Native Appropriations

Complicating the 2010 US Census Native Data

2012-01-27T12:25:00.000-05:00

Back in 2010 when the census came in the mail, I remember sitting with my roommate at the kitchen table filling out our forms together, laughing and joking about our "household." When we got to the race category listed above, my roommate quickly checked the "Black, African Am, or Negro" box, with a snide comment about how it still says "Negro" in 2010, and moved on. I sat, contemplating the boxes for a bit, wondering how to identify to best capture "me".

I knew, from my prior work in admissions, that checking Native "alone" would mean something very different than checking Native "in combination," in terms of statistics and reporting, but I also am Native "in combination," so it felt disingenuous to check only Indian. I thought about it for a bit, checked American Indian/Alaska Native, and wrote in "Cherokee Nation of Oklahoma"--then checked the White box too. My roommate thought I was weird for thinking so deeply about it. But it mattered to me, because I was already anticipating the statistics that the US Census released yesterday. I am Native. Period. But when you try and fit a political/citizenship category into a racialized one, the results get complicated, as you'll see.

The lead headline for the census press release is "2010 Census Shows Nearly Half of American Indians and Alaska Natives Report Multiple Races." I already, right there, see that as problematic, wrought with assumptions, and loaded with colonial underpinnings. But we all know I think that about most things. ha.

To "over-sensitive" and "easily offended" me, the headline is a commentary on the "realness" of the American Indian population, loaded with western/colonial conceptions of blood quantum and racial purity as markers for belonging and identity. This, to me, screams "Real Indians are disappearing!!!". But since we have been "disappearing" for 500 years, despite our growing population numbers, I guess I shouldn't be surprised. The real number is 44% identify as more than one race, which is different to me than "nearly half". They could have just as easily said "56% of AI/AN population identifies solely as Native!" which tells a very different story. The majority of our peeps still identify as only AI or AN. We are not disappearing.

Reading the report (which is available in PDF and I highly recommend flipping through), there are many, many things they could have focused on, like the fact the Native population has increased at a rate much greater than the overall population, or that the ability to self-designate tribal group for the first time created new tribal categories (like "Hopi" being counted outside of "Pueblo"), but they instead focused in on the racial categories. Speaking of that population increase, here's a handy graphic:

So this shows us that the total US population increased 9.7% from 2000-2010, but the AI/AN population (alone) increased at nearly twice that rate, and AI/AN (in combo) increased almost 40%! You go, Natives--keep on making those ndn babies (I joke, I joke). But interesting, right?

The other thing this data made me think about is how ingrained the myth of an Indian ancestor is in our national narrative. Cause according to this data, there are HELLA Natives out there!

Ok, let's break down this chart (click to make it bigger). This shows the "largest tribal groupings" in the US. Personally, I also have some problems with the groupings erasing individual tribal identities--"Chippewa" is both an antiquated term as well as not a tribe, same with "Iroquois" or "Sioux"--but that's an aside.

I think the fascinating part of this chart is to compare the number of enrolled members of any of these tribes to the number of people who identified on the census. Cherokees (I'm assuming that's CN, UKB, and EBC together?) at 819,105? That's about 400,000 more than are enrolled (based on my really vague and loose mental math). The Blackfeet one cracks me up too--I'm sure the Blackfeet Nation is stunned to know they've got 90,000 relatives they didn't know about! (Their reservation in MT is home to about 8,500 enrolled members, and I assume there are some more not living on the rez, but not nearly that many).

I chose Cherokee and Blackfeet, because based on my personal experience, those are the two tribes that everyone seems to have an ancestor from--"Cherokee" is big for both white and Black folks, and "Blackfeet" seems to be big in the Black/African American community. While many people may actually have some Native blood in there, chances are it's probably not Cherokee or Blackfeet. Sorry to burst your bubble. This appropriation of Indian identity is a whole other blog post, which I'll get to at some point.

But that brings us back to the "alone" versus "in combination" conversation. What does it mean for these people who are checking the box based on some long lost ancestor to be counted in the numbers of AI/AN in the US? Is this a good thing, or a bad thing? Chances are, that person is not dedicated to Indian causes or has any cultural ties whatsoever, but we can't discount those numbers completely, because in those "in combination" numbers are plenty of mixed Natives who have cultural connections and are enrolled.

The way the question is phrased on the census is interesting too. It asks for "Enrolled or Principle tribe"--I think a better measure of these numbers would just say "enrolled tribe" with a line, and then "other tribal affiliations" with another.

These are just some things I've been thinking about as I've been reading through the data--what are your thoughts?

US Census: 2010 Census Shows Nearly Half of American Indians and Alaska Natives Report Multiple Races

US Census: The American Indian and Alaska Native Population: 2010

The Stanford "Indian": Then and Now

2012-01-26T15:29:00.000-05:00

I just came back from an amazing long weekend in the Bay Area, where I was at a training to be on my reunion homecoming committee (5th year reunion! I'm either really old or really young, depending on your perspective). I seriously love my alma mater more than is probably healthy. But this is a place that I credit with the development of my activist and social-justice oriented frame of mind, and also credit my work in admissions after graduation with opening my eyes to the disparities in higher ed for Native students--which is now my research in grad school. In many ways, it could be seen as ironic that the place that supported and nurtured my Native identity and allowed me to major in Native American Studies/Critical Studies of Race and Ethnicity has a past that includes that image above.

That shirt in the picture came from a thrift store in San Diego years ago, where I paid $15 for it. Fifteen dollars. For an old tshirt. But I bought it because I couldn't bear the thought of someone else picking it up, finding it "cool" and "vintage" and strutting around town in it. So I bought it, and then gave it to the Assistant Director of the Native program at Stanford, because I didn't want it lying around my house. I imagined it like the Tell-Tale Heart...beating in my drawer...::shudder::

This past weekend when I was on campus, I stopped by her office and saw it sticking out of a drawer. I pulled it out, we laughed about it, and talked about ways it could be used in an educational exhibit of some sort, and how it's important to remember the mascot's history.

The quick version of that history, from the Stanford Native Center website:

In February of 1972, 55 Native American students and staff at Stanford presented a petition to the University Ombudsperson who, in turn, presented it to President Lyman. The 1972 petition urged that "the use of the Indian symbol be permanently discontinued"--and further urged that the University "fulfill its promise to the students of its Native American Program by improving and supporting the program and thereby making its promise to improve Native American education a reality." The petition further stated that the Stanford community was not sensitive to the humanity of Native Americans, that the lack of understanding displayed by the name of a race being placed on its entertainment, and that a race of humans cannot be entertainment. The mascot in all its manifestations was, the Indian group maintained, stereotypical, offensive, and a mockery of Indian cultures. The group suggested that the "University would be renouncing a grotesque ignorance that it has previously condoned" by removing the Indian as Stanford's symbol, and by "retracting its misuse of the Indian symbol" Stanford would be displaying a "readily progressive concern for the American Indians of the United States."

Later that year, the University removed the mascot. I love that the mascot issue was born out of Native student activism on campus. Read the rest of the history here on the NACC website.

So after I left the Native program offices, I walked over to the Alumni Center for my training. As I was flipping through the packet they gave us, I found this, The "Policy Regarding American Indian Images":

Apologies for the cell phone picture. But basically it sends a big stfu to any old alums who want to pull out their feathers and face paint for their reunion homecoming publicity or mailings. From the policy:

"We acknowledge that such imagery was not meant to be offensive when adopted. However, these images perpetuate stereotypes, are hurtful and offensive to American Indians and others, and are particularly inappropriate and insensitive in light of the history of forced assimilation that American Indian people have endured in this country."

lululu's to that. I was so happy to see this in the packet--and I as I sat there at the table in the alumni center, it made me think about all the Native students who had come before me and who worked so hard to get rid of the mascot. As the only Native on any of the reunion committees this year, I hope I'm making them proud.

Stanford still has a LONG way to go in making the campus climate a completely safe and supportive environment for Native students, and definitely needs work in supporting the ethnic community centers and staff, but personally I find it awesome that there is at least some explicit institutional support around the contentious mascot issue, especially when sending out those mailings with the Indian on them to old alums would probably bring in some more donations to the university.

I'm the first to admit that I've completely and totally drank the Stanford kool-aid (but it's so tasty and full of palm trees!), so if anyone has differing opinions on how the administration has dealt with the mascot issue over the years (and it continues to be an issue, believe me)--definitely send me an email.

I'm also curious how other institutions with an Indian mascot past deal with their alums and images, if you've got stories, share them in the comments!

(Thanks Miss Denni!)

PS--Also, a while back I shared one Stanford Alum's story about how reading Native Approps changed his mind about Indian Mascots. It's worth a read if you're somehow still on the fence.

Gawker uses "Mail of Tears" for a cheap pun

2012-01-17T23:33:00.001-05:00

This, my friends, is a post about how the internet is a slow learner. A few days ago Gawker writer Leah Beckmann posted a round-up of crappy reader mail, and in a clear lapse of judgment and lack of awareness of American history, or a blog in her own network's history, entitled it "Mail of Tears"--complete with a picture of Iron Eyes Cody (the Italian actor who played the "crying Indian" in that famous PSA).

