The "standard definition" of "cultural appropriation" nowadays seems to be when someone from an oppressing group copies -- out of context -- an element of a culture that the oppressed group subscribes to. As if a person is automatically responsible for what others of their group does, which seems kind of, you know, discriminatory. It seems to go hand in hand with the notion that culture itself is rigidly defined (for example, "this is French culture," and "that is Navajo culture," and "that's Japanese culture").
Copying culture itself (at least in the absence of deliberate fraud) isn't theft anyway, as one can't steal what can't be stolen. The term "cultural appropriation" itself is, dare I say, "problematic." I think the whole notion of "cultural appropriation" was born out of the notion of intellectual property, which is distinctly modern.
Enforced white assimilation, that's for sure.
And yet, a public figure actually has a horribly offensive costume, and they'll sit on their hands. Why? Because it's easier to go after kids dressed as eskimos, because they won't fight back, and their parents are too guilted to say anything.
Throw in a white woman dressed as Al Bundy or Archie Bunker while we're at it.
