Free yoga class cancelled - is guilty of "cultural appropriation"

[LaCroix]

I've known never-born-there indians who were very culturally indian

[Valmy]

I've known never-born-there indians who were very culturally indian

And I have known others who were not.

[LaCroix]

It is just the assumption she has some kind of deeper knowledge or cultural appreciation because of what she looks like.

and itt there are people who assume she doesn't have a deeper knowledge or cultural appreciation based on flimsy evidence

[LaCroix]

And I have known others who were not.

okay, but what makes more sense: the public canadian university removed a yoga instructor from a yoga class due to "cultural misappropriation" of indian culture and replaced the instructor with someone who had no indian culture, or the university replaced the instructor with someone who had indian culture?

[Valmy]

It is just the assumption she has some kind of deeper knowledge or cultural appreciation because of what she looks like.

and itt there are people who assume she doesn't have a deeper knowledge or cultural appreciation based on flimsy evidence

Whomever those people are should feel ashamed. But nobody is claiming that. Rather that she has no golden trophy of superiority to teach something because she looks like people of a certain country. Like demanding a Chinese language teacher look Chinese.

[LaCroix]

Whomever those people are should feel ashamed. But nobody is claiming that. Rather that she has no golden trophy of superiority to teach something because she looks like people of a certain country. Like demanding a Chinese language teacher look Chinese.

you're assuming she was chosen simply because of her looks. why couldn't she have been chosen because (1) her looks, and (2) she's culturally indian?

[Valmy]

And I have known others who were not.

okay, but what makes more sense: the public canadian university removed a yoga instructor from a yoga class due to "cultural misappropriation" of indian culture and replaced the instructor with someone who had no indian culture, or the university replaced the instructor with someone who had indian culture?

It was not like they fired an employee here dude. They banned somebody offering free services and accused them of committing some kind of racist crime because she was not a native Indian. Then they gave their blessing to another person who was also not a native Indian but looked like one.

[Valmy]

you're assuming she was chosen simply because of her looks. why couldn't she have been chosen because (1) her looks, and (2) she's culturally indian?

She was not "chosen" she was permitted. Others are banned.

[LaCroix]

It was not like they fired an employee here dude. They banned somebody offering free services and accused them of committing some kind of racist crime because she was not a native Indian. Then they gave their blessing to another person who was also not a native Indian but looked like one.

more assumptions

original instructor was removed because she wasn't indian. they then found an indian. you and grumbler are saying the indian they found wasn't culturally indian when there's no evidence of that. if they had replaced the original instructor with an indian who wasn't culturally indian, that would be pretty dang offensive. it would also reflect really, really badly on the university when the university is already dealing with a nationally reported incident.

She was not "chosen" she was permitted. Others are banned.

you're dodging the question. just change what I said from "chosen" to "permit" = whether chosen or permitted... that's irrelevant to this discussion

[Valmy]

you're dodging the question. just change what I said from "chosen" to "permit" = whether chosen or permitted... that's irrelevant to this discussion

Yes it is. You are presenting this like they were hiring somebody for a position and wanted somebody more qualified. Which is not true.

Would the original woman have been banned if her skin color had been different even if she had not been more culturally Indian? Of course not.

original instructor was removed because she wasn't indian. they then found an indian.

They found a Canadian with the right pigmentation.

original instructor was removed because she wasn't indian. they then found an indian. you and grumbler are saying the indian they found wasn't culturally indian when there's no evidence of that. if they had replaced the original instructor with an indian who wasn't culturally indian, that would be pretty dang offensive. it would also reflect really, really badly on the university when the university is already dealing with a nationally reported incident.

Seriously? So they should also ban people who look Indian but are not sufficiently culturally Indian? Who determines that?

Man lots of people have be banned before we reach something non-offensive.

[LaCroix]

you're dodging the question. just change what I said from "chosen" to "permit" = whether chosen or permitted... that's irrelevant to this discussion

Yes it is. You are presenting this like they were hiring somebody for a position and wanted somebody more qualified. Which is not true.

