died in the Irish potato famine?

It depends. Are you 1/8 Black Irish?

Only when I turn the lights off

 Shadow Captain Edithae wrote:

 jasper76 wrote:

 Shadow Captain Edithae wrote:
I see your "Check your Privilege" and raise you a "I have 1/8 Irish blood!"

If black people today can claim they're oppressed because their ancestors were enslaved 2 centuries ago, can I complain I'm being oppressed because I just maybe have some ancestors who died in the Irish potato famine?

It depends. Are you 1/8 Black Irish?

Only when I turn the lights off

Not sure if that's a sexual innuendo.

 Sigvatr wrote:

 Shadow Captain Edithae wrote:

 jasper76 wrote:

 Shadow Captain Edithae wrote:
I see your "Check your Privilege" and raise you a "I have 1/8 Irish blood!"

If black people today can claim they're oppressed because their ancestors were enslaved 2 centuries ago, can I complain I'm being oppressed because I just maybe have some ancestors who died in the Irish potato famine?

It depends. Are you 1/8 Black Irish?

Only when I turn the lights off

Not sure if that's a sexual innuendo.

Nah, if it were a sex thing he would have said "only in my pants"

That 1/8th and "in the dark" made me become suspicous!

Sining wrote:
This whole privilege thing is really amusing to someone from an Asian culture.

Honest question, why?

Because its a "First World" problem?

First heard of this on CBC with the author.
This article is quite good and "splains" it well:
https://www.guernicamag.com/daily/rebecca-solnit-men-explain-things-to-me/
The crux of the matter:
"Though I hasten to add that the essay makes it clear mansplaining is not a universal flaw of the gender, just the intersection between overconfidence and cluelessness where some portion of that gender gets stuck."

I do find the term a good reminder to not spout off too much and to assume others may very well know more than I.
I could not find the article but I remember it stems from men needing to "show off" knowledge for status while women use it more to connect with others.

Another "shot" at men is unfortunate but it do feel it has merit in common behaviors.

hmmmm....regarding 'Black Irish', its actually a thing:

from WIkipedia:

Black Irish is an ambiguous term sometimes used (mainly outside Ireland) as a reference to a dark-haired phenotype appearing in people of Irish origin.[31] However, dark hair in people of Irish descent is common, although darker skin complexions appear less frequently.[32] One popular theory suggests the Black Irish are descendents of survivors of the Spanish Armada, despite research discrediting such claims.[33] In his documentary series Atlantean, Bob Quinn explores an alternative 'Iberian' hypothesis, proposing the existence of an ancient sea-trading route skirting the Atlantic coast from North Africa and the Iberian Peninsula to regions such as Connemara. While preferring the term "The Atlantean Irish", Quinn's reference to certain phenotypical characteristics (within elements of the Irish populace and diaspora) as possible evidence of a previous Hibernian-Iberian (and possibly Berber) admixture mirrors common descriptions of the Black Irish.

Didn't mean for anything to get all racey

 Talizvar wrote:
The crux of the matter:
"Though I hasten to add that the essay makes it clear mansplaining is not a universal flaw of the gender, just the intersection between overconfidence and cluelessness where some portion of that gender gets stuck."

In my experience it's not exclusive to men. Not noticably more common among men either.

I'm all in favour of having a term for the behaviour, because it is a pretty gakky behaviour, but the way I see it there is no reason to slip "man" in there, because women too will try to "educate" people (men and women both) that don't need and/or want it.

Geez, is it 18:55 already? Better go check my privileges.

If you see someone using an obviously biased / loaded term, just do the same as you'd do when about to step into a pile of dog poo: make your way around it.

You don't stop in your tracks, loudly shouting at it, cursing the dog that made it, do you?

 Sigvatr wrote:
If you see someone using an obviously biased / loaded term, just do the same as you'd do when about to step into a pile of dog poo: make your way around it.

You don't stop in your tracks, loudly shouting at it, cursing the dog that made it, do you?

Thing is, it doesn't have to be a biased/loaded term. I see this behaviour quite a bit, and it'd be nice to have a proper name for it. I disapprove of "Mansplaining", not because it's somehow offensive to men, but because it's inaccurate.

I have no problem with the dog that took the dump, but it'd still be nice to have it cleaned up.

 Shadow Captain Edithae wrote:
Because its a "First World" problem?

