Register  |  Sign In
View unanswered posts | View active topics It is currently Mon Aug 10, 2020 9:33 pm



Reply to topic  [ 38 posts ]  Go to page 1, 2  Next
 "Self Identification" vs "Cultural appropriation"? 
Author Message
Indiana Jones IV
User avatar

Joined: Fri Oct 22, 2004 8:24 pm
Posts: 1333
Location: Southern California
Post "Self Identification" vs "Cultural appropriation"?
The following may have been swirling around in my head a while before this JK Rowling *nonsense* forced my hand--I must speak! ;)

I'm not getting into this latest example's repulsive minutia of the tar & feather insta-response sheepish masses vomit into each other (largely because there isn't anything to actually be upset about if you are a reasonable person with a functioning mind), but it inspires a question I continue to have whenever trans things come up.

Why is it socially acceptable/brave/etc to "self identify" as a different gender than the one you were born/raised/lived but--for example--Rachel Dolezal https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Rachel_Dolezal is a monster who must be shunned? Why is "cultural appropriation" a different beast than "self identification"? Either way isn't it a person deciding for themselves who they are/how to express themselves and then living that life?

How come this:
Someone is born a white lady, they "self identify" as black and then live every day of life as Black-Woman-in-the-World as far as they (and everyone they know) are concerned.
= NOT okay, a bad lady who must be ostracized.

Yet this:
Someone is born a white lady, they "self identify" as male and then live every day of life as Guy-in-the-World as far as they (and everyone they know) are concerned.
= :thumbsup: They're people, too! BURN JK ROWLING AT THE STAKE!!!

??

I'm not looking to have a pointless shouting argument, I just generally don't see this discussed every time someone isn't pure enough for whatever reason and must be shown the light.

So, what's the difference?


Thu Dec 19, 2019 4:44 pm
Profile
Deshi Basara
User avatar

Joined: Thu Sep 27, 2007 3:36 pm
Posts: 5320
Location: The Interstice
Post Re: "Self Identification" vs "Cultural appropriation"?
Dolezal's deal is similar to blackface which is historically thought of as making fun of an oppressed race, right or wrong. It was never about a desire to be that race. If there were suddenly a whole huge crop of Dolezals complaining about oppression, the left would start cow-towing to them in a hurry.

_________________
Top 10 Most Impressive Box Office Opening Weekends

Most Impressive Openings: Honorable Mentions


Thu Dec 19, 2019 5:27 pm
Profile
Hold the door!
User avatar

Joined: Sun Jun 01, 2014 10:26 pm
Posts: 15343
Location: Philadelphia, Pennsylvania
Post Re: "Self Identification" vs "Cultural appropriation"?
The transgender identity originated from the mental disorder gender dysphoria. Being transgender and or transitioning medically is a treatment for their mental condition, and many remain dubious as to whether it’s the best type of treatment. I address trans men as men and trans women as women, even though they’re still technically the other gender, as a courtesy.

Cultural appropriation is applied too liberally. A white girl wearing a chinese inspired dress to prom is not cultural appropriation as long as the dress has no ceremonial or cultural purpose she is ignoring. Being “transracial” like Dolezal is impossible because there is little to no genetic difference between the races. If Dolezal feels an affinity for the black community, great but that doesn’t make her black.

_________________
Image


Thu Dec 19, 2019 6:11 pm
Profile
Indiana Jones IV
User avatar

Joined: Fri Oct 22, 2004 8:24 pm
Posts: 1333
Location: Southern California
Post Re: "Self Identification" vs "Cultural appropriation"?
I read what Rowling said and lumping her statement into "anti-trans" or "hate speech" or whathaveyou seems quite over the top and disingenuous.

Dress however you please.
Call yourself whatever you like.
Sleep with any consenting adult who’ll have you.
Live your best life in peace and security.
But force women out of their jobs for stating that sex is real?
#IStandWithMaya #ThisIsNotADrill

This statement was in response to a specific event, which if you read about is *hardly* an Earth-shattering occurrence. Everyone having these silly responses of making Rowling a villain advocating transphobia/violence/etc is either genuinely deluded or a bit dense, in my opinion.

Also, fuck this word "cisgender." I was born a male and I remain a male--that makes me "male." There are also "females," which I was not born as and have no desire to be. Some people are born with both parts, but that is exceptionally rare (it also already has a word).

