Comments

1. Aaminah wrote:

   Uh, *I* AM Native American. And I am ill reading these other two idiots. Kimbolive is right - there is no need to trash talk Black women asking why they STILL aren’t freakin’ represented in the magazine. First of all, the original issue was over natural Black hair - that so-called misunderstanding was the reason Glamour decided to talk about the matter at all. Second, Blacks make up a significantly higher portion of the population, so it is reasonable that the fact that they aren’t represented should be noted and addressed. It’s safe to assume that the rest of us are severely underrepresented when we note that LARGER populations are also underrespresented.

   The best way to get represented is not to say we deserve representation more than any other group, but to demand accurate representation at all. There is NO REASON for us to fall for divide-and-conquer techniques; we should be working together to get better representation for all people of color.

   Posted 19 Mar 2008 at 12:19 pm ¶

2. Celeste wrote:

   I agree that native americans are, in general, very much ignored even in multi-racial spheres. I and understand feeling resentful of the attention that other minority groups that weren’t here first (willing or otherwise) get. I don’t think we should approach it from the perspective that only one minority gets the limited amount of media attention that isn’t devoted to white people. There isn’t a finite, set in stone, amount of attention that can be paid to minorities. We should work more toward increasing the visibility of all the minorities and we could probably do a better job of keeping everyone in mind even if they’re not present in the conversation at that moment. If we do that, then everyone gets a “throne” and no one has to be ignored at the expense of the other.
   On another note, I don’t think it’s that hard to try to understand someone else’s anger directed at your race (in my case black) and why they feel that way. It would have been really easy to just say that the above commenter was racist, anti-black and therefore had no legitimate complaints. Why do some whites seem to be unable to do the same thing, specifically reguarding the whole Rev. Wright said anti-white comments therefore Obama’s anti-white. Is it that hard to look beyond how offended and hurt you are by someone’s anger to what made that person think that way?

   Posted 19 Mar 2008 at 12:29 pm ¶

3. sylvie wrote:

   I have to respond to katurtle’s comment. Minority status isn’t just defined quantitatively; it’s more defined on quality of treatment, opportunities, and privileges as compared to the dominant group. And as minorities, I don’t think it behooves any of us to say to any other minority group to “just get over it” (especially if “it” means slavery) or to throw our people’s tragedies into a futile contest of Who’s More Oppressed? I think that kind of mentality is what’s preventing minorities from moving forward together instead of as separate, less effective factions.

   Posted 19 Mar 2008 at 12:43 pm ¶

4. CMEdwards wrote:

   As someone who is of black and Blackfoot descent this really sickens me. Nothing like fulfilling the stereotype that all minorities are like crabs in a barrel working to bring each other down, rather than upward.

   The reason blacks tend to be touted more is due simply to our history of national movements and of course (sadly) numbers. Native American populations have and continue to dwindle. I think if their numbers were stronger, their movement for equality and inclusion would be stronger.

   I want the same equality for all my brothers and sisters of color (or not of color) because I can never be equal if they are not as well.

   Posted 19 Mar 2008 at 1:29 pm ¶

5. DWS wrote:

   Sure I’ll “step down from my thrown (sic)” as soon as I get my casino cut for that 12% Native American heritage that I am told does not count…Seriously why fight over crumbs?

   Posted 19 Mar 2008 at 4:19 pm ¶

6. DWS wrote:

   Unfortunately there seems to be quite a bit of tension between the two communities. I think that is sad.

   Posted 19 Mar 2008 at 4:23 pm ¶

7. Rob Schmidt wrote:

   Most Indians don’t get a significant “casino cut,” DWS, so your comment is off-base.

   I trust Redskin magazine will provide beauty tips for Indian women in its companion mag Squaw:

   http://www.bluecorncomics.com/2007/09/redskin-magazine-to-launch.html

   (Just kidding, of course.)

   Posted 19 Mar 2008 at 4:41 pm ¶

8. DWS wrote:

   Rod,

   My comment was a tongue in cheek response to the post. I am well aware that most Indians don’t get a casino cut and most Blacks don’t sit on thrones.

   Posted 19 Mar 2008 at 4:56 pm ¶

9. thesciencegirl wrote:

   I imagine it’s frustrating to not have the concerns of your minority group addressed very often, particularly considering the abhorrent treatment of Native Americans in this country. But I think one reason why most people don’t automatically think to consider them when discussing race is their small numbers. I read recently that most Americans never meet a Native American. I can see how this is true. I visited a NA reservation last year for a service trip, and of the 15 of us med students from all over the country, about half had never personally encountered a NA before. I learned a lot more about historical treatment of NAs than I ever learned in my public school education, and I had the unique (for me) perspective of being the interested but ignorant outsider asking potentially dumb questions in my effort to understand a community that was new to me.

   I would echo others who point out that minority groups are not crabs in a bucket… we do not need to pull each other down in order to raise ourselves up.

   Posted 19 Mar 2008 at 5:00 pm ¶

10. hbsoul wrote:

    i don’t comment here very often, but this is actually something I’ve been thinking about a lot ever since this business about the absence of black and other models of color from high fashion. (By the way, I’m black). I think the biggest absence in terms of US mainstream beauty standards is of indigenous - looking women. You don’t even see them in Latin America in places where they are the majority. So while it’s good that this topic has been brought up, it would have been better if it were done in more productive way. While I don’t look to mainstream media to create these images, I understand why many people do fight for access.

    Posted 19 Mar 2008 at 5:42 pm ¶

11. Aaminah wrote:

    “I read recently that most Americans never meet a Native American. ”

    Please believe me, you all have met Native Americans before. You just don’t “recognize” us because we aren’t in buckskins and feathers all the damn time.

    Posted 20 Mar 2008 at 7:04 am ¶

12. Laura wrote:

    “Please believe me, you all have met Native Americans before. You just don’t “recognize” us because we aren’t in buckskins and feathers all the damn time.”

    Thats what I was going to say. Native American history/culture is taught in history classes, to slimmest extent. Most kids come away with the idea that they’re “extinct.” On top of that, many Native Americans aren’t recognized as such on a national level because of the requirements for groups to be considered a tribe. (Relatedly, blood quotas are the result of US government legislation.) That has a lot more to do with the reason that Native Americans are invisible to most of the US population, more than the numbers.

    Posted 20 Mar 2008 at 10:21 am ¶

13. Orville wrote:

    I have heard this before some other minority groups saying that black people we get too much press coverage. I think Carmen should examine the prejudices people of colour have for each other more often on this website. If we can talk about the problems people of colour have with the white majority. Why are we afraid to speak the truth about the tensions between each other? I remember when I was a kid wanted to visit Japan, I remember in high school I was so excited about learning Japanese culture. However, I was horrified and angered when I learned in Japan blackface dolls were popular and they view blacks and other Asians as inferior. My love affair with Japan died. I am not reconsidering visiting Japan I don’t want any problems, I don’t want anyone harassing me because I am a black man when I visit a foreign country.

