# data[].attributes.body
The line between appreciation and appropriation is very thin and gray, which makes appropriation so difficult to define. When is borrowing a cultural symbol or practice appropriation and when is it appreciation? Many define it as appropriation when the heritage is not acknowledged or the culture is used as a way of stereotyping/mocking.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.readable_text
Last month, during Couture Fashion Week in Paris, Zuhair Murad became the latest fashion figure to be accused of cultural appropriation.

The Lebanese designer, whose garments have been worn by stars like Jennifer Lopez and Kristen Stewart, created a beautiful collection ― but it incorporated Native American imagery in a way that left a lot of people uncomfortable.

Many of the garments featured details and accessories (like feathers in the models' hair) that appeared to reference an " outsider's view of many Indigenous cultures," as Teen Vogue wrote. Then there was the social media promotion, which included the hashtag #IndianSummer. Finally, Murad's fashion show set included large painted poles arranged to look like teepees without coverings.

Murad offered a statement in response to the criticism, saying, "The house pays homage to the craftsmanship of an array of ancient tribes, notably the Sioux, the Navajos, the Iroquois, and celebrates their traditional prints, embroideries, and pictograms."

While Murad credited the indigenous tribes for his inspiration ― something that many brands fail to do ― his statement obviously wasn't perfect. (More on that later.)

As we gear up for fashion month, with New York Fashion Week kicking off Thursday, perhaps it's time for a refresher on the difference between appropriation and appreciation. Designers, bloggers, models and everyone else, please take note.

ANGELA WEISS via Getty Images

What is appropriation, again?

As HuffPost has written before, the Cambridge Dictionary defines cultural appropriation as "the act of taking or using things from a culture that is not your own, especially without showing that you understand or respect this culture."

For example, it's disrespectful to the indigenous community to send a lingerie-clad model down the runway with a feathered headdress. Vogue publishing photos of a white model in geisha-inspired outfits ― in its diversity issue, no less ― probably isn't the best way to pay homage to Japanese culture. And for everyone's sake, don't present a bunch of white models sporting locs, and then apologize for your "lack of sensitivity" by saying " Funny how you don't criticize women of color for straightening their hair," a la Marc Jacobs.

LeRhonda Manigault-Bryant,associate professor of Africana studies at Williams College, provided a more nuanced explanation of cultural appropriation, telling HuffPost, "It's actually really hard to define, and I think that's part of what makes it so complex."

"I think of it, in the most rudimentary terms, as this very fluid exchange of culture that happens among human beings," she went on. "But the way that we think about it, especially now, is that it refers to taking someone else's culture ― intellectual property, artifacts, style, art form, etc. ― without permission."

When is appropriation bad?

As Fordham University law Professor Susan Scafidi told Jezebel in 2012, appropriation is " most likely to be harmful when the source community is a minority group that has been oppressed or exploited in other ways or when the object of appropriation is particularly sensitive, e.g. sacred objects."

To expand on Scafidi's point, look at Kim Kardashian's recent "Bo Derek braids" controversy. Kardashian, who is inarguably privileged, posted an image of herself wearing cornrows, crediting Derek as her inspiration. But cornrows, a hairstyle very much associated with black culture, have a complicated history that goes back further than Derek.

As Manigault-Bryant pointed out, Kardashian wearing braids "becomes a kind of symbol of beauty in some ways." But black students have been punished for wearing similar hairstyles. That double standard, she said, "complicates the idea of appropriation."

Derek responded to the controversy by arguing that cornrows "are just a hairstyle" (which, again, isn't true for many people) that she wore for a movie, the 1979 film "10."

However, Derek also acknowledged on Twitter that she'd copied the hairstyle " from Ann-Margret's backup singer from her Vegas Sho [sic]."

"And we all copied Queen Nofretari. I hope Her Royal Highness is flattered," she wrote. (Derek's mother was a makeup and hair artist for Ann-Margret, the Swedish actress, when Derek was young. People magazine notes that "Derek might be referring to the Egyptian Queen Ahmose-Nofretari, sometimes known as Ahmose-Nefertari, who was buried with braids.")

That acknowledgement by Derek, Manigault-Bryant explained, is "a critical piece" of information when it comes to appreciation vs. appropriation.

At the same time, Derek was late to acknowledge her inspirations ― not unlike Murad, who cited "the Sioux, the Navajos, [and] the Iroquois" in a statement after his fashion show had already happened. "Nobody should have to remind you to say where you got something from," Manigault-Bryant told HuffPost. "It shouldn't be an afterthought."

"Imitation is the best form of flattery," she said. "Most people believe that and agree with that, and yet if you're imitating something but you're not actually giving credit where credit is due, in academic communities we would call that plagiarism."

Can designers borrow respectfully?

What, aside from not using other cultures as the heart of their collections, can designers do if they face such accusations? In 2018, is an apology enough?

For one thing, designers should be transparent about their inspirations from the get-go.

"We are absolutely inspired by other people all the time ― academics included," Manigault-Bryant said. "But there's no way I could make a living and not actually cite or invoke by name the people who inspired me. We should not intellectually or culturally plagiarize. We should truly get in the business of paying honor and homage where it's due."

"There needs to be increased diversity of all the various forms to make sure these kinds of things aren't happening," she added.

