*Of course, it's "socially constructed"

Of course, 'culture' and 'religion' are socially constructed. A lot of "things" and "stuff" are socially motivated man-made constructs. But this does not divorce them from their roots or particular histories. Calling something out as "socially constructed" doesn't do much anymore and it certainly doesn't negate its history. At some point, the re-appropriation and bastardization of non-white culture has been driven by a fascination of "otherness", a romanticization (or demonization) of a "mystique", and arguably driven by a western marketing phenomenon for 'originality', being 'unique', and bricolage 'spirituality'. The contemporary political economy drives capitalization to sever 'culture' from its historical roots for the sake of "fashion", "trend", and "art". This is not to say that it cannot or should not be appreciated, quite the contrary, it should be appreciated, understood, and respected, accompanied by the significance of its local value and sense of history.

*appropriately, this discussion changes in various ways depending on what it is we're talking about and its context.