cultureethicssocial media

From Admiration to Appropriation: When Saying ‘Very Chinese Time’ Crosses the Line

ttoptrends

2026-01-22

9 min read

A nuance-first guide to when the "very Chinese time" meme and the Adidas jacket cross from homage into appropriation — plus a practical checklist.

Hook: You want the virality without the backlash — here's how to tell if a trend is admiration or appropriation

Creators, editors, and culture-hungry audiences face the same problem: trends move at the speed of a scroll, but ethics don’t. The “very Chinese time” meme and the viral Adidas jacket moment show exactly why; both went from shorthand for admiration to flashpoints for online backlash almost overnight. If your goal is to participate in or report on fast-moving pop culture without erasing communities or triggering identity politics firestorms, you need practical rules — not hot takes.

The setup: why nuance matters in 2026

Short-form platforms, generative AI, and a hyper-global youth culture mean trends now travel farther and faster than in 2020. By late 2025 and into 2026, the cultural landscape sharpened: creators who once relied on aesthetic borrowing now face stronger scrutiny, and audiences expect context. That makes a one-liner caption or a costume clip more likely to be labeled as either appreciation or appropriation — and the distinction increasingly depends on intent, power dynamics, and attribution.

Quick definitions (for clarity)

Appreciation: learning about and engaging with another culture with respect, accurate context, and credit to originators.
Appropriation: extracting cultural elements without permission, context, or recognition, often reinforcing stereotypes or benefiting the appropriator more than the source community.

Case study 1 — The “very Chinese time” meme

What started as a viral, comedic template — a caption device for “major life vibe” posts — quickly morphed into something more complicated. People across TikTok, X, and Instagram leaned into a shorthand that equated certain aesthetics or behaviors (eating dim sum, wearing certain clothing, photo filters of neon cityscapes) with being “very Chinese.” That shorthand appealed to millions because it was playful and aspirational. But it also relied on essentialized, stereotype-friendly cues about what “Chinese-ness” looks like to outsiders.

Why Asian creators pushed back

Asian creators began flagging the meme for three main reasons:

It flattens a diverse, 1.4 billion-person family of cultures and histories into a few visual cues.
It reproduces stereotypes — from cuisine tropes to clothing cues — without context or the voices of people who actually live those experiences.
It allows creators who are not Asian to gain likes, follows, or sponsorships off of cultural markers that have long been marginalized or stigmatized.

“Context matters. Saying you’re ‘very Chinese’ because you like a city skyline or a jacket isn’t the same as centering the stories of the people who built that culture.” — sentiment echoed across Asian creator reactions in 2025–26

When the meme tips into appropriation

Performance of caricatured elements (mock accents, exaggerated gestures).
Monetizing the trend without crediting or compensating Asian creators who popularized it.
Using the meme to fetishize or exoticize living people rather than to engage meaningfully.

Case study 2 — The Adidas jacket debate

The jacket in question — a Tang-style, frog-button jacket in an Adidas collab that circulated widely in late 2025 — became a lightning rod. Some viewers praised it as a stylish homage merging sportswear with traditional elements. Others saw it as an example of a global brand repackaging cultural signifiers without clear credit to the source communities or designers.

Key flashpoints

Attribution: Was the design developed with Chinese or Asian designers, or was it a Western creative team lifting motifs?
Commercial benefit: Did Adidas meaningfully involve or compensate the communities whose aesthetics it borrowed?
Context: Was the product presented as a celebration of heritage, or as a novelty fashion item divorced from history?

Asian creators on platforms like TikTok and YouTube weighed in with a pragmatic lens: a jacket alone doesn’t decide intent, but the surrounding labor and credit decisions do. When multinational brands profit and the original craftspersons, designers, or communities remain invisible, audiences call it out — and rightly so.

How power and scale shape appropriation

There’s one unavoidable fact: appropriation is about power. When global brands, non-Asian influencers, or dominant-culture media adopt Asian-coded aesthetics, they do so from a position of influence — amplifying visibility but often capturing the commercial upside. The result is a net extraction of cultural capital.

Practical indicators that a trend might be appropriation

Missing origin story: No link to the technique, region, or creators who originated the look.
Profit imbalance: Non-source creators monetize the trend while original artists get no recognition or revenue.
Stereotype reinforcement: The trend relies on reductive or dehumanizing tropes.
Permission absence: Cultural or ceremonial elements are presented casually without consent or context.

Voices from Asian creators — common themes and guidance

Asian creators broadly offer three consistent takeaways when trends intersect with their identities:

Credit and context are non-negotiable. If you borrow a cultural form, name its origin and link to creators or history.
Hire, collaborate, and compensate. If you’re commercializing an aesthetic, bring in the people who live that culture as paid partners.
Avoid caricature; prioritize humanity. Celebrate skills, craft, and lived experiences rather than a shallow visual shorthand.

In practice, creators have used these principles to push for better outcomes. Throughout 2025 and into 2026, we’ve seen: increased calls for brand transparency; creators adding “origin tags” and credit cards to their posts; and a rise in micro-collabs between global labels and Asian designers who were previously sidelined.