Longtime readers of the blog might think this sounds eerily familiar...and that's because in 2010, Jezebel (Gawker's "sister site") wrote about Meghan McCain crying and gave it the hashtag #trailoftears. I was, clearly and similarly, enraged. So why recreate the wheel? I'll just quote directly from that post here:

Yes, that says Trail of Tears. Trail of Tears. The forced relocation of my ancestors, where they were unlawfully and forcibly removed from their homelands in the Southeast and marched over 1000 miles, in the dead of winter, to what is now modern day Oklahoma. Over 4,000 of the 15,000 Cherokees who began the journey died along the way from exposure, hunger, and disease.

The Trail of Tears was also unlawful in the truest sense of the word. Chief John Ross of the Cherokee Nation took the case to court, fighting for the right for his people to remain in their homelands, where they had been for thousands of years. The Cherokees argued that as a sovereign nation, the state of Georgia had no right to enforce a removal within Cherokee territory. The case worked it's way up through the court system, ended up in the supreme court. In a series of decisions, Justice John Marshall and his court sided with the Cherokees, stating that only the national government had the right to intervene in Indian Affairs. To which President Andrew Jackson reportedly stated: "John Marshall has made his decision; now let him enforce it!"

With the signing of the Indian Removal Act in 1830, Jackson took matters into his own hands, authorizing the removal of thousands of Native people from throughout North Carolina, Georgia, Tennessee, Florida, and Alabama.

To put this in perspective, this is the mid 1800's. The Cherokee Nation was a successful and prosperous community, with large plantations, farms, schools, printing presses that produced books and a newspaper in the written Cherokee language, a literacy rate exponentially higher than the local white community, and a system of colleges that educated members of the "Five Civilized Tribes" (I hate that term) in a way that incorporated both mainstream and tribal education traditions.

The federal government sent in troops to enforce the removal, and without warning, they swooped into these communities, burning homes, killing livestock, and removing families without even time for them to gather belongings. They were then rounded up into concentration camps where conditions were squalid and supplies limited, and then forced to begin their journey.

My great-great-great grandparents came over on that journey, a time that is called Nunna daul Isunyi in the Cherokee Language--The Trail Where They Cried.

And I'll just change up the ending a bit to make it work...

So, ~~Jezebel~~ Gawker, calling ~~Megan McCain crying over her dad picking Sarah Palin as his running mate a #trailoftears~~ a post that begins with the words "Choke on Shit and Die" a "Mail of Tears"? You are dismissing the pain and legacy of my community's genocide--and that's not something I take lightly.

I know it's embarrassing to get called out when you eff up, but, I'm sorry ~~Jezebel~~ Gawker, ignoring the issue isn't gonna fix it. This may seem small and inconsequential to you, but these are my ancestors and my community, and the way this was handled does nothing to restore my faith in how people of color are treated on your site.

Bottom line, I know you think Native people are a big ol' joke, Leah Beckmann, but don't dismiss Native people telling you that this is hurtful, wrong, and in incredibly poor taste. It's an easy fix. Fix it. Now.

Post on Gawker:

Choke On Shit and Die Asshole’ and Other Things You Said to Us This Week

My post about Meghan McCain (Jezebel did end up changing the tag, eventually):
Jezebel uses #trailoftears to describe Meghan McCain

Leah Beckmann's twitter is here, and you can email her at leah@gawker.com if you'd like to tell her what you think.

(Thanks Allison!)

Hey Kardashians: Why you so obsessed with me?

2012-01-13T17:16:00.000-05:00

Another Kardashian transgression to add to the (growing) list: E! Online posted this pic of the Jenner girls with Kourtney Kardashian and Mason, taken at Mason's 2nd birthday party back in December. Looks like they were uber creative and went with a "Cowboys and Indians" theme. Wow. Adding insult to injury is the fact that E! used the headline "Cute Alert!"--I, personally, don't find racial drag "cute".* If little Mason and his mama were sporting some blackface, would that be "cute"? (Answer: no. A Cowboys and Indians Party is just as bad as a Blackface Party)

Here's how they "came up" with the theme (via an interview in OK! Magazine):

How did you come up with the Western theme for Mason's party?

Kourtney: Actually, Scott came up with it. We were just walking in the Hamptons, and he said, "Let's do cowboys and Indians." I thought it was cute, so I made Mason a little cowboy.

So many points for creativity! ::eyeroll::

But there's a bigger issue here. I really don't know what the Kardashians have against Natives, or why they seem to be so obsessed. As a proud Armenian/Cherokee, I don't appreciate one of my cultures denigrating the other. It creates confusionz in my head. But let's list off some of the Kardashian fails in the past year or so, shall we?

October, 2010: Khloe sports a headdress and tweets the message "I love playing dress up!"

August, 2011: Khloe has a sexy headdress photo shoot, with an accomanying tweet "What do you think of my tribal look?"

October, 2011: Kourtney and Mason dress up as Indians for the Dancing with the Stars halloween episode

November, 2011: Kris Jenner uses the term "Indian Giver" on national television to signify that Kim won't be giving her ring back to (other) Kris. (She says it at about 2:58 below)

video platform video management video solutions video player

December, 2011: Mason's 2nd Birthday Party has a "Cowboys and Indians" theme

...and I rest my case. The Kardashians definitely make it to the worst offenders list.

Earlier:
Oh No, Khloe Kardashian
No Khloe, I do not like your "tribal look"
Kris Jenner uses the term "Indian Giver"

*Though my sister and I think Mason is adorbs...did you see the Kardashian Xmas card? His baby GQ pose! Squee!

(Thanks Aza!)

Students respond to ABC's "Children of the Plains"

2011-12-13T13:00:00.000-05:00

"I know what you probably think of us...we saw the special too. Maybe you saw a picture, or read an article. But we want you to know, we're more than that...We have so much more than poverty."
I know many of you saw the Diane Sawyer 20/20 special "Children of the Plains," and I let it pass by without much comment on the blog. I had plenty to say, but I knew a lot of folks from the community, and some of my friends, thought it was great--so I let it go, and didn't think it was really my place to barge in with my super-critical lens on the whole thing.

But some awesome kids from ~~Pine Ridge~~ Rosebud, SD put together this short, but powerful video in response to the special, which I love:

Reminded me of this quote from Adam Sings in the Timber: "It often seems as if America has only two frames through which to view its Native culture: ceremony and pageantry or poverty and addiction."

There's a lot of power when we get to represent ourselves.

Youtube: More Than That

If you're interested in some of the criticisms of the special:
Indian Country Today: Children of the Plains was little more than "Poverty Porn"

The actual special:
ABC 20/20: "Hidden America: Children of the Plains"

Earlier:
Between Pageantry and Poverty: Representing Ourselves

Pepper Ann Follow-Up: Why I'm glad I have readers

2011-12-08T17:46:00.001-05:00

Yesterday I posted about an awesome Pepper Ann cartoon that dealt with Peppy "discovering" her Navajo ancestry. Then, some readers pointed out some even cooler things I didn't notice upon first watch, and some pointed out how I had made some really poor language choices in my write-up, so I'll get to that too.

1) Pepper Ann's best friend Milo (the one who identifies as Native Hawaiian) is actually named Milo Kamalani--and in the first 30 seconds of the cartoon, he says "My family can be traced back hundreds of years to the Kanaka Maoli people of the Hawaiian Archipelago." The writers on this show clearly knew how to do their research! It's fantastic that there was a contemporary Native Hawaiian character on the show, considering there are officially like zero representations of Native Hawaiians in the media today. I don't know how much (if at all) his heritage was worked into the show, but I do think it showed some awareness and foresight to give him a Hawaiian name from the get-go.

2) The voices of Dave and Carol (the Navajo Mom and son) were voiced by Cody Lightning and Irene Bedard--They even used Native actors. Cool.

...and here's the part where I kinda messed up. I got an email in my inbox this morning (edited for punctuation, it was from an ipad):

"Why is it better indian people change their names to "Northern European White names." And dress in "white clothes." We know Indian people don't walk around in headresses all day and beat drums, but we shouldn't sell out and conform to the white norm. You seem proud they have "normal " names. That's kind of insulting. So traditional native names are not normal? I see this totally different--why not be proud of who you are? I am."

So she's referring to my paragraph where I excitedly said: "Look, they're in normal clothes! And they're named Dave, Carol, and Bob. The grandpa (not pictured) is named Andy (no sterotypical names!)."

I'll admit "normal" was probably the exact wrong descriptor. I completely agree with the email too, and I'm clearly not advocating that every Native person shun their traditional name or burn their regalia. I was more excited that it was a contemporary representation of Native people that broke stereotypes and didn't have the flute music in the background, or a "mystical" element, or a character with a stereotypical name. The whole point of the episode was to point out how ridiculous Pepper Ann looked in her quest to discover her heritage, and the contrast made it that much clearer.

I also liked that the family clearly still had a lot of pride for their culture and a lot of cultural ties (as you can see in all the scenes from their house--pictures of the southwest on the walls, Navajo baskets, a portrait of a Navajo woman in traditional clothing, etc.--Even though they lived in suburbia.

I like when people point out my missteps, I write most of these posts really quickly, so sometimes things come out in the exact opposite way of what I mean. Keep the emails coming! (Unless you're really mean. Cause that doesn't help anything. It just hurts my fragile self-esteem.)

But the bottom line is this cartoon is still a great teaching tool, and you should watch it.

