Cultural Fetishization
Fetishization is defined as the act of objectifying someone or something, often stripping them of their autonomy and complexity for their own desires. Fetishizers tend to have an extreme obsession with their fetish, which creates a stark contrast between their fabricated perception of illusions and the reality of what it actually is. It replaces a genuine understanding of that person or group with an exaggerated, distorted delusion of desires.
The following pieces were written by volunteers in All The Same’s Writing Department, which covered multiple topic questions relating to Cultural Fetishization.
ON THIS PAGE YOU’LL DISCOVER:
– Cultural Appropriation vs. Cultural Appreciation
– Fetishization of Indigenous Culture
Cultural Appropriation vs. Cultural Appreciation
Written by Logan Rosen
We have started something that we cannot stop. It will continue to grow and grow like a parasite, eating away at the core of our being, at our sense of self. Maybe it started with the telephone — maybe it started with the Silk Road. Whatever the origins, we find ourselves today in a world where two people, in opposite hemispheres, may not have lives as opposite as you’d expect.
The anthropological term for this is Glocalization, which, as it sounds, means a Global Localization. In layman’s terms, technological advancement leads to places losing the uniqueness specific to that area, the attributes that make that place different. Human culture no longer reflects its origin, nor the achievements made to attain survival, but rather, its progress as an entire species — One universal culture. This has varying effects. The diffusion of medicine, ideas, and technology; The ability to impact a nation overseas, provide refugee aid, and boost the Human Development Index — this all comes from Glocalization. Yet, this pseudo-pinnacle of advancement has proven itself to be a Monkey’s Paw, for in exchange for all these gifts, we have lost the core of our individualism. As global interconnectivity and mass media erode uniqueness, cultural diffusion blurs with fetishization, turning culture from a personal experience to a commodity people imitate to fill their own existential void.
When everything is everywhere, what remains is a uniform world deprived of anything special. The small quantity of rare aspects left become coveted, profitable. In a capitalist world, any business venture is one worth taking, even if it disregards thousands of years of cultural development. As written in the Journal of Consumer Research, the prominent companies that mass advertise products “fail to fully understand the complexities involved in the commercialization of culture and are unable to determine when consumers will perceive their product offerings as cultural appropriation” (Lin). When attempting to make an advertisement acknowledge rarity, it is difficult to do so without objectification, which often distorts the sacrosanct aspects of culture. If this were simply a continuation of diffusion, the approaching angle would be different, but this is a twisting to the point of perversion of items that hold intimate value to thousands. When culture becomes a purchasable commodity, it is no longer an aspect of one’s self. Instead, commercialization turns it into a trend, nothing more than a mere accessory, a preference — a fetish.
On social media, the “appropriation vs. appreciation” argument is debated upon endlessly, but scarcely is the term actually defined. What has resulted is a societal expectation to recognize the difference without being told what the difference actually is. This becomes increasingly ironic when you take the nature of social media into account, which, in modern-day, serves as a mass platform encouraging youth to emulate prevalent influencers. The new generation has been systematically conditioned to normalize mimicking another person for aesthetic purposes, and subsequently, conditioned to normalize mimicking another person’s culture. Admiration becomes fetishization when the gap between a desire to participate versus a desire to be is indistinguishable. Children are on social media, taking on someone else’s identity before they have an opportunity to develop their own. They are using imitation as a coping mechanism for unaddressed insecurity, attempting to fill a void by embedding someone else into themselves.
Although amplified by modern technology, emulation to the point of fetishization has been a repeating pattern throughout all of mankind. 20th-century philosopher Jean-Paul Sartre, who infamously claimed “Hell is other people”, used a similar train of thought as the basis for his ideas. As explained by PhD graduate Marnie Binder, Sartre’s ideas can be explained as imagining you are “peering through a keyhole at someone else … The other person does not know you are watching them, so they are completely objectified for you, by you, and you are completely absorbed in the activity of doing so and thus are not very aware or reflective of your own subjective self” (Binder). The act of observing, when taken to a great enough extent, strips the observed of their personal authenticity, and the observer of their sense of self. Sartre’s existentialist philosophies now hold more truth than ever, as the metaphorical keyhole has manifested through the smartphone as social media. Fetishization not only holds potential for equal psychological harm to both the imitator and imitated, but also deconstructs the basic principles of what makes something itself. All that is left is the shell of what once defined human reason as something special.