Actionable checklist for creators, publishers, and brands

Use this checklist before posting, collaborating, or launching a campaign that lifts cultural elements:

Trace the origin: Can you identify where the element came from (region, community, craftsperson)? Link or cite it in your caption or product description.
Ask who benefits: Will the original creators or communities gain visibility, credit, or revenue?
Consult a native voice: Before using ceremonial, religious, or culturally significant items, ask someone from that community for guidance.
Credit publicly: Tag creators, name the region or tradition, and add a short caption explaining your relationship to the inspiration.
Compensate: Pay designers, performers, or educators who help you access the cultural asset.
Refuse the caricature: Avoid mock accents, exaggerated gestures, and any depiction that reduces people to tropes.
Be transparent about intent: If your goal is homage or education, say so and show how you learned.
Respond to feedback: If creators from the community raise concerns, engage respectfully and be prepared to change course.

How reporters and editors should cover these moments

Journalists and editors have a special role. You don’t just chronicle the trend; you shape how audiences understand it.

Prioritize voices from the culture being discussed. Seek out Asian creators, designers, and scholars — not just influencers who adapted the meme.
Contextualize: explain histories and structural power relationships that make an aesthetic ethically complicated.
Don’t amplify harmful caricatures in coverage. Use screenshots and embeds judiciously and with explanatory captions.
Include practical resources and next steps for readers who want to engage responsibly (see checklist above).

Real-world examples of good practice (2025–26)

Late 2025 and early 2026 gave us models for how brands and creators can do better:

Micro-collaborations where large labels funded co-designed drops with Asian artists and gave winners public credit and royalties.
Content series where creators explained a cultural practice before demonstrating it — adding context reversed a lot of suspicion.
Creators who donated a percentage of earnings tied to a trend to community organizations and posted final receipts publicly, increasing trust.

When backlash is legitimate — and when it’s performative

Not all backlash is created equal. Some calls-out are constructive and aimed at transparency and repair; others are virtue signaling or performative outrage. Distinguish between them by assessing whether the criticism demands concrete change (credit, payment, removal) or merely punishes with piling-on commentary.

How to respond if you’re called out

Listen first. Don’t delete the post immediately unless it’s harmful — preservation helps document the context for later repair.
Acknowledge quickly and honestly. If you missed credit or made an error, say so.
Make reparations: credit, pay, or reroute profits to the communities involved.
Document the changes publicly so the community sees concrete steps, not just PR statements.

The future: trend ethics in a generative-AI world

By 2026, generative AI has compounded the stakes. AI can remix cultural artifacts at scale, making context and attribution even more important. Platforms have started piloting features that encourage or require creators to declare source materials and collaborators — a shift described in how newsrooms built for 2026. Some brands now route a portion of AI-generated revenue to cultural preservation funds. But the technology is neutral; ethical use depends on human decisions.

Three forward-facing practices

Prefer source-first AI tools: choose models trained with licensed, credited datasets from creators who consented.
Embed provenance: include source metadata and links in captions and product pages so audiences can follow the origin trail.
Support cultural stewardship: allocate portions of proceeds to artisans, museums, and non-profits that preserve the traditions you’re inspired by.

Practical templates you can use now

Copy-paste these short caption templates when you post a trend-based piece of content:

“Inspired by [region/tradition] — learned from [creator/link]. Thanks to [@handle] for the guidance. Here’s more: [link].”
“This look borrows details from [tradition]. I collaborated with [designer] and donated [X%] of proceeds to [org].”
“I’m sharing this to celebrate [skill/heritage]. If I misstep, tell me — I’ll correct and credit.”

Checklist: Before you post

Do you know the origin? (Yes / No)
Can you tag or credit an originator? (Yes / No)
Is any element ceremonial or sacred? (Yes — don’t use / No — proceed with care)
Will this benefit the culture or only you? (Both / Only me — reconsider)

Final takeaway: aim for repair, not permission

“Very Chinese time” and the Adidas jacket are not inherently bad. Their ethics depend on three things: context, credit, and compensation. If you want to participate in or report on a viral cultural moment in 2026, prioritize the communities behind the aesthetics. That means naming sources, amplifying native voices, and ensuring commercial upside flows back to originators.

The moral of the meme economy: speed and virality don’t absolve responsibility. Acknowledge history. Credit creators. Pay where possible. And when community members push back, listen and act.

Call to action

If you publish, create, or amplify trends: use the checklist above on your next post, tag at least one creator from the culture you’re referencing, and commit to sharing revenue or visibility when possible. Want a ready-to-use attribution card for captions and product pages? Subscribe to our creator toolkit and get a free “Origin + Credit” caption template designed with Asian creators for immediate use.

toptrends

Contributor

Senior editor and content strategist. Writing about technology, design, and the future of digital media. Follow along for deep dives into the industry's moving parts.

Up Next

Freelancer Playbook 2026: Pricing, Packaging and the Holiday Rush

iot•10 min read

Edge AI & Smart Sensors: Design Shifts After the 2025 Recalls

entertainment•8 min read

Rian Johnson ‘Got Spooked’: The Real Cost of Online Negativity on Creative Careers

2026-01-25T04:50:40.887Z