And from a public relations perspective, Ronn Torossian, a PR professional and founder of 5WPR, told HuffPost, "Brands need to be conscious of their audience; they need to be conscious of the political time that we live in."

There are brands that seem to be doing things right, or at least moving in a positive direction. There's the Brazilian sportswear label Osklen, which took inspiration from the Asháninka, an indigenous people who live in the Brazilian and Peruvian rainforest, for its spring 2016 collection. Osklen paid the tribe in order to use aspects of their tattoos and traditional fabrics in its collection. With the money, the Asháninka were able to build a school and open a store to sell their artisanal products.

Then there's Gucci's recent collaboration with the Harlem designer Dapper Dan (real name Daniel Day). Some accused the Italian label of copying Day, who made a name for himself in the '80s and early '90s by repurposing designer goods into new garments. In response, Gucci creative director Alessandro Michele said Day was among his inspirations, and later made him the face of a Gucci campaign. Gucci and Day also collaborated on a store in Harlem to sell made-to-order garments.

"Giving credit is one thing, but being included from the onset is also important," Manigault-Bryant said.

At the very least, when brands are called out for crossing the line from appreciation to appropriation, they need to own up to their mistakes and offer a sincere apology.

"A good apology is always telling the truth. A good apology is owning up. A good apology is moving quickly. And a good apology is authentic and real and isn't fabricated," Torossian said. "It needs to come from the heart."

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.keywords[]
asian voices celebrity style  hair care native americans cultural appropriation fashion designers fashion events women's accessories bo derek zuhair murad

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
When Cultural 'Appreciation' Is Just Straight Up Appropriation

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
Last month, during Couture Fashion Week in Paris, Zuhair Murad became the latest fashion figure to be accused of cultural appropriation. The Lebanese designer, whose garments have been worn by stars like Jennifer Lopez and Kristen Stewart, created a beautiful collection ― but it incorporated Native American imagery in a way that left a lot of people uncomfortable.

# data[].attributes.headline
Urban Outfitters: Cultural Appropriation 

# data[].attributes.subject
Urban Outfitters: Cultural Appropriation 

# data[].attributes.body
Urban Outfitters is well known for their hipster fashion and controversy around cultural appropriation with numerous cultures.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.readable_text
So Urban Outfitters has yet again had to pull a product after protests from people who are part of that culture. This time, it's Hindus. According to the Philadelphia Business Journal:

Urban Outfitters has pulled its line of duvet covers that feature Hindu deity Lord Ganesha from its website after religious leaders banded together to urge its removal. The duvet covers, which were exclusively available online for $129-$169, are now labeled as "sold out" on the Philadelphia-based company's website.

The image has been removed from the UO website; a set of pillows with the same design is also gone. Weirdly, there's another Ganesha tapestry by a different designer (shown at the top of the page) that's still up, along with pictures of how one might use it as a bedspread, plus a Golden Ganesh tank top.

This seems to happen about every three months for Urban Outfitters - less than a year ago, they got in trouble for appropriating the same deity, which resulted in the hilarious headline " Urban Outfitters pulls religiously insensitive socks."

But Hinduism isn't even close to the only religion or culture that UO's gotten in trouble for appropriating.

If you'd like a primer on when cultural appropriation in fashion is acceptable or are thinking something along the lines of "What, I'm not allowed to wear anything from a culture that's not my own? That's bullshit!" this post is a pretty good sum-up of why people might get mad upon finding one of their gods being used to sell $8 socks.

The "Lord Ganesha duvet cover" in question.

There's the similarity aspect -

Is XYZ an homage, or a copy?

If XYZ's an homage, does it only draw from stereotypes?

If XYZ's close to a straight-up copy, is anyone from the culture that made the original XYZ seeing any of the profits?

There's the significance aspect -

Is the thing that inspired XYZ deeply meaningful in a religious or cultural way?

Has the culture that originated XYZ started using it as fashion in this way themselves?

Does selling XYZ en masse to suburban teenagers trivialize the original?

And there's the source aspect -

What culture is XYZ drawn from?

Who made or designed XYZ?

What's the designer's connection to the culture?

Is the culture being drawn on one that's historically been a lot less powerful than the culture of suburban America?

The socks alone would give you the idea that URBN kind of refuses to learn the underlying point about why people get upset with them over and over, even if they usually stop selling the specific merch in question. And it's not remotely just Hinduism that's gotten pissed about this. Let's take a look at Urban Outfitters' history of cultural appropriation, and run each example through the three-S test.
Yeah, there's plenty of other companies that do all this stuff, fashion neccessarily takes "inspiration" from all over the place, and trends originate in much higher places than Urban Outfitters. But URBN, for whatever reason, is particularly lunkheaded about it.
1. Native American prints, 2011

REPRESENTATIVE ITEMS: "Native"-print flasks, dresses, pants, shirts, socks, leggings, underwear, everything.

SOURCE: Mish-mash of Native American cultures in general, Navajo Nation in particular.

SIMILARITY: The Navajo Nation's 2012 lawsuit against Urban Outfitters points to symbols and marks that "evoke the Navajo Indian Tribe's tribal patterns, including geometric prints and designs fashioned to mimic and resemble Navajo Indian and tribal patterns, prints and designs."

