Alright, so this came up from a few discussions and personal responses I've received to previous writings. So I've decided to start a series, "Confessions from a Person of Color." These are things that I've always wanted to find a way to express to some white people. This blossomed into receiving confessions from other people. So now these aren't entirely personal to me, but are also things that I've heard from others. The intention is to create dialogue. If you have a comment, you can send me a message personally, or if you'd like to be anonymous, you can post comments at http://whatwouldjohncollierdo.blogspot.com/. If you'd like something to be included, please write me a message. I will be posting a confession about every week or so. Please share with others and please share dialogue with others as well. Thank you!
Sometimes, the weight of the world really is on your shoulders and you will probably never know what that feels like.
No matter where are, it’s hard to ignore the feeling that people expect you to be a certain way because of your race – whether you’re the exception or the stereotype. And so sometimes how well I do on a test, or where I am in my graduating class, or even the fact that I graduate from high school can put me in separate places in your mind.
And the truth is that sometimes I don’t want to be the ‘one that got out.’ Or ‘the one that fell through the cracks.’ I am not a personification of affirmative action. And I am not an automatic failure. But sometimes the friends get to you and tell you that you’re suddenly too good for them. And sometimes your family gets to you and tells you that you’re the future for them. And sometimes your community gets to you and says you abandoned them. And sometimes the media gets to you and you’re afraid of looking or sounding like an idiot. Every word we say can mean the difference between being Van Jones and Antoin Dodson. We carry those weights every day. Deciding whether or not we’re going to be ‘that black guy’ or ‘just an Indian.’ We carry decisions that have the expectations of entire communities and races of people on them.
And the harsher truth is that you will probably never feel that. You have an advantage that gives you freedom to move within the power structure that permeates this nation. You wonder why not all black guys can succeed like Barack, and why not all black guys talk like Morgan Freeman. You wonder why reservations are so poor and why there are community centers on university campuses. You wonder why we can’t make it. But for us every decision has a consequence, and you will mark those in your mind and continue to wonder why we are so ‘obsessed’ with race. And we will continue to wonder why you haven’t started to think about the consequences of your actions.
Wednesday, November 24, 2010
Thursday, November 18, 2010
Thankstaking (or Thanksgiving, if you prefer)
Takesgiving (or Thankstaking)
I am writing this not to bash thanksgiving, but rather out of anxious anticipation of how my rather conservative office will be decorated next week. I spent some time today walking the halls thinking of how I would best phrase my response when I see cartoon images of Indians and pilgrims on the walls. It’s only a matter of time. In fact, one coworker has already broken out the Pilgrim hat. Also, this is available at http://whatwouldjohncollierdo.blogspot.com/.
First thing is first – I don’t hate Thanksgiving, or the people who celebrate it.
Let me reiterate - I am not against Thanksgiving. Our family celebrates Thanksgiving every year. For us, it is a time of togetherness and a chance to visit and spend time with each other. It’s not like I’m NOT going to see loved ones when I get the chance, right? In fact, I am going to see some very dear friends this thanksgiving because that's what I always do.
No, my problem with Thanksgiving is how people learn about it and present it. You can ask any student in America’s school system about the history of thanksgiving and you’ll probably get similar answers – Indians and Pilgrims had a feast.
First thing – Indians??? All Indians? Or just some Indians? As a follow up to the mascot rant, this rather juvenile portrayal of Indians denies “Indians” any individual identity. How many of you can name the specific tribe that was part of the first “thanksgiving feast”? In teach about, or portraying thanksgiving, there's never any mention of individual tribal identity, which erases us as a part of the story. Just saying "indians" isn't good enough to justify anything.
Second thing – this holiday seems to skip parts that are too ‘harsh’ or inconvenient for people to remember. What happened after thanksgiving? Unfortunately, this story did not have a happily ever after. For some people, thanksgiving may have been the end of Indians in school. Nobody teaches the subsequent Native histories (yes, we all had separate histories) about federal termination, relocation, and assimilation policies. These are experiences that have altered (and in some cases decimated) entire nations. Now we happen to be a halfway remembered, halfway honored race. Somehow we all got erased…until thanksgiving. And then we were erased again and only portrayed as the generic Indian.
