(cont.) but i’m still very much of the opinion that nothing should be done to protect people from offending the people who actually adhere to the sects that hold these things ‘holy’. i don’t think there’s anything wrong with stereotypes, AS LONG as people are educated to know that stereotypes are just that. i very much agree that people should really buy the native american crafts from native americans (cont.)

(cont.) and not from huge morally indefensible companies like f21, who don’t give a shit about the people they take the inspiration for these things from. but just because one group of people consider something sacred doesn’t make it so. people should be allowed to desecrate whatever they want, as long as they never harm any humans, or destroy other people’s work (e.g. churches, burial grounds, temples etc.). i’m open to have my mind changed on this, though.

Okay.  To start, I think two things are getting mixed up in all of this:

1) cultural appropriation

2) ‘costumes’, ‘dress up’ and other forms of engaging in perpetrating stereotypes

Both piss me off, but they are not both cultural appropriation.  I’m not going to discuss the second point, just the first, because I think that’s where most of the ambivalence is in people who are just starting to think about this.  Most people already understand why playing ‘dress up’ using racist stereotypes is wrong…and if they don’t, I basically write them off as not worth the time.

Okay.  So, cultural appropriation.  I see two errors with your argument so far:

a) the appeal to common practice: people culturally appropriate all the time, thus cultural appropriation is okay and;

b) a misunderstanding of what ‘restricted’ means.

On the first issue, when cultural appropriation is taking place (as in, restricted symbols are being used/taken without permission), you cannot rely on the fact that it happens to justify it happening.  What I mean is, I’m arguing it’s wrong, and I’m not saying it’s just wrong when it’s native restricted symbols.  The fact that people do it anyway does not change a wrong into a right.  You would have to make an argument about why these symbols cannot be legitimately restricted in the first place.  What doesn’t pass the muster is saying, “well it’s wrong but other people do it so it’s okay for me to do it too”.  That’s the “he did it first!” defence that doesn’t save us as children either :D

Which brings us to b.  A lot of the things you discuss fall under the ‘costume’ category in 2, so we weed those out right away.  They aren’t cultural appropriation per se, and their level of offensiveness depends on the context (i.e. whether they perpetuate harmful stereotypes that are used to justify continuing oppression against a people).

However, while you may not be arrested for claiming to hold restricted qualifications (having an MD etc), you are nonetheless committing a fraud.  Most common law and civil law countries have specific Acts controlling certain types of professions…doctors, lawyers, architects, and so on.  These legislative regimes define who is eligible to become a member of these professions, what qualifications they must have, what obligations and duties apply and so forth.  Thus, not everyone can practice medicine, or law etc.  You can pretend to have these qualifications and you might even get away with it, but what you are doing is still probably illegal.

Now you can argue that anyone should be able to do these things and the restrictions are invalid…but I doubt you will.  There is a reason these restrictions are in place and most people can come up with good reasons for that without delving into the legislative history.

What you can’t do, is convincingly argue that because people are committing fraud by actually impersonating police officers (i.e. not just dressing up as a costume), lawyers, medical doctors and so forth, that this makes violating those restrictions ‘okay’.  That wouldn’t make any logical sense, if you actually understand and support why those restrictions exist.

Analogies are of limited use, unfortunately.  I gave analogies within western culture that would be understandable to settlers.  They are not equivalents to native cultural restrictions.  We don’t write elaborate Acts regulating who can be a warrior, and who can wear a headdress, and who can practice medicine.  Our cultural restrictions are expressed in other ways, and it’s not really that important for you to understand exactly how that works.  Not for this discussion.

It is important, however, to understand that these restrictions exist, and that they are not unimportant merely because you do not come from the culture, and do not understand the reasoning behind them.  An immigrant to Canada, coming from a nation where anyone can practice medicine (I doubt such a place actually exists though) cannot use this lack of restriction in his or home country to justify practicing medicine in Canada.  It would not be allowed.

And here is where analogies just aren’t adequate.  You aren’t living in a First Nation community, and I am not saying that you have to in order for these restrictions to apply to you.  I think they apply outside our communities too, and not just because these lands are originally ours.  Our own people are not allowed to access certain symbols because within our culture they are restricted.  Merely living outside our culture should not extinguish the restrictions and open up the floodgates to non-natives, on precisely the basis that they aren’t us.  That is basically saying that the restricted cultural symbols of all other cultures you are not a member of are open to you (but not to the people in the culture).  And frankly, that would be fucked up. 

It renders the symbol meaningless, stripping it of all its cultural context…while at the same time, the people using it claim an affinity with the culture they are taking it from.  I’m sorry, but you can’t have it both ways.  Steal our restricted shit, and don’t care…but don’t pretend that it honours us or that it is anything less than theft.  (I say this in general, I’m not directing it at you).