Earlier:
Pepper Ann "Dances With Ignorance": Quality TV for an Indian Appropriator Near You!

Youtube: Pepper Ann "Dances with Ignorance"

(Thanks RJ and "guest"!)

Pepper Ann "Dances with Ignorance": Quality TV for an Indian Appropriator Near You!

2011-12-07T11:28:00.001-05:00

I spotted this video on My Culture is Not a Trend last night, and had to share. Pepper Ann is/was(?) a cartoon on the Disney Channel, featuring a super awkward, kinda oblivious, but nearly always endearing main character, Pepper Ann. I had flashbacks to the theme song when I started watching this...Pepper Ann, Pepper Ann, she's much too cool for 7th grade...no one's greater than Pepper Ann! She's her own biggest fan, Pepper Ann!...But I digress.

This quick episode (only 11 minutes! watch it!) features the exact same plot as Running Zack, the episode of Saved By the Bell when Zack discovers his "Indian" heritage, but this one is much more well done.

Quick synopsis: teacher tells the class they're doing heritage reports, Pepper Ann decides all of her European ancestry is "boring" and then her Dad informs her she's actually 1/16 Navajo, and gives her a concho belt that belonged to her ancestor. Pepper Ann then gets super excited, relying on every stereotype possible to represent her new "Indianness"--war whooping, crying a single tear for littering, putting her brother in a cradle board, beating "war drums", etc. The whole time her friends are telling her she's being offensive and wrong, but she's too caught up in her ficticious identity to care.

Then she invites a "real" Navajo family over for dinner, she makes a complete fool out of herself in a plains Indian costume, building a tipi out of bed sheets, making smoke signals, suggesting they do a rain dance. The family gets offended and leaves, and later Pepper Ann eventually goes to apologize, learns the truth about Navajos, and gives a culturally correct and sensitive classroom presentation. I'm not really doing it justice. You should watch it.

Here's the Navajo family:

Look, they're in normal clothes! And they're named Dave, Carol, and Bob. The grandpa (not pictured) is named Andy (no sterotypical names!). The whole episode is pretty awesome and spot on. Clearly the writers actually talked to some Navajos (what a novel idea). And I love that Pepper Ann's friends are totally informed about cultural sensitivity and the proper way to represent--and her friend is also Native Hawaiian, which is cool. At one point he says "I'm Native Hawaiian, but I don't walk around in a grass skirt and dance the hula everyday." Sounds like we should be friends.

And here's the moral of the story, after the Navajos leave:

Pepper Ann: What happened? I thought I was just learning about my background!
Moose: That's just it, Peppy. You weren't interested in learning anything. They barely got to talk.
Pepper Ann: All I wanted to do was show them how much I knew about our culture from stuff I picked up on TV, and in the movies, and in comic books...
Mom: Yes, but that's what stereotyping is, Peppy. Even when it's done with the best of intentions. You can't believe things about any group of people without getting to know them first!

Cue the sappy music. Anyway, watch it. You'll be glad you did. I think every person who's been dressing up as an Indian and uses the "honoring" argument should be forced to watch it, or every person who thinks discovering an Indian ancestor means they can walk around in full buckskin and feathers.

Youtube: Pepper Ann "Dances with Ignorance"

(Thanks adailyriot!)

Cambridge 5K Yulefest Postcards, Really?

2011-12-06T16:39:00.001-05:00

"Yulefest" is a Cambridge, MA tradition of sorts, a Holiday-themed 5k race through the streets of Cambridge, ending at a big tent full of beer. It's considered to be irreverent, silly, and (from what I've heard) an overall good time. "Creative holiday wear" and costumes are encouraged, and everyone has a grand ol' time. Until now. Cause I'm not having a grand ol' time after seeing their promotional materials.

Here's the description from Cambridge 5k (the organizers):

Long before Christmas, there was a quirky winter festival named "Yule" that people really loved. Join us 12/18/11 for a 5K race that takes the holidays back to their old school roots!

Run the race in your most creative "holiday-wear" and you could win a prize at our post-race party (sponsored by Clover Food Lab, Pretty Things, Notch Session & Peak Organic)!

Registration includes a great shirt + admission to our post-race Yulefest Party (21+) featuring great music, craft beers & awesome awards! > You will LOVE this race!

I'm not against fun. In fact, this sounds like a lot of fun. And I would totally participate, if I weren't an overly-critically-fun-destroying-troll who finds joy in ruining your ignorance defense. I'm talking about the postcard above.

Let's break it down, shall we?

Two vintage-looking Indian women, waving/saying "how", wearing stereotypical feather headbands, accompanied by a tipi wrapped around a Christmas tree. Fantastic. I assume they were going for "cute" "clever" maybe even a little "hipster" or "ironic"? Or maybe it's a weird reference to the taking the "holidays back to their old school roots" in the description? But, what, I ask you, does the stereotyping of Native people have to do with running, or even the holidays for that matter?

So I tweeted it to the organizers, and here's how it went down (it's really not that exciting so don't anticipate too much, but I included some snarky commentary from my followers too):

...and the apology, of sorts. "Didn't mean to offend anyone. Thanks for the schooling, we agree with you." They only had 140 characters, so I can't expect a novel. But admittedly, it was a little anti-climactic.

But did they agree with me enough to go pull the postcards from the various shops around town? or retweet my tweet to their followers? or post something on Facebook? That would probably be asking too much, right? Who knows.

Now, the overly-critically-fun-destroying-troll needs to get back to her end of semester grading. Hooray!

If you'd like to send them a note:

Twitter: @Cambridge5k
Web: http://cambridge5k.com/
Facebook: https://www.facebook.com/Cambridge5K

(Thanks April and Megan!)

Have a Happy Indigenous Holiday Season: Part 1

2011-11-30T12:06:00.001-05:00

It's a good season to be Indigenous! I hope everyone had a safe and happy Turkey Day (or You're Welcome Day, or Thanks-taking day, or Day of Mourning, however you chose to celebrate/not celebrate). I've had an incredibly busy month, which I'm sure you noticed, given the lack of anything up here. But back to the blog!

I often extol the merits of "buying Native" or purchasing from a Native artisan whenever possible, and as the holidays approach, it's a wonderful time to put that ideology into practice. Jessica Metcalfe at Beyond Buckskin has been putting together a fabulous series of posts on the Native artists on Etsy, and I wanted to share some of her resources on here as well. She's going to be continually posting for the rest of the month, so be sure and check back in! (lots more after the jump)

Jessica's Posts:

Post 1: Holiday Shopping Guide: Support Native Artists and Small Businesses on Etsy

Beautiful beaded cuff from Sparkle and Bead's Etsy shop

Post 2: Spotlight on Etsy Seller Ndnchick

Gorgeous beaded necklace--only $50!

Post 3: Etsy Treasury Lists (Jessica put together some beautiful themed lists!)

"Native American Red Red Christmas" (my personal favorite)

And, for those of you in the New England area, there is also an awesome Native Arts Show going on this Saturday (Dec. 3rd):

Then there is the always great Demockratee's site (by Ryan Redcorn, of the 1491's and Buffalo Nickel Creative):

And Native Threads, a great family-run Indian clothing and apparel company, located in my hometown of San Diego:

Finally, Cheef Clothing, the maker of my favorite sweatshirt (It says "I was here first"): The website is down, but hopefully will be back up soon!

If you have other websites, Art shows, resources, or companies that will help us all Buy Native this holiday season, please leave them in the comments! Stay tuned for Part 2, where I'll share some amazing Native organizations/causes that would love your holiday support.

PS- a FB commenter from NZ pointed out that many Etsy sellers don't ship internationally, so any global resources would be very much appreciated too.

PPS- I made that "Buy Native" logo in Microsoft Word! I'm such a techie! ha.

Beyond Buckskin:

Holiday Shopping Guide: Support Native Artists and Small Businesses on Etsy

Spotlight on Etsy Seller Ndnchick

Etsy Treasury Lists

Harvard Native Program:

2011 New England Native Art Show and Sale

(Thanks Dr. Metcalfe!)

Kris Jenner uses the term "Indian Giver"

2011-11-03T14:56:00.000-04:00

(It's a two-post day! omg!)

I just saw this on my Facebook feed and felt the need to share. So for those of you who don't spend 90% of your day reading celebrity gossip blogs (I'm incriminating myself here), Kim Kardashian got married 75 days ago. Her wedding cost anywhere from $10-20 million dollars. She filed for divorce 3 days ago. Now people are speculating whether or not she'll give Kris Humphries (the ex-hubbs) the ring back. And here's what Kim's mom, also named Kris (that's creepy, right?) had to say about it:

"I hate an Indian giver. It's a gift, you know."

This was on Good Morning America, if you were wondering. Awesome, Kris Jenner. Thanks for that. Here's the video clip, the "Indian Giver" line is at 2:58:

video platform video management video solutions video player

There's no real consensus on the etymology of the term "Indian Giver" on the internets, but I thought this was a good summary (source here):

Meaning:
One who gives a gift but later takes it back.
Origin:
Indian giver derives from the alleged practise of American Indians of taking back gifts from white settlers. It is more likely that the settlers wrongly interpreted the Indians' loans to them as gifts. This term, which is certainly American, may have been coined to denigrate of the native race. Historians would now agree that, where deceit was concerned, it was the settlers who were the front runners. It isn't uncommon, and it could be argued that it is customary, for the conquering race to attempt to justify their invasion by dismissing the conquered as dishonest and stupid.

