Anachronism and American Indians at Racialicious - the intersection of race and pop culture

Anachronism and American Indians

by Guest Contributor Lisa, originally published at Sociological Images

In many places in the midwest the American Indian is very present, but in other places in the U.S., like in California, Disney’s Pocahontas is as close as we get to “Indians.” The idea that American Indians are gone comes, in part, from the ubiquitous representation of them with feathers, buckskins, and moccasins. These anachronisms are everywhere (see, for example, here, here, here, here, and here).

American Indians are as modern as the rest of us, why are representations of American Indians, as they live today, so unusual? And what effect might that have on the psyche of American Indian people?

Via PostSecret.

Trackbacks & Pings

WHY I HATE EVERYTHING | the Hathor Legacy on 29 Nov 2008 at 1:23 am

[…] more of her thought-provoking post here. Racialicious picked up the post here, where there’s an interesting conversation going on that involves Rob Schmidt from Blue Corn […]

Comments

Jaye wrote:

I noticed that too, that it’s almost like when you talk about American Indians, it’s like talking about people who aren’t part of present times, or only exist in the past. It kind of reminds me of how people talk about developing countries…as though because those countries don’t have the same technology or modernization of Western countries, those developing countries are talked about as though they are literally existing in the past. Because the way they live seems like something from the past, there’s this feeling that they’re separate from modern times, and it almost becomes self-explanatory and self-fulfilling. It’s this weird manipulation of people’s concept of time and history.

Posted 27 Nov 2008 at 9:30 am ¶
Chris wrote:

Especially today, the mythifying of the indian stands in sharp relief to the modern reality. Where are the positive images of indigenous peoples? I teach Spanish, and every time I come to a segment in the textbook about indigenous peoples, it is “othering” them in the same way–feathers and quaint traditions, ancient and glorious history and invisible present. Indigenous leaders throughout the Americaas have had a striking role in the development of the modern nations, but they are still marginalized and separate.

Posted 27 Nov 2008 at 11:35 am ¶
Renee wrote:

The treatment of the Indigenous Peoples as mascots for sporting teams and the like is part of the way that the colonizing process continues. It is a way of creating them as the continual other.
Recently when a group complained about a 40 year tradition of dressing children up there was a backlash. To this day we feel that we have a right to appropriate culture and then get upset when we are told that this is wrong.
Unless Indigenous peoples are playing the roles constructed for them by society they are seen as a mob or unruly. Never is there a thought given to the offense that mainstream culture is doing by forcing these rules.

Posted 27 Nov 2008 at 11:44 am ¶
Jess wrote:

I think there are several dynamics going on.

First, let’s face it, Native people aren’t a big part of the population. Any group that is 2% or less of the population as a whole is not going to be that visible. I’m not saying that’s good, it’s just a fact. Orthodox Jews aren’t visible and the images of them are pretty anachronistic too, because the only images most people even heard of are in Fiddler on the Roof unless you live in LA or New York. Same for Amish people, who aren’t anything like the movie Witness — but how many people have been to Lancaster County, relative to the 300 million people int he US? A lot of white people had the same anachronistic images of South Asians too before they started living here in numbers great enough that more people had actually met them.

Second, there’s the issue of where Native people were sent under the reservation system. It’s easier to stereotype folks who live in remote areas because they aren’t around. If the biggest reservation in the country was in, say, Chicago or Las Vegas and not in the Four Corners the situation would be different.

Third, the narrative of Manifest Destiny that said the Natives would assimilate or disappear is a strong one. It’s come under fire in the last 50 years or so, but it’s a strong part of American culture. And it’s a way people could justify genocidal policy.

Fourth, in any culture that is under fire, there is a strong push to be “traditional” as a form of resistance. This happens a lot, and many people — DeLoria, Josephy — have pointed it out. That doesn’t always mean that those cultural practices are traditional, but it means that you get a lot of mythologizing. That’s not always a bad thing. But what you end up with is an idealization of the past and an idealization of those images. Kind of like fundamentalist religious movements that seem to idealize a mythical past when everything was OK, if only we followed the “old ways” strictly enough.

Native people in the US aren’t in the position to be able to live as their ancestors did (nor would they want to necessarily). But I see this kind of thing when people say the kids aren’t being “real” or when anyone talks about whether someone is “really” (insert culture here).

Fifth, there’s the government policy of destroying native culture that existed until the 1950s and possibly later, if you count development projects as part of that. It’s hard to build a culture that fits seamlessly into the modern world when your language and religion are both actively discouraged.

Combine all these things and it’s no wonder that the images of Native people get relegated to the past, as a regrettable but perhaps necessary part of the expansion of the United States (and to an extent Canada). Throw in the effects of poverty and marginalization and you get a very unhealthy mix by any definition.

All that said, it isn’t like there’s been no movement in Native communities all over the place to revitalize art, language, and certain practices, and figure out how to make them all fit into the wider world, and reclaim a place among the cultures that make up the US. That’s been a big success, I think, in presenting images of Native people that are not solely grounded in stereotypical images. It isn’t mainstream, as such, but it’s a nice start.

Posted 27 Nov 2008 at 12:35 pm ¶
Gothic Guera wrote:

I need that in poster size. I recall reading a poem about the same topic.
Sure You Can Ask Me A Personal Question
by Diane Burns
How do you do?
No, I am not Chinese.
No, not Spanish.
No, I am American Indi-uh, Native American.
No, not from India.
No, not Apache.
No, not Navajo.
No, not Sioux.
No, we are not extinct.
Yes, Indian.
Oh?
So, that’s where you got those high cheeckbones.
Your great grandmother, huh?
An Indian Princess, huh?
Hair down to there?
Let me guess. Cherokee?
Oh, so you’ve had an Indian friend?
That close?
Oh, so you’ve had an Indian lover?
That tight?
Oh, so you’ve had an Indian servant?
That much?
Yeah, it was awful what you guys did to us.
It’s real decent of you to apologize.
No, I don’t know where you can get peyote.
No, I don’t know where you can get Navajo rugs real cheap.
No, I didn’t make this. I bought it at Bloomingdales.
Thank you. I like your hair too.
I don’t know if anyone knows whether or not Cher is really Indian.
No, I didn’t make it rain tonight.
Yeah. Uh-huh. Spirituality.
Uh-huh. Yeah. Spirituality. Uh-huh. Mother
Earth. Yeah Uh’huh. Uh-huh. Spirituality.
No, I didn’t major in archery.
Yeah, a lot of us drink too much.
Some of us can’t drink enough.
This ain’t no stoic look.
This is my face.