Whether cultural fetishization is the fault of glocalization, corporate, social media, or simply engraved in human nature, it is the present we are met with today. As the border between admiration and appropriation continues to blur, so does our individuality, and what sprouts from this will unceasingly eat away at our core until there is nothing left to feed on. If you still find yourself questioning why any of this holds relevance in the grand scale of things, I ask you only to think about what makes you yourself — what makes you exist in context. Are you replicable? If your answer is yes, you may just be the result of emulation, too.
How Have Indigenous Cultures Been Fetishized in Spiritual and Wellness Spaces?
Written by Inaya Mohideen
Introduction:
The global wellness industry- a booming market of extensive trillions of a double-edged nature. Although appearing on the forefront to be a realm encapsulating the pinnacle of spirituality and a pathway towards healing, this monopoly cowers behind a façade of fabricated authenticity; concealing a treacherous paradox of prioritizing the fetishization of marginalized indigenous groups and cultural practices under the guise of promised, ethically sourced spiritual prosperity.
Cultural fetishization: The Wellness Industrial Complex
The “Wellness Industrial Complex” is an umbrella term referring to the fetishization of cultures within spiritual spaces; a multiplex of acts such as cultural commodification, erosion of cultural identity, deprivation of sanctified nature, exploitation and pervasive perpetuation of rigid stereotypes stemming from colonial influences.
From the “panchamahabhutas” of Ayurveda, to the herbal remedies of Chinese Medicine and more, these global indigenous practices under varied philosophical and medicinal beliefs, echo a shared set of motives: to attain interconnectedness and “harmony” between the body, mind and spirit within a fostered inclusive environment. However, cultural exchanges of such beliefs with European colonial groups had introduced the opposite effects, leading to disparities of power between both worlds. Subsequent effects include the trivialization, exploitation and forceful suppression of indigenous cultural beliefs in the western world’s unilateral favor of enforcing their own views (such as biomedicine and establishing outlets to maximize profiting off indigenous peoples).
Cultural commodification is witnessed where practices like yoga, shamanism workshops, and other esoteric activities are often decontextualized; deprived from complex historical and spiritual roots and instead sold in mass packages to non-indigenous consumer groups for profit.
Reports from First Nation societies of Australia state members being invited to deliver workshops and ceremonies for key cultural practices, such as smoking ceremonies, yarning circles and bush remedies. However, these native instructors are often given sparse remunerations for their services; instead expected to accept “visibility and exposure” as “sufficient” payment, exercising their cultural knowledge and authority for free. Whilst indigenous facilitators are being starkly underpaid, non-indigenous instructors invited to carry out the same cultural engagement are being compensated proportionately to their labor.
Another example is the harvesting of the sacred tree species “Palo Santo”. Treasured by indigenous societies across the Yucatán Peninsula, Peru and Venezuela, its analgesic constituents are renowned for revitalizing physical health and cleansing negative energy during activities such as yoga and aromatherapy. Issues with Palo Santo emerged not from the plant itself but its nascently overwhelming demand, leading to culturally ignorant sourcing. The estimated global market size for Palo Santo “sticks” resided within USD 208.5 million during2024. Subsequently, to meet high demands, suppliers began unethically harvesting live trees instead of following SEFOR established frameworks of harvesting dead remnants of trees after a 4-10 years timespan. Additional instances include reports from SERFOR centering the interception of trucks transporting nearly 7900 kg of illegally harvested Palo Santo wood within an astonishing 2 month timeframe (October-December 2019). Colossal demand and mass harvesting of Palo Santo have lead to potential habitat loss and forest fragmentation, where the species struggles to naturally replenish its abundance. Issues of cultural appropriation arise as the events mentioned are direct violations of indigenous rights, highlighted by articles under bodies such as the UNDRIP. Examples include violations of Article 8 that states Indigenous individuals have the “right not to be subjected to forced assimilation or destruction of their culture”, along with Article 24 stating the “right to the conservation of traditional medicines and health practices”.