The phrase is quite early in the history of the the USA. Thomas Hutchinson described the term as proverbial as early as 1765, in his The history of the Province of Massachusetts Bay:

"An Indian gift is a proverbial expression, signifying a present for which an equivalent return is expected."

Basically, I think we can all agree that it's probably not the best term to use to describe a negative act, considering it stereotypes Indians as deceitful and un-generous (not generous?), which, if you've ever been in a Native community, is about the farthest thing from the truth. Ever heard of giveaways? or Potlatches?

The Kardashians don't exactly have an awesome track record with sensitivity towards Native issues. Khloe wore a headdress a few months ago, twice, and for Dancing with the Stars on Halloween, Kourtney (and Mason, her son) wore Indian costumes. Though they claim Native heritage (vomit).

Annoying, right? Also annoying is that currently on Google news there are over 40 articles with "Indian Giver" in the headline. /headdesk

USA Today: Kris Jenner on Kim's Ring 'I hate an Indian giver'

Let's debrief what happened with Halloween

2011-11-03T13:50:00.002-04:00

This isn't going to be a story about how I chased some Pocahottie down the street yelling about the history of colonialism and subordination of Native peoples, or how I ripped a headdress off a huge guy and stomped it in the mud in the name of justice (Actually, I did that one time at a football game. Not recommended.). This is me needing to get some stuff off my chest about the way that my series of Halloween posts were received on the internet, the way I approached the issue of Indian Halloween costumes, and how I'll move forward (and do better) from here.

So, a quick recap. Wednesday, October 26th, I posted an "Open Letter to Pocahotties and Indian Warriors this Halloween." I wrote it in about 30 minutes or so, writing completely from a place of borderline activist fatigue. I knew that a post where I attempted to reason with the dominant discourse that says "dressing like Indians=totes ok" wouldn't work. So I went for the purely emotional argument, knowing full well that I was baiting the haterz, and would probably not receive an overwhelmingly positive response.

What I didn't expect was nearly 6,000 shares on Facebook, 19,000+ pageviews, and over 300 comments (before I shut them down). All of a sudden, people who don't know me, don't know this blog, don't know the things I talk about day in and day out, were saying things about me that were harsh and horrible (I know, woe-is-me, wah wah, I-put-it-on-the-internet-I-should-deal-with-it), and I'll be totally honest, it scared me a bit.

So I followed the emotional appeal with a post that showed the in-your-face racism for sale in the form of Indian costumes, and surprise, surprise, none of the people so eager to hate on my feelings and my opinion ventured to tackle the actual costumes that I find so egregiously offensive.

But I want to go back to some of the things I said in the original post, and clarify. Most of you don't know this, but my doctoral work is in education. My research focuses on access to higher ed for Native youth, and my goal is to produce research that re-frames the stories about Native students from a deficit perspective to a positive, success based approach. I'm sick of everything that paints Indian Country as this solely desolate and hopeless place, when I see so much strength, joy, excitement, and hope coming from the kiddos I work with. That being said, I totally went for the deficit approach in my Open Letter, and it's been bothering me.

I played the Oppression Olympics card--"You don't know what it's like!" "Hunger! Unemployment! Sexual Assault!" "We have it so bad!" "You are oppressing me!!" When plenty of other communities of color and marginalized groups do know what it's like. It doesn't do us any good to fight over who has it worst.

I also feel like I mis-represented myself a bit too. I am a proud Native woman, and I know what it feels like to feel invisible, to feel marginalized, and to feel silenced. But I've also written many times before about how I also have a whole-lotta privilege of my own, being really mixed (i.e. looking white), growing up in a suburban area where I was afforded a gazillion opportunities, and attending prestigious universities for my education, where I've been able to sit and read piles of critical theory and develop my angry/activist lens. So I know what a lot of it is like, but I also can walk through my life without anyone ever knowing I'm a Native person. I don't know what it feels like to live on a reservation, to experience the direct effects of racist governmental policies. So I don't like being seen as "the voice" of Indian issues. Because my voice is only one Indian voice, one perspective. There are 4.1 million Natives in the US, and there are 4.1 million different ways this blog (and that post) could be written.

But I was just so tired of fighting. I just wanted someone to not only hear me, but to listen. Do I regret posting it? Absolutely not. If I managed to start 6000 conversations about Indian costumes, I did my job. Would I have approached it differently today? Probably. But I still stand by everything I said. That's how I feel. Do I feel better having clarified things in this post? Absolutely.

Moving forward, I want to make sure I re-frame many of my discussions away from a deficit perspective. I think it's important for my non-Native readers to understand the realities of contemporary Native life, but I also think that only relying on those tropes furthers negative stereotypes as well. So I'll try to strike a balance. I'm also going to develop a commenting policy, probably a lot like Racialicious's, so we can have actual, productive conversations in the comments, rather than dealing with racist trolls who don't know what they're talking about. yay.

TL;DR version (aka a summary):
I wrote a post about Indian costumes. It went viral. People were mean. I felt like I relied too much on negative stereotypes of Indian Country to make my point. I feel like I wrote like I know everything about being Indian and Indian issues. I don't. Now I feel better. Thanks.

PS- This is my 250th post on Native Appropriations! Cue the confetti!!

Coast Salish Influences in Seahawks Fan Gear

2011-11-02T16:29:00.000-04:00

Welcome guest blogger, and one of my BFF's, Marjorie J (Tulalip and Swinomish), she's a current law student and I've clearly gotten in her head with the Native Appropriations talk. If I've gotten in your head too and you'd like to guest blog about an issue, just send me an email!

I have mixed feelings about The 12th Man design by one of my favorite t-shirt companies, Casual Industrees. I am not sure if the artist is from a Coast Salish tribe, which either heightens or ends the debate. Based on my personal aesthetic alone my first reaction is: this looks awesome. Of course being one of Adrienne's friends and a devoted fan, I question my endorsement after my analysis naturally evolves into larger questions about art, identity, acceptance, and what happens when Native cultures live harmoniously (or at least not so adversely) with others?

The Amateur's Art Analysis and A Peek Into My Thought Process:

The artist extended the theme of the stylized Seahawks logo on a foam head and added wings, not previously found on the logo or the foam heads. The style of the wings is clearly contemporary and does not follow the customary rules of any Coast Salish art forms I know. Rather, the wings incorporate customary shapes used in Coast Salish art by modern and traditional (Native) artists alike.

Where we start to move away from imagery of a fan's foam head towards a fan's headdress or mask is the face: the two green paint lines on the cheek suggest the 12th Man is wearing "war paint" instead of mimicking the black grease or tape the players use on their cheeks to cut down on glare. Now it's starting to look more like a hipster appropriation and misinterpretation and I wonder - was the inspiration for this design a transformation mask?

Let's assume the artist is not from a Coast Salish tribe. Generally as to the entire design and specifically as to the shapes used in the wings, how offensive is this appropriation? Consider...

Native Identity and Regional Identity:

One day a few weeks ago, a fellow Washingtonian (who does not identify as Native) and I were discussing how Coast Salish art is not hard to come across in the day-to-day life of a non-Native person in Washington and especially Seattle. It is commissioned as public art by Seattle (sculptures, 2-D designs, and even manhole covers among other things). It's bought up and displayed by universities, airports, art museums, hospitals, private non-native collectors, tribes, and Indian casinos alike. My friend mentioned how she didn't realize until moving away from Washington how accustomed she'd come to seeing it. I realized that the images I find so comforting are also reminiscent of home to her.

Because of this day-to-day presence of Coast Salish art through the region, the art is not only Native, it might also be a component of regional identity.

Because of this, I started to think about the extent of local tribal influence outside of art. Anyone with nominal familiarity with my tribe will probably tell you that our 'presence' in the past 30 years has grown like crazy. The success of commercial investments has translated into economic and political influence that reaches far beyond the reservation borders.

Now, any tribe with economic success is an exception and not the norm. However, keeping in mind that most tribes are probably working towards more economic success and political representation...

Let's Compare Another Regional Identity:

Looking at this, I started to compare it to what I saw in New Zealand. Check out the use of shapes in the 12th Man and compare it to the appropriation/incorporation/influence of common Maori art and shapes throughout New Zealand (look at the Rugby World Cup logo for Wellington and official ball, this place name sign for the Kapiti Coast, and a logo for a University of Auckland event & tell me if you see any similarities). The Maori culture is an undeniable, unique, and influential component of the broader New Zealand culture and identity. I wonder how the prevalent use of Maori art and themes by non-Maori has evolved to what it is today? Does it matter that Maori make up a larger percentage of the NZ population than Natives do in the U.S.? That the Maori language is one of the official languages of NZ? Or that the Maori have devoted seats in Parliment? If it's not appropriation, is it incorporation - suggesting the non-Maori with power are acting more cooperatively than entitled? Or is it influence - a result of political and cultural power? The extent to which any or all Maori people believe it is appropriation, I obviously have not inquired. But if my questions are answered, how do they inform my last question?

Yup, finally my last question:

So, for me at least, it all begs the question: When Native cultures actively work to increase artistic, political, and economic success in a region and have thus become a component of both Native identity AND regional identity, is there a point at which we, the local Natives accept non-Native interpretation/incorporation of our culture (i.e. art) as something that unites us as a region of people?