Posted 27 Nov 2008 at 1:24 pm ¶
Rob Schmidt wrote:

You can read a lot about the harm of Native stereotypes at

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

For instance, there’s this statement from the American Psychological Association:

The American Psychological Association is calling for the immediate retirement of all American Indian mascots, symbols, images and personalities by schools, colleges, universities, athletic teams and organizations, the Association announced today.

APA’s action, approved by the Association’s Council of Representatives, is based on a growing body of social science literature that shows the harmful effects of racial stereotyping and inaccurate racial portrayals, including the particularly harmful effects of American Indian sports mascots on the social identity development and self-esteem of American Indian young people.

Posted 27 Nov 2008 at 2:04 pm ¶
Rob Schmidt wrote:

Also, there’s been a lot of talk about Thanksgiving in the Native and mainstream press this year. For instance, this posting on “Playing Indians for Thanksgiving”:

http://www.bluecorncomics.com/2008/11/playing-indian-for-thanksgiving.html

Posted 27 Nov 2008 at 2:08 pm ¶
Jessica Yee wrote:

Hmmm.

The picture kind of says it all with what a lot of us feel these days as youth, I think.

I can’t speak for everyone, but as a Native woman living in an urban centre, I’m always playing the game of Indigeneity to try and find some semblance of community and belonging.

I have the privilege of having a car and traveling for work in our communities for a good percentage of the year, so I’m able to make those connections. But if I couldn’t, and I think back to when I didn’t, my culture wasn’t a huge part of my life like it is now.

It’s also coming of age as I get older and realizing the necessity of being so prolific with cultural competency and integration so it survives, I sure am damn more proud then when I was younger.

Posted 27 Nov 2008 at 2:56 pm ¶
Chief Many Feathers wrote:

And in a similar vein:

http://shirt.woot.com/Friends.aspx?k=6506

Woot allows users to report offensive posts, but refuses to acknowledge all of the forum complaints against this shirt and its even more offensive description. Apparently hubris prevents them from taking the appropriate action against themselves. Hypocricy, anyone?

Btw, please don’t feed shirt.woot. Give them an earful for Thanksgiving instead.

Posted 27 Nov 2008 at 4:20 pm ¶
em wrote:

@Gothic Guera: thanks for sharing that…i’m gonna go look her up.

Posted 27 Nov 2008 at 9:55 pm ¶
Jessica Yee wrote:

One other important point I forgot to mention is that in the absence of hearing actual Native voices, we have a whole bunch of non-Native people posing, claiming, and otherwise acting like they are experts on us and chiming in with an air of supremacy with every single little thing having to do with “Native”.

It’s like taking up space to fill in a void somewhere that you are doing more damage than you realize. Or pretending you know what it’s REALLY like, instead of referring or supporting people to listen to us, the people, themselves.

Not that I’m asking people to come to terms with anything, or that I find this quietly oppressive practice rather annoying.

Posted 27 Nov 2008 at 11:24 pm ¶
Kathy-Oneida Nation wrote:

@ Jess

How the hell do you know that we can’t live like our ancestors in the past? What do you mean by that? Sure, we need and like present day things, but does applying their spirituality today and getting back to our roots mean nothing?

And why do you and other people here who comment on this site (i.e. Rob Schmidt) keep referring to us as “they” and trying to speak for us? Where are you getting your information from?

Posted 27 Nov 2008 at 11:43 pm ¶
Carolyn Chambliss wrote:

Thank you Lisa for this very interesting and informative post and everyone above for your personal insights. You have articulated a concept that I haven’t seen expressed with such clarity to this day and I think that it was high time somebody put this issue on the table. By articulating a need for a post-romanticized and contemporary vision of Native American identity, you have paved the way to begin breaking stereotypes, raising consciousness and opening up possibilities of seeing and being for all people of native heritage and otherwise.
From the lite saccharine artwork on the schmaltzy t-shirt to the down-right racist iconographies of the Redskin logo it is high time Native American identity become identified with who Native Americans are today. For Natives, going to Pow-wows is an important empowering expression of their heritage and artistic gifts, something that they weren’t even allowed to do in the recent past. Equally important and worthy of respect are the visual identity of artist like Joy Harjo, a Mvskoke tribal member,contemporary Jazz musician, poet,and artist. Joy looks great in Jeans, T-shirt and otherwise unadorned except for a sax around her neck! I’ll be happy when the day comes that people like Joy will come to mind for an average US citizen when they think of a N8ive artist or citizen.

Great work Lisa and a big step in the right direction of moving beyond ethnocentric and logocentric perception of the narrow-minded and uninformed.

Posted 28 Nov 2008 at 6:05 am ¶
Dana wrote:

I sent this to Shirt.Woot!:

I am writing regarding the shirt titled “Chief Many Feathers”. This shirt is a blatant mockery of indigenous culture in North America. The depiction of an animal wearing what is supposed to be a sacred item of regalia is both insulting and racist. I am disgusted that this company has both a) Decided to continue to sell this shirt after many complaints and b) Written a fake story about the chicken depicted claiming that it is Pawnee! I will never purchase anything from this company and will encourage everyone I know to stop buying items from “Shirt.Woot!”. Your ignorance of this issue will only be further proved to me when you either send me some sort of form letter response or do not respond at all.

Signed,
Dana xxxxx

Posted 28 Nov 2008 at 12:02 pm ¶
Jess wrote:

@Kathy-Oneida Nation

(sigh)

I’m not talking about every single part of a culture, I am simply saying that native nations generally aren’t in a position to live as they did in 1700, any more than anyone else is — last time I checked the local Jews don’t do animal sacrifice any more — the temple was burned to the ground in 70 AD.

So no, they can’t practice their religion as their ancestors did either. That just means the world has changed some — nothing more. Cultures don’t remain static unless they are dead.

I would venture to say that your own culture (the Oneida) has changed considerably in the last 400 years or so, if for no other reasons than the forced relocation, the population being decimated by European diseases, the huge trauma inflicted by white settlement. That doesn’t take away from your claim to the land, your status as a Native, or anything else. It just means that people did what people do all the time, which is adapt. It isn’t derogatory to say that, I hope. If anything, it shows the powerful resilience that Native cultures all over the continent have had in the face of genocidal policy.

I was trying to get across that the whole image of living “traditionally” is a complicated matter, and more than setting your life up like a character from a bad historical novel. The image of natives wanting to
all go back in time or live the way they did in the distant past is an inaccurate one.

As to the “they” reference, well, in any discussion a certain amount of generalization will happen.