    Posted 20 Mar 2008 at 10:43 am ¶

14. Gregory A. Butler wrote:

    I think somebody should tell katurtle that there is no “Oppression Olympics”!

    It’s not a matter of “my group is oppressed more than yours” it’s a question of opposing ALL oppression and injustice, no matter who it’s aimed at!!!

    Posted 20 Mar 2008 at 10:53 am ¶

15. Jen wrote:

    See, I don’t think First Nations people are that small a group. And I think that the fact that they are so often perceived as such, when not rendered wholly invisible, is one aspect of their oppression. Who gets to define who/what counts as First Nations/Native American/etc.? Are we going by the definitions put forth by governments, which have very vested interests in the annihlation of indigenous peoples? By self-definition?

    And is there a way to talk about the specific and unique position(s) that First Nations people as a group occupy without it becoming an oppression olympics? Legitimate and valid complaints are being put forth, even if they’re not in a form that you like: Why is it that First Nations people do not even make the radar? Why is it that their hair isn’t talked about in terms of corporate environments? Because we think there are no First Nations people working there? Because we don’t even think they exist?

    Posted 20 Mar 2008 at 12:17 pm ¶

16. Jen wrote:

    To add to my above comment: I also sincerely doubt that there have been no Native American movements. I’m from, and reside in, Canada, so my reference points may be different from many of you from the USA, but First Nations movements, organizations, and activism persist to this day in Canada. Again, I think this is a symptom of the way that First Nations people (and thus their land claims) are made invisible, and illustrates the legitimate issues that were pointed to by the two Native American commenters above.

    Posted 20 Mar 2008 at 12:40 pm ¶

17. CMEdwards wrote:

    I go back to my original statement and amend the part about numbers and reiterate the point about a “movement”.

    I think if First Nation groups developed social movements on inclusion in arts, media, fashion, etc. , by protest and or through continual discussion you would see them more presented. I think Asians and Latinos are doing that more as I often read “Letters to the editor” in many fashion magazines arguing their inclusion. Unfortunately, most people think of Native people in relation to casinos and not to their portrayl in the media (TV, fashion, etc.).

    With that said, I think blacks and other “minorities” would gladly get behind and support the cause. I like to believe that as people of all colors, we don’t have to be a house divided and that are messages are stronger when we speak as one.

    Posted 20 Mar 2008 at 12:45 pm ¶

18. Latoya Peterson wrote:

    Jen -

    “And is there a way to talk about the specific and unique position(s) that First Nations people as a group occupy without it becoming an oppression olympics? ”

    Of course there is. I do try to post things that come to my attention (like the fact that 2/13 comments were from women who self-identified as NA while the article did not discuss them at all).

    However, the oppression olympics part comes in when you start attacking other ethnic groups for a perceived slight against your own. That’s what happened with the first commenter, wanting blacks to get off their “thrown.” In my opinion, these kinds of divisions are less helpful because both sides instantly flock to the defensive.

    However, the real issues do remain, which is that NAs (and indigenous - looking women) are not represented.

    To address this comment:

    “Because we think there are no First Nations people working there? Because we don’t even think they exist?”

    I will say it is very complicated. I would not be surprised if many people do think NAs have died out, as their achivements and discussions on NA heritage are not spoken about in the present tense. Only in the past.

    There was also a lot of intermixing - that slavery era remix Wendi talked about in one of her posts. There was also a lot of shame at one point to be a NA in America.

    There is also the fact that many people claim to be part NA. I can’t tell you how many times I have been in a class discussion about NA and hear random people pipe up “I’m part Cherokee! I’m part Lakota! I’m part Blackfoot!”

    (Not meant as a diss CMEdwards, not doubting your llineage).

    However, it seems like it is treated as a fun bit of folklore, something everyone can lay claim to, but something difficult to challenge.

    With me, things were a bit different. Some of the women I saw in the textbooks were the spitting image of my still living great grandmother. There are things I remember hazily, things she told me when I was much younger. She told me about how bad it was to be Native American in the 1920s and 30s. How people called you dirty, how there was no support if you were left your people, how you might die if you stayed. There seemed to be a lot of pain surrounding those memories, so I often wondered, but did not ask.

    About a decade ago, my mother was on a college campus when a student ran up to her, excited. He was apparently working on an anthropology project, and said that she looked exactly like a member of a certain tribe that historically lived in what is now Virginia.

    That’s where we are from. Apparently, we are Piscataway-Conoy (not sure on spelling.) No one is sure. My grandmother had the idea of taking a photo of her grandfather and her father, and going to ask some of the still living residents about those men. She has not yet followed through.

    I tell this long story because I think it has a lot to do with how NAs are perceived in America. If you are unaware of what the NAs went through, everything that you are fed is romanticized. Even the Trail of Tears becomes a noble march into oblivion, rather than the terror filled trek that it was. People tend to grasp on to claim this part of their heritage as it seems to be untarnished. It is a race issue that has seemingly passed. The Native Americans died but left us their wisdom and their love of the land. Etc, etc, etc.

    We may occassionally see a magazine ad about preserving reservations, but most people skim past those in their reading.

    In some ways, the Native Americans have become the perfect, silent minority. They can be the object of myth and “savage wisdom” or become faceless adversaries for heroic cowboys…and no one would know the difference because most people just don’t know. And a lot of the activism that is being done is not promoted or discussed nearly as hard as when someone looks to appropriate NA culture for their own artistic ends. Why would Hollywood/the MSM want to hear real NA voices? Why, when they would have to treat them as people, and not a historic memory trottred out twice a year? Why bother with understanding tribes and alliegences and history when you only want a cute visual?

    My great grandmother assimilated into blackness. With each generation, my family has gotten darker and darker. I have wanted to ask her about this for a few years now, but I do not want to cause her pain. Why choose blackness? How could being black in 1919 have been an improvement over anything?

    I think the stalled background searches and the unasked questions in my family stem from an underlying fear.

    What if we are Native American? What if we are Piscataway-Conoy? What legacy will I inherit? What responsibility will I have? Will they accept me, as a black American child, who only shares 1/16 of their bloodline?

    And most of all - can I deal with having TWO legacies of extreme oppression and genocide?