Third thing – it just seems to be a way to promote youth partaking in disrespectful imagery of Native Americans. I believe that education and dialogue is the best way to facilitate social change. What bothers me is that we are teaching children a sugarcoated version of Thanksgiving, and having them dress up as generic, stereotypical Indians, and then they reenact it. How can I expect adults to engage in open dialogue when we don’t even teach that to our children?
Fourth thing – I don’t hate thanksgiving. I’m not going to ask people to stop celebrating thanksgiving. I am not saying that people shouldn’t spend time with their families and loved ones. No, I am just asking people to have an open dialogue of how we represent the holiday, how we teach it to our children, and that we all remember ALL of native history and not just the good points. I mean, think about it – it’s called thanksGIVING. But who GAVE? And WHAT?
At home last night I mentioned to my boyfriend, “what if we didn’t have the first thanksgiving?” Well, first off, the colonies would have starved (and the irony is that my boyfriend can trace his lineage back to the Mayflower, needless to say, we’ve had some interesting dialogue). Secondly, the world would be vastly different. People don’t remember that the ships went both ways. We gave potatoes to the Irish. We gave tomatoes to the Italians. We gave chocolate to the French. I don’t regret it.
Often I get responses such as “Well, if Columbus never came we would never have America. You must hate America.” Or, “Well Thanksgiving is a major holiday for families and is significant in American history. You must hate families and America.” I don’t hate America. (Sidenote: More than half of my family serves in the Armed Forces. How can I hate America? Actually, Native American troops played key roles in World War I. They fought when they weren’t even considered citizens yet.) Also, that response shows me that you are trying to justify history. I didn’t ask for justification. I’m asking for understanding and dialogue. Neither of us can change history, but we can definitely change how we teach and talk about it.
Please, let me know if you have any questions, comments, or concerns. I’m more than happy to discuss what I write, and more than happy to rewrite what I’ve written to fit a learning environment or for you to share. This will also be available at http://whatwouldjohncollierdo.blogspot.com/. Thanks!
P.S. For those that do share on your Facebook walls, thank you! I feel very honored. However, if you could just let me know if you receive any feedback it would be much appreciated. Thanks!
I am writing this not to bash thanksgiving, but rather out of anxious anticipation of how my rather conservative office will be decorated next week. I spent some time today walking the halls thinking of how I would best phrase my response when I see cartoon images of Indians and pilgrims on the walls. It’s only a matter of time. In fact, one coworker has already broken out the Pilgrim hat. Also, this is available at http://whatwouldjohncollierdo.blogspot.com/.
First thing is first – I don’t hate Thanksgiving, or the people who celebrate it.
Let me reiterate - I am not against Thanksgiving. Our family celebrates Thanksgiving every year. For us, it is a time of togetherness and a chance to visit and spend time with each other. It’s not like I’m NOT going to see loved ones when I get the chance, right? In fact, I am going to see some very dear friends this thanksgiving because that's what I always do.
No, my problem with Thanksgiving is how people learn about it and present it. You can ask any student in America’s school system about the history of thanksgiving and you’ll probably get similar answers – Indians and Pilgrims had a feast.
First thing – Indians??? All Indians? Or just some Indians? As a follow up to the mascot rant, this rather juvenile portrayal of Indians denies “Indians” any individual identity. How many of you can name the specific tribe that was part of the first “thanksgiving feast”? In teach about, or portraying thanksgiving, there's never any mention of individual tribal identity, which erases us as a part of the story. Just saying "indians" isn't good enough to justify anything.
Second thing – this holiday seems to skip parts that are too ‘harsh’ or inconvenient for people to remember. What happened after thanksgiving? Unfortunately, this story did not have a happily ever after. For some people, thanksgiving may have been the end of Indians in school. Nobody teaches the subsequent Native histories (yes, we all had separate histories) about federal termination, relocation, and assimilation policies. These are experiences that have altered (and in some cases decimated) entire nations. Now we happen to be a halfway remembered, halfway honored race. Somehow we all got erased…until thanksgiving. And then we were erased again and only portrayed as the generic Indian.
Third thing – it just seems to be a way to promote youth partaking in disrespectful imagery of Native Americans. I believe that education and dialogue is the best way to facilitate social change. What bothers me is that we are teaching children a sugarcoated version of Thanksgiving, and having them dress up as generic, stereotypical Indians, and then they reenact it. How can I expect adults to engage in open dialogue when we don’t even teach that to our children?
