#reappropriation

[thesilicontribesman]

Roman Woman Dressed As A Pharaoh, Roman Period, 100 to 200 CE, Liverpool World Museum

A granite statue in the Egyptian style for a Roman house or garden.

[processes]

[filth-thezine]

When he was with a client, he had to be careful not to use any of the forbidden words. Struggle, resist, rebel, queer—and a host of others—were considered too radical by the State and had been banned decades ago, replaced with more innocuous words such as 'to make effort ', 'to dispute' and 'to betray'. Queer, having passed through 'LGBTQIA+' at the turn of the century and 'Sexual and gender divergents' to decades later, now had no permissible equivalent that wasn't a slur. As the linguists working in the State knew very well, without a vocabulary to express it, there could be no concept. By banning the very idea of queerness, they hoped that the people themselves would also disappear.

Otter Lieffe, Margins and Murmurations

[beyond-mogai-pride-flags]

Lesbo Pride Flag

A pride flag for reclaiming the word Lesbo. Often directed at sapphics and lesbians. [id.: 3 horizontal stripes of foggy pink, lavender indigo, and dark orange/orangy black. ends id.]

[etakeh]

Tweet from Fifty Shades of Whey @ davenewworld_2 dated July 4, 2021

Hobby Lobby hates diversity so much they took out a full-page ad in the papers saying America should only be led by Christians, which is why I'm taking out a full-tweet ad to let you know Hobby Lobby doesn't keep track of inventory which is why people always shoplift there. 💁🏽‍♂️ https://t.co/gLSYXwyIQ4

Included is a screenshot from the Hobby Lobby website:

Why are your stores closed on Sundays?

We have chosen to close on the day most widely recognized as a day of rest, in order to allow our employees and customers more time for worship and family. This has not been an easy decision for Hobby Lobby because we realize that there are things more important than profits. This is a matter of principle for our company owner and officers.

Why don't you use scanners in your stores?

We have considered scanning at our registers, but do not feel it is right for us at this time.

_________________

In case you were wondering, there are comments on this post suggesting that hey don’t use barcodes because of Revelations - "scanning would be a sign of the Beast."

Another comment reads

"The line pattern at the beginning, middle, and end of a barcode is very similar but not identical to the pattern used for 6. So people are (incorrectly) taught there's a 666 on every barcode. Further muddying things, my understanding is that the mark may not even been 666 at all."

I mean ok.

[transmissionsfromthebattlefield]

Flag of Discomfort, 2022

Digital illustration

[kny111]

Reappropriation

Linguistic reappropriation, reclamation or resignification[1] is the cultural process by which a group reclaims words or artifacts that were previously used in a way disparaging of that group.

Characteristics

A reclaimed or reappropriated word is a word that was at one time pejorative but has been brought back into acceptable usage, usually starting within its original target, i.e. the communities that were pejoratively described by that word, and later spreading to the general populace as well.[2][1][3] Some of the terms being reclaimed have originated as non-pejorative terms that over time became pejorative. Reclaiming them can be seen as restoring their original intent. This, however, does not apply to all such words as some were used in a derogatory fashion from the very beginning.[1]

In terms of linguistic theory, reappropriation can be seen as a specific case of a type of a semantic change, namely, of amelioration - a process through which a word's meaning becomes more positive over time.[4]

Brontsema suggested that there are at least three identifiable goals of reclamation: 1) value reversal  2) neutralization  3) stigma exploitation. The value reversal refers to changing the meaning from pejorative to neutral or positive. Neutralization refers to denying the term to those who want to use it, or words in general, to oppress and hurt another group. Stigma exploitation, finally, refers to the use of such terms as a reminder that a given group has been subject to unfair treatment. Those goals can be mutually exclusive, in particular stigma exploitation is incompatible with the other two goals.[1]

Reclamation can be seen as both an individual, psychological process and as a sociological, society-wide process.[5][6] In terms of a personal process, it has been discussed in the context of empowerment that comes from "disarming the power of a dominant group to control one’s own and others’ views of oneself", and gaining control over they way one is described, and hence, one's self-image, self-control and self-understanding.[6][3] Brontsema wrote that "At the heart of linguistic reclamation is the right of self-definition, of forging and naming one’s own existence."[1] Other scholars have connected this concept to that of self-labelling.[3] The empowerment process, and the denial of language as a tool of oppression as abuse of power, has also been stressed by scholars such as Judith Butler and Michel Foucault, the latter who also referred to it as a "reverse discourse".[7]

In terms of wider sociopolitical empowerment process, reclamation process has also been credited with promoting social justice,[8] building of group solidarity[7] and activists group that engage in this process have been argued to be more likely to be seen as representatives of their groups and see those groups as raising in power and status in the society.[3] Scholars have argued that those who use such terms to describe themselves in the act of reappropriation "will feel powerful and therefore see his or her group label as less stigmatizing. Observers will infer that the group has power and will therefore see the label as less saturated in negativity".[3]

Although those terms are most often used in context of language, this concept has also been used in relation to other cultural concepts, for example in the discussion of reappropriation of stereotypes[9] of reappropriation of mass, popular culture like science fiction literature into elite, high literature[10] or reappropriation of traditions.[11]

[primrose-path-of-dalliance]

you know, i’ve never exactly had my finger on the pulse of the hamilton fandom or the numerous articles that got written about it back when it was at its peak. but i really think there’s an aspect of what this musical did culturally that’s very underrated. there was a lot of criticism about how hamilton never featured historic people of color in its cast or lyrics. and i agree that the absence of characters of color in musical media needs to be corrected.

but hamilton’s purpose was always about something else. failure in one avenue doesn’t mean there weren’t other, successful intentions of good. to understand that, take a step back and reflect upon the reactions of white detractors of hamilton. you know what they complained about?

how hamilton was historically inaccurate because the original historical figures were white. how hamilton was “discriminatory” toward white broadway actors because hiring focused on actors of color.

what hamilton did was give powerful, high-profile opportunities to living musical actors of color, both established and aspiring, across multiple countries. what hamilton did was service theater students from communities dominated by populations of color. what hamilton did was look at a story written by our oppressors, created and controlled for so long by white people, and said “hey, this shit is ours now. we’re taking it.”

hamilton was an act of re-appropriating a narrative used against us for ages and rewriting it:

so that the people telling it were actors of color,

so that the themes were those of the experiences of marginalized communities in the united states,

so that the musical genres were as far from western standards of “respectable music” as could be unironically performed in the white house as a work of art ever.

you know what hamilton did? it had a cast of nearly all actors of color on stage in the white house, performing seriously and authentically to an audience of majority white and wealthy politicians.

it had okieriete onaodowan (a nigerian american), anthony ramos (a puerto rican american), daveed diggs (a jewish black american), and leslie odom jr. (a black american) on that very stage as they listened to lin manuel miranda (a puerto rican american) beside them rap:

I imagine death so much it feels more like a memory When’s it gonna get me? In my sleep? Seven feet ahead of me? If I see it comin’, do I run or do I let it be? Is it like a beat without a melody? See, I never thought I’d live past twenty Where I come from some get half as many Ask anybody why we livin’ fast and we laugh, reach for a flask We have to make this moment last, that’s plenty

that’s not a song for the white folk. that’s not a song for the wealthy and powerful. that’s a song for every single marginalized, impoverished person in this world who sees death in front of them clear as day rather than a hypothetical lying decades away.

what hamilton did was take a story used by our oppressors and give it back to living communities of color. and that’s sorely underrated in social justice these days.