    Posted 20 Mar 2008 at 1:17 pm ¶

19. AC wrote:

    Jen - very thought provoking comments. Having spent most of my life in Washington (state), Wyoming, Colordao and Kansas, I never though of First Nations/Native Americans as being in small numbers. I did, however, recogonize that their population had been greatly reduced from what it once was through genocide/ethnic cleansing in the name of the largest real estate swindle ever perputated.

    I’d never thought of the extent to which the self-interested government got to define who is Native American and who isn’t. Given the generations of forced assimilation and the attempted annhilation of the individual tribal cultures is it possible for the Nations to define themselves, to “recount” their population if you will? Would you use something similar to the one drop rule? What of those who are “lost” to the Nations and for whatever reason wish to remain apart? This is not a challenge, I am sincerely curious and trying to wrap my head around something I’ve never really thought about before. It’s very interesting.

    As to the rest of your comments: Yes, I believe that we can discuss the unique experience of each minority group. I believe that how you avoid the “oppression olympics” is to avoid comparision with other minority groups. Each group has experiences that are unique to that group. But unique is not synonymous with “better”, “superior”, or even ” more oppressed”, rather unique is synonymous with different.

    We can respect each others differences, but even more important is to acknowledge what we have in common and, as commentators above noted, try to work together for our collective good.

    I read the first two comments and even if I felt put off by the delivery I can see that they have some grievances. It’s not for me to label them as legitimate or not. I don’t want others stepping in and judging my grievances as valid or invalid.

    What I can do is think back to the last time I read a “beauty” magazine - in addition to noting the absence of black women like me, did I also notice the lack of Native American women, any indigenous women? Yeah - yeah I did, now that you mention it.

    Why? I figure for the same reason black women and other minority women are not focused upon - because there aren’t enough of us in positions of power and influence to reach the kind of critical mass needed to raise the questions at the editorial level: why aren’t we using more women of color as models, why aren’t we covering topics of interest to women of color, so forth etc.

    This is a lesson for all of us: when we reach those levels of power and influence don’t forget to be as inclusive as you can to ALL the minority populations.

    Beyond that I don’t know why First Nations people don’t make it onto the radar more frequently. I certainly know that they exist. I’m racking my brain and I’m going to go out on a limb here and suggest that maybe their hair isn’t talked about in terms of corporate environments because it isn’t substantially different than the hair of white women? And that hair is discussed all the dang time, which is what led to us black sister’s complaints. (Tah - dah - full circle lol!)

    Seriously, you’ve given a lot of food for thought and I intend to work harder at being more inclusive in my rabble rousing work for equality for the minority populations of this Country. Thank you for really bringing that home to me.

    Posted 20 Mar 2008 at 1:31 pm ¶

20. Nia wrote:

    So basically it comes down to “my race was more oppressed than yours! we deserve more!”

    uh boy… will wonders never cease. katurtle gimme a break.

    Posted 20 Mar 2008 at 3:13 pm ¶

21. LT wrote:

    Hi,
    I was going to write a very long post, but decided to just scale it down a bit.

    First- we are all forgetting the Eve was African. All genetic beauty standards start with her. ALL ethnic groups are a mutation of that Eve, be it European, Asian, Native American, etc. Genetic/DNA research has proven this to be a fact. So how others view us should not be of concern. For more info just visit the forum at http://www.afrigeneas.com , http://www. FTNDA.com or just google DNA.

    Katurtle-Native American hair issues- my niece is Asian. Since genetically there is a connection between Native Americans and Asians they should have similar hair issues. Try Pantene products. My stylist for years was Caucasian. She and her sister were shop owners in the San Fransisco Bay Area. I have seen them use relaxers on Caucasian hair and style/cut Asian hair. I was told that some of the things important to healthy hair is moisture, a healthy body, vitamins and medication a person might be taking. Vitamins A and D, I think are the ones recommend for hair issues.

    Native Americans and their plight- Please not forget that some of the issues that the Native Americans are having today also stem from the decisions made by their early tribal leaders such as John Ross and John Ridge. Also, early eastern tribes made decisions to mix with/marry into the
    European and African communities when their rights were taken away. Some of their intermarrying and cohabitating led to offspring who carried a diluted blood line. This was also 1 of the things that led to the formation of the “1 Drop” rule in some states and the non existence of some tribes by the federal and state governments in others. If you are interested in this, just google, Virgina indians, colonial indians, miscegenation, etc. Plecker from the VA State Dept of Vital Records used this to change the racial status on birth certificates of mixed race babies back in the 1920s. He composed a list of those who were claiming Native American status but who he considerd to be black. Info on this google Plecker.

    Piscataway Conoy are found in MD. Some of the VA tribes were Mattaponi, Pamunkey, Chickahominy, Nansemond, Monacan, Nottaway. There were some Tuscarora in NC and some counties in southern VA and some Cherokee in western VA and NC.

    Also, when your folks talk about being Indian, especially if they might have been from MD, VA, NC, etc., they might have been discussing East Indians who came American as indentured servants. Some African slaves where racially mixed before being brought to America. Some Africans who came/were brought in to the Tidewater area in the early 17th century were considered indentured servants. So in VA many of the people of that status intermarried/cohabited and had children that were mixed race.

    So as you can see racial identity in this country is not as clear cut as most people would believe. So I think that health and beauty issues should be looked at on an individual basis as opposed to a whole community. The the old saying, “Beauty is in the eye of the beholder” is just what it says. The fashion, photography, the media, etc should not be those we look at to determine the standard for anything. Our standard should be set for ourselves and if not that, certainly not from a glamour magazine. If anything we should be looking toward Africa, the place of ALL of our origins. As long as we buy into the hype, we will always use someone else’s standard to see if we measure up and we probably will not.

    BTW, I have had DNA testing. I am tri-racial, female, predominantly African. I have also been researching my family history for over 15 years.

    Posted 20 Mar 2008 at 4:46 pm ¶

22. Angel H. wrote:

    I think somebody should tell katurtle that there is no “Oppression Olympics”!

    Instead of the torch relay, the runners just fight over the damn thing.

    Posted 20 Mar 2008 at 5:11 pm ¶

23. Latoya Peterson wrote:

    LT -

    “Piscataway Conoy are found in MD. Some of the VA tribes were Mattaponi, Pamunkey, Chickahominy, Nansemond, Monacan, Nottaway. There were some Tuscarora in NC and some counties in southern VA and some Cherokee in western VA and NC.

    Also, when your folks talk about being Indian, especially if they might have been from MD, VA, NC, etc., they might have been discussing East Indians who came American as indentured servants. Some African slaves where racially mixed before being brought to America. Some Africans who came/were brought in to the Tidewater area in the early 17th century were considered indentured servants. So in VA many of the people of that status intermarried/cohabited and had children that were mixed race. ”

    This is the most useful information I’ve gotten, ever. I sincerely appreciate your comment.