Just like when Latoya Peterson talks about “the black community” they don’t mean that all black people think alike all the time like pod people, it’s just a shorthand way of describing something. I don’t think it should be controversial to say that a deliberate policy of cultural assimilation (or destruction, depending on your definitions) affected all Native peoples in the United States to one or another extent.

The specifics would differ between groups. For example, the experience of the Haudenosaunee nations, the Apaches and the Cherokees would differ considerably, I would expect. But that’s sort of a separate discussion to have, and I am happy to have it.

Posted 28 Nov 2008 at 2:40 pm ¶
Caitie (Shakesville) wrote:

Gothic Guera, thanks, that’s a brilliant poem. I’ll be looking for more of her work.

I had an unfortunate (for me, anyway, in that it means I have to admit having been blindly racist again - no matter how I try, it creeps up on me and I end up getting it wrong) realization as I read it.

I was a (to be clear of the point of privilege I’d like to acknowledge: I’m pink-skinned, English-born, blue-eyed Privilege Girl, in many ways) child of the 70s, and for me, my issue growing up was apartheid in South Africa. I went to demonstrations here in Canada, wrote letters, boycotted, did interviews, anything I could to help end what I saw as an evil system, exploiting the indigenous people by mandating their “other”-ness.

I don’t think it’s likely to have escaped anyone’s notice here how much that parallel sounds uncannily (and uncomfortably) familiar.

So…Caitie (I ask myself)? Why the hell aren’t you fighting against *this* apartheid? Besides being twenty years older and fatter, what’s different?

Well, nothing is. Right down to questions of who’s what colour-enough, identity cards, the works. See what I mean about “blind”? How ashamed I am to have missed this. :/

Can’t change my past, but I’m about to change my future. Thanks for the clue-by-four in this thread, folks, I’m about to go and try to make good use of the new forehead dent. I’ve been a sort of “frowning-at-the-editorial”-type ally; I think it’s time to move to letter-writing, donating-to-causes, making-some-noise-on-my-blog-type ally.

Head-noddingly-brow-wrinklingly thoughtfully yours,

Caitiecat (my name at Shakesville)

Posted 28 Nov 2008 at 8:18 pm ¶
Rob Schmidt wrote:

I refer to Native people as “they” because I’m not one of them, obviously. Which pronoun would you suggest I use?

If you think my brief references to the American Psychological Association and the Native and mainstream press count as “speaking for Natives,” I can’t help you. I’ve never heard a Native disagree with the APA’s statement on mascots, so I presume most Natives agree with it. As for the press, I’m doing what Jessica Yee recommended–referring people to places where they can hear Natives voice their own concerns. I do the same on my own website and blog where I quote Natives extensively.

As for the general reaction I’m sensing…FYI, I work for and with Native people in my daily pursuits. My postings on Native issues routinely receive overwhelming support (in the 90% range, I’d guesstimate) from Natives themselves. If anyone doesn’t like what I’m doing, take it up with the vast majority of Natives who DO like what I’m doing. They’re the judges of my work, not you.

In short, when you convince this vast majority to turn against me and disparage or dismiss my work, then I’ll reconsider it. Until then, no.

Posted 28 Nov 2008 at 9:14 pm ¶
Rob Schmidt wrote:

Note to Racialicious: Did I miss a rule that says only blacks can comment on black issues, Latinos on Latino issues, Asians on Asian issues, and so forth? If I did, I’ll try to conform to this rule in the future. If not, maybe we need more acceptance or tolerance of everybody’s right to comment on racial issues.

Posted 28 Nov 2008 at 9:15 pm ¶
salsoul wrote:

Second, there’s the issue of where Native people were sent under the reservation system. It’s easier to stereotype folks who live in remote areas because they aren’t around.

That’s so completely untrue. I live in Minneapolis, which has the largest urban Native population per capita, and I’ve had to deal with tons of people at my workplace claiming that all Natives are drunks. One idiot even said he’s never seen a sober Native person on the bus, which is complete crap; he’s just imagining that the (many) sober natives he sees are Greek or Latino or something. Or what about South Africa? Black people were and are a HUGE majority there, yet that didn’t stop the whites from stereotyping them as thugs so dangerous that they needed to live under a brutal apartheid regime that made 50s America look like Candy Land.

Posted 28 Nov 2008 at 11:14 pm ¶
Kathy-Oneida Nation wrote:

@Jess

Guess you missed the point there.

Since…..

the difference between Latoya saying “they” talking about the black community is that she belongs to that community. And me saying “they”" referencing the Native community is I actually belong to that community.

Whereas you referencing “they” to all of us, without placing yourself in that spectrum, in this colonized land would be……………

And please, I don’t need an analysis from you on how my nation and people have changed. I’m well aware, being part of the people myself, thank you.

Posted 29 Nov 2008 at 4:03 am ¶
Latoya Peterson wrote:

I’m allegedly on vacation, but let me jump in here to clarify a few things.

@all -

Racialicious is designed to be a multiracial space for discussion. Anyone can comment on any issue, and I prefer that happens, instead of people being in their segregated discussions.

However -

Kathy-Oneida Nation is quite correct. It does get tricky when someone purports to comment on the nature of a community that is not their own. Now, I can only speak to Rob - not as familiar with Jess, but I’ve been working with you, Rob, since I’ve been on this blog - and I understand where you are coming from. We’ve checked Newspaper Rock for a while, and Rob actually does do good work with reference to bringing awareness to issues within the Native Community, particularly in reference to stereotypes.

However, Rob, this is part of the process. I know that you and Jessica have knocked heads before about this. And to be honest, that is going to happen. Tim Wise often writes about how he doesn’t expect anything from the communities he discusses in his anti racism work - he is often met with mistrust, but he acknowledges it is with good reason.

Carmen and I run a multiracial blog - we get hit all the time with questions about why we cover the things we do, and who we allow to cover certain issues. Often, if we are called by the media, we are asked to refer them to someone that is a part of a certain group - a transracial adoptee, or maybe a Muslim woman who is also African-American. Could Carmen and I talk about some of these issues? Sure we’ve posted on it enough, done our own research.

But most of the time, producers want someone who speaks from that experience. It isn’t just for the authenticity factor - it’s also because a lived experience can provide insights that you just cannot duplicate with research and observation.

And this is why we - and I would caution everyone on this blog to do the same - tread lightly when we cover issues outside of our own experiences. We all internalize stereotypes, and we can all make mistakes. And it is only by listening and learning that we move forward.

This is why I am glad Jessica Yee came to write for us, and continues to write for us. Because, while we can intellectualize about experiences not our own, it is the authentic experience people respond to. Jessica started writing here, and now we see regular comments posted from Kathy, Cecilia, and other self-identified natives. Before Fatemeh started posting, we had very few self identified Muslims on site - now we have a little crew of about twelve or fifteen.