Beyond aims of earning profit, spiritual materials such as the Ojibwe people’s “dream catcher”, Native American textiles, and the “Nkisi Nkondi” regalia of the Kongo People have faced trivialization from the colonial perspectives of the western world. Such viewpoints conceptualize these objects to be merely for entertainment purposes, aesthetic allure or a misunderstanding its overall purpose. The Nkisi Nkondi, a figure that was known by the Kongo People to be a symbol of justice was depicted by colonizers from Belgium, France and Portugal to be weapons of resistance (perceiving the figure to symbolize paganism beliefs), therefore removing the figure from the tribe’s possession through coercion or by force.
Reclaiming Sovereignty Of Ethical Wellness:
To combat the fetishization of global indigenous cultures, the concept of cultural appreciation must be heavily emphasized. “Appreciation” refers to the desire to respectfully explore another culture, including developing a consolidated understanding of its historical and social backgrounds in a manner extending beyond merely “adopting” its elements. Actions taken to reinforce this criteria can be linked to a nexus of efforts, such as the establishment of the UNDRIP body and 46 corresponding articles. Key articles include Article 11 (right to “practice and revitalize cultural traditions”), Article 12 (right to “manifest, practice, develop and teach spiritual traditions, customs and ceremonies”) and Articles 10, 19, 28, and 29 which explicitly mention aspects of FPIC (Free, Prior and Informed consent). Practices such as western psychedelic research into indigenous medicinal practices are being ethically reformed by efforts from indigenous voices. Global Indigenous consensus processes of knowledge-gathering for traditional medicine identified 8 interconnected ethical principles: Reverence, Respect, Responsibility, Relevance, Regulation, Reparation, Restoration, and Reconciliation. Additional efforts include spreading awareness to educate and eradicate colonial stereotypes about indigenous cultures, expressing reciprocity by seeking permission from indigenous societies to teach and use elements of their culture along with ensuring members of the minority group’s involvement in these efforts (with provision of adequate compensations).
White Saviorism: A Modern Form of Cultural Fetishization
Written by Ayesha Akbar
White saviorism functions as a modern form of cultural fetishization because it transforms other cultures and communities into symbols of moral purity, adventure, or redemption for privileged outsiders. Instead of genuine empowerment, it reproduces colonial dynamics by reducing real people to props in someone else’s narrative of virtue.
In the age of social media, it seems that even compassion has a filter. Behind pretty photos of smiling volunteers ‘changing lives’ abroad lies a modern echo of colonial thinking; the belief that salvation flows one way, from light to dark, and from privileged to poor. White saviorism describes a mindset where individuals from privileged backgrounds assume they are saving or rescuing communities in need, where ‘need’ often means failing to conform to Western norms. Cultural fetishization, similarly, turns cultures into symbolic objects shaped by fantasy rather than reality.1 Both flatten people into simplified images to serve someone else’s expectations.
The roots of white saviorism dates back to early colonialism, when early European colonizers claimed to ‘civilize’ people they labelled as ‘savage’. In reality, these were simply different cultures with different traditions, rather than inferior ones. White saviorism is essentially a modernized colonialist worldview; the mindset that any culture that does not conform to Western ideals should conform, and essentially be remade. These beliefs are perpetuated in what we see today in modern charity, aid, and media; while these things are helpful in and of themselves, many influential figures and organizations involved imply the narrative that ‘progress’ means becoming more Western. Even with good intentions, many modern aid campaigns and influencers reinforce the idea that empowerment looks like assimilation, rather than self-determined growth.