    And yes, it looks like DNA testing is the way to go, as no one in my fam (Mom’s side paternal, maternal, dad’s side paternal)can tell me anything about where we were from.

    Posted 20 Mar 2008 at 5:17 pm ¶

24. LeAnne wrote:

    Hold up, let me get this right:

    Glamour Magazine goes out of THEIR way to insult a hairstyle that is indigenous to black people and a hair style that reflects a deeper issue… yet black women are bringing attention to themselves by being mad?

    No offense to the Native Americans but…. THEY DID NOT INSULT YOU! They didn’t insult Asians, hispanics or heavy-set white women… they insulted black women. Why are you trying to turn their lame attempt at an apology from us? Why is everyone always wanting to piggyback on black people’s plight?

    This isn’t even an issue of “women of color”… this is an issue about BLACK women.
    hairsmystory.com

    Posted 20 Mar 2008 at 5:44 pm ¶

25. DWS wrote:

    Thank you for posting LT. I knew you could articulate it better than I could.

    Posted 20 Mar 2008 at 5:47 pm ¶

26. Torontonian wrote:

    I still get the feeling that the plight of Native Americans and Aboriginal Canadians are not comparable to general “ethnic minority” issues. It’s like comparing apples and oranges, or comparing race to sexual orientation.

    Posted 20 Mar 2008 at 7:52 pm ¶

27. Michelle wrote:

    Nobody knows what it is like to be a black woman, in this one respect, our hair.

    My mother was looking at a dog one day and she said that it dawned on her that even dogs have straighter, silkier hair than West African descendants. I know that some women with Persian and Jewish ancestry get ultra curly hair, but NO ONE has what we as West African descendants have. The curly white hair simply isn’t the same. Last time I checked, Black women are walking around with Asian, Indian, and Native American hair sewn, glued and pasted onto their heads in an effort to hide the dreaded, hateful naps. Why? Because they don’t have the courage (and BELIEVE ME, it takes courage to wear your hair in its natural state) to wear their natural hair at work. Why? Because it won’t look as pretty, glamorous or as professional to their co-workers or themselves.

    On this, Black women are not only on a throne, but we are on the throne, on the island, by ourselves.

    Now, we can talk about NA women being represented, that’s totally fair. I get it. But I wish that the rest of the women of the world would understand what it is like to BE THE ONLY ONES IN THE WORLD with the hair issue. Other women have other issues with beauty and skin color and we can share that, but until I see some Asian chick with an Afro weave, going to her corporate job, hoping that it won’t rain, I can’t have sympathy.

    Posted 21 Mar 2008 at 1:57 am ¶

28. Celeste wrote:

    @ Michelle,
    The hair thing is one issue that we definetly have to ourselves. I’ve had my hair pressed since I was 3 and relaxed since I was 10 and I’m 27 now. I do not have the courage to wear it in it’s natural state and as ashamed as I am of that cowardice, I don’t want to deal with all the crap that comes from looking more scary/other. My mom is in her late 50’s and has been pressing her hair (except for the afro stage in college) her whoel life. 3 years ago she wore a natural style for awhile. She took a break from it and pressed it was shocked at the deluge of compliments about how much her coworkers liked it better now from her subordinates (this is an a city that is at least .55% black).
    And let’s not even talk about dating, I’ve never had a “Something New” moment when some non-black or black guy I was dating suggest that I bid the chemicals adieu. All of the non-black ones just said that they weren’t really attracted to women with kinky hair. The most I ever did was make them feel what my natural texture was like when I was getting close to a touch-up. If I wanted to go natural I think my husband would support it but I’m not really sure. I’m reluctant to ask. My grandmother prefers my hair long (it’s past my shoulders and for some reason dark blonde, see next post) and straight and I dont’ feel like I could change it while she’s still alive.
    So kudos to all the black women with more courage than I have. I envy you but I’m definitely not there yet.
    And I hear you one the rain…. with rare exception I don’t buy a coat unless it has a hood!

    Posted 21 Mar 2008 at 9:00 am ¶

29. Celeste wrote:

    re: genetic testing. it’s definetely a do. I scored in all 4 groups in descending order Subsaharan African, Caucasion, Asian and a wee bit of Native American. I have no idea how that Asian got in there…. maybe some railroad lovin’. But at least I know now, so I’d definetely recommend it.

    Posted 21 Mar 2008 at 9:03 am ¶

30. Aaminah wrote:

    Michelle,

    I am NA and constantly stressed because I can’t get my hair to dread properly! Nah, really, I totally feel you on this one. You’re right: it is a unique issue for Black women and we should respect that. Representation needs to be approached for ALL women of color, but hair-specific issues are different for Black women and should be approached in a balanced and inclusive way. What bothers me most about the comments on this particular Glamour issue is that the sparking controversy was over Black hair. Black women SHOULD feel beautiful in their natural hair. You SHOULD feel “safe” professionally and like your natural hair, whether it is braids, cornrows, dreads, mini-naps, or afro is respected. To acknowledge this does not in any way demean or diminish the rights of other women of color to feel represented in print media and “spoken to” in beauty and fashion magazines.

    Posted 21 Mar 2008 at 9:11 am ¶

31. Celeste wrote:

    I think you summed it up really well, Aaminah and I realy, really wish it were safe. Just a little example that keep smy natural hair in the closet. My residency program director is on the admissions comittee for the med school. so one days he shows me the folder of an applicant, opens and says “Look at this”. I notice that the picture is of a young black man but then stupidly start looking at his credentials, etc. My program director says “No, not his application, his hair!”. The poor young man was foolish enought o be applying for med school with locks/dreadlocks. My program director thought that only AA’s from Africa or islanders wear dreds and also inquired as to how you wash them. So like a good little rented negro I explained that AA’s are starting to wear natural styles. I tried to explain that you usually don’t wash dreds everyday and that it’s a good idea to use more dilute products so they don’t gum up your hair (stuff I read in Essence but I’m no expert). It was surreal and I could not believe I was having the conversation. So my advice to black applicants is save the dreds (a small afro might be okay) until you don’t need anyone to accept you into a school, residency, fellowship or your first job. After that, feel free to be yourself……sad but true.

    Posted 21 Mar 2008 at 9:29 am ¶

32. Aaminah wrote:

    “So my advice to black applicants is save the dreds (a small afro might be okay) until you don’t need anyone to accept you into a school, residency, fellowship or your first job. After that, feel free to be yourself……sad but true.”

    But it’s just this attitude of expediency that allows the corporate world to continue to deny your right to wear your hair natural.