This doesn’t mean that everyone posting has the same ideas and opinions - it just means they feel like this is a place where they feel their voices will be heard. And while I understand wanting to connect, and share our knowledge - especially if this is something we know about, or have spent time with - we also have to understand that it can be really galling to come to a space like this, and still feel like others are trying to speak for you.

So, in sum, Rob, I understand what you are saying. But it’s part of the job. I can never know what it’s like to be anything but black. It’s the only lived experience I have, and if you remember my earlier writings about different aspects of blackness, I devoted a lot of my time then to debunking stereotypes. Now, that I oversee this blog, there are times when I want to interject a common experience, or discuss my observations, or what have you - but again, you have to tread lightly.

When all is said and done, I can have as many ideas and theories and opinions as I want - but others have to actually live their experiences as I live mine. And what I’ve found is that when I do tread lightly, and I do try to create a space where people feel as though they can speak, I get much more than I could ever ask for. And people don’t doubt my credibility, which is nice.

Posted 29 Nov 2008 at 12:52 pm ¶
Jess wrote:

Kathy, how am I supposed to refer to native people then?

I mean really, I am not one, but I do feel it’s important to discuss. I don’t think I need to be a native to say “this was really awful what was and is being done to you” and I don’t presume to speak for everyone.

I have spent a lot of time talking to many native people about these very issues, as part of the journalistic work I did some years back. So I like to think that not being deaf, dumb and blind I can build a picture of what folks are thinking. It’s not a scientifically valid poll, but combined with a little reading of folks like DeLoria, I think I can build a little bit of a sense of what’s going on.

I may be wrong — lord knows, a lot of things that came up in the work I did will likely be out of date by now.

But your response begs tghe question of just how any person who isn’t a native (or black or whatever) is supposed to discuss any of this. And my problem with it is that it means you get bogged down in the identity of the person speaking rather than what they are actually saying. Aside from that, it precludes any possibility of change. If that’s the case — we’re all stuck in our identity boxes and can’t talk to each other or even make an attempt at understanding anyone else’s experience– what the hell’s the point?

I’m quite aware of the dangers of speaking for people, or presuming to, but I don’t think it should be controversial to say “Black people as a rule probably thought segregation sucked.”

Or take Ward Churchill. It’s pretty clear (to me anyway) that his claim to Native ancestry is likely bogus. But does that make anything he wrote in his analysis of land claims wrong on its face?

Now, to the part that you got bent out of shape over, where I said, in a general sense, that native people in this (or probably any other Western Hemisphere nation) aren’t in a position to live as their ancestors did, I was attempting to say that the stereotypes were wrong for that very reason. You are treating certain things as mutually exclusive when they are not.

Which gets us to salsoul. The statement I made that one component of stereotyping was to make native people invisible does not automatically mean that large native populations in cities such as Minneapolis (or Phoenix, or Tucson) aren’t stereotyped. I was saying that in a situation where for the vast majority of the population natives are invisible (because they have been moved out of sight) it’s easier to get stuck in the buckskins image. The two points are not mutually exclusive.

Posted 29 Nov 2008 at 1:19 pm ¶
A. wrote:

I went to the University of Illinois. What’s even more insulting is that an American Indian woman is a person who spoke out against the stereotyping at work with Chief Illiniwek, and the Lakota also spoke out. Still the people in this area wanted to ignore them, and continued to until the NCAA put their foot down.

To this day, the people here are pissed.

Posted 30 Nov 2008 at 1:57 am ¶
Kathy-Oneida Nation wrote:

Thank you Latoya.

I think it’s interesting when non-Native or in my experience white folks automatically jump to extremes when we rightfully question their motives and ask them to place themselves when they want to work with us.

One of the foundational markers of allyship is indeed PLACING and IDENTIFYING yourself when you are reporting on issues within a community that is not your own.

It’s imperative that you do this, since you are dealing with peoples and communities that are still battling with colonization. Or did you forget that?

We absolutely need allies and did I say you had no right to echo the issues we’re facing? I did not. I simply spoke up to say that you are crossing dangerous lines by making statements like “they” without credibility or support to listen to us, the people.

What I really thought was that if you were in true allyship with us, I wouldn’t even have to be defending myself or these points right now to you.

Posted 30 Nov 2008 at 3:11 pm ¶
Kathy-Oneida Nation wrote:

Oh, and thanks so much for asking Jessica Yee to write, she works in so many of our communities speaking true and powerful words, so that’s how I found out about this website!

Posted 30 Nov 2008 at 5:33 pm ¶
Persia wrote:

There’s no topic that invites more self-questioning and stress on my part than Native issues. I am both the well-meaning White girl who doesn’t get it, and something else– but what that something else is is hard both to define in my own heart, and for others.

My great-grandmother was Native. She came back with her Union soldier husband after the Civil War. I don’t know what tribe she was. She faced so much racism when she came here that one day she packed up everything that related to her history and heritage– who she was– and threw it out.

But it didn’t disappear, of course. It never disappears. I think her mistreatment led to a lot of things that still echo through my family (and doesn’t really need to be aired out here). There’s other intermarriage in my family history, but it’s older, and less focused.

I can see the Native American in my face, and my grandmother’s even more strongly (no, it’s not high cheekbones, actually). It’s part of me, but it’s near invisible. And what my family went through– unpleasant as it was– is nowhere near as difficult as other people’s stories, much less the reality of reservations, or people thinking you’re Italian or a drunk on first sight. But it’s still there, and it’s mine, and I want to reclaim it and make something good of it– and fucked if I know where to start.

Posted 01 Dec 2008 at 12:00 pm ¶
Suzy wrote:

As a mixed Native woman, it’s the constant need to doubly prove yourself that gets exhausting…first prove you are Native, then prove you are really Native… that you have the stereotypical Native experience that is too often expected.

Love the postcard and the poem.

Posted 01 Dec 2008 at 2:57 pm ¶
Rob Schmidt wrote:

Thanks for your thoughts, Latoya. I realize POCs are sensitive to this issue. I still receive occasion “Who are you, white man?” questions on my blog. I explain my background there just as I’ve explained it here.

I hope I do tread lightly in this (mine) field. My comments here are usually short and refer people to more information, especially from Native sources. I try not to go on about how Natives think or feel.

P.S. When I posted my comments, there were no other comments on Lisa’s item. I didn’t know if anyone was going to answer the questions she posed. Therefore, I provided my brief answers.