You can obviously amend your gender to your liking, and that's all wonderful--do what you want--but I suppose what I find bothersome is a vocal minority having a hissy fit that *everyone* be reclassified. If you don't go by the new & approved words (as decreed by...?) then you're a monster and any push back is deserving of a completely non-proportional response.

Also, back to Dolezal, her deal was definitely *not* some blackface thing where the end game is comedy/art/racism/whatever--she lived and identified as a black woman (and would have continued to do so if some reporter wasn't trying to further their own career by means of this white black lady). You are correct, though, that if Dolezal suddenly re-emerged with an army of other falsies claiming unjustified/historical oppression I'm sure the extreme left would bend over in a hurry :mer:


Thu Dec 19, 2019 6:14 pm
Profile
KJ's Leading Pundit
User avatar

Joined: Tue Oct 12, 2004 4:45 pm
Posts: 62765
Location: Tonight... YOU!
Post Re: "Self Identification" vs "Cultural appropriation"?
Zwackerm is right with his second paragraph. And hilariously wrong with his first.

_________________
trixster wrote:
shut the fuck up zwackerm, you're out of your fucking element

trixster wrote:
chippy is correct

Rev wrote:
Fuck Trump


Thu Dec 19, 2019 6:15 pm
Profile
Indiana Jones IV
User avatar

Joined: Fri Oct 22, 2004 8:24 pm
Posts: 1333
Location: Southern California
Post Re: "Self Identification" vs "Cultural appropriation"?
Again, in reference to Dolezal, if she identifies as such and lives her life as such then why do *you* or anyone else get to tell she's wrong?

If this same lady decided she was a man (but didn't go through any surgeries to make it so) and simply re-branded herself Charles Davis while making efforts to appear as a man (as far as she knew how) as well as carrying herself in public as a man (as far as she knew how) then in our current climate she gets a rallying cry.

Seems hypocritical to me.


Thu Dec 19, 2019 6:21 pm
Profile
KJ's Leading Pundit
User avatar

Joined: Tue Oct 12, 2004 4:45 pm
Posts: 62765
Location: Tonight... YOU!
Post Re: "Self Identification" vs "Cultural appropriation"?
Malcolm wrote:
I read what Rowling said and lumping her statement into "anti-trans" or "hate speech" or whathaveyou seems quite over the top and disingenuous.

Dress however you please.
Call yourself whatever you like.
Sleep with any consenting adult who’ll have you.
Live your best life in peace and security.
But force women out of their jobs for stating that sex is real?
#IStandWithMaya #ThisIsNotADrill

This statement was in response to a specific event, which if you read about is *hardly* an Earth-shattering occurrence. Everyone having these silly responses of making Rowling a villain advocating transphobia/violence/etc is either genuinely deluded or a bit dense, in my opinion.

Also, fuck this word "cisgender." I was born a male and I remain a male--that makes me "male." There are also "females," which I was not born as and have no desire to be. Some people are born with both parts, but that is exceptionally rare (it also already has a word).

You can obviously amend your gender to your liking, and that's all wonderful--do what you want--but I suppose what I find bothersome is a vocal minority having a hissy fit that *everyone* be reclassified. If you don't go by the new & approved words (as decreed by...?) then you're a monster and any push back is deserving of a completely non-proportional response.

Also, back to Dolezal, her deal was definitely *not* some blackface thing where the end game is comedy/art/racism/whatever--she lived and identified as a black woman (and would have continued to do so if some reporter wasn't trying to further their own career by means of this white black lady). You are correct, though, that if Dolezal suddenly re-emerged with an army of other falsies claiming unjustified/historical oppression I'm sure the extreme left would bend over in a hurry :mer:


This is also hilariously stupid. Not a single person in the world will get mad at you for calling yourself a male. Also, very, very, very few transgender people will get mad at you for calling them a male/female incorrectly. It's only when you continuously do so, actively doing it, is it upsetting.

JK knows exactly what she's supporting. The woman in question deliberately misgendered a coworker, and continued to do so. So her contract wasn't renewed. Saying you "support" that clear jerk is transphobic. Because you're saying that her bullying them should be allowed. Imagine a coworker calls you a bitch every day. They'd get fired. That's what happened.

