👉🏼👉🏼🚫Why Being Careful and Not Overstepping Boundaries with Cultural Beliefs in Movies is Crucial✋⛔🛑

Today, a comment landed on one of my recent articles that truly sent disturbing waves through me.

If you could have seen my face when I read it, it would have been a mixture of disbelief, frustration, and a deeply familiar weariness.

I'd just put out a piece discussing the critical importance of respectful representation in media, especially when it comes to sensitive cultural and spiritual practices.

The conversation I hoped to foster was about nuance, understanding, and the crucial line between appreciation and appropriation.

Then came the suggestion:

"I'd like to see those themes used in something other than a horror movie. What would a rom-com with Palo and Santeria look like?"

And my immediate, visceral response was: absolutely not.

This seemingly innocuous remark perfectly encapsulates why it's so crucial to understand, and not overstep, boundaries when dealing with cultural and spiritual beliefs in mainstream entertainment. It highlights a fundamental misunderstanding of what closed practices are and why they are not, and should never be, fodder for Hollywood tropes.

Understanding Closed Practices: More Than Just "Themes"

Let's be unequivocally clear: Palo and Santeria (also known as Lukumí or Regla de Ocha) are not "themes." They are complex, deeply rooted, and living Afro-Cuban spiritual traditions. They are religions, faiths, and ways of life for countless practitioners, built on centuries of history, ancestor reverence, and profound spiritual commitment.

When we talk about closed practices, we're referring to traditions, rituals, and knowledge systems that are exclusive to a specific group—often an ethnic, ancestral, or religious community.

These practices require initiation, lineage, or specific training to participate in or even truly understand.

They are not meant for outsiders to learn, use, or profit from without proper context and explicit permission from the tradition's custodians.

Why are they closed?

For many reasons:

• Preservation: To safeguard the integrity and purity of the tradition from misrepresentation, dilution, or commercial exploitation.
• Respect: To honor the ancestors, deities, and spiritual entities central to the faith. These aren't concepts; they are sacred beings.
• Protection: To prevent harm, as misuse or misunderstanding of spiritual work can be seen as spiritually dangerous or deeply disrespectful within the faith.
• Historical Context: Many closed practices, especially those originating from marginalized communities, were historically kept internal to survive persecution, colonialism, and cultural erasure.

To suggest a "rom-com" involving the profound spiritual work and sacred elements of Palo and Santeria is not just insensitive; it's a profound trivialization. It reduces centuries of deep spiritual practice to a superficial plot device, stripping it of its meaning and sacredness. The "spells" often depicted in movies are a gross oversimplification of complex spiritual offerings, prayers, and deep-seated knowledge that practitioners spend lifetimes learning and honoring. These are not for public display or casual replication.

The Fine Line: Cultural Appropriation vs. Respectful Engagement

My original article, and the work of many thoughtful creators, aims to highlight the difference between respectful engagement and outright cultural appropriation.

Cultural appropriation occurs when elements of a minority culture are adopted or used by members of a dominant culture without understanding, respecting, or acknowledging the original context and significance. It's often done for profit, entertainment, or aesthetic appeal, without giving credit or showing genuine reverence.

Turning a sacred, closed faith into the backdrop for a rom-com is a textbook example of trivialization and appropriation.

It risks:

• Perpetuating harmful stereotypes: Reducing complex beliefs to caricatures.
• Misinforming the public: Presenting inaccurate or superficial versions of deeply spiritual practices.
• Disrespecting practitioners: Invalidating their faith and the seriousness of their spiritual path.
• Eroding the sanctity: Contributing to the erosion of boundaries that protect these traditions from exploitation.

My initial point about Rosario's approach to incorporating elements of faith was about the film doing so with reverence, research, and without exposing sacred or private elements. That is the critical distinction. It's about approaching a culture with humility and asking,

"How can I tell a story that honors this, without exploiting or misrepresenting it?"

The answer, especially with closed practices, is often:

“You can't, at least not in the way you might think.”

Drawing the Line: Not Everything is for Everyone

So, what would a rom-com with Palo and Santeria look like? My answer is simple: it shouldn't. At least, not in the way that comment implied.

Hollywood and creators have a profound responsibility. The default when encountering a closed spiritual practice should be not to use it unless you are an initiated member of that tradition, or you are working in extremely close, supervised collaboration with the community's highest authorities, with their express consent and oversight. Even then, the purpose would be to inform and educate, not to create lighthearted entertainment that risks trivializing or exposing sacred knowledge.

Respect means understanding boundaries. It means recognizing that not everything is for everyone, and that some things are sacred, private, and deeply personal for a reason. Instead of asking how to adapt a closed faith for mainstream entertainment, we should be asking how we can better educate ourselves, support the communities that maintain these traditions, and advocate for their right to preserve what is theirs without fear of cultural theft or mockery.

It's time we all learned to draw that line.