Posted 01 Dec 2008 at 3:32 pm ¶
Rob Schmidt wrote:

Some thoughts to ponder:

Would it help if commenters listed their racial background by “blood quantum”? Then we could be sure the opinions expressed were authentically black, Latino, Asian, Indian, and so forth.

Often people here comment on aspects of the white-dominated mainstream culture: entertainment, politics, sports, fashion, etc. Since I’m white and others aren’t, should people defer to me on these subjects?

If it isn’t obvious, my answer to both questions is NO. We should judge comments by their content–by their accuracy and honesty–not by their ethnic origin.

Posted 01 Dec 2008 at 3:46 pm ¶
Sanguinity wrote:

Persia:

My family story is similar — my great-grandmother died denying that she was Native or had lived on a reservation, even though we know otherwise. We also know that she probably witnessed the U.S. cavalry coming onto her reservation to put down an uprising, but again, she denied it.

My grandfather and father are both enrolled in their Nation. (I’m not.) But they still made a strong push to assimilate, to move away and blend in, to follow in my great-grandmother’s footsteps and try to leave Indianness behind. Which they were both grossly unable to do, of course, because it doesn’t work that way. Even I haven’t even been able to leave it all behind, and I was basically raised middle-class white (except not as innocent of history as most white kids are).

Know when I’m least able to leave it behind? When I run into a wannabe who’s going all elves-and-fairies romantic on me: “gosh, wouldn’t it be awesome to be a little bit Indian? I wish I was adopted so I could pretend that I–” I want to punch them in the jaw, I flash so angry on them. This is my family history they’re fantasizing about, and they have no idea how much pain they’re wishing on their ancestors just so that they can indulge themselves in a little “specialness.” So I tell them exactly what they were just wishing for, and that I know this because my family lived that.

The other time I can’t leave it behind is when I’m dealing with whites who want to minimize this nation’s history and present with respect to Native genocide. I see the elisions, evasions, minimizations, excuses, and lies, the ones that so many white people don’t quite ever seem to notice. So I speak up again: That’s not the way it happened. And you’re harming REAL PEOPLE by believing it did happen that way.

I, too, have had a hard time learning to put a name to what I am and am not, especially since Tribe Wannabe is such a threat to Native identity in this country, and I don’t want to play into that. For me, this has been an exercise in explicitly learning who I’m not — claiming the privilege, acknowledging my family’s assimilation, knowing the consequences of the differences between my family history and the histories of those who are still strongly connected to Native communities and Nations. But in that process, I also acknowledge that there are two things I get — the pervasiveness of white mainstream lies about our country’s history, and the slimyness of Tribe Wannabe fantasies — and that those are the places where my family’s history are claimable and useful. I still have to be very careful about making it clear that I’m not enrolled, and that I am speaking from the authority of a family that knows and remembers its history, and that I’m not one of those white girls who claims a romantic smidgen of Cherokee without knowing what it means in terms of actual lives to be a smidgen Native.

Which, you know, is a delicate balancing act. But as long as I’m honest with myself and the people I’m talking to — this is who I am, this is who I am not, this is what I know about, this is what I don’t know about — it seems to work out okay.

Drop me a line at my journal (link in my handle) if you want to talk more. But I personally think that you can reclaim your history and make it useful, as long as you’re absolutely clear that you’re claiming your history and identity, and that you’re not claiming other people’s identities for yourself.

Posted 01 Dec 2008 at 3:48 pm ¶
NancyP wrote:

Middle-aged white woman here. My fashion stereotype of Native Americans is “bolo tie and ponytail” for men, “long hair” for women, otherwise pretty non-specific Western or Midwest US dress. I can’t identify any other stereotypes that I hold, other than “on average, poorer” and “likes pickup trucks”. I don’t run into many publicly self-identified NAs day to day in St. Louis - not sure if the population is indeed low, or is higher but uninterested in informing people or signaling by choice of bumper sticker, hair style, or assumption of traditional name (if possessing a European patronymic).

I am not sure why some whites think that NAs stay in pow-wow dress all the time or get all new-agey about “NA spirituality” or whatever. No common sense, I guess.

Posted 01 Dec 2008 at 10:40 pm ¶
nascardaughter wrote:

In many places in the midwest the American Indian is very present, but in other places in the U.S., like in California, Disney’s Pocahontas is as close as we get to “Indians.”

Not sure what is meant by “the American Indian is very present,” but California has either the largest or the second largest Native population in the US, depending on who’s counting. The San Diego area has something like 20 federally recognized tribes.

Linguists typically regard California as the most linguistically diverse area in North America, mostly because of the range of Native American languages spoken here.

Just sayin’.

Posted 02 Dec 2008 at 2:13 am ¶
Carolyn Chambliss wrote:

Commenting on post n. 29 by Rob, and Sanguinity post n.30.
There are a lot of gray zones when it comes to racial dialectics and I think the broader the color spectrum, the richer and more relevant the argument. It’s not by limiting, but by being inclusive that we all as human beings have a lot to gain.

As Rob provocatively enquires “Would it help if commenters listed their racial background by “blood quantum”? Then we could be sure the opinions expressed were authentically black, Latino, Asian, Indian, and so forth…NO. We should judge comments by their content–by their accuracy and honesty–not by their ethnic origin.”

Personally, I think that compassion, understanding and respect for other human beings should be of primary consideration in all arguments while giving a privileged voice to “lived” experience.
Although I technically have a fair percentage of Native blood in my own veins - I look nothing like my native ancestors. Certainly Rob is more qualified to discuss a whole host of arguments relative to Native Heritage than I am!

To “Sanguinity”, you and I actually share a similar family history, but I don’t look like a POC, so therefore I must be a poser if reclaiming my Native Heritage is an important part of my identity? My sister looks like a Native, I look like a Swede - it’s just one of those odd tricks of nature. I’ve been called a “Barbie Doll” all my life, and my claims to Native Heritage are usually met with ridicule, but if my little sister asserts the same, she gets acceptance and admiration. Do you think that my sister is more authentic just because she looks the part? She’s got the right features, skin and eye color, so does that make her more authentic?

Certainly when one can not claim lived experience or membership to a given culture, they should “tread lightly” when offering their views or perceptions of that particular reality. However, don’t we all have a lot to gain by being inclusive and analytical rather than racially biased or gender specific for the sake of argument? Should all non-native voices be silenced or given second shrift even if they are Highly respected Scholars of Native studies? That sounds dangerously close to racially driven censure to me. Wouldn’t that be a huge disservice to All human beings? What about the discipline of Cultural Anthropology - is there no relevance to living among the people of an endangered culture in order to protect ,preserve, document for future generation and promote awareness of that culture to the outside world?