Would the original woman have been banned if her skin color had been different even if she had not been more culturally Indian? Of course not.

original instructor was removed because she wasn't indian. they then found an indian.

They found a Canadian with the right pigmentation.

original instructor was removed because she wasn't indian. they then found an indian. you and grumbler are saying the indian they found wasn't culturally indian when there's no evidence of that. if they had replaced the original instructor with an indian who wasn't culturally indian, that would be pretty dang offensive. it would also reflect really, really badly on the university when the university is already dealing with a nationally reported incident.

Seriously? So they should also ban people who look Indian but are not sufficiently culturally Indian? Who determines that?

Man lots of people have be banned before we reach something non-offensive.

I already said in this thread that the university originally made a stupid decision by trying to appease a complaint. your discussion seems focused on that original decision. we're not talking about the original instructor and the university's first decision.

just because the original instructor was removed due to her skin color (and probably because she wasn't culturally indian - if for whatever reason the original instructor was a white chick who was culturally indian and that was somehow acceptable to society, I'm guessing she wouldn't have been removed due to "cultural misappropriation"), doesn't mean the replacement was permitted (i.e., the university chose to permit her) solely because of her skin color. the fact that the replacement instructor has actually been to india suggests that this replacement has at least some indian cultural identity

[Malthus]

The new Yoga teacher seems to be saying pretty expressly that she identifies as a Canadian with an "Indian background".

"Nothing was brought to my attention to teach in a different way or do something differently than the other instructor because none of that was really mentioned to me," Priya Shah, the new teacher, told the CBC. "When I read [about it], I was kind of thinking 'Did they hire me because I'm Indian?. . . I was born in Calgary, I grew up in Canada but my background is Indian and I've been there once before. I was there for about five months."

She added: "There are many people in my family who practice but I've never had the thought that since I'm Indian that I'm a better yoga teacher." 

Her point appears to be that her "Indian background" has nothing whatsoever to do with her teaching of yoga, which will go on exactly as under the other instructor; she expressly states that she never thought the fact she's Indian would make her any better at it.

The inescapable suspicion is that she was hired because of her race: or, as she herself put it, "Did they hire me because I'm Indian?". Apparently, there was no issue of actual changing the content of the course: "Nothing was brought to my attention to teach in a different way or do something differently than the other instructor because none of that was really mentioned to me...".

[grumbler]

Well surely both have the base qualification of being able to teach yoga. Your post makes it sounds like the new woman doesn't even know any yoga.

I can only reach conclusions based on eidence.  Your "surely" conclusion isn't based on any evidence (in fact, the new teacher, being interviewed about the job, never even mentions that she practices yoga, just that some of her family does).  Sorry the truth makes it sound like something you don't like, but I can't change the evidence.

Besides it was 'perceived race' that was the issue so not surprising they would use it as the fix.

That's what makes it so funny and, at the same time, so pathetic. "Indian" is a "race," now?  Racist organizations should be run off campus, not accommodated.

[grumbler]

more assumptions

original instructor was removed because she wasn't indian. they then found an indian. you and grumbler are saying the indian they found wasn't culturally indian when there's no evidence of that. if they had replaced the original instructor with an indian who wasn't culturally indian, that would be pretty dang offensive. it would also reflect really, really badly on the university when the university is already dealing with a nationally reported incident.

More assumptions.  You have no idea how "culturally Indian" (whatever that means) the new instructor is, nor how many "culturally Indian" points the university required the new teacher to have to be able to pass the "culturally Indian" litmus test... if being "culturally Indian" was even a factor (which no one says it was).  The new teacher has the right skin color and name to satisfy the racist litmus test, so she's in.

And this is a public university doing this?  They really should know better.

[Valmy]

Oh wait...she was hired? I thought this was a volunteer instructor giving free classes? Maybe I misunderstood.