How cultural

but its validity has been misconstrued as people have continued to use it without understanding others’ intent.

Seki highlights the success of the Montreal Protocol and reaffirms its significance in the fight against climate change. Through the implementation of the Montreal Protocol, the Earth has reduced a 1 degree Celsius increase in our Earth’s global temperatures. Scientists warn that an increase to 1.5 degrees Celsius would drastically increase the risks of natural disasters such as floods, fires, droughts, and food shortages.

Secretary-General of the World Meteorological Organization Petteri Taalas explained why the restoration of the ozone was dire.

“Our success in phasing out ozone-eating chemicals shows us what can and must be done as a matter of urgency to transition away from fossil fuels, reduce greenhouse gasses, and limit temperature increase.”

Taalas emphasizes the idea that the ozone’s recovery can act as proof to … society that environmental issues are manageable, and the only way to fix environmental issues is by banding together.

On Jan. 15, 2022, Hunga TongaHunga Ha-apai, a submarine volcano in the Tongan archipelago in the southern Pacific Ocean,. erupted, and the powerful blast released an alarming amount of water vapor, aerosols, and ash; the three main contributors to the environmental crisis. Additionally, China’s sudden increase of CFC-11, a hydrochlorofluorocarbon used in foam insulation and refrigerant, violated the agreements of the Montreal Protocol. China delayed restoration by a decade; however, it was only by a year due to the Chinese government cracking down on the use of CFC11, and eliminating its use in 2019.

Due to the effects of volcanic eruptions like Hunga Tonga and the increased use of CFC-11 in China, the levels of ozone recovery have not been steady. Throughout these struggles, the effort to restore the ozone remains, and the estimations for full ozone recuperation stand strong.

– Kyra Trifiletti

Cultural appropriation brings out the worst in everyone.

Our world is made up of countless cultures – represented in the languages we speak, the clothes we wear, the food we eat, as well as the traditions and customs we follow.

Every culture is different, but we see threads similar to one another as they continue to be embraced and evolve.

More specifically, in nations like America, where communities have been built on immigration and interaction, cultures have entered a melting pot of diversity. However, in more modern debates, ethical expressions of culture have been challenged with ‘cultural appropriation.’

In a decade of cancel culture and polarization, has the term ‘cultural appropriation’ become desensitized? That raises the question, which is the root of this heated issue: giving more credit, representation, education, and or sensitivity?

Cultural appropriation is defined as “the unacknowledged or inappropriate adoption” of customs practices, or ideas of a person or society. The term has been popularized on social media platforms,

It has been paired with arguments of individuals ‘owning’ cultures, instead of not understanding or misrepresenting them. And while these arguments raise logical questions as to who can declare some practice or object as their own, it also opens debate on misrepresentation and the unrecognized victimhood of minorities.

For instance, fashion is a common scapegoat for cultural appropriation. While an individual can claim a piece of clothing has traditional ties to their culture, claiming to exclusively own it is an offensive stretch.

The issue is, by ‘owning’ a culture, you take it upon yourself to police anyone outside of your culture for wearing or taking influence from that specific piece of clothing.

Even more, it dismisses other cultures that may have historically similar foundations in fashion. This mindset stands hypocritical of diversity, building itself on the theory where X is yours, Y is mine, and there could never be a crossover. Not only does this encourage the segregation of cultures, but it also eliminates the defense for finding a tradition in fashion simply appealing.

As humans, we are all naturally drawn to things we find attractive. But when this argument arises, it is immediately shut down for the offensive, surfacelevel use of aesthetics.

What makes these situations even more difficult to resolve is that the counters against cultural appropriation are rarely considered, as those who claim to ‘own’ a culture dig into the assumption of ill intent.

The cancel-and-attack mentality society so heavily turns toward today keeps a polarizing divide from recognizing the real issue – accurate representation. In most cases, it is impossible to track down the origin of a cultural practice or object.

In theory, the argument of giving credit to a culture’s owner seems fair, but it is both impractical and unnecessary when you consider how basic representations of cultures have now gone global – consistently borrowed and shared in today’s age of the internet and travel. More dire attention needs to be placed on educated intent and representation.

When we adopt a custom or item from a culture outside of our own, understanding where it comes from and why we choose to wear it should be the bare minimum. If it is out of mockery or insensitivity, marginalized groups have a right to speak about their frustration. The marginalized groups that culture is being taken from often feel more passionate about appropriating culture because they come from a background of structural racism, degrading stereotypes, and fetishization.

Yet, they should have adequate avenues to represent their culture in the same ways celebrities outside of their culture do – in celebration, not degradation.

Accurate representation outweighs assumptions of appropriation. Today’s world would not have such diverse cultures if it weren’t for the borrowing, adoption, and interaction of different ethnic groups. As the media continues to desensitize and polarize identity politics, it will become more difficult to understand the depth and meaning of our debates.

The debate on cultural appropriation has evolved drastically over the past decade, and while foul intent is the root of the issue, misrepresentation is just as vital in discussions moving forward.

– Aliyah Ramirez and Alexis Ramirez