Should the Smithsonian Institute be abolished because it is a product of the European enlightenment and colonialism? Quite frankly I would rather that my daughter and everyone’s children be able visit their extensive collection and to learn from it.

Posted 02 Dec 2008 at 10:34 am ¶
Persia wrote:

Thanks for the invite, Sanguinity, I might just take you up on it!

Posted 02 Dec 2008 at 11:49 am ¶
Sanguinity wrote:

@ Carolyn:

You’ve misread me. Where did I say that someone had to “look POC” to claim one’s heritage?

Your lived experience is your lived experience. If your lived experience derives from how you’re perceived (or not perceived), it’s no less lived experience than experiences that come from social ties.

Additionally, I am not advocating the silence of non-Native voices. I’m advocating remembering that non-Native voices are either speaking for themselves as non-Natives, or they are speaking for someone else with all the slippery problems that go with that. I’m advocating that wheresoever possible, one should seek out and listen to Native voices themselves, rather than relying on non-Native go-betweens.

(Re your example, it seems a rather unfortunate choice to me: there’s a long history of Highly Respected Scholars of Native Studies not being respected by the people they write about. Because of that history, I approach such scholars with caution, and preferentially look for the voices of Native people themselves. Non-Native people can be good allies; unfortunately, living among Native people doesn’t automatically make you a good ally.)

For myself, I’m trying to walk the line of speaking about my own, non-enrolled, lived experiences while not letting my voice inadvertently silence enrolled Native voices — and I do that by being clear about who I am and who I am not.

Posted 02 Dec 2008 at 12:59 pm ¶
Rosa wrote:

I’m another white person from Minneapolis, but I lived in other parts of the Midwest most of my life, and racism against Native people here is just *way* different than in other places.

I occasionally ran into new agers who really did believe Native cultures had all died out, in Iowa and Indiana. Also, white girls in my high school (in the early ’90s in Iowa) who had mixed-race babies would sometimes claim the dads were Indian to avoid telling people they were Black. But mostly the racism was belief in the “Noble (ecological, savage, ahistorical) Indian”

Up here there’s just crazy intense racism, people thinking all Native people are poor addicts, welfare cheats, or dangerous gang members, racism against people with French surnames because they’re assumed to be native or metis… I’d never run into that before, or the assumption that because I’m white I’ll agree with that kind of vicious talk. It was kind of stunning.

Posted 02 Dec 2008 at 1:04 pm ¶
Cecelia wrote:

I love this post and have been meaning to reply. I currently reside in Michigan and I can go weeks without seeing another Native (other than my Dad or my relatives who live in Detroit). The Native American is present in the Midwest, yes but specifically on reservations. Like my relatives who live on a reservation here in Michigan which is 500 miles from the metropolitan region I live in. It is important to be more specific in regards to what you mean by the “Midwest.” The Midwest means different things to a lot of people.

As an Ojibway Native American woman I am affected by these images because I feel dishonored and disrespected. I feel unseen and unheard when I see images like this.

I am often asked, “what are you?” Which is a horrible way to approach someone that you want to get to know, especially in regards to their racial and ethnic identity. I usually get, “you are Latina, Italian or you may even have African American heritage.” Very few ever guess that I am Native. I feel that people often expect a stereotypical image of a Native. My hair is long, in braids most of the time but people often expect more in my image, the way I talk, ect. I usually try to explain to the person that this is highly offensive and is not the best way to engage with a person about their identity.

Posted 03 Dec 2008 at 12:22 am ¶
Carolyn Chambliss wrote:

To Sanguinity,
Well said! I agree with you entirely. I like the way that you answered my challenge. I wasn’t “misreading you” so much as jumping to the next possible step and challenging that possibility.

I too: am “advocating that wheresoever possible, one should seek out and listen to Native voices themselves, rather than relying on non-Native go-betweens.”

Unfortunately because of outsiders who have continuously exploited native peoples by living among them and exploiting them further still it does even more to doubly silence the real voice of that culture as well as making members of that culture reluctant to trust outsiders.
Sorry for the clunky wording!

Case in point, post n.37 by Cecilia:
well said! Thank you for your thoughts and personal experience! as you said:
“As an Ojibway Native American woman I am affected by these images because I feel dishonored and disrespected. I feel unseen and unheard when I see images like this.”

To Cecelia I say: May you find the strength and courage to make your voice heard!
and:
“Very few ever guess that I am Native. I feel that people often expect a stereotypical image of a Native. My hair is long, in braids most of the time but people often expect more in my image…”
Isn’t that the whole point of this thread?

“BECAUSE I DON’T FIT THE STEREOTYPES, I FEEL FRAUDULENT AND INVISIBLE”…

-Isn’t it hight time for a paradigm shift in the status quo? What good does it do if we feel fraudulent if we don’t bring those contradictions to light through various media?

-Where are the Native Spike Lee’s who can advocate the different voices of Native identity through the mouthpiece of popular culture, as Spike continues to be a controversial and important voice for African American culture and all its nuances?

-Why to this day are non-natives playing interesting roles in films that should instead be sounding boards for Contemporary Native identity?

Posted 03 Dec 2008 at 4:59 pm ¶
SixFootWoman wrote:

RE: “I too: am “advocating that wheresoever possible, one should seek out and listen to Native voices themselves, rather than relying on non-Native go-betweens.”

Unfortunately because of outsiders who have continuously exploited native peoples by living among them and exploiting them further still it does even more to doubly silence the real voice of that culture as well as making members of that culture reluctant to trust outsiders.”

Last year I was on a message board that discussed different religions, and a Native poster mentioned something about a performing a tobacco blessing. I had never heard of this, and so I posted in response asking what a tobacco blessing was, as I don’t know any Native people and had never learned much about Native culture and spirituality beyond standard history book fare, (or God help us, F-Troop). That was the extent of my post.

I was quite taken aback by the vitriolic response I received asking why she should bother to answer my question, as I obviously have no real interest in Native culture. Huh? To this day I have no idea how my question was offensive. I used a search engine to find out about the tobacco blessing, but because of that experience, I am hesitant to ask similar questions of Native people. The comment above just confirmed for me that this is the probably the best course to take, but I don’t see how it goes anyone any good to try to have it both ways—jumping on outsiders’ lack of knowledge of a particular culture while refusing to provide the knowledge when asked. It goes nowhere.