The guys from Sudan I work with would laugh at all this gak. These are people who spent half their lives in refugee camps and somehow seem to have the best attitudes i've ever seen. Bring up racism and they say "people are people" and they have a very "just get on with it " attitude, however they also say people in this country have it too good as they think we complain about too much small stuff. KInda refreshing to talk to really.

 Sigvatr wrote:
That 1/8th and "in the dark" made me become suspicous!

He only sleeps 3 hours a day.

 Bullockist wrote:

The guys from Sudan I work with would laugh at all this gak. These are people who spent half their lives in refugee camps and somehow seem to have the best attitudes i've ever seen. Bring up racism and they say "people are people" and they have a very "just get on with it " attitude, however they also say people in this country have it too good as they think we complain about too much small stuff. KInda refreshing to talk to really.

I can say the same things about the guys from Angola I'm working with, minus the refugee camps bit, as Angola is currently a fairly stable country.

 reiner wrote:

 Sigvatr wrote:
That 1/8th and "in the dark" made me become suspicous!

He only sleeps 3 hours a day.

Heh. More like 12.

The joke was that I only look black if I turn the lights off and sit in the pitch black dark. Guess it fell flat.

 Aesop the God Awful wrote:

 Sigvatr wrote:
If you see someone using an obviously biased / loaded term, just do the same as you'd do when about to step into a pile of dog poo: make your way around it.

You don't stop in your tracks, loudly shouting at it, cursing the dog that made it, do you?

Thing is, it doesn't have to be a biased/loaded term. I see this behaviour quite a bit, and it'd be nice to have a proper name for it. I disapprove of "Mansplaining", not because it's somehow offensive to men, but because it's inaccurate.

I have no problem with the dog that took the dump, but it'd still be nice to have it cleaned up.

The people who "mansplain" are really being condescending narcisists so we can combine those two words and make a new one like narciscending. It's a made up word, means the same thing but is gender neutral. Bam, problem solved, problem staying solved, Rangers lead the way.

For crying out loud Samantha, stop being so narciscending! Dang it Paul why do you always have to be so narciscending!


Automatically Appended Next Post:

 Shadow Captain Edithae wrote:

 reiner wrote:

 Sigvatr wrote:
That 1/8th and "in the dark" made me become suspicous!

He only sleeps 3 hours a day.

Heh. More like 12.

The joke was that I only look black if I turn the lights off and sit in the pitch black dark. Guess it fell flat.

Yup, flatter than a potato pancake.

 jasper76 wrote:
Dismissing relevant concepts because of silly parrot phrases goes both ways. "Tumblr feminazis" or "SJWs" (I honestly don't know what that means) are ridiculous cliches that lead people to dismiss the fact that there is a segment in the feminist community that takes things way, way overboard, and would prefer a neutered male populous with no opinion and no voice, because of what boils down to an accident of birth.

Well, actually that “segment” of feminists is irrelevant not because of silly parrot phrase, but because of lack of power and influence on… anything, really.
And this is not double standard. Wizardchan is full of terrible, terrible misogyny from people that have the exact same lack of power and influence, and that misogyny is no more of a concern to me than the people you are talking about. Actually, I do feel sorry for them, and rather than trying to fix their misogyny, I would work on trying to fix their social/relational, and for some of them work, problems.

 CthuluIsSpy wrote:
I don't think Sigvatr actually believes in that system.

I know. He still called me a zero .
I know his opinion on the subject well enough to even if my sarcasmometer had broken down, I would still notice something was off .

 CthuluIsSpy wrote:
I'm sure it's a work of parody though, considering how I scored the rank of "gaklord"
In fact, I suspect most of these privilege charts are a work of parody; they cannot be legit. They are just so...bad.

Of course they are. And unless people are running in the famous “oppression Olympics”, your “privilege level” is irrelevant. What is relevant is your privilege related to a specific issue that is being discussed. For instance, if I am arguing with Ashiraya about how strong Space Marines are compared to Imperial Guard, the fact I am a man and she is a women is completely irrelevant. If we do discuss about how welcoming to outsiders game shops/clubs are, it is not anymore. Because that means she has experienced first-hand some stuff I did not experience first-hand.

 whembly wrote:

 jasper76 wrote:

 Shadow Captain Edithae wrote:
I see your "Check your Privilege" and raise you a "I have 1/8 Irish blood!"

If black people today can claim they're oppressed because their ancestors were enslaved 2 centuries ago, can I complain I'm being oppressed because I just maybe have some ancestors who died in the Irish potato famine?