_________________
trixster wrote:
shut the fuck up zwackerm, you're out of your fucking element

trixster wrote:
chippy is correct

Rev wrote:
Fuck Trump


Thu Dec 19, 2019 6:24 pm
Profile
KJ's Leading Pundit
User avatar

Joined: Tue Oct 12, 2004 4:45 pm
Posts: 62765
Location: Tonight... YOU!
Post Re: "Self Identification" vs "Cultural appropriation"?
Malcolm wrote:
Again, in reference to Dolezal, if she identifies as such and lives her life as such then why do *you* or anyone else get to tell she's wrong?

If this same lady decided she was a man (but didn't go through any surgeries to make it so) and simply re-branded herself Charles Davis while making efforts to appear as a man (as far as she knew how) as well as carrying herself in public as a man (as far as she knew how) then in our current climate she gets a rallying cry.

Seems hypocritical to me.


To you. But you're clearly deranged.

_________________
trixster wrote:
shut the fuck up zwackerm, you're out of your fucking element

trixster wrote:
chippy is correct

Rev wrote:
Fuck Trump


Thu Dec 19, 2019 6:26 pm
Profile
Indiana Jones IV
User avatar

Joined: Fri Oct 22, 2004 8:24 pm
Posts: 1333
Location: Southern California
Post Re: "Self Identification" vs "Cultural appropriation"?
I didn't say anyone would get mad for saying I'm a male--I said people push back when you say you find this new word, cisgender, moronic. And then you did just that, so way to toe the line! Also, I commend you on making this personal for some reason (need to win the virtue wars?).

Also, you simply calling me deranged isn't an argument. Do you actually have an argument for why Dolezal is a monster/deranged and trans people are unsung heroes?


Thu Dec 19, 2019 6:33 pm
Profile
Indiana Jones IV
User avatar

Joined: Fri Oct 22, 2004 8:24 pm
Posts: 1333
Location: Southern California
Post Re: "Self Identification" vs "Cultural appropriation"?
Magnus wrote:

To be clear, I am not agreeing or advocating any attacks on JK. I was trying to provide an descriptive explanation as to why people feel the need to attack her, not a justification for it.

Also, the term 'cisgender' in the way it is used by most has nothing to do with sex. Your sex is male. Your gender would be cisgender. As I said, there still is not a full consensus on terminology and definitions on a lot of this stuff so I'm not claiming all of this to be dogmatic.


I didn't get the impression you were pro-anti-Rowling ;) And your use of cisgender just reminded me of the many discussions I've had with people (my own sister among them) about that stupid word.


Thu Dec 19, 2019 6:36 pm
Profile
So much has happened to me that I don’t understand
User avatar

Joined: Sun Jul 31, 2005 2:30 am
Posts: 32157
Post Re: "Self Identification" vs "Cultural appropriation"?
Just to note, JK and the person she was defending (Maya Forstater) have no problem with people identifying with a different gender. She was saying that you can change your gender but you can’t change your sex, and that a male who removes his genitalia is still a biological male, even if their gender is female. I agree with this because there are more things that make someone a biological male or female than their outer body parts.

Effectively what’s happening is the trans movement already “won” the debate about gender, so now they want to win the debate about sex as well by allowing people who had surgery to be legally considered the other sex, not just the other gender. And there’s a whole bunch of people online who are just going to have an automatic Pavlovian response any time something remotely anti-trans is posted.

As for Rachel, frankly it would make more sense to call her black if she got some permanent skin procedure and other facial surgery to give her black features, than to call a post op trans woman a biological female. In the latter case her insides are still not female, while race is mostly defined by the stuff you can change on the outside. Was it wrong to call Michael Jackson white? Not sure.


Thu Dec 19, 2019 7:26 pm
Profile
KJ's Leading Pundit
User avatar

Joined: Tue Oct 12, 2004 4:45 pm
Posts: 62765
Location: Tonight... YOU!
Post Re: "Self Identification" vs "Cultural appropriation"?
Shack wrote:
Just to note, JK and the person she was defending (Maya Forstater) have no problem with people identifying with a different gender. She was saying that you can change your gender but you can’t change your sex, and that a male who removes his genitalia is still a biological male, even if their gender is female. I agree with this because there are more things that make someone a biological male or female than their outer body parts.

Effectively what’s happening is the trans movement already “won” the debate about gender, so now they want to win the debate about sex as well by allowing people who had surgery to be legally considered the other sex, not just the other gender. And there’s a whole bunch of people online who are just going to have an automatic Pavlovian response any time something remotely anti-trans is posted.