SIGNIFICANCE: "The Navajo weaving tradition developed in the American Southwest over centuries and emerged as a distinctive Navajo activity by 1650. Generations of weavers used handmade tools and local materials to clothe their families with blankets in traditional and innovative patterns. Navajo weaving was not isolated. It shared many traits ... with weaving by the Pueblo Indians who lived in neighboring villages. During the 1600s, contacts with Spaniards and Mexicans introduced sheep's wool and indigo dye. By the early 1700s, Navajos actively traded their blankets to other Indian tribes, and received praise for their tight weaving and bold patterns."

OBJECTION: The Sioux Nation's Sasha Houston Brown posted an open letter to URBN CEO Glen Senk:

All too often industries, sports teams and ignorant individuals legitimize racism under the guise of cultural "appreciation". There is nothing honorable or historically appreciative in selling items such as the Navajo Print Fabric Wrapped Flask, Peace Treaty Feather Necklace, Staring at Stars Skull Native Headdress T-shirt or the Navajo Hipster Panty. These and the dozens of other tacky products you are currently selling referencing Native America make a mockery of our identity and unique cultures.

2. Keffiyehs, 2007
REPRESENTATIVE MERCH: Anti-war wovenscarves

SOURCE: Palestine, Middle East in general

SIMILARITY: Knockoff.

SIGNIFICANCE: "Also known as a shemagh or hatta, it was first made popular by Middle Eastern peasants moving into cities in the early 20th century, according to Rashid Khalidi, an Arab studies professor at Columbia University. ... The plain white one is most popular in the Gulf states, for example. The red-and-white one was associated with the Jordanian army. The black-and-white versions are most common in Palestine and were traditionally worn by rural peasants.

At various times, they have became a symbol of Palestinian nationalism. In the 1930s when the British tried to ban them, elite city dwellers wore them in solidarity with peasants, often atop their fezzes. Palestinian leader Yasser Arafat then adopted the headscarf in the 1960s, and it became the emblem of Palestinian nationalism. "People were wearing it already, but Arafat really made it into a symbol," said Khalidi. By the 1980s, wearing the scarf in Europe or North America implied solidarity with the Palestinian movement."

OBJECTIONS: From Arab-American forum Kabobfest: "With a great deal of discomfort and a tad bit of pissed-off-ness, I regret to (re)inform the KABOB-o-sphere that Palestine has officially become a trend ... That's right folks, for a mere $20 (or 75.0127 Saudi riyals) you, too, can jump on the socially stupid hipsterdoofus bandwagon by rocking your very own 'Anti-War Woven Scarf '! (available only at Urban Outfitters or ... er ... uh ... the Middle East)."

3. Bindis, 2013

REPRESENTATIVE MERCH: Face Gems

SOURCE: South Asia, particularly India

SIMILARITY: Knockoff.

SIGNIFICANCE: "Traditionally, the bindi is worn on the forehead of married Hindu women. It symbolizes female energy and is believed to protect women and their husbands. ... The bindi is most commonly a red dot made with vermilion. In addition, the bindi is a way of accentuating the third eye, the area between the eyebrows where attention is focused during meditation. ...

More recently, the bindi has become primarily a decorative accessory and is worn by unmarried girls and non-Hindu women. It is also no longer restricted in color or shape, and self-adhesive bindis made from felt in various designs and colors are common. Bindi styles often vary by the area of India in which they are worn."

URBN DESCRIPTION: "These face gems are modeled after the traditional ones that were originally worn by Gwen Stefani in the 1990s to signify the third-eye connection she felt with Gavin Rossdale." (OK, that copy is a joke on the UO blog, but... I mean, come on.)

OBJECTION: "FACE GEMS? REALLY URBAN OUTFITTERS? IT'S CALLED BINDIS. IF YOU ARE GONNA TRY TO FUCKING STEAL ASPECTS FROM MY CULTURE, AT LEAST WRITE BINDIS."

4. Ethiopian dress, 2013

REPRESENTATIVE MERCH: Vintage '90s Linen Dress

SOURCE: Ethiopia/Eritrea

SIMILARITY: Via Lolla Mohammed Nur, who started a petition about it: "A friend of mine showed me Urban Outfitters was selling a "one-of-a-kind" dress on their website, which seemed to be an Ethiopian and Eritrean dress. It was being sold as a vintage dress; the labeling said nothing about it being Ethiopian or Eritrean. ... They said it was "popular in the 90s era," but it was popular because people like my mom wore it.

SIGNIFICANCE: "This was just one dress, but it still made me mad. The model was wearing it with a pair of boots and her hair was disheveled, which was awkward and disrespectful. Ethiopians and Eritreans are very proud of our culture and heritage and the many ways that manifests itself - language, identity, dress, food, dance, art. We're protective of that."

OBJECTION: "While there was an aspect of feeling proud my culture was being recognized, you're also being robbed by this company that has no affiliation with you or your community parading this dress on their website as something people would assume to be American. ... It could have been a positive thing for us. But it is just one example of what American corporations in the fashion industry are good at doing: ripping off designs from indigenous communities (I'm using that term very broadly), and calling them something they're not. It's a larger issue, but it's also an ethics question about this company. If they'd behaved ethically they would have done something about it."

5. Dia de los Muertos, 2013

REPRESENTATIVE MERCH: Dia de los Muertos tank, tee, other housewares.

SOURCE: Catholicism in Latin America, particularly Mexico.

SIMILARITY: Knockoff of imagery.