    As a Muslim woman, I wear hijab. It’s not accepted by many schools and businesses. But it’s who I am, and it’s a legally guaranteed right. You’d be amazed how many companies don’t know it’s legally guaranteed, but you’d be equally surprised how many companies do know and have no shame about still telling you you can’t wear it. I tell women that they need to ear hijab to their interview. How can you make an exception to get the job and then expect the job to respect you when you come to them later saying “I want my rights”? If you are willing to compromise for expediency at the beginning, why should any company not expect you to keep making the compromise?

    In order to push for change, we need to lead by example and fight for our rights to be recognized.

    Posted 21 Mar 2008 at 1:39 pm ¶

33. juju wrote:

    “Piscataway Conoy are found in MD. Some of the VA tribes were Mattaponi, Pamunkey, Chickahominy, Nansemond, Monacan, Nottaway. There were some Tuscarora in NC and some counties in southern VA and some Cherokee in western VA and NC.
    Also, when your folks talk about being Indian, especially if they might have been from MD, VA, NC, etc., they might have been discussing East Indians who came American as indentured servants. Some African slaves where racially mixed before being brought to America. Some Africans who came/were brought in to the Tidewater area in the early 17th century were considered indentured servants. So in VA many of the people of that status intermarried/cohabited and had children that were mixed race. ”

    My mother is Piscataway, though not of the Conoy band. I have done a good deal of family research and have never heard anything like this before. I have also researched general Piscayway history and enslaved African history of the Chesepeake area. (My father is African American and from Virginia) I have looked at an assortment of materials from Maryland and Virginia, including records of slave ships. I must have really missed something because I have just never heard of anything like this. Do you have a source you could share?

    I have also had a DNA test that said that I belong to a mtDNA haplogroup found among indigenous people of eastern North America. You should know that many indigenous people do not trust DNA tests because of the fear of how it could be used to disinherit people from ancestral land, and don’t necessarily accept the out of Africa theory and the idea of the subsequent Asia to America land bridge migration.

    Posted 21 Mar 2008 at 6:58 pm ¶

34. Kaonashi wrote:

    I am flabbergasted…and I mean-FLABBERGASTED by the two comments made by the two NA women in the above article. It’s the squeaky wheel that gets the grease. And the reason why Blacks, Gays, and now Latinos in this country are “heard” is because they are standing up and saying “WE DEMAND TO BE HEARD!” They are being proactive. Asians are beginning to understand that to be heard in this country they have to speak up, and they are beginning to do so in spades. Biracial people are doing the same thing.

    What have I heard from the NA community lately? What’s that noise?

    *tumbleweeds*

    *crickets*

    Exactly. If people can hear you on the school mascot issue (whch a LOT of people agreed with the NAs about) then they will hear you on other things as well. Stop hating, get organized and GET IT DONE.

    Posted 21 Mar 2008 at 9:09 pm ¶

35. Michelle wrote:

    Aaminah,

    You summed things up quite eloquently. However, I must tell you that the shame, deep seeded self loathing, the pain, the horror, the anger with your hair is simply unspeakable. The hajib is accepted in your communities and places of worship. You can take that acceptance, put it in your hearts and with a lot of bravery, walk into the interview, knowing your rights and knowing that your people will support you.

    Imagine wearing your hair in a cute natural style and having your grandmother, who raised you, tell you that you were raised better than to run around looking unkempt. Imagine that the very sight of your natural hair brings her to tears. Imagine that she stops speaking to you. Imagine that the last time you see her alive, she is disowning you because of your hair. Now, go into the interview and be proud of yourself.

    Aaminah, I could on and on about the pain that I have suffered because of my hair. And the hajib can be taken on and off. The hair growing out of your head will never change. It can only be processed and pressed into temporary submission.

    Posted 22 Mar 2008 at 12:49 am ¶

36. DivergentDana wrote:

    Now, now, Kaonashi. We should ideally be sensitive to and knowledgable of the unique combination of challenges that the NA community faces, and as a result, respect their intelligence and refuse to give them “Bootstraps Speech 2.0: The Minority Report.” They’re only 1% of the population, are disproportionately impoverished, spread out all across the country and consist of many tribes with many differing needs, desires, perspectives, agendas and relationships with mainstream culture and the government, and these things have to be taken into consideration — not only by Native Americans themselves, but by anyone who would deign to criticize them. It’s very tempting at times to respond to anger and blame with more anger and blame, but it obscures even the most noble of messages (this whole thing is a case in point) and perpetuates a cycle of defensiveness, mistrust and rivalry that benefits absolutely no one. For every person like katurtle who decides to blame black people for “bogarting the spotlight” there’s someone that sees black victories as victories for humanity, victories for fairness, and victories for themselves. And while there are some in the black community that are callous towards the concerns of other (especially smaller) minority groups and defensive about keeping their thin sliver of pie, there are also some who know that lending a helping hand is the right thing to do, and that we as Americans should ideally get together, search for a larger crust, and bake a new damn pie.

    You and I both know, Kaonashi, that the media only pays attention to the type of activism that catches its fickle fancy, or else, folks wouldn’t be acting as if Bill Cosby’s the only black person that has ever challenged or attempted to augment the negative aspects of inner city culture, or as if Jesse Jackson represents the whole of the non-conservative black community. Just because we don’t hear it, doesn’t mean that no one’s making noise, and Native Americans as a group shouldn’t be blamed because katurtle (to me, kryscoo’s post seems perfectly innocuous) woke up one day and decided to quench her thirst with a tall glass of haterade.

    http://www.hanksville.org/NAresources/indices/NAactivist.html

    http://www.indigenousaction.org/about.html

    http://www.bluecorncomics.com/stharm.htm

    Posted 22 Mar 2008 at 1:06 pm ¶

37. DivergentDana wrote:

    Hope I didn’t double post…

    Posted 22 Mar 2008 at 1:07 pm ¶

38. Allison wrote:

    Ditto Divergent Diva…and thank you for the links.

    I wish that we would stop the whole “who is more oppressed” game. Fret not, people! There is plenty of oppression to go around…

    Posted 22 Mar 2008 at 3:31 pm ¶

39. Aaminah wrote:

    “The hajib is accepted in your communities and places of worship. You can take that acceptance, put it in your hearts and with a lot of bravery, walk into the interview, knowing your rights and knowing that your people will support you.”

    “And the hajib can be taken on and off.”

    Michelle,

    I totally feel where you are coming from in regards to your issues with your hair, and I think I have clearly expressed 100% support for you. But in your above statements you marginalized, disrespected, and all out offended me by your assumptions and just plain ignorance of facts. What you have displayed here, intentionally or not, is a great amount of the “oppression olympics” that we are all trying to get past.