As for Rachel, frankly it would make more sense to call her black if she got some permanent skin procedure and other facial surgery to give her black features, than to call a post op trans woman a biological female. In the latter case her insides are still not female, while race is mostly defined by the stuff you can change on the outside. Was it wrong to call Michael Jackson white? Not sure.


Did all the twitter trolls tell you that? Because that's 100% not what the situation is.

_________________
trixster wrote:
shut the fuck up zwackerm, you're out of your fucking element

trixster wrote:
chippy is correct

Rev wrote:
Fuck Trump


Fri Dec 20, 2019 10:27 am
Profile
So much has happened to me that I don’t understand
User avatar

Joined: Sun Jul 31, 2005 2:30 am
Posts: 32157
Post Re: "Self Identification" vs "Cultural appropriation"?
Chippy wrote:
Shack wrote:
Just to note, JK and the person she was defending (Maya Forstater) have no problem with people identifying with a different gender. She was saying that you can change your gender but you can’t change your sex, and that a male who removes his genitalia is still a biological male, even if their gender is female. I agree with this because there are more things that make someone a biological male or female than their outer body parts.

Effectively what’s happening is the trans movement already “won” the debate about gender, so now they want to win the debate about sex as well by allowing people who had surgery to be legally considered the other sex, not just the other gender. And there’s a whole bunch of people online who are just going to have an automatic Pavlovian response any time something remotely anti-trans is posted.

As for Rachel, frankly it would make more sense to call her black if she got some permanent skin procedure and other facial surgery to give her black features, than to call a post op trans woman a biological female. In the latter case her insides are still not female, while race is mostly defined by the stuff you can change on the outside. Was it wrong to call Michael Jackson white? Not sure.


Did all the twitter trolls tell you that? Because that's 100% not what the situation is.


Yes it is





They are talking about biological sex not gender, and JK’s tweets divides the two pretty clearly

The problem for trans is that unlike gender which was a social construction and therefore easy to change, we did not make up biological sex, and it doesn’t only exist in us. So because biological sex truths of life threatens to undercut everything trans is trying to do with gender, trans will likely have to push some idea like sex no longer being real or being ambiguous enough that it can be replaced with gender. There are feminists on the other side (called TERFs derogatorily) who push the biological sex over gender idea because they hate gender in general, as it’s a social concept that implies to be a woman you have to act/talk/look feminine or to be a man you have to act masculine. So this makes them natural adversaries to the trans movement who need gender for any of it to work. With that said it’s unclear if either JK or Maya have that position


Fri Dec 20, 2019 2:12 pm
Profile
KJ's Leading Pundit
User avatar

Joined: Tue Oct 12, 2004 4:45 pm
Posts: 62765
Location: Tonight... YOU!
Post Re: "Self Identification" vs "Cultural appropriation"?
SHE DIDN'T GET FIRED FOR STATING "sex is real".

That's fucking insane. Good god.

_________________
trixster wrote:
shut the fuck up zwackerm, you're out of your fucking element

trixster wrote:
chippy is correct

Rev wrote:
Fuck Trump


Fri Dec 20, 2019 2:18 pm
Profile
100% That Bitch
User avatar

Joined: Wed Dec 17, 2008 3:42 pm
Posts: 15903
Location: Monterrey, Mexico
Post Re: "Self Identification" vs "Cultural appropriation"?
OMG did I really read gender dismorphya? Me as a gay doctor find this to be the biggest bullshit ever and ofc it comes from Zwackerm. That fucking disorder has been erSed from the latest DSM V. It's not a thing.

It is not real. Stop using that shit and educate yourself better. I beg you still are afraid of "the gays" coming at you when they are near you. Such a fucking disgrace someone who's younger than me thinks of that.

_________________

Image
Tongue Pop!


I kneel with Magnus.


Sat Dec 21, 2019 1:26 pm
Profile
The Kramer
User avatar

Joined: Sat Oct 23, 2004 11:36 am
Posts: 17348
Location: Classified
Post Re: "Self Identification" vs "Cultural appropriation"?
Maybe I just play too much civilization, but isn't spreading your culture the goal? I've never understood the whole appropriation thing. Let's teach our children about the wonders of diversity by telling them they can only be what they look like? Just take their money.