SIGNIFICANCE: "Dia de los Muertos honors the dead with festivals and lively celebrations, a typically Latin American custom that combines indigenous Aztec ritual with Catholicism, brought to the region by Spanish conquistadores. (Dia de los Muertos is celebrated on All Saints Day and All Souls Day, minor holidays in the Catholic calendar.)"

OBJECTION: Via Elaine Rita Mendus at MásWired: "The clothes pull Mexican images and culture from where they belong and turn them into cute jokes for teens and twenty-somethings to wear without a clue or a care as to where these images came from. The meaning and culture is completely pulled from the holiday when somebody decides to slap a picture of Marilyn Monroe with her face done up as a sugar skull onto a tee shirt. Or, turn a Star Wars storm trooper's helmet into a calavera."

6. Catholics

REPRESENTATIVE MERCH: Vanessa Mooney Fly Awhile Rosary Necklace

SOURCE: The rosary is a string of prayer beads used in the Catholic tradition.

SIMILARITY: It doesn't have beads, but it does have the cross at the end, a little Mary at the Y-joint and that obvious rosary shape.

SIGNIFICANCE: Rosaries are basically prayer organizers; the beads all signify different prayers. They're arranged in sets of decades - one Lord's Prayer, ten Hail Marys, one Glory Be to the Father - during which you're supposed to be thinking about one of several Mysteries. Usually, you're supposed to do five decades, one complete go-round of the string, in a session.

OBJECTION: Nobody's made a stink about this specifically regarding Urban Outfitters, but people wearing rosaries as secular jewelry is a thing in general. I include it because I find it personally annoying. Even though I'm not Catholic anymore, it's one of few times where I as an American-born white lady feel like I can get a whiff of what cultural appropriation feels like. Teenage Madonna was one thing (for one, hers were real, not mass-produced knockoffs; for two, the Ciccone family was extremely Catholic); mass marketing them just strikes me as irritating and lazy.

7. Fair Isle

REPRESENTATIVE MERCH: Infinite sweaters, leggings and

SOURCE: Fair Isle is a traditional knitting technique used to create patterns with multiple colors. It is named after Fair Isle, a tiny island in the north of Scotland, that forms part of the Shetland islands. Traditional Fair Isle patterns have a limited palette of five or so colours, use only two colours per row, are worked in the round, and limit the length of a run of any particular colour.

SIMILARITY: Well, they tend to have more weed-inspired patterns than the average handknitted Scottish ones, as seen above.

SIGNIFICANCE: The Fair Isle people have been having their patterns ripped off without compensation by pretty much every mass-market clothing brand for almost a century, and appear to have given up. Even so, I note it because it's the same design laziness.

8. Buddhism

REPRESENTATIVE MERCH: Buddha Buddha Happiness Light, Buddha banks, lots of other stuff.

SOURCE: Buddhism, specifically Chinese.

SIMILARITY: This little nightlight guy is a chibi version of the Laughing Buddha: "When westerners think of "Buddha," usually they don't visualize the Buddha of history, meditating or teaching. Instead, they visualize a fat, bald, jolly character called "The Laughing Buddha." Where did he come from?

The Laughing Buddha emerged from Chinese folktales of the 10th century. The original stories of the Laughing Buddha centered on a Ch'an monk named Ch'i-t'zu, or Qieci, from Fenghua, in what is now the province of Zhejiang. Ch'i-t'zu was an eccentric but much-loved character who worked small wonders such as predicting the weather."

SIGNIFICANCE: It's motherfucking Buddha, the actual center of an actual religion.

OH NUH UH

OBJECTION: Buddhists appear to be too chill for Twitter or petitions, but... I mean, look at this.

KAWAII!!!!

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
8 more cultures Urban Outfitters ripped off

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
So Urban Outfitters has yet again had to pull a product after protests from people who are part of that culture. This time, it's Hindus. According to the Philadelphia Business Journal: Urban Outfitters has pulled its line of duvet covers that feature Hindu deity Lord Ganesha from its website after religious leaders banded together to urge its removal.

# data[].attributes.headline
Assimilating American/White Fashion by Rejecting Roots

# data[].attributes.subject
Assimilating American/White Fashion by Rejecting Roots

# data[].attributes.body
This Indian American writes about the complex relationship of not wanting to appear too ethnic with her bindi, and the struggle of accepting her ethnicity.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.readable_text
This debate has been going for a long time; why are so many white people still wearing them to our festivals?

I spent a really long time trying to work out how to start this article.

I thought about the time I was 12 and proudly wore a bindi to school every day - a ritual I soon abandoned for fear of looking too ethnic. Or the number of times I've struggled to broach the topic of bindis and paint-on third eyes to friends who regularly wear them to festivals or parties. Then, on a recent Saturday night, inspiration struck in the unlikeliest of places. I was sitting at a swanky inner-city establishment with a group of (mostly Indian) friends when two women walked in and approached the bar.

"Hey," I whispered. "She's wearing a bindi".

We all turned to gape. Affixed between this white girl's eyebrows was a sparkly blue bindi.

The entire scene was like something out of a Hatecopy print.

Many South Asians born and raised in the West have a complex relationship with their 'Indianness'. For many of us, learning to be comfortable in our own skin is a long and often painful process. So it can feel slightly awkward watching people with no obvious connection to South Asia publicly engage with elements of our heritage when we wouldn't do the same.