(Thanks Marjorie!)

We are not a costume.

2011-10-31T13:56:00.000-04:00

Happy Halloween! If you didn't get your fill from my Open Letter to the PocaHotties and Indian Warriors This Halloween, or the follow up of Halloween Costume Shopping: A Sampling of the Racism for Sale, here are some human reminders as to why you might not want to dress up as a stereotypical Native this Halloween: (lots more photos after the jump)

(context for Robohontas here)

In case you were wondering, I'll be dressing as Katniss Everdeen tonight. She's fictional. and I'm a nerd. :)

Earlier:
Halloween Costume Shopping: a sampling of the racism for sale
Open Letter to the PocaHotties and Indian Warriors This Halloween
But Why Can't I Wear a Hipster Headdress?
Nudie Neon Indians and the Sexualiztion of Indian Women
A Cowboys and Indians Party is just as bad as a Blackface Party
Paris Hilton as a Sexy Indian: The Halloween Fallout Begins (includes lots of links about the costume issue)
Mid-Week Motivation: I am not your costume

(Thanks Girlaboutcamp, Chelsey, Jaclyn, Robohontas, Bree, and SAIO!)

PS- You can still send me your "I am not a costume" pictures or post them in the comments, I'll keep adding to the collection!

Halloween Costume Shopping: A sampling of the racism for sale

2011-10-27T16:00:00.000-04:00

"Sexy Indian Adult Costume"

After my open letter yesterday, I feel like some people still aren't getting it (maybe it was the 100+ comments telling me to eff off?). Despite my appeals to emotion and greater human decency, it seems that many people in the world of thar' intranets need some more physical reminders as to why dressing like a Native person this Halloween might be a problem. So I, dear random-probably-racist-internet-not-friend, am happy to oblige. Because, as a person of color, that's my job, right? To prove to you that racism exists? To teach you why these things are wrong? To offer evidence of such wrong-doings? What fun it must be to never have to worry about such things! What a privilege!

To state my case, I wandered to the Spirit Halloween website. I did a simple one word search: Indian. I got 56 results, all Native-themed. I chose a few at random to share with you below. Hooray!

To start off, I give you the description for that "Sexy Indian" above:

Hey cowboy - get a look at this Indian! Stop him in his tracks in this sexy Indian Dream Catcher adult costume and all your dreams will come true. There's no need for a bow and arrow - just shoot him sexy looks and he'll make tracks in your direction - it might get so hot he'll put out smoke signals!

Awesome. Cowboy/Indian stereotypes, mentions of dream catchers, bows and arrows, and smoke signals! But it gets better (worse?):

"Tribal Trouble Indian"

Put the wow back in pow-wow when you go native in this very sexy Tribal Trouble Indian adult women's costume. They may need to break out the peace pipe because the other squaws will want to torch your teepee when their menfolk see you in this foxy costume!

"The other squaws will want to torch your teepee?" That's....great.

But the "menfolk" are included in the fun too:

"Indian Brave Adult Men's Costume"

Go native American in this classic adult men's Indian Brave costume. Your job - to hunt. Hunt for prey like food and beer or pretty women in this comfortable costume. Get what you want then lay back and enjoy - pass the peace pipe!

Glad women are equated with food and beer. Glad the costume is "comfortable" too. God forbid you be "uncomfortable" when you're being an ignorant misogynist! And I won't even with the peace pipe comment.

and don't forget the teens and tweens...they want to bring boys back to their tipi's too!

"Indian Princess Tween Costume"

You are an Indian Princess, able to hunt, gather and lead. In this cute Indian Princess tween costume it will be a snap to gather and lead the boys back to your tipi! Dance to celebrate the harvest or welcome a full moon in this fun costume trimmed with lots of fringe, feathers and more.

I'm sure every parent wants their daughter to be gathering boys and leading them back to the tipi. but only while they're mocking Indian spirituality by "dancing to celebrate the harvest," of course.

and saving the worst for last:

"Pocahottie Adult Women's Costume"

Girl, you won't be sitting around the campfire stringing beads in this Pocahottie Pow Wow costume! The work is done and it's time to play cowboys and Indians, only this time the Indian picks off the cowboys that she wants. Put the wow in pow wow and practice some native American rituals in this sexy Pocahottie costume. Is that an ear of corn in your pocket or are you just glad to see me?

Yeah...I can't.

I hope these can serve as examples as to why I'm so pissed off. The dripping misogyny and stereotyping is so blatant, it almost reads like satire. But these are real products, for sale on websites and in thousands of Spirit stores nationwide. Thousands of people are seeing, reading and internalizing these messages.

These costumes are hurtful and dangerous because they present a false and stereotyped image of Native people. The public sees these images, and it erases our current existence, so the larger, contemporary issues in Indian Country then cease to exist as well. When everyone only thinks Indians are fantasy characters put in the same category as pirates, princesses, and cartoon characters, it erases our humanity. Have fun thinking through that one.

But let's be real for a minute. Can you seriously read those descriptions and still say that this is totes ok? Really. Be honest with yourself. Read them again. Think about if these descriptions were describing you and your family. Then tell me I'm being "over-sensitive."

Thanks for playing, and have a happy, healthy, racism-free Halloween!

Earlier:
Open Letter to the PocaHotties and Indian Warriors This Halloween
But Why Can't I Wear a Hipster Headdress?
Nudie Neon Indians and the Sexualiztion of Indian Women
A Cowboys and Indians Party is just as bad as a Blackface Party
Paris Hilton as a Sexy Indian: The Halloween Fallout Begins (includes lots of links about the costume issue)
Mid-Week Motivation: I am not your costume

Open Letter to the PocaHotties and Indian Warriors this Halloween

2011-10-26T15:10:00.000-04:00

Dear Person that decided to dress up as an Indian for Halloween,

I was going to write you an eloquent and well-reasoned post today about all the reasons why it's not ok to dress up as a Native person for Halloween--talk about the history of "playing Indian" in our country, point to the dangers of stereotyping and placing of Native peoples as mythical, historical creatures, give you some articles to read, hope that I could change your mind by dazzling you with my wit and reason--but I can't. I can't, because I know you won't listen, and I'm getting so tired of trying to get through to you.

I just read the comments on this post at Bitch Magazine, a conversation replicated all over the internet when people of color are trying to make a plea to not dress up as racist characters on Halloween. I felt my chest tighten and tears well up in my eyes, because even with Kjerstin's well researched and well cited post, people like you are so caught up in their own privilege, they can't see how much this affects and hurts their classmates, neighbors and friends.

I already know how our conversation would go. I'll ask you to please not dress up as a bastardized version of my culture for Halloween, and you'll reply that it's "just for fun" and I should "get over it." You'll tell me that you "weren't doing it to be offensive" and that "everyone knows real Native Americans don't dress like this." You'll say that you have a "right" to dress up as "whatever you damn well please." You'll remind me about how you're "Irish" and the "Irish we're oppressed too." Or you'll say you're "German", and you "don't get offended by people in Lederhosen."

But you don't understand what it feels like to be me. I am a Native person. You are (most likely) a white person. You walk through life everyday never having the fear of someone mis-representing your people and your culture. You don't have to worry about the vast majority of your people living in poverty, struggling with alcoholism, domestic violence, hunger, and unemployment caused by 500+ years of colonialism and federal policies aimed at erasing your existence. You don't walk through life everyday feeling invisible, because the only images the public sees of you are fictionalized stereotypes that don't represent who you are at all. You don't know what it's like to care about something so deeply and know at your core that it's so wrong, and have others in positions of power dismiss you like you're some sort of over-sensitive freak.

You are in a position of power. You might not know it, but you are. Simply because of the color of your skin, you have been afforded opportunities and privilege, because our country was built on a foundation of white supremacy. That's probably a concept that's too much for you to handle right now, when all you wanted to do was dress up as a PocaHottie for Halloween, but it's true.

I am not in a position of power. Native people are not in positions of power. By dressing up as a fake Indian, you are asserting your power over us, and continuing to oppress us. That should worry you.

But don't tell me that you're oppressed too, or don't you dare come back and tell me your "great grandmother was a Cherokee Princess" and that somehow makes it ok. Do you live in a system that is actively taking your children away without just cause? Do you have to look at the TV on weekends and see sports teams with mascots named after racial slurs of your people? I doubt it.

Last night I sat with a group of Native undergraduates to discuss their thoughts and ideas about the costume issue, and hearing the comments they face on a daily basis broke my heart. They take the time each year to send out an email called "We are not a costume" to the undergraduate student body--an email that has become known as the "whiny newsletter" to their entitled classmates. They take the time to educate and put themselves out there, only to be shot down by those that refuse to think critically about their choices.Your choices are adversely affecting their college experiences, and that's hard for me to take without a fight.

The most frustrating part to me is, there are so many other things you can dress up as for Halloween. You can be a freaking sexy scrabble board for goodness sake. But why does your fun have to come at the expense of my well-being? Is your night of drunken revelry really worth subjugating an entire group of people? I just can't understand, how after hearing, first-hand, that your choice is hurtful to another human being, you're able to continue to celebrate with your braids and plastic tomahawk.