And like I say in the longer article, don’t get hung up on the word ‘sacred’:

I do not care if you are religious, spiritual, or atheist.  These are choices you make, and I respect them.  However, because of the turbulent history of religion in western settler philosophy (and in many other parts of the world, from whence Canadians come), the translation of terms from our languages into the word ‘sacred’ can sometimes cause trouble.  Let’s talk about that for a second.

I feel that when other cultures discuss ‘sacred’ things, some people feel obligated to reject or elevate those things because of how they feel about their own religious traditions, or their atheism.  The issue gets confused as being about ‘religion’, when that is not necessarily what is going on.

Usually when we say ‘sacred’, there are more complex terms in our own language that apply…all of which basically mean to impart that the thing in question is ‘important and meaningful in a specific way’.  When you see the term ‘sacred’, please remember that.

Also, desecration of the restricted symbols of oppressed peoples is inherently harmful, as it bolsters already institutionalised systems that continue to oppress us.  For many years, we were denied our cultural practices and our symbols by law.  We were punished for wearing these items, practicing our ceremonies, speaking our languages and so on.  That has changed, but now we see these things used against us in new ways.  Used to stereotype us as all being the same, fitting into ‘positive’ or ‘negative’ caricatures, erasing our actual traditions and culture.  Our symbols and ceremonies are being taken up by people who feel that they do not have to abide by the restrictions, and so these people (being much more numerous than those within our cultures who are allowed to wear/do these things) get to basically define what the symbols/ceremonies mean.  That is cultural erasure and it continues the process of cultural genocide. 

I’m not talking about moccasins or feather earrings.  There are many items within our cultures that are not restricted and can be used by non-natives.  That does not mean it is all up for grabs, and it certainly does not mean that taking restricted things is not harmful, or somehow an exercise of some noble human right.

I hope  that clarifies things more for you, whether you end up agreeing or not.  Also, you  might consider this….oppressed peoples, colonised peoples, do not have the institutional power to do what you claim should be done freely.  We cannot appropriate the restricted symbols of settler culture, because we would be punished for this.  I don’t want us to have some ‘equal right’ to do this mind, you, but the power imbalance involved should not be forgotten.

It’s gendered in the sense that certain things are based on being male or female, but it’s not sexist.  Sexism (like racism) is systemic power imbalance.  Prejudice or discrimination based on one’s sex/gender, which negatively foster conditions where one sex/gender is elevated at the expense of the other. 

When you come from a culture where the feminine has for so long been subjugated and denigrated, while the masculine is elevated and celebrated, of course it is difficult to understand how gender roles are not necessarily based on power inequalities in other cultures. 

Remind yourself of one very important thing:  European cultural values are not universal.

These are the cultural values that have been imported to the Americas, and continue to dominate the socio-political structure of the Americas.  Nonetheless, our socio-political structures also exist, but are not understood by most non-natives except through the lens of that European culture.  (So basically, not understood at all.)

In our cultures, women and men are equals, and this is not something we struggled to achieve after centuries of enforced inequality.  Let that be your starting point for figuring it out.  It would be pointless for me to give you examples, because it’s going to to take you a long time to accept what I’ve just said as possible, coming from where you come from.

Fuck everything about this.

Ah yes, Edmonton.  Still sucking ass and treating us like shit.  Fuck you.

Welcome to the 21st century, where this shit is still going on.

A former employee of the Edmonton Police Service says racist behaviour of her colleagues and her boss forced her from her job.

“I was told by my sergeant within the victim services unit to be less aboriginal at work,” Kathleen Sawdo told a shocked Edmonton police commission Thursday night.

“I was told that my appearance, photos of my children and regalia at my desk — a blade of sweetgrass and a bough of cedar in my office — was culturally aggressive, assertive and obtrusive and I was told my co-workers in the unit found all this to be offensive.”

Sawdo was a civilian employee in the victim services unit at the time.

She complained about the reprimand, but no one was disciplined, she said.

Instead she was isolated from her team and forced to leave the southeast division and work at headquarters downtown.

“I went to work everyday in fear, with no support,” Sawdo said.

A promised cultural sensitivity session was never held, she said.

She was bullied by her co-workers to the point she quit in March 2011 after almost one year on the job.

Sawdo also accused her colleagues and bosses in victim services of failing to engage or support the aboriginal community in the city.

Although most of her clients were aboriginal, she was dissuaded from helping them, she said.

“Given the attitude and behaviour of victim services employees, very few received the support they deserved and are entitled to,” she told the commission.

“I had to sit there and listen to victim advocates take a look at the name ‘Cardinal’ and say, ‘No, they’re aboriginal,’… and refuse to send out a victim impact statement,” Sawdo said.