Posted 04 Dec 2008 at 12:17 pm ¶
Sanguinity wrote:

@ SixFootWoman:

A couple things…

First: She was one person you talked to. If it was true that no Native person ever made information available to you, then you might have a legitimate complaint that Native people can’t “have it both ways.” However, our saying in this thread that you should preferentially seek out Native voices does not mean that all Natives must necessarily make themselves available to answer all questions at any time. Instead, I’m saying that lots of Natives have already spent a good deal of time and effort putting their perspectives out there, or explicitly making themselves available to you in educational forums, and that you should take advantage of that.

Second: You don’t say what your identities and privileges are, but there’s a common mainstream conceit one should be able to ask questions of any random minority individual — race, ethnicity, religion, sexual orientation, whatever — and get an on-the-spot explanation from them. Additionally, the conceit goes, this is a reasonable first approach to learning more about other cultures.

However, when you’re a member of a minority, that conceit can work out to spending a lot of time and energy answering the same elementary questions over and over. What’s more frustrating, is that a lot of these questions have answers already readily available through means that don’t require someone to stop a random stranger and ask them to explain themselves — means such as books, workshops, internet sites. After a while, you also start to notice a pattern: many of these random question-askers fail to avail themselves of other educational resources, even after they realize that there is stuff that they don’t know but would like to know; they simply never look at the reading list you give them, and just keep on asking you whatever random questions pop into their heads. If you’ve spent a while on the receiving end of these questions, they can stop sounding like good faith: instead, they sound self-centered and arrogant. They sound like someone is asking you to put in effort to educate them, despite the fact that they have made zero effort to educate themselves. (If you want a better idea of how that energy differential can play out, damali ayo’s How to Rent a Negro might be a good start.)

In short, while your question may not have sounded rude to you, it may have sounded very rude to the person who you were asking. You do say that you knew very little about Native cultures or spirituality when you asked the question; it also sounds like you asked the question before you even did so much as use a search engine. Perhaps if you had already done an internet search, and thus asked a somewhat-informed question about tobacco blessings, you might have gotten a more open response. (Or, you know, perhaps not. Hard to know, because I’m not her.)

And one third thing: it’s pretty common for people in your position to hear more vitriol than was actually there — if you don’t understand where the objection is coming from, or that what you did was offensive (let alone why), then the emotional component of the response coming back at you often sounds bigger than it actually was. I wouldn’t be surprised if you went back and looked at that exchange again, that her response might now seem “curt” or “exasperated.” Obviously, that’s pure conjecture on my part, but it is based on having seen a number of these exchanges, and the way otherwise-well-meaning people tend to talk about them after. She might very well have been vitrolic, but I ask you to consider the possibility that she wasn’t, but that it felt that way because you were so surprised/bewildered by her response.

Um, and that’s all I got. Basically, you can do a lot to “preferentially seek out Native voices” without placing random demands on individual Native people you meet. Additionally, it’s a sign of respect to do your homework first.

Posted 04 Dec 2008 at 2:38 pm ¶
SixFootWoman wrote:

@Sanguinity

Thank you for your perspective. Yes, I realize it was just one person, but since it was the first NA person I’d ever “spoken” to, it set me to wondering if simply asking questions about one’s culture was considered offensive in that culture. It was definitely vitriolic, as her little comrades (not necessarily NA’s but other regulars on that message board) jumped in to sing backup for her. It could also have been one of those situations where a group seizes control of a message board as “theirs” and and dumps on outsiders.

I do want to emphasize that this is not someone walking randomly up to a person of another race or religion and asking them a question I could look up first. I would never do such a thing! I live in northern NJ and have worked in Manhattan for 30 years, 19 of them at the WTC, probably the most diverse office space in the country–it’s not as though I’m in my own little world. However, the NY metro area does have some Native people, but not a whole lot–I’ve never personally met a Native American, but I’ve met a Sherpa.

Still, I don’t think I was wrong. I was on a message board that purports to be about different religions discussing their differences and commonalities, and if one is going to post about a practice or belief that it’s likely others wouldn’t have heard of and then slam that person for not having heard of it, it sounds like a set-up to me.

I don’t know what you consider “my position” to be, but I don’t read things into words that aren’t there. There is nothing in “what is a tobacco blessing?” that warranted such viciousness.

Posted 04 Dec 2008 at 4:38 pm ¶
SixFootWoman wrote:

“How to Rent a Negro”

Looks absolutely hysterical, thanks.

Posted 04 Dec 2008 at 4:48 pm ¶
Carolyn Chambliss wrote:

Tansi Sanguinity,
Excellent answer above, well stated and I agree. Hi Six Foot, sorry that you had a negative experience, but please try to put yourself in that person’s shoes, I always find that helpful when I have been personally attacked and from my view point unjustifiably. How do you know that you haven’t run into other Natives on the bus, in the subway, in Central Park? Maybe you thought they where Porto Ricans? That’s what I believe the point of this thread is. I don’t look like an NDN - so I feel fraudulent…

It really is exasperating feeling as though you are an Automatic Ambassador for your culture to anyone who wants to know. Think of it as a brusk wake up call or a not so friendly invitation to learn - which btw you did right away did by googling. That’s a good start!

I think if you go through the right channels and genuinely interest yourself in Native Causes, you will meet a lot of very friendly, open and kind Natives who are more than happy to share their knowledge and experiences. Try the facebook group “Native Nations are Joining Forces” - thats a fantastic group run by a Dannish Inuit originally from Greenland. Everyone there is so helpful, inclusive, informative and kind. You could have a big circle of Native and mixed Native friends as well as other Citizens of the world - in no time. All you need is a big dose of humility and the willingness to learn. I think you should be proud of yourself already just for being curious, just tread lightly as Latoya was saying above when asking questions and develop a hard shell.

Being of mixed race myself, I can say that my colonial ancestors - like George Washington - didn’t really take the time to educate themselves before making public policy to obliterate a Native culture that was already nearly wiped out by smallpox. Here’s a handy link:
http://www.iwchildren.org/redskinhate3.htm

Yes, “our” Founding Fathers like Thomas Jefferson certainly borrowed many political concepts from Native culture like Iraquoi Confederation - blending those concepts into the US constitution, but unfortunately without due credit. There are so many aspects of “American” culture that are direct derivatives from Native traditions from culinary to spiritual to Womens rights, but unfortunately, one more there is little or no recognition of this.

It is that exasperating “invisibility” or “silenced voice” thay the above graphic is alluding to as well. ” I don’t fit the stereotypes” so I feel “fraudulent”. Maybe it was just that sentiment of being invisible that sparked the vitriol in your direction. Try to imagine the ire wasn’t directed at you, at the larger Popular culture that nearly ignores the existence and relevance of the people in question. Wouldn’t you be a bit miffed yourself if The founding Father of this Nation referred to your particular ethnicity as:
…being no different from wolves, helping to justify overwhelming hatred of Native People whom he labeled redskin savages:
“BOTH BEING BEASTS OF PREY, THO’ THEY DIFFER IN SHAPE.”