' Cultural appropriation ' is a common grievance among members of our socially conscious generation. Simply defined, cultural appropriation refers to the adoption of elements of one culture by another. At first glance, it's easy to see why this may not seem so big a deal. Culture is fuzzy and complex. Cultural groups have long borrowed various customs, practices and symbols from one another. But the problem arises when the cultural groups in question do not, for whatever reason, have an egalitarian relationship. The nature of this relationship can transform a seemingly innocent act of cultural borrowing into more sinister one of exploitation.

When it comes to cultural appropriation, context is everything. For example, when someone without Native American heritage wears a headdress to a festival or a Halloween party, they claim ownership of this symbol for themselves by detaching it from its historical context and simultaneously erasing its cultural significance. This process of detachment and erasure contributes to the systematic oppression of First Peoples and the destruction of their cultures. This is not to say that borrowing from indigenous cultures is always offensive; but the special significance of the headdress makes it off limits to cultural outsiders.

But while most would agree that wearing a headdress amounts to cultural appropriation, opinion on the bindi isn't so straightforward. This may be because not everyone agrees on what the bindi symbolises. In India, bindis are widely worn by women from many different religious and cultural communities, including Hindus, Jains, Sikhs, Buddhists and Catholics. Some believe it is linked to the third eye, or ajna chakra, a site of wisdom and power said to be situated between the eyebrows (this is why I'm also uncomfortable with third eye face paint). Others associate it with married women, though it is also commonly worn by children and single women. Parents may also mark their babies' faces with bindis to ward off the evil eye.

Nonetheless, some argue that the religious significance of the bindi is lost on many South Asians today, meaning that it's not such a big deal if other people wear it without understanding its cultural significance too. This is a pretty contentious claim, and one I personally believe to be untrue. This aside, I feel that this argument kind of misses the point. It could be said that wearing a bindi for purely aesthetic reasons, without any connection to South Asia or South Asian religions, erases its history and transfers its ownership to cultural outsiders. At times, this can feel a little unfair.

Many Indian cultural practices were shunned or prohibited over 200 years of British colonisation. And for South Asians living overseas, publicly celebrating our cultures can be uncomfortable, or downright scary. Despite strongly identifying with my Hindu Indian heritage, I wouldn't consider wearing a bindi in my day-to-day life for fear of being treated differently, or even vilified - not an unreasonable fear in these times.

Fans of the bindi may also be drawn to the romantic appeal of Hindu or South Asian culture. This is a little unsettling. Our cultures have long been fetishised and gravely misunderstood in the West. Hinduism is often romanticised as a wholly inclusive, tolerant and peaceful religion. As within nearly all other religious traditions, this may be true of some - but definitely not all - of its strands. Even Hindus (especially those of us who are physically far away from its consequences in South Asia) sometimes forget its more problematic elements.

Of course, there are many non-South Asians who have genuinely engaged with these traditions. But there are also many who have not, while happily donning bindis, practicing yoga and hanging Ganesha tapestries outside their festival tents in a performance of Indianness that few Indians would recognise. Failing to genuinely engage with the history of these cultural products just contributes to the cycle of exoticisation. It's a little dehumanising. As Melbourne-based writer Kamna Muddagouni states, "a wider ignorance about Hinduism and South Asian culture [...] when you've spent a fair amount of your formative years being othered, can hit home hard".

Still, I wouldn't say that wearing a bindi is always bad. Remember, context is everything. Wearing a bindi at a Hindu wedding is pretty different to accessorising with one at a bush doof.

Why? The former scenario involves a space dominated by Hindus and/or South Asians that facilitates a celebration of our cultures on our own terms. In this context, you're not exerting ownership over the bindi if you choose to wear one, as you have been invited to participate in our rituals and are making a concerted effort to meaningfully engage with us. In the latter scenario, you're wearing the bindi in spaces that are not ours, and that often exclude us - thus completely separating it from its cultural history and significance - and from us.

So who can wear a bindi, and where? Unfortunately, there's no simple answer to that question. A number of South Asian women writing on this subject have formulated their own criteria for acceptable usage of the bindi. Aarti Olivia suggests that a non-South Asian may wear a bindi if they are either getting married to a South Asian, or attending an Indian festival or ritual. Meanwhile, recognising the broader cultural significance of the bindi, Reclaim the Bindi suggests that all South Asians, including those who do not have Hindu heritage, may wear the bindi at their own discretion.

I find it more useful to use these suggestions as just that - suggestions, or rough guidelines for behaviour, rather than steadfast rules. It is literally impossible to come up with an exhaustive list of acceptable situations for wearing a bindi. I would also argue that providing such a list would place the onus to protect against offensive behaviour on those who are offended - which is both really annoying, and would do little to tackle complacency around these issues in the long term.

I suggest a better approach is to encourage a general attitude of engagement, reflection and respect. Be curious, ask questions, do your research. Understand your position and be mindful of the impact of the decisions that you make. What is your understanding of the bindi? Why are you wearing it? Is your behaviour likely to cause somebody pain or discomfort? Are you contributing to a wider culture of disrespect or dispossession that you would otherwise not support? And sure, if you decide to wear a bindi anyway, not all South Asians will be offended. But some definitely will. And to me, that's enough of a reason to err on the side of caution.