So I know you probably didn't even read this letter, I know you've probably already bought and paid for your Indian costume, and that this weekend you'll be sucking down jungle juice from a red solo cup as your feathers wilt and warpaint runs. I know you're going to scoff at my over-sensitivity. But I'm telling you, from the bottom of my heart, that you're hurting me. And I would hope that would be enough.

Wado,

Adrienne K.

PS- I wonder if you saw these posters? Because I think they illustrate my point really well.

UPDATE 10/27: Have a look at some of the costumes I'm talking about. I think it makes my arguments a lot clearer.

Earlier:
But Why Can't I Wear a Hipster Headdress?
Nudie Neon Indians and the Sexualiztion of Indian Women
A Cowboys and Indians Party is just as bad as a Blackface Party
Paris Hilton as a Sexy Indian: The Halloween Fallout Begins (includes lots of links about the costume issue)
Mid-Week Motivation: I am not your costume

Readers, if you want to send over an "I am not a costume" picture, I'll put together a big post--power in numbers!

Your Daily Combo Merman-Indian Chief Christmas Ornament

2011-10-14T10:05:00.003-04:00

"Chief Merman Christmas Ornament from December Diamonds is a traditional tribal chief that leads a tribe."

He must be the "traditional tribal chief" of one of those NW coast tribes. They really like their salmon. Ayyye.

Yeah, I have no idea. Luckily this guy is only $23.95, much unlike our lovely $7000 "Pueblo Clown Goes to Sturgis" from last week.

Happy Friday!

Diamonds of the Sea: Chief Merman Ornament

(Thanks Maren!)

MerMAN (cough, cough). MerMAN.

Winslow Health Center on the Navajo Nation Gets Their Groove On

2011-10-13T16:03:00.000-04:00

Just a quick, positive post for today. I know many of you have seen all the coverage that Sasha Brown's Open Letter to Urban Outfitters has been getting (making it to ABC news, Jezebel, all over!), and I'm really happy after truly years of writing about this stuff (especially at Urban), the word is finally getting out. I want to give a HUGE thanks to my friend Marjorie and her friend Brian, who's a lawyer at Navajo, and the one who sent me the cease and desist letter back at the end of September. There would definitely be no discussion without them!

So, for today, my friend Scott sent me this video this morning, and I thought it was amazing. The video shows the staff of Winslow Indian Health Care Center, located on the Navajo Nation in Winslow AZ, rocking out to Katy Perry's "Firework." They made the video as part of the "Pink Glove Dance Contest," which is about cancer awareness, and winners will get $10,000 donated to the charity of their choice.

Beyond the adorable-ness and positive message, I think this video makes concrete a lot of things we're glossing over with the Navajo product name issue. The Navajo Nation is a vibrant, real, awesome community doing great things. They're not some abstract, mythical tribe out in the desert, they're a group of Aunties and Uncles dancing to Katy Perry and running a health center that supports both traditional and modern medicine (see if you can spot the sign for "Traditional Medicine Man Services" at the Health Center). I love it. This just totally makes me smile.

Vote for their video here! They're currently in 9th place, let's help them win the money for Cancer Centers of Northern Arizona!

Pink Glove Dance Contest: Winslow Indian Health Care Center

(Thanks Scott!)

Representing the Native Presence in the "Occupy Wall Street" Narrative

2011-10-12T12:13:00.000-04:00

I have yet to feel connected to the Occupy Wall Street movement, or even the Occupy Boston movement happening here in my backyard. I consider myself an activist, an at-times radical, and I clearly feel passionately about advocating for voices unheard and on the margins. But, Occupy Wall Street hasn't appealed to me. There has been a lot of coverage as to why people of color, and Natives in particular, are having mixed emotions about this whole movement--and I agree with a lot of those sentiments. But I even have issues with the language and images being used to represent the Native presence in the movement. I'm not easily pleased, apparently.

Jess Yee (who I'm obsessed with) wrote a fabulous piece for Racialicious pointing out the inherent issues with calling the movements "Occupy....", namely, that, oh, these lands are ALREADY OCCUPIED and sites of ongoing colonialism. She quotes John Paul Montano, an Anishinabe writer and his open letter to the "occupiers":

I hope you would make mention of the fact that the very land upon which you are protesting does not belong to you – that you are guests upon that stolen indigenous land. I had hoped mention would be made of the indigenous nation whose land that is. I had hoped that you would address the centuries-long history that we indigenous peoples of this continent have endured being subject to the countless ‘-isms’ of do-gooders claiming to be building a “more just society,” a “better world,” a “land of freedom” on top of our indigenous societies, on our indigenous lands, while destroying and/or ignoring our ways of life. I had hoped that you would acknowledge that, since you are settlers on indigenous land, you need and want our indigenous consent to your building anything on our land – never mind an entire society.

I agree completely. But, being the person that I am, I also feel the need to deconstruct images and language--I've got a critical filter that can't be turned off. So let's look at the image above, the one that's being widely used to "complicate" the Occupy Wall Street narrative.

This image (which I can't find the original source for, so please send it over if anyone knows), was shared far and wide on Facebook, and even made it to the Indian Country Today article that quotes Jess's piece. From my ventures around the internets, this seems to be "the" image used to push back on the narratives of colonialism in the OWS movement.

But, in my opinion, this image only serves to further stereotype Native people and present mis-information about the land which is currently being double-occupied. We've got the red and black motif, the Edward Curtis stoic Indian warrior with the eagle feather and buckskin--who's clearly from a Plains community, with a buffalo, an arrowhead, and a red power fist. Reads like a list of "10 things to include to make it recognizably Indian."

Yes it acknowledges Wall St. is on "occupied Algonquin land"--but one problem: Manhattan is Lenape land. So we've got the stereotypical Plains imagery to represent a movement that is taking place on the East Coast. Everyone already forgets that there are Nations and Indigenous Peoples in the East, and this just continues to marginalize and erase their ongoing presence in their homelands.

Luckily, I've come across some posters that do a better job at representing the issue:

This at least has a Lenape woman (Jennie Bob, picture from 1915), and I like that the message is clear at the bottom: "Occupied since 1625"--because, let's be honest, I really don't think a lot of non-Native people even know what "decolonize" means, which makes it easier for them to dismiss the underlying issues. But, it's still a historic photo, which could be argued puts the issue in the past. I still like it way more than the original (again, if you know the source, let me know).

This poster comes from Oakland, and I like the juxtaposition of the current Oakland skyline with the Ohlone tribal member. No Plains warrior here.

I want to end with pointing out that not all of the "Occupy" movements have marginalized Native peoples and ignored legacies of colonialism. Occupy Denver has taken a bold stance, incorporating a 10 point platform from the Denver American Indian Movement into the overall message of the movement. The points can be read in full here, but here is an expert from the intro:

If this movement is serious about confronting the foundational assumptions of the current U.S. system, then it must begin by addressing the original crimes of the U.S. colonizing system against indigenous nations. Without addressing justice for indigenous peoples, there can never be a genuine movement for justice and equality in the United States. Toward that end, we challenge Occupy Denver to take the lead, and to be the first “Occupy” city to integrate into its philosophy, a set of values that respects the rights of indigenous peoples, and that recognizes the importance of employing indigenous visions and models in restoring environmental, social, cultural, economic and political health to our homeland.

Lulululu's to that. If every "Occupy" City began with that foundation, I sure as heck would be out there with my signs and warrior-activist attitude. But you know I'd be breaking up some faux-"Indian" drum groups along the way. Appreciation without appropriation, folks! geez.

So what do you think? Is it more important to disrupt the narrative with images that non-Native folks already recognize and resonate with? or are the images like the "Decolonize" poster doing more harm than good? And what do you think about Occupy Denver?

Awesome articles you should read:

Racialicous: Decolonization and Occupy Wall Street
Racialicous: Occupy Wall Street: The Game of Colonialism (Jessica Yee's article)
John Paul Montano: An Open Letter to the Occupy Wall Street Protesters
Unsettling America: Decolonize Wall Street
Tequila Sovereign: Manna-hata (Info about the Lenape history of Manhattan)
Indian Country Today: Indians Counter Occupy Wall Street Movement with Decolonize Wall Street
Indian Country Today: Why I'm Occupying Wall Street
Press TV: Indigenizing Occupy Wall Street (about Occupy Denver)
Occupy Denver: An Indigenous Platform for Occupy Denver (AIM's 10 Points)

(Thanks to Kannon, who was the first one to point out to me that the Decolonize Wall Street poster was problematic.)

Anthropologie "Haida Poncho"--is Haida the new Navajo?

2011-10-07T10:34:00.003-04:00

A couple of weeks ago, I drew attention to how obsessed Urban Outfitters is with the term "Navajo" to represent a catch-all stereotypical southwest/plains asthetic. Then this week, reader Julia sent me a link to the Anthropologie website, with several "Native" inspired pieces. The one that caught my eye was the "Haida Poncho," shown above.

I just thought it was interesting, given we recently discussed Miss Canada's horrific "Homage to Haida," that Haida keeps popping up, rather than the typical Navajo or Cherokee.

First of all, this poncho is made by Pendleton, but is part of their "Portland Collection"--the hipster cool line that I've written about before. I went to both the Pendleton site and the Portland Collection site, and couldn't find anything with the name "Haida."