As for the Ts, yes they are overly sensitive about vocabulary and have an "it's our turn now" syndrome, but at the same time, why does anybody even care enough to push back against them? I think they are mostly just used as symbols for both liberals and conservatives rather than seeing them as actual people. JK didn't have to retweet this, she was trying to start a discussion and it was a mistake, and she deserves a little bit of negative press because of it.

_________________
I kneel with Magnus.

Followers of the anti-christ will show their allegiance by wearing his marking on their forehead.


Sat Dec 21, 2019 2:31 pm
Profile
The Kramer
User avatar

Joined: Sat Oct 23, 2004 11:36 am
Posts: 17348
Location: Classified
Post Re: "Self Identification" vs "Cultural appropriation"?
Magnus wrote:
The real solution is that no one should give a fuck what JK says because she's just a childrens book writer with no authority on majority of topics.
So she should shut up and dribble? Can't agree with that one. She did her best to show several generations of people how toxic the death eaters ideology was. Hermoine, her status as muggle born already making her the victim of discrimination, chooses to stand up for another group of marginalized people. She's probably the biggest fictional influence for modern liberalism.

_________________
I kneel with Magnus.

Followers of the anti-christ will show their allegiance by wearing his marking on their forehead.


Sat Dec 21, 2019 2:37 pm
Profile
Indiana Jones IV
User avatar

Joined: Fri Oct 22, 2004 8:24 pm
Posts: 1333
Location: Southern California
Post Re: "Self Identification" vs "Cultural appropriation"?
Magnus wrote:
Also, the term 'cisgender' in the way it is used by most has nothing to do with sex. Your sex is male. Your gender would be cisgender. As I said, there still is not a full consensus on terminology and definitions on a lot of this stuff so I'm not claiming all of this to be dogmatic.


Well, according to what I've read at several sites the last couple months that's a horribly offensive and insensitive thing to say because "sex" is apparently also a societal construct brutishly yielded by idiot doctors who get to decide on a whim what each baby is as it leaves the womb--genitals be damned ;) Also, I'm still on the lookout for any reason beyond "because" why these are wildly different scenarios (and simply calling me deranged, or whatever, isn't actually a reason/argument):

A -
Someone is born a white lady, they "self identify" as black and then live every day of life as Black-Woman-in-the-World as far as they (and everyone they know) are concerned.
= NOT okay, a bad lady who must be ostracized.

B -
Someone is born a white lady, they "self identify" as male and then live every day of life as Guy-in-the-World as far as they (and everyone they know) are concerned.
= :thumbsup: They're people, too! BURN JK ROWLING AT THE STAKE!!!

If sex/gender are societal constructs and the body you're born into is simply a shell to be altered to fit what your brain says you are, then how come the same can't be said for race? One is all in our heads, even if the physical form dictates otherwise, but the other isn't and I'm horrible for asking why? I've read through *several* articles/papers/etc on the transracial/transgender differences/similarities and the ones that disregard "transracial" as being a thing in and of itself do so via arguments that could be applied to "transgender" with great ease so...again, why are they so fundamentally different?

*I am 100% not looking for childish name calling and finger pointing, this is an actual topic that I'm interested in discussing so hopefully a vitriol-free back and forth is possible :cool:


Mon Jun 08, 2020 2:08 am
Profile
100% That Bitch
User avatar

Joined: Wed Dec 17, 2008 3:42 pm
Posts: 15903
Location: Monterrey, Mexico
Post Re: "Self Identification" vs "Cultural appropriation"?
Because I cannot believe this post with my eyes.

I'm not even gonna explain how wrong that post was.

_________________

Image
Tongue Pop!


I kneel with Magnus.


Mon Jun 08, 2020 2:52 am
Profile
Indiana Jones IV
User avatar

Joined: Fri Oct 22, 2004 8:24 pm
Posts: 1333
Location: Southern California
Post Re: "Self Identification" vs "Cultural appropriation"?
And I'm asking you--why? Do you have an argument/thoughts, or do you just want to sit back and feel superior? There are articles by professors/biologists/etc that address this very thing I'm asking about, so it isn't as if I'm speaking lunacy--these are topical discussion points whether they make you feel happy inside or not :mer:

Civil discourse with people who have different opinions than your own is part of life. I'm not ranting and raving or throwing vulgarities and slurs around or calling for violence--I'm simply saying fully formed words in sentence form and asking for other input.

What's so hard about doing the same? Can you?