And if you're currently cringing because you wore a bindi to a bar last week, don't worry about it. We all do silly things. Just next time, maybe don't.

-

Feature image: Maria Qamar/Hatecopy.

-
Vidya Ramachandran is a writer and law student from Sydney, interested in race, ethics and identity. She is passionate about Zadie Smith and pasta.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
Everything You Should Know Before Sticking A Bindi On Your Head

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
This debate has been going for a long time; why are so many white people still wearing them to our festivals? I spent a really long time trying to work out how to start this article.

# data[].attributes.body
Many people in cultural minorities are expected to assimilate to cultural norms rather than embracing their true identities.

# data[].attributes.body
The privileged majority may reject their own culture and become non conformists by assimilating alternative cultures.

# data[].attributes.body
Clothes and fashion are a big part of identity in society. Clothing is often a big topic in the appropriation debate, because fashion trends or ceremonial clothing from one culture is often used as an identifier for stereotyping and harassment, while the prominent group turns it into "edgy" or "trendy" fashion.

# data[].attributes.body
Ariana Grande has come under fire for using a "blaccent" as a way to be trendy

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.readable_text
Accusations that Ariana Grande has been imitating black people by speaking with a "blaccent" have sparked an online debate, with many people rushing to the "Thank U, Next" singer's defence.

The allegations arose online following a recent interview with Grande conducted by , in which she spoke about a variety of childhood photos.

While looking at a photo of herself as a toddler eating a cookie, she said: "I'm like b***h, that's my cookie, that's my juice, okay. Carry on. Thank you next, that's what this baby picture says."

Some have claimed that Grande was deliberately trying to sound like a black woman during the interview, and have criticised her for committing cultural appropriation by doing so.

"Her voice goes from normal to trying to imitate a black woman," one person tweeted in response to the video.

"Why is she trying to sound like Beyoncé," another person wrote.

A "blaccent", as defined by Wiktionary, is an accent that is "characteristic of African-Americans".

This isn't the first time that the star has been accused of cultural appropriation, with some saying that she purposely tans her skin to look especially dark.

A number of social media influencers have recently come under fire for " blackfishing", which involves using makeup, hair products and, in some cases, surgery to drastically change their appearance.

"Ariana Grande has fake tanned her skin to the extreme, enlarged her lips, and fakes a stereotyping blaccent," one person wrote in a tweet that's garnered more than 3,000 likes.

"Cultural appropriation is the exploitation of non-white cultures. It isn't literally claiming to be a different race.

"Face it - she's a white woman in brown/blackface."

Numerous people have been defending Grande, with many stating that there is no truth to the "blaccent" accusations.

Many have also highlighted the fact that Grande's voice has been the same ever since her days as a teen Nickelodeon star on TV series Victorious.

"Y'all really grasping for straws trying to make her look bad. Oh well," one person tweeted.

"Why would she try to imitate a black woman? Like y'all are just hating to hate at this point. Please come up with something else. Something better," another person wrote.

Some people have pointed out the fact that the allegations have made sweeping generalisations about the way in which black women speak.

"So are you implying that that's what black women should sound like, lmfao that's so pathetic," someone wrote on Twitter.

"None of the women in my family nor any of my black women friends sound like that, thank u next."

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
People are accusing Ariana Grande of cultural appropriation

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
Accusations that Ariana Grande has been imitating black people by speaking with a "blaccent" have sparked an online debate, with many people rushing to the "Thank U, Next" singer's defence. The allegations arose online following a recent interview with Grande conducted by Billboard, in which she spoke about a variety of childhood photos.

# data[].attributes.body
People of other races will talk like the more dominant race of their area over the phone in order to get better opportunities.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.readable_text
The phenomenon of "talking white," or changing your voice to sound more like a white person, is having a real media moment right now. Upcoming films " Sorry to Bother You" and "BlacKkKlansman" both feature black men appearing to be white over the phone. But does it work? The following is a transcript of the video.

Manny Ocbazghi: Can you tell what race I am just by hearing my voice? Turns out, Americans are pretty good at guessing your race just by hearing your voice. It's called linguistic profiling and we all do it. There are certain auditory cues that give us subtle hints about who we're talking to. A lot of black Americans speak what's referred to as AAVE, or African American Vernacular English.

John Fleming: AAVE is non-rotic meaning, that like a British accent, there are no "R" sounds at the end of words or at the end of syllables.

Ocbazghi: John Fleming is a speech and dialect coach for movies and video games.

Fleming: Generally speaking, there's the "th" sounds, the "tha, tha" and, "the the," get replaced with something. Generally a "T," or a "D." There's a few other vowels and things, but it kind of keeps going and going, and it gets kind of, into the weeds a bit.

Ocbazghi: When it comes to being on the phone though, black people will often try to sound more white. It's a form of code-switching. Or in this case, alternating between two different dialects. Black people talking white is having a real moment in media right now. "Sorry To Bother You" is a movie about a black salesman whose career only takes off when he starts talking white. And "BlacKkKlansman" is a movie about a black detective who infiltrates the KKK by pretending to be white over the phone. The idea is to speak in what's called the standard accent.

Olivia Kang: The standard accent is the one spoken by the majority group or the socially advantaged group.

Ocbazghi: Olivia Kang is a psychologist at Harvard. She's working on a project that explores the hidden biases we hold.