    A) What makes you think hijab is accepted in our communities? It’s not. There are plenty of Muslim women who don’t wear hijab, Muslim men who don’t care to support women to wear hijab, plenty of Muslims who have ALL THE SAME SELF-HATRED you describe in your family in regards to your hair. It is extremely presumptuous for you to assume hijab is somehow “easy”.

    B) Legal rights aside, it is EXTREMELY hard to find a job in hijab in many places. For you to assume we go in with pride and somehow are able to make people accept us is thoughtless. We are discriminated against and not accepted plenty. There is also the matter of what type of hijab scarf is acceptable and whether or not it provides the level of coverage Islamically correct or in accordance with the comfort and beliefs of the individual woman. In fact, there is the reality that hijab isn’t just the head scarf but the clothing in general, which means that the right to wear the headscarf does me no good if I am simultaneously expected to wear a fitted suit that displays my body.

    C) The hijab can be taken on and off, you say? Really? Can you just take your shirt off to be accepted on the job? This is something I am sorry to say I hear too often from some African Americans and am damn sick of being told. It’s a flawed and ignorant argument to begin with that shows no knowledge of what hijab means. But it is also just plain rude because it displays your belief that we somehow choose to be discriminated against, choose to otherise ourselves, and therefore have to deal with the consequences of that choice.

    There are plenty of people you can argue with for your rights, people who say thoughtless or downright mean things about your right to natural hair. It’s just plain ludicrous to choose to disrespect me when you will find few who are quite as supportive of your right to your natural hair. I could be your ally, but instead you decided to insult me. Whatev… I’m done.

    Posted 23 Mar 2008 at 1:27 pm ¶

40. Aaminah wrote:

    Thank you Divergent Dana.

    Native Americans have been speaking up for centuries. If some people have a vested interest in acting like we don’t, that’s on them. We may, however, priortize our issues differently than some communities. And I really have to say, for myself and most Native women I know, our inclusion in beauty/fashion magazines is pretty freakin’ low on our radar compared to the many other issues we face including poverty, land theft (yes, it still happens), having experiments done on us and being guinea pigs for new medications, ridiculous rates of cancer, having our children taken from us, and all the attending depression etc that goes with that. That said, those who do want to push for more inclusion in media have every right to do so.

    And JuJu, thank you for bringing up the fact that many of us don’t accept the land-bridge theory or need science to authenticate us. Many of us believe our people originated here and we are truly of this land. DNA testing is of no particular import to us. Oftentimes those who support DNA testing and talk of how we came from elsewhere do so as a means of excusing their right to be here by claiming they are just later immigrants than we but that we were also immigrants. This shows a profound disregard for our own stories of our histories. People of African, Asian or other origin should recognize the patriarchial Euro versions to be self-serving and afford us the same respect for our beliefs as we afford them for theirs.

    Posted 23 Mar 2008 at 1:40 pm ¶

41. LT wrote:

    Juju Wrote:
    “My mother is Piscataway, though not of the “Conoy band. I have done a good deal of family research and have never heard anything like this before. I have also researched general Piscataway history and enslaved African history of the Chesepeake area. (My father is African American sand from Virginia) I have looked at an assortment of materials from Maryland and Virginia, including records of slave ships. I must have really missed something because I have just never heard of anything like this. Do you have a source you could share?

    I have also had a DNA test that said that I belong to a mtDNA haplogroup found among indigenous people of eastern North America. You should know that many indigenous people do not trust DNA tests because of the fear of how it could be used to disinherit people from ancestral land, and don’t necessarily accept the out of Africa theory and the idea of the subsequent Asia to America land bridge migration.”

    Yes, http://www.freeafricanamericans.com/East_Indians.htm and the FPOC forum at Afrigeneas at http://www.afrigeneas.com . You may want to check out articles about the Melungeons , http://www.melungeon.org/node/80 or http://www.indolink.com/displayArticleS.php?id=051307084810 to name a few. Google Virginia Demarce and her article about Tri-Racial Isolates or Tim Hashaw’s article about the Melungeons.
    You sited “enslaved African history”. Maybe this is where we differ. My genealogical research has dealt with both free and enslaved people. Some of my family have been here since the mid 1600s and were from Surry County, VA. Some of my husband’s maternal folks were also Free People of Color in Nansemond Co., VA and Gates, Hertford and Bertie Counties, NC. He has done DNA testing and knows that he is 14% Native American with African and European mixture. This side of his family claims a connection to the Tuscarora while his father’s folks have a possible connection to the First People of southern NC and SC and the lost colong of Roanoke. My DNA testing shows a 7% East Asian component with also an African and European mixture. Because I have been doing genealogy for so many years my DNA results confirm most of what my genealogy paper trail reflects.

    According to the documentary “10,000 BC” and “The Real Eve”, the eastern”First People” as they prefer to be called, are not connected to those who used the land bridge from China. According to “10,000 BC” which was shown a couple of weeks ago on the History Channel, the First People of the Chesapeake area have connections to Spain, France and southern Europe. Those who crossed the land bridge connect with the First People in the western part of America. As for DNA, using the Y DNA testing and the MTDNA testing, you might not believe the results, but they are factual. I have heard too many who want to claim First People ancestry deny the results of these tests. In fact, I have seen Europeans deny the results if they show African ancestry. Oh, you may also want to read Helen Roundtree’s, “Pocahontas’s People”

    Also, you mentioned your father was from VA. Do you mind mentioning his surname? We might be related.

    Posted 23 Mar 2008 at 3:27 pm ¶

42. LT wrote:

    Aaminah wrote:
    And JuJu, thank you for bringing up the fact that many of us don’t accept the land-bridge theory or need science to authenticate us. Many of us believe our people originated here and we are truly of this land. DNA testing is of no particular import to us. Oftentimes those who support DNA testing and talk of how we came from elsewhere do so as a means of excusing their right to be here by claiming they are just later immigrants than we but that we were also immigrants. This shows a profound disregard for our own stories of our histories. People of African, Asian or other origin should recognize the patriarchial Euro versions to be self-serving and afford us the same respect for our beliefs as we afford them for theirs.”

    Aaminah,

    I am wondering where you have obtained your information about DNA testing? Have your researched it or listened to someone who doesn’t want you to do DNA testing? I have not heard anyone stated what you have stated in your post. I think not testing shows a fear of showing results that are just the opposite of what a person claims their ethnic origins are. By testing a person might prove they are not a member of a particular ethnic group. NO ONE can take away your sense of culture. It is only you who can choose not to identify with it.