After the Urban post, a few readers pointed out to me that the products were not named "Navajo" on the original brands' sites, meaning Urban had added the name on later. Pendleton is generally pretty accurate with their descriptions, linking them to the correct tribe or community where the design originated, so I was surprised that they would call this southwest mess a "Haida" poncho. It makes sense that it may have been a branding choice by Anthro.

Oh, did I mention Anthro and Urban (as well as Free People) are all under the same parent company? Cause they are. Surprise, surprise.

So, if you were wondering what a Haida poncho would look like, here's an example, made by the incredible Dorthy Grant, a Haida designer:

A little different, right? Here is where we pause and talk about how harmful this is to smash completely different cultural groups into one stereotyped "Native American Design." This erases out existence as diverse, living, and contemporary communities, and furthers the stereotype that there is only one type of "Indian"--the plains warrior that died out long long ago.

But you know what I thought of instantly when I saw the poncho? Wednesday Addams in the Thanksgiving Pageant:

Side-by-side comparison?

Look, I made Wednesday a new outfit!

UPDATE 10/11: A commenter pointed out that the website has changed the name from "Haida Poncho" to "Ashcreek Poncho"! Though some other third party sites are still calling it "Haida." A definite step in the right direction, and pretty awesome if we had anything to do with it!

Links:
Anthropologie "Haida Poncho" (only $248!)
Dorothy Grant, Haida designer

Earlier:
Oh, (Miss) Canada
Urban Outfitters is Obsessed with Navajos
Let's Talk About Pendleton

(Thanks Julia!)

Your Daily Pueblo Pirate Clown on a Tricycle

2011-10-05T13:28:00.001-04:00

What do you get when you combine a ken doll, some sharpies, maybe a little tempra paint, a small dancing mud kachina that looks like a bear, and an intricately carved to scale wooden three wheeled motorcycle?

This, apparently.

Thank my dad for this one--he was driving through Vista, CA on his way home from jury duty and spotted "The Indian Store," a behemoth of a building that he'd never come across in 25+ years of living in San Diego. He got home and googled, and of course, this would be the representative image he chose to send me. I mean, how can you pass this up?

If you're interested in purchasing this here piece that I've named "Pueblo Clown Goes to Sturgis", it can be yours for the low, low price of $7000. I'm not kidding. Does it have to be mentioned the artist is non-Native? Cause he is. Duh. The site also shows him carving a "Native American style totem pole." Awesome.

Or, you can send me $7000 and I'll go to Target, buy the aforementioned ingredients, substitute the carved wooden trike for a plastic action figure one, and you get an "authentic Indian craft!"

Questions I have in viewing this piece:
- Is he wearing an eyepatch?
- Does he have sharpie 5'oclock shadow?
- Is he wearing a chocolate old-fashioned donut on his head?
- Is he scratching his behind?
- Why doesn't his friend sit down in the comfortable-looking back seat? Isn't dancing on a moving vehicle dangerous?

All joking and WTF-ing aside, this guy is making "art" pieces that include sacred pueblo kachinas, and is making a mess of them. Talk about appropriation and mis-representation. Not cool.

But if you'd like to support a real Indian artist and place an order for my version of "Painted Ken Goes to Sturgis"--let me know in the comments. ha.

(Thanks Dad!)

Random Appropriation of the Day! (Lush "Pow Wow" Lip Scrub)

2011-09-29T15:48:00.000-04:00

It's been a few months since I posted a "Random Appropriation of the Day"--things that use Native imagery/names/references that are just totally random and don't necessarily necessitate (necessarily necessitate? ha. I'm leaving it.) an entire wordy post. These "Random Appropriations" are simply to point out how ubiquitous the use of Native imagery is in our everyday lives, and to question products that we might not even pause and think about. So, a weird one for today:

Product description:
Pow Wow Lip Scrub – 3474 – Vegan – 20g - £4.75
Popping candy to polish your pout this Christmas!
Helen's been trying to figure out a way to use popping candy in more of our inventions - and why not, it's such good fun! So here it is: a delicious, bright green popping candy lip scrub. Scrub and buff your lips this winter with our exfoliating spinach powder, goji berry and caffeine powder lip buffer. It's sure to make you as strong as Popeye and look as beautiful as Olive Oil!

Then, according to tipster Megan:

"There is also a video that briefly explains the reasoning behind the name which has since been made private, but as far as my memory serves me the gist is "pow wow is the Native American word for a gathering, and we do that a lot at Christmas'. Quite where the lip scrub comes into it I have no idea. I am at a loss at what any of this has to do with a non-existent, monolithic, Native American culture."

It appears that the product has been taken down completely--several websites display a "product not found." So perhaps they wised up and decided they should call it something that actually, oh, describes the product? Like "Popeye Power Lip Scrub"? (I should go work for Lush...)

Anyway, random, right?

(Thanks Megan!)

Cal's "Affirmative Action Bake Sale": I want my free cookies.

2011-09-28T10:31:00.000-04:00

Yesterday, UC Berkeley's College Republicans Chapter decided to have an "Affirmative Action Bakesale" to protest a new bill that has been introduced into the CA legistlature that would reverse parts of Prop 209, which in 1996 banned the use of race as a factor in admissions decisions in the UC system.

The premise of the bake sale is not new, and has definitely been used on other college campuses. The basic idea is that there is different pricing for different racial groups, as follows:

White: $2.00
Asian: $1.50
Latino: $1.00
Black: $.75
Native American: $.25
$.25 discount for women

The pricing implies that standards are lower for non-whites and women, and that the (poor, innocent!) White males are just royally screwed by the whole system. But you know what I see from that pricing? I GET FREE SNACKS. (I joke, I joke)

I'll let the illustrious Tim Wise breakdown why this is so stupid (as if you needed an explanation):

Tim Wise, author of the book "White Like Me: Reflections on Race from a Privileged Son," calls the bake sale a "sarcastic and rather smarmy slap at people of color."
"There are a lot of ways to make a point about your disagreement with affirmative action,"

"I get the joke," he continued. "How very original. It's been done for 15 years. The point that I think needs to be made ... is that by the time anyone steps on a college campus ... there has already been 12- to 13-years of institutionalized affirmative action for white folks, that is to say, racially embedded inequality, which has benefited those of us who are white. And it's only at the point of college admissions that these folks seem to get concerned with color consciousness."

So we're clear why this was a silly publicity stunt. But what about those girls in the picture above wearing headdresses? They decided to be "cute" and pretend to be Native American women and get free cookies.

You can hear from them in their own words at this video here. But the gist of what they say is:

"This bake sale trivializes the issue of affirmative action, so we thought to show our opinion of the bake sale, we would trivialize their opinion."

Um, that doesn't even make sense. At all. In the words of my friend Kayla (a Native UC Berkeley student):

Even if anti-bake sale, [this] makes no sense to me, since the next logical step ought to have been "maybe we ought not to trivialize Native American (women) with stereotypical headdresses"

Amen. Basically this whole thing was a big mess, and got far more attention than it deserved. There were several counter-protests, and even a table selling "Magical Costco Muffins" with different prices for Muggles and Wizards, but the bottom line is that, clearly, the College Republicans of UC Berkeley have no grasp of historical context, current systems of institutional racism and inequality, or their own blinding privilege.

(Thanks MK, Kayla, Caroline, and Olga!)

A "Cowboys and Indians" party is just as bad as a blackface party.

2011-09-27T12:00:00.000-04:00

Sociological Images, one of my favorite blogs and a large inspiration for this here bloggy blog, keeps a running post of "race themed" parties on college campuses. Recently, they re-posted it because there was a big bruhaha in Canada over some boys and girls completely painting themselves black to "honor" a Jamaican sprinter, which you can see in the picture above.

Visceral reaction, right? We all instantly cringe, and shake our heads, wondering, "what the eff were they thinking?!" Blackface, in our society, is an ultimate taboo. We know it's wrong, though most folks probably can't verbalize why other than to shout "THAT'S RACIST!"--More on that in a minute.

In addition to several examples of blackface at campus parties, SocImages also has some examples of students dressing up as stereotypical "Mexicans," that I'm sure we all can agree are equally offensive:

As I scrolled down the list, however, I couldn't help but think, "Wait, where are the Cowboy and Indians parties?"

Let's look at some examples, all pulled from the first page of a google images search for "Cowboys and Indians Party." These were not hard to find. Most were posted with pride--"look at my sweet-a** costume, bro!" They can't be found on the websites of CNN or even the local newspaper. There were no bloggers calling for public apologies. In our society, this practice, completely akin to the images above, is accepted, condoned, and normal:

From the poster: "My friend Adam had a Cowboys & Indians themed party on Saturday night. Buddy and I picked up some stuff from Party City and a fabric store and made some pretty sweet Indian gear. The party was a lot of fun and there are more pics up on facebook if you’re interested."

(source)

Caption: "7:40 p.m. There were cowboys and Indians everywhere…"

(source)

This girl even made a nice collage for us! (/sarcasm)

"The Lambda Chi's had a cowboy & indian party last night. I had so much fun."

(source)

And then my personal favorite...

Which, irony of all ironies, comes from a photo gallery of folks in the peace corps, in Zambia.

So, why is it, that we as a society have deemed it "totes ok" to dress up in redface, but not blackface, or brownface? The explanation is long, and the practice of playing Indian goes all the way back to the Boston Tea Party, where the colonists dressed up as Indians without the benefit of PBR or ironic mustaches.