“I’m sorry, I’m ashamed,” she told commission members. “I’m ashamed of your service and that needs to be fixed.”

What’s that?  No honey, the fact that the okimâwastotin (that headdress worn by clueless hipster girls all the time) is generally reserved for males in Plains cultures is not sexist or patriarchal. You can stop trying to ‘save us from sexism’ thanks.

In fact, we were centuries ahead of you in the gender equality department.  There are of course a great diversity of socio-political traditions in our various nations, but one thing comes through loud and clear…our women held positions of power.  Not merely over hearth and home, but politically as well.  In some nations, women run the roost, and this without denigrating or subjugating men (in case you were worried).

Centuries of racist and sexist interference by European powers has taken its toll.  We do indeed face sexism in our communities, to an extent unthinkable before Contact. It is sadly the case that the oppressed often internalise their oppressor, and the oppressor for us has always been racist, and sexist. 

To combat this, we look to our traditions, which are egalitarian.  Where men and women are respected and venerated.  We do not fumble towards equality as sameness, as so many settler feminists insist we should (in our context only, as they often recognise this is a ridiculous approach otherwise).  We revive equity.  We acknowledge different gender roles, and recognise that the female is not subservient in our cultures. 

When we discuss ‘women’s power’ and ‘women’s roles’, you hear echoes of your history.  But your history is not ours.  Our history speaks proudly of the strength of our women and our men.  Gender roles were not created in our societies to elevate men and turn women into chattel.

You settler women have much to overcome.  Your history is fraught with inequality and abuses.  I am sorry that you come from such twisted traditions.

Do not attempt to transplant your historical circumstances into our Nations.  You have no idea what the headdress means in our cultures.  To claim that the restrictions on who can wear it are ‘sexist’ merely highlights this ignorance…your inability to see outside your own cultural norms, outside your own sad, sexist cultural history. 

Colonisers always believe they have the right to define reality, particularly for those they have colonised.  What kind of feminist are you, when you take part in these inequalities of power, and proclaim for us the meaning of our own symbols and traditions? 

In case you’re not sure, it makes you a racist feminist. 

It gets me every time.  Grand entry. I’m okay, it’s just a little moving.  The posting of the flags.  Swelling feelings all messing up with my breathing. The POW/MIA flag, hot damn I’m tearing up, the salute, the veteran’s song and I’m pretending there’s dust in my eyes.  It doesn’t matter how many times I see it.  I’m always a bit of a wreck for a few minutes after.

I am firmly anti-war.  I am anti-imperalism, anti-colonialism.  I respect our warrior traditions, but I do not support the subjugation of peoples in the name of economic or political hegemony. 

I’ve had people claim that this actually makes me pro-war.  Allow me to chortle, yes chortle I say!

But I do struggle somewhat with my ideology, versus my reality.

I’ve met a fair number of Canadian soldiers.  From Elders to folks my own age, native and non.  I can’t stand what the young ones in particular are involved in.  I can’t stand how some people demand you honour soldiers and never ever question what they do.  I can’t stand people demanding that you believe these people are doing it for you and your freedom.

Yet when you talk to soldiers, past or present, on a one-to-one human basis, things are different.  Most of these men and women have really thought about what they are doing, and why. When I talk to a soldier one-on-one, I don’t find the mindless thug I expect, though I certainly believe they are out there.  More often, I find someone who is very much aware of the inherent problems with the system they are fighting within, but who has chosen to do their best within it anyway.

Ultimately, I do believe that we need warriors.  I do not necessarily agree that they need to be doing the work Canada and the US has them doing, but let’s get back to the personal. 

Indigenous people have consistently put themselves at risk in Canada and the US to fight in wars alongside people who had no respect for them.  People say they fought for their countries, but I’ve heard it said, they fought for their Nations.  Our Nations. 

When Cree men became warriors, in the old days and sometimes even still today, their community would hold a funeral for them.  They would give away their possessions.  They would surrender themselves to death.  No light thing then, to be a warrior.  Not an easy choice, not a glorious one, not a cool or fun thing to do.  A very serious decision.  

Our people did it again, and again, even though they would come home to a country that treated them like second class citizens.  A country that stole their land while they were off risking their lives, only to give it to non-native veterans instead.  They did it, even though they lost so very much.

So during the posting of the flags, during the veteran’s song, and during every opening and closing prayer that honours our veterans, I listen without conflict.  I have no respect for war and for those who ensure conflict will never cease.  And I will say what I think about the kind of people that the armed forces tends to attract, but when it comes down to it, I respect our aboriginal veterans.  I respect our warriors.  And when we’re one-on-one, I’m open to respecting the non-native warriors too.

hardboiledandwutnot:

kamen-rider-equine:

thatsjustprime:

dobbaaa:

no words omg

Female martial artists are scary as fuck

… That is a Sentai-level finisher at least!