Kang: If you speak with a standard accent, you're judged as being more intelligent, more competent, more credible, more hireable. Now, having a regional accent, or a non-standard accent, now you're not getting those advantages. You're seen as less credible, or less hireable.

Ocbazghi: These biases are implicit. This isn't Charlottesville tiki-torch racism, it's much more discreet than that.

Kang: The most basic way of understanding implicit bias is by thinking about the associations we make. If two things occur together over and over again in our experience, we link them together.

Ocbazghi: Salt and pepper, day and night, bread and butter. These types of associations are helpful, but there are some that aren't. Now, if I say the word, genius, you're probably thinking of some collectors edition white dude. Now, if I say the word criminal...

Kang: Voices aren't just sounds. In a lot of ways, they're auditory faces. So, when you hear a voice, you can in some sense piece together what the person on the other end of the phone, can look like. Roughly how old they are, their gender, where they come from. But, the interesting thing is that you can also form impressions about character. So, how intelligent someone is, how competent, how likable, how trustworthy. And, these impressions can be flawed, right? A lot of these things might have a basis in your implicit biases, or things that you've heard, portrayals you've seen on television. And so, when people are doing something, like conducting a voice interview, often the implicit biases they have about voice can influence the decisions that they're making.

Ocbazghi: In order to combat some of these implicit biases, black people, myself included, try to sound as white as possible. I sound like Bill Gates impersonating your mailman. Why hello there. I'm wondering if there are any positions available. Oh no, I don't mind waiting. But, does changing your voice actually work?

A study in 2001 found that landlords would make racist snap judgments to callers with certain dialects. Compared with whites, blacks were less likely to get callbacks, less likely to be told there was an apartment available, and more likely to get their credit questioned. However, blacks who code-switched fared better than those who didn't. Code-switching helps in other areas too.

Fleming: Actually, Don Lemon is a very good example, because to become this main host that he is, he's talked about how he had to change - because he's from New Orleans - and he consciously had to change his accent for the sake of moving up at CNN.

Ocbazghi: Instead of changing the way we speak, maybe we should change the way we listen. I might be able to tell your race from your voice, but that doesn't tell me anything about your character.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
The phenomenon of "talking white," or changing your voice to sound more like a white person, is having a real media moment right now. Upcoming films "Sorry to Bother You" and "BlacKkKlansman" both feature black men appearing to be white over the phone. But does it work?

# data[].attributes.body
People talking in their native languages and accents are seen as dumb or even ghetto while others copy accent and slang for personal gain

# data[].attributes.body
Dictionary.com definition: "The unacknowledged or inappropriate adoption of the customs, practices, ideas, etc. of one people or society by members of another and typically more dominant people or society."

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.readable_text
Justin Bieber has been accused of cultural appropriation after revealing a new dreadlock hairstyle on Instagram.

The Canadian pop star posted a picture of his new locks on Sunday, before sharing another image yesterday that prompted Stephanie Cohen, co-founder and legal and political organiser at the Halo Collective, a natural hair organisation, to say he has "no right" to wear the style.

"When I see a white person in mainstream media sporting a black hairstyle, it makes me angry," Cohen told The Guardian. "I'm angry because this standard does not exist when a black person simply wears their hair in this way.

"You can't just wear something so historically significant and ignore the struggles behind what the hairstyle purports."

So what exactly is cultural appropriation?

Oxford Dictionaries, which only put the phrase into its official lexicon in 2017, defines cultural appropriation as "the unacknowledged or inappropriate adoption of the customs, practices, ideas, etc. of one people or society by members of another and typically more dominant people or society."

Simply put, it is when someone adopts something from a culture that is not his or her own - a hairstyle, a piece of clothing, a manner of speaking, even a type of exercise (yoga, for example).

Bieber, for instance, was previously accused of cultural appropriation in 2016 when an image of him sporting cornrows "prompted outrage on social media", The Guardian says.

However, says the EverydayFeminism website, that's not the whole story. Unlike cultural exchange, in which there is a mutual interchange, appropriation refers to a "particular power dynamic in which members of a dominant culture take elements from a culture of people who have been systematically oppressed by that dominant group".

Originally derived from sociologist writing in the 1990s, "its usage appears to have first been adopted by indigenous peoples of nations tainted by histories of colonisation, such as Canada, Australia and the United States", says The Tablet.

What's wrong with it?

It's often fine to take on aspects of another culture, argues Quartz writer Jenni Avins, whether it's putting on espadrilles or making coffee with an Italian espresso machine. Simply getting ready in the morning is a "daily act of cultural appropriation and I'm not the least bit sorry about it", she says.

The problem arises when somebody takes something from another less dominant culture in a way that members of that culture find undesirable and offensive. The point is that the more marginalised group doesn't get a say, while their heritage is deployed by someone in a position of greater privilege - for fun or fashion, perhaps, and out of a place of ignorance rather than knowledge of that culture.

Wearing espadrilles to work is therefore different from wearing a sombrero to a Halloween party or sending a series of white models down the catwalk wearing their hair in cornrows.

As Dr Adrienne Keene of Native Appropriations tells EverydayFeminism, "You are pretending to be a race that you are not and are drawing upon stereotypes to do so."

Can it work the other way around?