Similarly, today’s social media and voluntourism are beginning to turn ‘helping others’ into a form of personal branding, where cultures become an aesthetic more than anything.2 We can notice this in a widespread shift in the portrayal of mission trips and charity tourism now often prioritize the helper, placing them on a pedestal, while glazing over those being helped. This is especially evident with campaigns like orphanage voluntourism in Cambodia, where foreign volunteers post photos holding children for proof of compassion, and influencer mission trips in Haiti, where creators use images of Black children as aesthetic backdrops for their own moral branding. These trends, again, have good intentions, but exemplify how ‘helping’ is increasingly performed for an audience, turning poverty and culture into visual content rather than relationships, collaboration, or long-term change. This can also mean that when the novelty, or views, run out, a project is abandoned. In this way, voluntourism turns real communities into aesthetic symbols; exotic, emotional, and consumable, mirroring the logic of cultural fetishization, where “the Other”3 is valued not for their reality, but for how they enhance the outsider’s self-image.
White saviorism persists because it fulfills psychological and cultural desires for control, goodness, and moral clarity, leading to a sort of messiah complex. It feels good to be a savior, and gives people a sense of purity and power. This is, after all, the psychological root of colonialism; ‘superiors’ helping and fixing ‘inferiors’.4 On top of this, fetishization reduces real lives into simple narratives, which abstracts people and cultures into caricatures of themselves and further removes the ‘saviors’ from the fact that they are holding lives in their hands. This sense of superiority, coupled with the abstraction of cultures, can end up blinding people to systemic change or the voices of locals, and we already seem to be heading that way.5
This is not to say that all cross-cultural help is harmful; many volunteers and aid workers genuinely want to help. The issue is not the individual’s heart, but the structure and narrative that they, usually unknowingly, contribute to. To clarify, the critique is not aimed at individuals who want to help, but at the structural narratives that elevate the outsider’s role while minimizing the agency of local communities. Ethical international aid absolutely exists when it centers around local knowledge and collaboration rather than personal branding, but the way it’s framed perpetuates a continuum of destruction that cannot be undone without changing the mindset and unconscious assumptions behind ‘helping’. Rejecting white saviorism means rejecting cultural fetishization itself: the reduction of real people into symbols used to validate someone else’s sense of goodness.
White saviorism today is less visible than its colonial ancestors, but its impact is just as real. It continues to turn cultures into symbols and people into props for outsiders’ moral narratives: an updated form of cultural fetishization disguised as generosity. From colonial “civilizing missions” to Instagram-friendly voluntourism, the logic remains that the outsider’s redemption becomes more important than the community’s autonomy. This is not just a representational issue; it shapes policy, aid funding, social expectations, and real people’s lives. If we hope to ever build real solidarity, we must first unlearn the instinct to consume cultures, and instead learn to respect them as whole, self-determining worlds.
Works Cited
Binder, Marnie. “Hell Is Other People”: Sartre’s Famous Quote Explained.” The Collector, 14
August 2023, https://www.thecollector.com/jean-paul-sartre-hell-is-other-people/. Accessed 18 November 2025.
Lin, Jason, et al. “Culture for Sale: Unpacking Consumer Perceptions of Cultural
Appropriation.” Edited by Markus Giesler, Research Gate, Oxford University Press on Behalf of
Journal of Consumer Research, Inc., 24 Nov. 2023,
www.researchgate.net/publication/375913165_Culture_for_Sale_Unpacking_Consumer_Perceptions_of_Cultural_Appropriation. Accessed 18 Nov. 2025.