It depends. Are you 1/8 Black Irish?

Dude... I'm 1/8th American Indian.

If you want to talk about a "chip on your shoulders"... get the off my land!

I pwn you both. I am half Jew .

 Shadow Captain Edithae wrote:
Because its a "First World" problem?

Japan is “first world”. South Korea is now “first world” too. Both are clearly Asian. Check your privi- I mean, prejudices!

 focusedfire wrote:
Everything you have listed here is a rationalization. An excuse that a person would use to not be assertive. It is not the demagogues fault that the person sitting there is being passive/ passive aggressive. Being assertive is how mature people politely deal with such issues.

Sigh. It's like you didn't even read the post where I explained that there can be reasons why a person wouldn't be in a position to be assertive. Maybe you don't understand this because you've never been on the wrong end of one of those relationships (OH GOD HE'S TALKING ABOUT THE 'P' WORD), but you should try to see it from that perspective.

The practices of Intellectual Obscurantism, Elitism and Jargon have been noted as problems for the Feminist cause to struggle with f
since, at least, the late 1960's/early 1970's.

I have never heard of any of that. Not from actual feminists, and not even from "feminists say stupid stuff" trolls who would love to quote something so ridiculous. Could you provide some examples of actual feminist arguments about this, along with evidence that the people making them are part of mainstream feminism and not just a random person with a blog that nobody pays any attention to?

It is the struggle against these that have formed the foundation upon which the concept of "mansplaining" is based.

No it isn't. The concept of "mansplaining" comes from people (usually men) acting like the women they're explaining things to are ignorant children, even when the women likely know more about the subject than the man. In fact, you know this already because you've had at least one person explain it for you. Let me quote their post again:

No, the term was originally used to denote when men would discuss stuff with a woman as if she had no knowledge of the subject, despite being knowledgeable about it. The woman who originally coined it did so in reference to a man at a party she had recently attended who insisted on explaining the premise of a book that he really liked to her, ignoring the fact that she was the author of said book, and only stopping when a male friend of hers informed the guy that she was the author.

 LuciusAR wrote:
I don’t think you’ve quite understood the rules here.

When westerners are inspired by non western culture and incorporate aspects of it into their own that’s Cultural Appropriation by westerners which is racist and bad.

When non westerners are inspired by western culture and incorporate aspects of it into their own that’s Cultural Imperialism by westerners which is also racist and bad.

Remember non western good, western bad.

Sigh. I don't really see why this is so difficult to understand.

"Westerners" appropriating "non-western" culture and using blatant racial stereotypes/treating religious icons as a toy/etc is bad because it reinforces existing racist attitudes and the ugly history of western imperialism. Essentially you're just adding one more insult against people who are already in a vulnerable position.

"Non-westerners" appropriating "western" culture can be disrespectful and tasteless, but because the power difference doesn't exist it's far less harmful. It's much easier to dismiss that kind of appropriation as "lol Japan" or whatever when you probably never experience racism directed at "western" culture.

So it's not that appropriation only works one way, it's that appropriation is a much bigger issue when it's a more powerful group appropriating things from a less powerful group.

 jasper76 wrote:
Dismissing relevant concepts because of silly parrot phrases goes both ways.

No, you're missing the point here. "TUMBLR FEMINAZI SJW LOLOLOLOLLOL" was a response to posts that said exactly that. There was no relevant concept, there was only "LOL THIS WORD IS SO STUPID". If people want to make a relevant argument about something that's fine, but there needs to be an argument, not just spam.

"Tumblr feminazis" or "SJWs" (I honestly don't know what that means) are ridiculous cliches that lead people to dismiss the fact that there is a segment in the feminist community that takes things way, way overboard, and would prefer a neutered male populous with no opinion and no voice, because of what boils down to an accident of birth. You'd have to have blinders on not to notice that, and I am a pretty liberal type of guy.

Yes, those people exist. But you know what? They're a tiny and irrelevant minority. There are very, very few people advocating those extreme positions like "crush the men and turn them into breeding slaves" or whatever, and nobody pays any attention to them unless they're laughing at how stupid they. You're doing the equivalent of pointing out the crazy guy on the corner who spends the whole day screaming about government mind control in the chemtrails and claiming that we need to recognize that there's a segment of the "people who have a complaint about the government" community that is completely insane. It's technically true, but it's not a very relevant thing to talk about and its only purpose is to dismiss mainstream elements of that community by associating them with irrelevant lunatics.