    Also, I really don’t understand your statement regarding which set of immigrants came to American first. I have not heard anyone deny that anyone came to American before the First People. I think the real question is how much of the First People gene is carried by those who claim to be descendants? BTW, I have a family connection to those tribes in VA who have federal recognition, Chicahominy and Pamunkey. My information doesn’t come from “self serving Euro versions”. Are you forgetting that the Euro versions at one time had Africans descended from monkeys? Why would we embrace their versions before doing our own research? Even today some anthropologists still don’t believe that mankind originated in Africa.

    Posted 23 Mar 2008 at 3:50 pm ¶

43. Celeste wrote:

    Hi Aaminah,
    You’re definetly brave you wear hijab to a job interview, if I were muslim, I really don’t think I could. There’s a lot of negative assumptions that hover around anyone with any type of religious headcovering and people would rather be anti-muslim (and anti-Sick just to make sure that you don’t miss any) than be decent. As I mentioned on another post I have a friend that won’t support Obama because she thinks he’s a closeted muslim and a muslim can’t be a good president (it’s the possiblity of being Muslim that’s the problem, not his race).
    The thing is is that, at least to me, religion is different from race. True it is something that can be displayed on the outside but people of a certain religion don’t have a basic similar phenotype. You can’t say “Oh that person has Buddhist or Catholic features.” Judaism is one exception to that I can think of offhand, although technically that isn’t correct. Religious discrimination is very ugly and oftentimes quite deadly but I don’t think drawing an equal sign between religious discrimination and racial discrimination is accurate. True, they can coincide when based on your race, people assume you’re muslim and then the discrimination get’s started. Or maybe they dislike both your race and your religion, that’s pretty common, too.
    I just going to go ahead an be blasphemous and say, yes…one can physically take off a hijab, or cross, or turban or whatever ways to demonstrate and practice your religious beliefs. Now, you might rather die than betray your religion and feel completely and uncomfortably exposed as I would if I were stark naked. However, plenty of people have forsaken their God, country, culture, beliefs, self-respect and families for the sake of expediency or not being burned alive, etc. Plenty of people have changed their beliefs with no coercion. Race/phenotype can’t be changed with any amount of coercion or personal spiritual journey.
    By that, I am not at all saying that you walking in with a hijab would have a better time of it than me with dreads. If there were a less “other” 3rd option, neither of us would get the job. If it were between hijab and dreads, it’s very likely that they’d take a black person (perhaps even less qualified) with natural hair. Right now, being seen as scary-other trumps inferior-other.
    One of my classmates from med school started wearing hijab and her dad totally disapproved because they were Pakistani and that wasn’t culturally acceptable for him. As a comprimise he said she could wear a flimsier headcovering (I guess it comes off on accident all the time) but she determined her own level of modesty and wore a covering that she wanted.
    Lastly, there’s that very unpleasant habit that almost every religion has with treating it’s own members differently based on race. Instead of listing the ones that have/still do, I’d like to challenge someone to list some that don’t because I can’t think of any offhand. In that case, thought, you can convert and get out from the bottom of that pile. Example, some low caste (often darker) Hindus converted to Christianity because then at least they weren’t participating in the caste system on a religious level. It probably didn’t just make their social status evaporate, but perhaps it helped somewhat.
    So, to bring a rambling post to a close. Race does not equal religion. On pain of death you can disavow your beliefs but no amount of threats will change what comes out of your head, or your skintone etc. But that doesn’t mean that religious discrimination can’t be the worse of the two.

    Posted 23 Mar 2008 at 7:39 pm ¶

44. Celeste wrote:

    Ooops I meant anti Sikh

    Posted 23 Mar 2008 at 7:40 pm ¶

45. Torontonian wrote:

    @Celeste:

    How can you compare a Christian wearing a cross, a Muslim wearing hijab, and a Sikh wearing a turban? There is no religious requirement for Christians to wear crosses.

    Also, your argument doesn’t make any sense to me. You’re saying that Aaminah can take off her hijab in extreme circumstances. Well, in extreme circumstances, a black person with dreads can cut them off, get her hair relaxed, or wear a wig. She can also use skin-lightening products and wear light-colour foundation.

    Are black people oppressing themselves if they wear their hair ‘naturally’ and don’t lighten their skin?

    Posted 23 Mar 2008 at 11:14 pm ¶

46. Adrianna wrote:

    It’s true that as black women we have a lot of issues with our hair,but unless we start embracing our natural hair people will keep discriminating.

    As for ignorant family members and friends who say shit about our hair being natural; we need to cut them out of our lives. We would not take that kind a crap from a stranger why then do we put up we the people who claim to love us. You would thing it is deadly sin to have our hair as nature intend it.

    For fuck sake if I want to have locks no one is going to tell me what to do with my hair. We have had to deal with people telling us how to look for a very long time. Aren’t we tired yet ? I know I am. I got sick of being an approval whore to corporate America, family members, bad friends, and the whole goddamn mainstream media a long time ago. I agree with the Afrobella post, consume the media, buy the clothes and the other products that finds you worthy by representing you.

    Te shame we feel about our hair has got to go , before we pass our fucked issues with hair to the next generation. let’s break the cycle. let’s get into positions of power ad change the media. It’s concentrated in the hands of the few and that needs to stop. Why read magazine that only want to portray one type of beauty. To paraphrase Susan Gilman.” wanting everyone to look a like is fascism”.

    Stop fascism! It’s bad for you !

    sorry for the long post . I have thought about this a lot.

    Posted 23 Mar 2008 at 11:32 pm ¶

47. Michelle wrote:

    Aaminah,

    Of course, it is IMPOSSIBLE to think that you misunderstood some things that I said. It is interesting that you said I could have had an ally in you, but I missed the boat. But, I am so terribly sorry that I missed the boat on such an understanding ally.

    In one of your posts you stated the following,
    “But it’s just this attitude of expediency that allows the corporate world to continue to deny your right to wear your hair natural” and “If you are willing to compromise for expediency at the beginning, why should any company not expect you to keep making the compromise?
    In order to push for change, we need to lead by example and fight for our rights to be recognized”.

    The tone of the above statements lead me to believe that there was a sense of pride about you and that you wore your hajib with said pride and confidence. The very fact that you could make those statements lead me to believe that there was a core of strength in you that allows you to fight so hard for your rights. So when you say “for you to assume we go in with pride and somehow are able to make people accept us is thoughtless” it is not only unfair, given my above examples, it is really a stretch to call me thoughtless. I actually thought a lot about your post. I CLEARLY came to the wrong conclusions, but thoughtless? Also, when did I say that I thought that you could make people accept you, or what gave you the impression that that is what I assume? I said “You can take that acceptance, put it in your hearts and with a lot of bravery, walk into the interview, knowing your rights and knowing that your people will support you”, however, I don’t see where I gave you the idea that I thought you could make people accept you. But, I will concede that point.