Bruce Ziff, Pratima Rao (1997), Borrowed Power: Essays On Cultural Appropriation, Albertala Review,https://albertalawreview.com/index.php/ALR/article/download/1045/1035/1142
Jana Cattien, Richard John Stopford, (2022), The appropriating subject: Cultural appreciation, property and entitlement, Philosophy and social criticismhttps://journals.sagepub.com/doi/10.1177/01914537211059515
Cultural Appreciation-Definition and Explanation 2024), The Oxford Review-OR Briefingshttps://oxford-review.com/the-oxford-review-dei-diversity-equity-and-inclusion-dictionary/cultural-appreciation-definition-and-explanation/
Angela Garcia B Cruz, Yuri Seo, Daiane Scaraboto (2023), Between Cultural Appreciation and Cultural Appropriation: Self-Authorizing the Consumption of Cultural Difference, Journal of Consumer Research https://academic.oup.com/jcr/article/50/5/962/7100345
United Nations (2007), United Nations declaration on the rights of Indigenous Peopleshttps://www.un.org/development/desa/indigenouspeoples/wp-content/uploads/sites/19/2018/11/UNDRIP_E_web.pdf
Palo Santo, Health Authors, H Arakelyan Hranush, S Hayk (2021), Palo Santo, Research Gatehttps://www.researchgate.net/publication/349074749_Palo_Santo
Peruvian Government (Unkown Author), (2019), En Piura SERFOR decomisa palo santo de procedencia ilegal,https://www.gob.pe/institucion/serfor/noticias/214594-en-piura-serfor-decomisa-palo-santo-de-procedencia-ilegal
Peruvian Government (Unknown Author) (2019), En Piura decomisan palo santo ilegal camuflado entre plátanos y limones, https://www.gob.pe/institucion/serfor/noticias/214490-en-piura-decomisan-palo-santo-ilegal-camuflado-entre-platanos-y-limones
Peruvian Government (Unknown Author), (2019), SERFOR definirá metodología para garantizar manejo sostenible del palo santo en Piura,https://www.gob.pe/institucion/serfor/noticias/1291109-serfor-definira-metodologia-para-garantizar-manejo-sostenible-del-palo-santo-en-piura
Elendu Chukwuka, (2024), The evolution of ancient healing practices: From shamanism to Hippocratic medicine: A review, Medicinehttps://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC11245246/#:~:text=Another%20challenge%20is%20the%20potential,communication%2C%20and%20collaboration%20in%20healing.
Emily Thornton, 2025, When healing harms: Cultural appropriation in the wellness industry, National Indigenous Timeshttps://nit.com.au/18-04-2025/17487/when-healing-harms-cultural-appropriation-in-the-wellness-industry
Kate Collins, (2016), Nkisi Nkondi in the History of Medicine Collections, The Devils Tale,https://blogs.library.duke.edu/rubenstein/2016/04/13/nkisi-nkondi-history-medicine-collections/#:~:text=The%20nails%20in%20the%20figure,can%20prove%20to%20be%20elusive.
Yuria Celidwen, Nicole Redvers, Cicilia Githaiga, Janeth Calambás, Karen Añaños, Miguel Evanjuanoy Chindoy, Riccardo Vitale, Juan Nelson Rojas, Delores Mondragón, Yuniur Vázquez Rosalío, Angelina Sacbajá, (2023), Ethical principles of traditional Indigenous medicine to guide western psychedelic research and practice, The Lancet Regional Health-Americas,https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC9950658/#:~:text=An%20Indigenous%2Dled%20globally%20represented,Western%20psychedelic%20research%20and%20practice.
“A Savior No One Needs: Unpacking and Overcoming the White Savior Complex.” Healthline, Healthline Media, 14 July 2021, www.healthline.com/health/white-saviorism.
Hussain, Babar, et al. “Manufacturing Beauty: How AI and Social Media Are Redefining Aesthetic Norms in Emerging Digital Cultures.” Acta Psychologica, vol. 260, Oct. 2025, p. 105734, www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0001691825010479, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.actpsy.2025.105734.
Cole, Teju. “The White-Savior Industrial Complex.” The Atlantic, theatlantic, 21 Mar. 2012, www.theatlantic.com/international/archive/2012/03/the-white-savior-industrial-complex/254843/.team, NeuroLaunch editorial. “Colonialists’ Impact on Psychology: Historical Interactions and Lasting Effects.” NeuroLaunch.com, 15 Sept. 2024, neurolaunch.com/colonialists-interact-with-psychology-by/.
Bernhaupt, Regina. “Social Media – a Systemic Change Perspective.” IFIP Advances in Information and Communication Technology, 2020, pp. 119–128, inria.hal.science/hal-03194546/document, https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-64246-4_10.