 Peregrine wrote:
"Westerners" appropriating "non-western" culture and using blatant racial stereotypes/treating religious icons as a toy/etc is bad because it reinforces existing racist attitudes and the ugly history of western imperialism. Essentially you're just adding one more insult against people who are already in a vulnerable position.

"Non-westerners" appropriating "western" culture can be disrespectful and tasteless, but because the power difference doesn't exist it's far less harmful. It's much easier to dismiss that kind of appropriation as "lol Japan" or whatever when you probably never experience racism directed at "western" culture.

So it's not that appropriation only works one way, it's that appropriation is a much bigger issue when it's a more powerful group appropriating things from a less powerful group.

Sorry, but I disagree here. Really, Japan has been just as big and as imperialistic as “western powers” since the beginning of the previous century. Calling Japan a “less powerful group”, especially when talking about culture, seems flat out wrong to me, with the whole anime fan craze thing. I would bet you a lot of money than France imports a lot, lot more cultural products from Japan than Japan does from France. Out of all the possible examples you could have used to illustrate your point, it was certainly the worst you could have chosen.
I wrote something earlier in this thread about what I felt was the real reason that made us just go “lol Japan”, but you did not address it.


Automatically Appended Next Post:
Oh my goodness, Dakka's word filter will turn the somehow pejorative word for people obsessed with Japanese pop culture into “anime fan”. Was that really necessary?

 Hybrid Son Of Oxayotl wrote:

 Peregrine wrote:
"Westerners" appropriating "non-western" culture and using blatant racial stereotypes/treating religious icons as a toy/etc is bad because it reinforces existing racist attitudes and the ugly history of western imperialism. Essentially you're just adding one more insult against people who are already in a vulnerable position.

"Non-westerners" appropriating "western" culture can be disrespectful and tasteless, but because the power difference doesn't exist it's far less harmful. It's much easier to dismiss that kind of appropriation as "lol Japan" or whatever when you probably never experience racism directed at "western" culture.

So it's not that appropriation only works one way, it's that appropriation is a much bigger issue when it's a more powerful group appropriating things from a less powerful group.

Sorry, but I disagree here. Really, Japan has been just as big and as imperialistic as “western powers” since the beginning of the previous century. Calling Japan a “less powerful group”, especially when talking about culture, seems flat out wrong to me, with the whole anime fan craze thing. I would bet you a lot of money than France imports a lot, lot more cultural products from Japan than Japan does from France. Out of all the possible examples you could have used to illustrate your point, it was certainly the worst you could have chosen.
I wrote something earlier in this thread about what I felt was the real reason that made us just go “lol Japan”, but you did not address it.

And lets not forget the horrible unforgivable injustice of Nintendo appropriating Italian American cultural stereotypes to crassly profit off of Super Mario Bros. That was mean.

On a more serious note:

http://www.slate.com/articles/news_and_politics/politics/2014/05/millennials_racism_and_mtv_poll_young_people_are_confused_about_bias_prejudice.html

From these results, it’s clear that—like most Americans—millennials see racism as a matter of different treatment, justified by race, that you solve by removing race from the equation. If we ignore skin color in our decisions, then there can’t be racism.

The problem is that racism isn’t reducible to “different treatment.” Since if it is, measures to ameliorate racial inequality—like the Voting Rights Act—would be as “racist” as the policies that necessitated them. No, racism is better understood as white supremacy—anything that furthers a broad hierarchy of racist inequity, where whites possess the greatest share of power, respect, and resources, and blacks the least.

Eliminate differential treatment based on race and racism ( i.e. treating people differently on the basis of race ) ends, but that doesn't encourage a victim mentality. Thus the "white supremacy" bovine excrement argument. You can replace racism with gender bias or western cultural supremacy or anything else because people who want to construe interactions as always being oppressor vs victim need to continually change the parameters of perceived bias to always have a "victim" for whom to champion. Some people don't want to acknowledge that people are less bigotted today than ever, they still want somebody to be a victim so you get concepts like "privilege" where even mere existence or subconscious actions are acts of oppression even when if somebody exhibits no overt evidence of prejudice.

 Hybrid Son Of Oxayotl wrote:
Sorry, but I disagree here. Really, Japan has been just as big and as imperialistic as “western powers” since the beginning of the previous century.