    However, you are right, I did over step my non-Muslim bounds by making stupid assumptions. You are well within your rights to show me my ignorance, stupidity and flat out racism. However, I simply and erroneously thought that the hajib was a form of religious expression within a particular faith. Given that, then I made the stupid assumption that there are institutions that teach and encourage women to wear the hajib. Therefore, I made the racist assumption that there are places, more importantly, institutions where women who wear the hajib can find encouragement and support.

    Finally, when I said that you could take your hajib on and off, I didn’t mean that you had the choice to take it off during an interview or at work or whenever someone was uncomfortable. My fault for not being clear, but would it have mattered? I was saying that at some points in your life, it comes off. I do know for a fact that it was not something that you were born with. However, hair texture is something that you are born with, and the way that it grows out of your head is genetic and therefore unchangeable, except through molecular manipulation.

    I didn’t mean to engage in oppression olympics and I didn’t mean to offend you, make you feel marginalized, disrespected or insulted or any of the other things that you accused me of. I apologize for whatever you may have felt.

    I just wish you had asked me to clarify. I also wish that we could have been racial allies, but in your words, “whatev, I’m done”.

    Posted 24 Mar 2008 at 12:55 am ¶

48. Cynthia C wrote:

    Torontonian,

    There’s no requirement for a Muslim woman to wear a hijab either, only a requirement for her to be “modest”, and modesty can be interpreted in many ways. Most Muslim women I’ve come across DON’T wear hijabs. In any case, I’ve seen many Muslim girls at the Eaton Centre who wear hijabs, yet aren’t exactly dressed all that modestly (I’m sure you’ve seen them too).

    Posted 24 Mar 2008 at 6:26 am ¶

49. Celeste wrote:

    Hey Torontorianm,
    As far as I know, muslim women aren’t required to wear a headscarf or any variation of hijab. I think that’s determined by the individual, her culture, family, political surroundings, etc. I wouldn’t say that it’s a requirement, because that implies that those muslim women who don’t are somehow less muslim and that’s really not for me to judge.
    We’ll have to agree to disagree on the relative permanence of garments versus all the ways black genes express themselves. You can cut off the dreads…but the same kindof hair is always going to grow back forever until you die. When the light colored foundation comes off, you’re still not light colored. It’s quite immutable. I haven’t seen a lot of examples where bleaching cream that made someone dark into a fair-skinned person. When I think of someone that’s done their best (perhaps been the most succesful) to change their racial phenotype, I think of Michael Jackson. his skin is whiter than white, I don’t know how much is makeup, even he has a weave.
    Are we oppressing ourselves….Hmmm…. I think you have to know when to hold them and when to fold them…etc. I think we alter our phenotype as a means to an end. My mother raised me in the midset that you get what you need from the group in power first. After that you can start calling them on their racism and more importantly be more true to whatever your heritage is. The benefit of that strategy is that you’re less vunerable to backlash and by then, perhaps people will see you as a whole person instead of just a headscarf or an afro. That’s just my strategy and I will fully admit that there is a place for refusing to comprimise yourself. I think that both approaches are always present and are probably needed within a population. The former ensures survival and the latter advances the cause.

    Posted 24 Mar 2008 at 8:26 am ¶

50. Celeste wrote:

    Adrianna,
    Obama can’t cut off his white grandmother nor can I, or would I ever cut off mine. I can’t reduce our relationship and all that she is to just her ingrained dislike of natural hair.
    I agree that I absolutely don’t want to pass on any hair issues to my kids. If they call me on my hipocrasy I’ll guess I’ll have to walk the walk as well. I am certainly not processing or pressing their hair. I also agree that media that ignores/disrespects me doesn’t deserve my little bit of money.

    Posted 24 Mar 2008 at 8:34 am ¶

51. Persia wrote:

    LaToya, your Native American ancestry is very similar to mine– but my great-great-grandmother assimilated into Whiteness, not Blackness, and she’s not around to explain why. (My great-great-grandfather met her during his Civil War service, so we only have the vaguest hints as to her geographical origin.) So I have this weird experience with color– I grew up seeing myself as white and being perceived as such but at the same time I always knew and was proud of having Native ancestry (the dark side of the story, where my great-grandmother got tired of being teased, put away her Native clothing, and never spoke of it again, came out much later).

    The thought of DNA testing is intriguing, but I do wonder how accurate it is– would I really know much more than I already do?

    Celeste, maybe we’ll get lucky and your kids and their natural hair won’t have to consider pressing their hair at all as they get older. It’s a nice dream, anyway!

    Posted 24 Mar 2008 at 10:56 am ¶

52. Torontonian wrote:

    Cynthia,

    Obviously, some Muslim women wear headscarves and some do not. I was under the impression that it was required, depending on the interpretation. That is, if you take a certain interpretation, then you have to follow that interpretation. If you wear a headscarf, you can’t just take it on and off at whim.

    Posted 25 Mar 2008 at 12:10 am ¶

53. juju wrote:

    LT

    Thanks for the links. I thought you were speaking of something specific to Piscataway history, but I guess that was not your point.

    I think you misunderstood me, my DNA results CONFIRMED what I already knew to be true, I am of a haplogroup specific to American indigenous people. I neither believe nor disbelieve the results. I don’t necessarily privilege science over oral history. DNA investigations into deep ancestry is still in its infancy.

    Regarding the connection between some eastern North Americans and some aspects of European populations, I presume that you are talking about mtDNA “X” that is found on both continents, in relatively small numbers. The “X” haplogroup that is found in some parts of eastern North America is of a different subclade and with different markers, from the haplogroup found in Europe. The idea is that the haplogroup shares a common origin in central Asia, with some members going to Europe, and others crossing the land bridge to North America.

    From what I remember from class (I was an archaeology major in undergrad) there were different waves of migration across the landbrigde that once connected modern day Russia with Alaska. The earliest waves are believed to have followed the west coast down to South America, with subsequent waves going to the Midwest, and through Canada to the eastern part of the continent. A much later wave is believed to be the Inuit.

    Yes, my focus has been on slavery history in hopes of coming up with a short list of African points of origin. I too believe that my African ancestors, like many black folks from Virginia, have been on this land since the 17th century.

    Posted 25 Mar 2008 at 6:50 am ¶

54. Adrianna wrote:

    Celeste wrote:

    “Obama can’t cut off his white grandmother nor can I, or would I ever cut off mine.”

    Celeste I respect your choice and Obama’s. Here’s hoping to a future where the next generation don’t feel the need to hide their texture!

    Posted 26 Mar 2008 at 12:00 am ¶

Post a Comment