-George Washington, President of the United States of America (Stannard)

What’s even worse:
“Lay waste all the settlements around… that the country may not be merely overrun but destroyed,” urging the general not to “listen to any overture of peace before the total ruin of their settlements is effected.” Sullivan did this reporting he had, “destroy[ed] everything that contributes to their support” turning “the whole of that beautiful region from the character of a garden to a scene of drear and sickening desolation.” Washington’s troops amused themselves by skinning the bodies of Indians “from the hips downward, to make boot tops or leggins.”
-Anthony F.C,. Wallace, the Death and Rebirth of the Seneca (Knoph, 1979)

Something to think about!!

Posted 05 Dec 2008 at 7:05 am ¶
Anonymous wrote:

“Hi Six Foot, sorry that you had a negative experience, but please try to put yourself in that person’s shoes”

I usually do, but perhaps my mistake was that I didn’t quite know what the shoes looked like. My question was specific to Native Americans (was it offensive to inquire as to culture or spirituality?) - similar to the idea that an Englishman finds it offensive to be asked what he does for a living or where he lives for the negative history of the British class system such a question can evoke. I do know a couple of people who have Native American descent, but none who actively embrace their culture, so I simply have never had the opportunity to have such a dialogue as occurs with other races, religions, etc.

I did some Googling, and as of the 2000 census, there are more than 40K Native Americans in NYC–.05% of the population, which surprised me. I don’t think I would confuse a Native with a Puerto Rican, though! I found that amusing, but I have personal interests in race and genetics esp. as regards American history, but you couldn’t know that.

Because part of my job includes monitoring contracts for participation compliance by M/WBE firms, I’m aware that there is a significant enough representation of Native Americans in the region, particularly on Long Island, who own construction firms that NA firms cannot be included in set-aside programs, although they do meet MWBE criteria for inclusion in subcontracting goals.

There are also the Ramapough people in the area where I live, who are recognized by the states of NY and NJ, but not federally. (Should be, IMO). Again, I don’t have any personal acquaintenances.

I did not think of anyone feeling as though they were being put in the position of being a cultural ambassador, so thank you for enlightening me. I will refrain from asking any such questions of a Native American unless they truly initiate the conversation or specifically welcome inquiries about their culture.

Which is a shame, because last month on the way to Syracuse for my daughter’s music event I enjoyed a stop at a place called The Turning Stone, and though I’ve looked through the website to find the origin of the name, I can’t find it, and by her signature there appears to be a person in this forum who might be able to tell me….

Thanks also for the other links and information. I’d like to add another source — “The Island at the Center of the World”, a book about the Dutch (my heritage) colony of New Amsterdam, which also points out that features of our democracy are directly taken from Native government, especially the concept of checks and balances. Also, “1491″.

Posted 05 Dec 2008 at 11:16 am ¶
SixFootWoman wrote:

Ugh–typed a looong post, then lost it.

- Carolyn Chambliss–Thank you for your response.

“How do you know that you haven’t run into other Natives on the bus, in the subway, in Central Park? Maybe you thought they where Porto Ricans?”

That made me laugh out loud–I have a personal interest in genetics, race, etc., esp. as pertains to American history, but you couldn’t know that. I don’t confuse Cubans or people from the Dominican Republic with Puerto Ricans, either. My question was specific to etiquette with regard to questions about Native American culture–whether it was impolite to ask, similarly to the way you don’t ask an Englishman what he does for a living or where he went to school because of the negative history of class connotations in that society. I simply do not have any NA acquaintances with whom I could enjoy such a dialogue as occurs with members of others races, cultures, religious groups, etc.

“That’s what I believe the point of this thread is. I don’t look like an NDN - so I feel fraudulent…”

I am of Dutch descent, so I won’t ask you to wear feathers and moccassins if you don’t ask me to wear wooden shoes and those silly white hats, OK? : )

“It really is exasperating feeling as though you are an Automatic Ambassador for your culture to anyone who wants to know. ”

That did not occur to me, and I thank you for pointing that out. Again, the original situation was in a venue where I felt the question would not be unwelcome. I will stay on the side of caution, and not make cultural inquiries to persons unless I am sure they are encouraged.

Not even to the person on here whom I think could answer the question, “Why the name ‘Turning Stone’?”, which I cannot find on the appropriate website.

Thanks also for the link and info–I’d like to add that a favorite book of mine, “The Island At The Center of The World”, about the Dutch colony of New Amsterdam and how it shaped the future US in general, does give credit where due to the influence of eastern Native American practices in shaping our government, particularly in the concept of checks and balances.

Posted 05 Dec 2008 at 11:39 am ¶
Carolyn Chambliss wrote:

Thanks Anon, and 6′, for your comments. I really enjoyed them and I’m glad that you both got the humor that I intended in pointing out “our” invisibility with no intended offense to Puerto Ricans - it was kind of an inside family joke - my own sister has sometimes been mistaken as such. I also LOL-ed about the buckskin vs. wooden shoes that was one of the best quotes on this thread - maybe we should make it into a t-shirt.

My own personal ethnicity is so mixed that I have the dubious accomplishment of having had ancestors that fought against each other in both the American Revolution, the Civil War AND probably having enslaved each other too… AND that’s before going back 500 years earlier to our links to Europe. I have Celtic blood and have worked here in Italy for a Roman noble who I used to trade barbs with because he liked to call me Pokanantis, so I’d assail him with stories of the Boudica who almost defeated Rome 2000 years ago, but tragically failed. We had jolly good fun at it, and it all started with one of those typical Italian comments that “We Americans” are a simple and childlike people because we don’t have any history”…I of course pointed out the 1000’s of years of Native History, culture, and civilization - so that’s how the whole thing escalated into an historic tit for tat but all in good spirit because that’s the only way that I could win considering that he was the CEO of the company that I worked for!

From my personal experience, I’ve found that backing myself up with historic facts has always helped me to keep a perspective on things and to even find humor in potentially offensive comments which here in Italy abound, especially during the last 8 years of the thankfully outgoing administration. Sorry to get on a tangent there…

Once again, thanks for the lively exchange I think that it is potentially enriching for everyone who chances upon this thread. I will read those books!
Mitaku Oyesin!

It will be a wonderful and glorious day when all we human can begin rejoicing on our shared commonalities rather than focusing on our differences don’t you think?

Posted 05 Dec 2008 at 3:49 pm ¶