I should clarify that this is talking about a US context (since the original question of appropriation involved a US singer on a US tv show). And in the US Japanese-Americans are still a minority and subject to racism, as pointed out by the quote I posted from someone with personal experience of that racism. Japan has been imperialistic and has some major issues with its neighbors, but that has to be treated separately from the experiences of Asian-Americans in the US. Remember, it hasn't been all that long since it was considered acceptable to label everyone with any ties to Japan as a possible traitor, evict them from their homes, and put them into concentration camps for a few years.

Calling Japan a “less powerful group”, especially when talking about culture, seems flat out wrong to me, with the whole anime fan craze thing.

Honestly that's kind of proving my point. A lot of the "Japan fans", at least in the US, don't really love Japan, they love a stereotypical version of Japan. You know, kind of like the music video that was cited earlier. And while they're common enough in certain geek communities they're still a pretty tiny minority in US culture as a whole.

 Peregrine wrote:
And in the US Japanese-Americans are still a minority and subject to racism, as pointed out by the quote I posted from someone with personal experience of that racism. Japan has been imperialistic and has some major issues with its neighbors, but that has to be treated separately from the experiences of Asian-Americans in the US.

Emphasis mine. That is precisely what I was talking about in my previous message that you did not address. Maybe you missed it. This is not about Japanese living in Japan, this is about Japanese living in the U.S.A.

 Peregrine wrote:
A lot of the "Japan fans", at least in the US, don't really love Japan, they love a stereotypical version of Japan.

I am going to keep talking about France because that is where I live and what I know most about, but just like French anime fan like a stereotypical version of Japan, Japanese people that like France like a stereotypical version of it. Furthermore, the stereotypical view of Japan from France has been fashioned and modeled by Japanese cultural products. If you want to blame anyone for this stereotypical version of Japan becoming so prevalent, you cannot put the blame on anyone but the Japanese people running the Japanese company that export those Japanese anime and manga and even music video made by Japanese artists, can you?

 Peregrine wrote:
And while they're common enough in certain geek communities they're still a pretty tiny minority in US culture as a whole.

In France, manga completely outsells comics, by a huge margin. Hollywood still beats the Japanese movie industry, sure. Same for TV shows. And there are still much more U.S. bands than Japanese bands on TV or radio. But as soon as drawings are involved, be it comics or cartoons, Japan just obliterate the U.S. competition.
The thing is, all those US cultural products comes along with all the mention of the US on the news, and we learn about bits of the US history in school. Therefore there is generally a pretty critical view of the US that balance and influence how the US media are received. The ignorance of Japan politics and history, though, is pretty bad, meaning you get people that end up idealizing Japan in ways they would never idealize the U.S.
That may surprise you as someone from the US, but here I have met way too many fans of Japanese culture that had no clue about the whole Japanese war crimes during WW2.

Therefore, you will understand why I am so reluctant to see Japan as a victim in a cultural war…

 Peregrine wrote:
And while they're common enough in certain geek communities they're still a pretty tiny minority in US culture as a whole.

There's a whole world outside of the USA wherein Japan and export cultural influence. Check your privilege.

 LuciusAR wrote:
I don’t think you’ve quite understood the rules here.

When westerners are inspired by non western culture and incorporate aspects of it into their own that’s Cultural Appropriation by westerners which is racist and bad.

When non westerners are inspired by western culture and incorporate aspects of it into their own that’s Cultural Imperialism by westerners which is also racist and bad.

Remember non western good, western bad.

Sigh. I don't really see why this is so difficult to understand.

"Westerners" appropriating "non-western" culture and using blatant racial stereotypes/treating religious icons as a toy/etc is bad because it reinforces existing racist attitudes and the ugly history of western imperialism. Essentially you're just adding one more insult against people who are already in a vulnerable position.

"Non-westerners" appropriating "western" culture can be disrespectful and tasteless, but because the power difference doesn't exist it's far less harmful. It's much easier to dismiss that kind of appropriation as "lol Japan" or whatever when you probably never experience racism directed at "western" culture.

So it's not that appropriation only works one way, it's that appropriation is a much bigger issue when it's a more powerful group appropriating things from a less powerful group.

I don't think taking elements from other cultures is always a bad thing like Sergio Leone's highly praised "Fistful of Dollars" trilogy is great and it's cinematography is clearly inspired by the style of Akira Kurosawa's work. Or many well known blues rock groups/artists such as Led Zeppelin,

Eric Clapton, Deep Purple, etc take blues elements (music that is often associated with black culture) and give a rock style to it (music that is usually associated with white culture).