Yes, it can and does - but usually in a different way. Often a more marginalised culture will adopt aspects of the stronger in order to fit in, not stand out. Black women, for example, frequently report they feel unable to leave their hair in its natural state. The BBC cites cases of women being told by employers it looks "unprofessional". Some say they must spend time and money to make it more like "white hair", HuffPost reports.

Again, it comes down to an imbalance in power. The black women in this example are not adopting elements of another culture for fun or even necessarily out of choice, but in order to avoid discrimination by the more dominant group. Again, it all comes down to cultural power, historic and modern.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
What is cultural appropriation - and how can you spot it? | The Week UK

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
Justin Bieber has been accused of cultural appropriation after revealing a new dreadlock hairstyle on Instagram. The Canadian pop star posted a picture of his new locks on Sunday, before sharing another image yesterday that prompted Stephanie Cohen, co-founder and legal and political organiser at the Halo Collective, a natural hair organisation, to say he has "no right" to wear the style.

# data[].attributes.body
Natural hairstyles are seen as nappy or dirty in a world ruled by white beauty standards.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
African-American Girl Faces Expulsion Over Natural Hair

# data[].attributes.body
Classically African hairstyles are seen as fashionable when worn by white models.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.readable_text
The fashion industry has a diversity problem. This is not news. We know this. We know this like we know that the Oscars are #sowhite and The Bachelor prefers blondes. So, it wasn't shocking to me that there was only one Black model in the Toronto Fashion Week show I went to last night.

When I walked into a parking garage under the Whole Foods in Toronto's Yorkville Village to watch Mikhael Kale debut his latest collection, it wasn't a surprise that one visibly Black model was the "other" amidst a runway full of her white peers. That (still) happens all the time. But when the models landed on their platforms (the show started as traditional runway show but turned into more of a tableau style of performance art), popped their hips, and settled into their poses, I registered that every woman had their hair braided into cornrows. Yes, even the white ones.

Here's the part in the story when I, as a Black woman in media, have to decide whether or not I'm going to let something like this get to me. "This" meaning the blatant cultural appropriation of taking a hairstyle that Black women all over the world have been mocked for or told that they are " unprofessional " for wearing and using it on white models to sell clothes. I have to decide whether I'm just going to shake it off or if I'm going to use my time and energy to call it out. I decided on the latter.

The conversation about whether or not white women wearing cornrows is cultural appropriation has been going on for years. The Kardashians seem to bring it back up annually. When Kylie Jenner wore her hair in cornrows in 2015, it sparked a debate, but it also was the catalyst for a slew of tone-deaf pieces about the " new hair trend " the Kardashians had started. Cornrows were even rebranded as "boxer braids" to give the Kardashians and Jenners credit for something that belongs to Black culture. Some people would call the Kardashians' adoption of Black culture appreciation over appropriation, but I wouldn't. If you adopt the culture of a marginalized group without a) giving them credit and b) using your privilege to uplift, promote, and compensate that culture, you are straight up stealing from them for your own gain.

As Teen Vogue fashion features editor Jessica Andrews, quoted by Mic, put it: "Black hairstyles are now considered 'cool.' Black people? Not so much." Exactly. If Kale loved the look of cornrows so much that he thought it was the best hairstyle to pair with his designs, he could have hired Black models to rock the hair and the clothes.

When I spoke to Toronto-based designer Hayley Elsaesser about her passionate plea for change in the Canadian fashion industry, she brought up Kale's show unprompted. Elsaesser makes a point to cast diverse models in her shows and says she's turned down a white model's request to wear her hair in boxer braids because she didn't want to "capitalize" on Black culture. For Elsaesser, seeing Kale's choice to put white models in cornrows was disappointing.

"There are Black models who aren't booked because they have cornrows time and time again," she says. "So, the fact that you're having models with cornrows who aren't Black women doesn't make sense to me. This is the time to give Black women the spotlight. If that's the hairstyle you're doing, use Black women in your show."

At this point, when it seems like someone in the fashion industry gets called out every fashion week for doing something appropriative ( Gucci, Valentino, Marc Jacobs, the list goes on), you would think Kale would know better, too. Amandla Stenberg's viral video called "Don't Cash Crop on My Cornrows" came out almost four years ago. Ignorance should never be an excuse, but now more than ever, it isn't.

White models wearing their hair in cornrows at Toronto Fashion Week is even more frustrating because we know the industry (Canada included) has a diversity problem. Representation on runways slowly seems to be getting better, but until Black models are equally represented, and until Black women can go to work without having their managers force them to quit over their braids, our hairstyles are not here to help you feel edgy or cool. Our culture doesn't exist for your street cred.

Refinery29 has reached out to Mikhael Kale for comment and will update the piece if and when he responds.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
There Were White Models With Cornrows At Toronto Fashion Week

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
The fashion industry has a diversity problem. This is not news. We know this. We know this like we know that the Oscars are #sowhite and The Bachelor prefers blondes. So, it wasn't shocking to me that there was only one Black model in the Toronto Fashion Week show I went to last night.

# data[].attributes.body
Hair is often a big part of a culture's identity, and hairstyles that are native to one culture are often seen as "bad" until stolen by another where they are seen as "different" and "quirky".

# data[].attributes.body
Privileged people are often praised or allowed to steal culture from other less privileged or oppressed peoples. They are often praised while the "parent" group of the cultural phenomena is criticized for the respective phenomena.