Cultural appropriation - is something that is done daily primarily to sell things originating in "third-world" countries for the psycho-social-entertainment of Western audiences. It centres around de-contextualized and ahistorical readings of other cultures for mainly profit incentives. But how is this perpetuated by the "sex industry"? How is this often (not always) supported by "sex radical activists" and academics? This excerpt is from an article at feministing.com about a new book called "Sacred Sex for the Twenty-first century" (sounds just like the last century to me!):
Tantra was once a supremely revolutionary practice. Tantra in India in its early days probably looked something like the social revolution in America in the 1960s: experimentation with sex and drugs, group ecstatic rituals with music, dancing and sex, loving whomever you chose regardless of race or background, and questioning the moral, ethical, and philosophical precepts of the day. In the twentieth century, Tantra was reintroduced in the West by a few brave sex, gender, spiritual, and political radicals who ventured to India in search of an active spirituality that would embrace and empower everyone in all aspects of life, including the sexual and political. The practice of Tantra today can once again be revolutionary in the face of the current cultural rise of fundamentalist sex and gender politics.
notice the probably? That's a pretty big assumption, cause you know - most of what happened in the 60s in India was often perpetuated by money grubbing upper caste pseudo-gurus to get western ppl's money. Kind of like 'spiritual tourism' - and anyone with even a basic understanding of third world politics of tourism will understand the problematic dynamics there in. In case you don't - here's a lurvly article. Also the 'experimentation' that the author assumes is 'so common' - was not common. It was isolated to very few upper class indians who had money. Such freedoms were not part of the lived experiences of many. So like anything that's about 'cultural appropriation' - it is again white people who define the creativity, the assumption of what was going on 'over there'. I.e. other cultures & other people are generally are only good to white-noeliberalism and commodification (or white politics) as long as they fortify what is being said by the white person/cultural creator at hand. The context/history is lost, and what's sold is 'culture'.
Notice the usage of the word bravery??? And how the people who bravely introduced this were pretty much like past 'pioneers' i.e. colonists. Not really a new dynamic here. Yeah, white ppl looking for a few fuck-ons in brown countries...nothing new here either, the US military has done that in every country they've ever invaded anyways. That's not really 'brave', it's about american entitlement and having mula and lots of it.
It's really interesting because in the previous paragraph, the author mentions the following:
Other people are turned off by the idea of Tantra and Tantric sex because of its image in America as couples therapy for white, middle-aged, middle-class, apolitical, woo-woo, New Age, sarong-wearing workshop junkies. In fact, Tantra is practiced in a wide variety of styles by a wide variety of people, including some of my friends who are young, leather-clad, gender-fucked anarchists who are into BDSM. Tantra embraces all genders, sexual styes and sexual preferences. It is primarily concerned with inner mystical experiences, not relationships and wardrobe.
So though she pays lip-service to 'white middle aged middle class people", which is super-funny because that only absolves her from her own whiteness/white guilt while trying to sell it to another group of white people which is indicated in "other people are turned off".
It's like for chrissakes, do I give a shit if the person next to me is called a 'hippie' or a 'granola'?... same shit, different neoliberal label. I don't care. Only white people are 'individuals' anyways, and from her interview that shines through repetitively.
Whatever, this is not new - and happens ALL the time, for something more local, read here. This was a fiasco that took place about two years ago. It resulted in a massive letter writing campaign by many south asian organizations.
Does Fashion Care about Racism?
"During the featured entertainment, I saw lots of white people with cowboy hats and tattoos with brown powder on their faces and bodies. After Black people have fought long and hard on the racist use of “black face"? in entertainment, I felt disheartened that in 2005, few lessons have been learned."
I will say this though, this is just Pt.1 of cultural appropriation of sexuality and the promotion of it often by white-upper-middle class academic sex positive theorists/white activists/cultural producers etc.... It's interesting because no one seems to be touching upon this element in academia, even though grassroots south asian activists here in Toronto have already drawn attention to the matter themselves. Namely in regards to their marginalization in both the LGBTTTIQ community and the non-profit industrial complex.
Comments closed, I just can't do it right now.
ETA: I removed the previous remark because it was awkward.