No. That’s an Ultra finisher.

This is what I do when people ask me if I pay taxes.

miloprod:

Dope art by artist Steven Paul Judd.

*4th in the series where he takes pictures from the late 1800’s early 1900’s and mix them with pictures from today.

In this picture L to R Black Horn -Hunkpapa -1872,Hopi girl at Oraibi -1901.

This is cool.

Lol…did you just tell me to look on Wikipedia to find out what ‘chief’ actually means?  Hilarious!

I could care less where you come from or who you are.  You are using your poor understanding of native spiritual traditions to turn a profit which is in itself a violation of protocol.  Since I’m not an exploitative fraud, it appears we have very little in common. 

As noted on the excellent blog, Beyond Buckskin, Etsy is a breeding ground for pathetic cultural appropriation.  You’re not simply creating little bits of art/jewelery, you are capitalising on distorted and false views of native americans.  You are perpetuating stereotypes and celebrating your own ignorance.  You are engaging in colonialism, right there on your little Etsy shop.  A tiny piece in a larger puzzle of non-natives dreaming up fantasies about us and presenting them to the culturally bankrupt.

You aren’t sorry about anything…your tone quite clearly informs the reader that you have no intention of stopping, and further,  you don’t really believe you are doing anything wrong.  You are that ignorant about our cultures.  You don’t even understand the words you are using to describe your ‘products’.  If you did, you wouldn’t use them.  If you were actually native, you would be able to say that on your page and not face violating the Indian Arts and Crafts Act (good thing you aren’t trying that).  If you had any connection to our cultures, you’d cut the New Age exploitative bullshit.  From your Etsy page:

According to Wikipedia the definition of a Secret Chief is:
A transcendent cosmic authority responsible for the operation and moral calibre of the cosmos, or for overseeing the operations of an esoteric organization that manifests outwardly in the form of a magical order or lodge system. Their names and descriptions have varied through time, dependent upon those who reflect their experience of contact with them.

Ugh.  Lemme guess.  You were an Indian in a former life?

So no.  I’m not going to take your false apology to heart. 

syntexis:

So, I know it’s cultural appropriation for a white person to wear a native head dress, but what about other races that are not native?

I ask this only because I never see anything about other PoC appropriating anything, and I’m an Asian girl that is genuinely wondering if it would be offensive to wear a native head dress.

I know that my race doesn’t REALLY change anything, and it would be offensive, but would it be less offensive?

Sorry, I’m being really inarticulate right now. Grr. Sorry, I sound really stupid :p If someone could bring some insight for me, that’d be great!

Thanks!

It’s cultural appropriation to wear a headdress unless you have earned it.  This goes for all people, other than those actually from within the culture where headdresses are worn (assuming the headdress in question is a restricted item).  Within the culture, wearing one without having earned it is not cultural appropriation…it’s disrespectful and likely to get you in trouble. 

In the Hall of Shame, there are a fair number of images of PoCs wearing headdresses or “Indian costumes”.  It strikes me as just as offensive, though clearly the context is different (historically and socially between PoCs and natives versus settlers and natives).

Today, the Hall of Shame hit its 500th image mark, bringing you visual examples of cultural appropriation and out-and-out racism.  The images are by far dominated by non-native women in headdresses.  The bulk of these are non-professional images taken at parties and festivals.  However, quite a few are professionally shot images for magazines or other kinds of photo shoots.  White women are the most represented, but there are also quite a few images of women of colour wearing these headdresses as well.

Then you have the really racist photos, which I think of as the ‘costume’ photos, where the people in question put ‘war paint’ on, ‘war whoop’, or engage in other clearly stereotypical behaviours.  It is difficult to tell where ‘fashion’  and ‘costume’ are separated, and a great many of the headdress pictures also include ‘warpaint’.  Playing Indian is apparently not just hilarious fun, it is also super ironic and cool. 

Then you have the ‘art’.  Depictions of non-natives in headdresses, on t-shirts, street art, tattoos and so forth. I would lovefor there to be some sort of psychological analysis done on this trend.  What the fuck is motivating these people?  What do they think these images mean?  Why are they impervious to explanations of why what they are doing is not okay?

Certain companies are really doing their best to tap into this bizarre market.  I have seen costume headdresses being sold around the corner here in Montreal.  Luckily I’ve yet to see someone actually out in public with a headdress, because I’m not sure I could contain myself.

I want this ‘trend’ to die quickly, but it seems to be on the rise instead. 

So this isn’t really a celebration of hitting 500 images.  More like a WTF, 500?