According to Philip Deloria, who literally wrote the book on Playing Indian, the colonists used the racial drag as a way to assert their individuality and differentiate themselves from the British, creating a new "American" identity in the process:

"There is this simultaneous embracing of Indians, which allows Americans to make claims of American identity. But at the same time, in order to make a real physical nation, they have to dispossess those Indians"

This led to policies of Indian removal in the 1830's, and the attempts to physically erase and assimilate Indigenous peoples. For "Americans" to lay claim to "their" nation, they had to get rid of the original inhabitants of "their land'. Throughout US history, donning redface has shifted and symbolized any number of movements, from rebellion to peace activism. But "real" Indians are always left out of the narrative. Americans are far too obsessed with their commodified and imagined images of "the Indian" to be concerned with true authenticity.

So how does this compare with blackface? In the words of scholar Kimberly Tallbear, "Black and White became a race binary, while White appropriated Red."

Scholars and historians argue that blackface was about creating a white identity that existed in contrast to Black slaves, and asserting power over Black Americans by relegating blackness to defined, extremely stereotypical character tropes. This was done through minstral shows, where whites painted their faces with black paint to perform.

Blackface was about creating an identity in opposition (a binary of Black vs White), while playing Indian was about absorbing "Indianness" into a national identity and narrative.

However, playing Indian still relegates Native peoples to stereotypical character tropes. The images above show one "image" of an Indian--the feathers, the fringe, the warpaint, the braids. Indians are sexy maidens, fierce warriors, peace-loving environmentalists, all holding up their hand to say "How." These characters were solidified through early cinema, where Westerns all seemed to include the helpless Indian maiden and the evil Indian warrior--all played by non-Native actors, of course--and continue through to today (see: oh, every post on this blog).

So, it's clear there are large similarities between blackface and playing Indian--both are intentional acts that draw upon stereotypes and a racist history to enact whiteness--but our Nation has created a narrative in which blackface=racist, while redface=normal.

Does that make it ok to play Indian or host a cowboys and Indians theme party? Absolutely not. It just goes to show how deeply the erasure of Native peoples runs. Just because our national narrative and history has somehow normalized the phenomenon does not excuse its roots in the process of systematic erasure of the First Peoples from our homelands.

Bottom line: Blackface=dressing up in a stereotypical costume of a race that is not your own, drawing upon a history of racism and inequality. Playing Indian=dressing up in a stereotypical costume of a race that is not your own, drawing upon a history of racism and inequality. Clear enough for you?

Sociological Images: Race-Themed Events at Colleges
Native News Online: Philip Deloria on Playing Indian
Wikipedia: Blackface
Theodore Allen: On Roediger's "Wages of Whiteness"

Earlier:
But Why Can't I Wear a Hipster Headdress?
Harvard's Conquistabros and Navajo's theme party
Playing Indian at Stanford Powwow
When Non-Native Participation in Powwows Goes Terribly Wrong

Editorial Note: I know I've extremely over-simplified a lot of this, and I don't purport to be an expert in the history of blackface or playing Indian, so please, feel free to disagree or point to other resources in the comments!

Urban Outfitters is Obsessed with Navajos

2011-09-23T12:22:00.000-04:00

"Navajo Nations Crew Pullover"

A search for "Cherokee" on the Urban Outfitters website reveals 1 result. A search for "Tribal": 15. A search for "Native": 10. "Indian": 2. But Navajo? 24 products have Navajo in the name alone.

This post started as a massive Urban Outfitters take-down, I spent an hour or so last week scrolling through the pages of the website, and adding anything to my cart that was "Native inspired" or had a tribal name in the description. I got through JUST the women's clothes and accessories (no mens or apartment), and had 58 items in my cart. So, then, like any good researcher, I began to code my cart for emergent themes, and the one that jumped out far above the rest? Urban Outfitters is obsessed with Navajos.

I want to show you some examples, and then talk a little about the issues with using tribal names in products that are decidedly not-<insert whatever tribal name here>. Finally, I want to share what the Navajo Nation in particular is doing about it, and the action they've taken is pretty cool.

Without further ado, some of the "Navajo" products to grace the pages of Urban:

From the basic:

"Title Unknown Techno Navajo Quilt Oversized Crop Tee"

"Truly Madly Deeply Navajo Print Tunic"

To the totally random:

"Navajo Feather Earrings"

"Navajo Sock"

The Antiquated:

"Leather Navaho cuff bracelet"

And, finally, the totally offensive:

"Navajo Print Fabric Wrapped Flask"

"Navajo Hipster Panty"

Of course, there are many more if you head over to the site and search "Navajo".

So what's inherently wrong with using Navajo in product names? And what can tribal nations do about it?

First of all, these products represent a stereotype of "southwest" Native cultures. The designs are loosely based on Navajo rug designs (maybe?) or Pendleton designs, but aren't representations that are chosen by the tribe or truly representative of Navajo culture. Associating a sovereign Nation of hundreds of thousands of people witl a flask or women's underwear isn't exactly honoring.

Additionally, it's more than likely that Urban chose "Navajo" for the international recognition--to most of the world Navajo (and Cherokee)= American Indian (my Jamaican friend didn't even know there were other tribes in the US until she met me). This conflation of Navajo with "generic Indian" contributes to the further erasure of the distinct tribes and cultures in the US and solidifies the idea that there is only one "Native" culture, represented by plains feathers and southwest designs.

Navajo has taken a bold step, and actually holds trademarks for 12 derivatives of "Navajo", three of which I'm citing below:

2061748: NAVAJO Sportswear; namely, slacks, shorts, skirts and jeans.

2237848: NAVAJO Clothing; namely, tops, vests, shirts, sport shorts, polo shirts, golf shirts, * jackets, * T-shirts and sweat shirts.

3602907: NAVAJO Online retail store services; namely, on-line ordering services in the field of clothing—specifically, men's and women's sportswear, namely, jeans, tops, shirts, sport shorts, polo shirts, golf shirts, T-shirts and sweatshirts.

I'm no law expert, but it feels like the products above might be violating the trademarks?

A few months ago, they Navajo Nation Attorney General actually sent a cease and desist letter to Urban Outfitters, and there are some great quotes from the letter (I'll try and post it in full in another post):

Your corporation’s use of Navajo will cause confusion in the market and society concerning the source or origin of your corporation’s products. Consumers will incorrectly believe that the Nation has licensed, approved, or authorized your corporation’s use of the Navajo name and trademarks for its products - when the Nation has not - or that your corporation’s use of Navajo is an extension of the Nation’s family of trademarks - which it is not. This is bound to cause confusion, mistake, or deception with respect to the source or origin of your goods. This undermines the character and uniqueness of the Nation’s long-standing distinctive Navajo name and trademarks, which—because of its false connection with the Nation—dilutes and tarnishes the name and trademarks. Accordingly, please immediately cease and desist using the Navajo name and trademark with your products.

As a Nation with a distinguished legacy and unmistakable contemporary presence, the Nation is committed to retaining this distinction and preventing inaccuracy and confusion in society and the market The Nation must maintain distinctiveness and clarity of valid association with its government, its institutions, its entities, its people, and their products in commerce.When an entity attempts to falsely associate its products with the Nation and its products, the Nation does not regard this as benign or trivial. TheNation remains firmly committed to the cancellation of all marks that attempt to falsely associate with the institution, its entities, its people or its products. Accordingly, immediately cease and desist using Navajo withyour products.

I haven't heard what the response was from Urban, if any, but I think it is a bold and positive choice for the tribe to take matters into their own hands and push back on instances of misrepresentation and cultural appropriation.

What do you think? Should tribes go the route of Navajo and trademark their tribal names? Do you think this will be an avenue for positive change or just mean tribal courts will be mired in lawsuits, taking away time from other important tribal business?

(Thanks Marj, Brian, and Aza!)

Native Appropriations

Complicating the 2010 US Census Native Data

The Stanford "Indian": Then and Now

Gawker uses "Mail of Tears" for a cheap pun

Hey Kardashians: Why you so obsessed with me?

Top 11 posts of 2011!

Students respond to ABC's "Children of the Plains"

Pepper Ann Follow-Up: Why I'm glad I have readers

Pepper Ann "Dances with Ignorance": Quality TV for an Indian Appropriator Near You!

Cambridge 5K Yulefest Postcards, Really?

Have a Happy Indigenous Holiday Season: Part 1

Kris Jenner uses the term "Indian Giver"

Let's debrief what happened with Halloween

Coast Salish Influences in Seahawks Fan Gear

We are not a costume.

Halloween Costume Shopping: A sampling of the racism for sale

Open Letter to the PocaHotties and Indian Warriors this Halloween

Your Daily Combo Merman-Indian Chief Christmas Ornament

Winslow Health Center on the Navajo Nation Gets Their Groove On

Representing the Native Presence in the "Occupy Wall Street" Narrative

Anthropologie "Haida Poncho"--is Haida the new Navajo?

Your Daily Pueblo Pirate Clown on a Tricycle

Random Appropriation of the Day! (Lush "Pow Wow" Lip Scrub)

Cal's "Affirmative Action Bake Sale": I want my free cookies.

A "Cowboys and Indians" party is just as bad as a blackface party.

Urban Outfitters is Obsessed with Navajos