Mon Jun 08, 2020 3:05 am
Profile
So much has happened to me that I don’t understand
User avatar

Joined: Sun Jul 31, 2005 2:30 am
Posts: 32157
Post Re: "Self Identification" vs "Cultural appropriation"?
There is clearly a bigger difference between sexes than race biologically, so I agree with Malcolm that you can't really find an excuse to be outraged at Rachel while being a full trans supporter.

For example many of the things that we separate by sex like bathrooms, sports, etc. were once divided by race as well, and we have since decided that it was racist to do so. We're allowed to identify as having attraction to either the opposite sex or same sex, and the latter can have parades to celebrate the latter - imagine how unacceptable if people only attracted to black people identified as it or had a parade celebrating it? Society has correctly determined that man v woman is a bigger gap than skin colour.


Mon Jun 08, 2020 10:47 am
Profile
Indiana Jones IV
User avatar

Joined: Fri Oct 22, 2004 8:24 pm
Posts: 1333
Location: Southern California
Post Re: "Self Identification" vs "Cultural appropriation"?
Hey look, a response that actually put some thought into things instead of patting yourself on the back for being so woke ;) Even though we don't agree on several things I appreciate your ability to not behave like several others here, who seem genuinely unable/unwilling to engage in civil discourse. I'm not surprised by the complete lack of reasonable argument from certain folks, as this isn't my first rodeo, but it's still a shame that some don't seem to know that a discussion forum is for discussing things.

An echo chamber seems more like what several people here would prefer to participate in :thumbsup:


Mon Jun 08, 2020 2:13 pm
Profile
So much has happened to me that I don’t understand
User avatar

Joined: Sun Jul 31, 2005 2:30 am
Posts: 32157
Post Re: "Self Identification" vs "Cultural appropriation"?
Malcolm wrote:
Hey look, a response that actually put some thought into things instead of patting yourself on the back for being so woke ;) Even though we don't agree on several things I appreciate your ability to not behave like several others here, who seem genuinely unable/unwilling to engage in civil discourse. I'm not surprised by the complete lack of reasonable argument from certain folks, as this isn't my first rodeo, but it's still a shame that some don't seem to know that a discussion forum is for discussing things.

An echo chamber seems more like what several people here would prefer to participate in :thumbsup:


Honestly compared to everywhere else on the internet right now this forum does well for allowing different perspectives.

Mob mentality/emotion driven responses/bullying has taken over political discourse on the internet right now.


Mon Jun 08, 2020 2:56 pm
Profile
Indiana Jones IV
User avatar

Joined: Fri Oct 22, 2004 8:24 pm
Posts: 1333
Location: Southern California
Post Re: "Self Identification" vs "Cultural appropriation"?
That's true in regards to these forums themselves, which I appreciate. I've been a member other places where they simply block/ban/etc *anything* a moderator perceives to be "negative" which varied greatly depending on the moderator's particular views.

Personally, whenever masses of people get together for any purpose I'll either bunker down somewhere or head the other direction--tons of people all together often result in mob mentality situations and no thank you, pass. I prefer discussion, civil discourse, debate, voting your interests (including/especially at the local level), and crazy backwards things like that.

I’ll also say that people are going a little overboard with descriptors that nobody could guess by looking at you or that simply don't apply and then calling it bigotry/hate the “right” word wasn’t used--for example, a person who’s born a female but identifies as male and chooses to dress/act as they understand “male” to be without any biological alterations while being sexually attracted to women who identifies as a “trans man.” That’s not a hypothetical, by the way--that’s a real person I know (well, knew). Until fairly recent history that person would have been a lesbian (a female sexually attracted to females), but now they’re a straight man because they say so? Huh what? Simply dressing and acting as one perceives a "man" to be isn't actually becoming a physical male. I could dress female and act as I understand "female" to be all I want, but that doesn't actually make me a female.


Mon Jun 08, 2020 3:29 pm
Profile
So much has happened to me that I don’t understand
User avatar

Joined: Sun Jul 31, 2005 2:30 am
Posts: 32157
Post Re: "Self Identification" vs "Cultural appropriation"?
delete


Mon Jun 08, 2020 4:13 pm
Profile
Display posts from previous:  Sort by  
Reply to topic   [ 38 posts ]  Go to page 1, 2  Next

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 6 guests


You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You cannot post attachments in this forum

Search for:
Jump to:  
cron
Powered by phpBB © 2000, 2002, 2005, 2007 phpBB Group.
Designed by STSoftware for PTF.