Fourth thing – I don’t hate thanksgiving. I’m not going to ask people to stop celebrating thanksgiving. I am not saying that people shouldn’t spend time with their families and loved ones. No, I am just asking people to have an open dialogue of how we represent the holiday, how we teach it to our children, and that we all remember ALL of native history and not just the good points. I mean, think about it – it’s called thanksGIVING. But who GAVE? And WHAT?
At home last night I mentioned to my boyfriend, “what if we didn’t have the first thanksgiving?” Well, first off, the colonies would have starved (and the irony is that my boyfriend can trace his lineage back to the Mayflower, needless to say, we’ve had some interesting dialogue). Secondly, the world would be vastly different. People don’t remember that the ships went both ways. We gave potatoes to the Irish. We gave tomatoes to the Italians. We gave chocolate to the French. I don’t regret it.
Often I get responses such as “Well, if Columbus never came we would never have America. You must hate America.” Or, “Well Thanksgiving is a major holiday for families and is significant in American history. You must hate families and America.” I don’t hate America. (Sidenote: More than half of my family serves in the Armed Forces. How can I hate America? Actually, Native American troops played key roles in World War I. They fought when they weren’t even considered citizens yet.) Also, that response shows me that you are trying to justify history. I didn’t ask for justification. I’m asking for understanding and dialogue. Neither of us can change history, but we can definitely change how we teach and talk about it.
Please, let me know if you have any questions, comments, or concerns. I’m more than happy to discuss what I write, and more than happy to rewrite what I’ve written to fit a learning environment or for you to share. This will also be available at http://whatwouldjohncollierdo.blogspot.com/. Thanks!
P.S. For those that do share on your Facebook walls, thank you! I feel very honored. However, if you could just let me know if you receive any feedback it would be much appreciated. Thanks!
Saturday, November 13, 2010
Seven reasons why I don't like Indian Mascots, and I'm willing to bet there's at least one you haven't thought of before...
Okay. Here is my mascot rant. But it’s not like any other mascot rant. I don’t to chastise or tell you that it just sucks. Rather, I have listed seven facts that will hopefully give some insight into why it sucks, from the big things to the little things. I’m willing to bet that there are some facts listed here that you’ve never heard before, or that you’ve never thought about before, or that you haven’t thought about in this context before. Some of the facts you have heard before, but please don’t get frustrated. I’m writing this for everybody. And, as always, feel free to comment, criticize, etc. This will also be available at http://www.whatwhouldjohncollierdo.blogspot.com. Thank you!
P.S. For you Stanford students, this is in direct response to the Fighting Harbaughs shirt. SHARE!
Fact one: we are a historically oppressed people.
The power dynamics that govern contemporary Native America are as old as first contact. Native populations were not only decimated by warfare, but also by diseases that were introduced to the new world. The rapid decline in population only reasserted European belief that they were dominant and able to control, enslave, and massacre the Natives. British, French, and Spanish empires negotiated (or coerced) Natives into compacts that outlined land settlements, resource usage, and power structures. As the “American” colonies were established, the sentiment of control and Manifest Destiny were furthered and the need to break from European practice allowed the new Americans to negate previously established agreements. After the revolution, compacts made by the British were considered null and void. At that point, American governments continued ‘treaty’ negotiations to outline definitions and restrictions for tribes. As American government and land mass expanded, so did their need to ‘deal with’ tribes. From extermination, to relocation, to assimilation – all acts of tribes were at the hand of outside forces.
Even contemporary issues that regulate tribal governments are at the hands of federal regulations. There are even cases where state rights trump tribal rights (even though that’s unconstitutional). Consider this – Native Americans are the only ethnic group in America that need document their blood quantum in order to be recognized by any governmental entity. There are also restrictions for a ‘minimum’ blood quantum to be considered part of a tribal entity.
To say that historical oppression has nothing to do with the current state of Native America is entirely naïve. Furthermore, to say that it’s in the past and that we should ‘get over it’ is extremely selfish and does not acknowledge that there is a domino effect to historical oppression.
This all should have been Native History 101, but I felt like it was somewhat relevant and necessary to establish that before I continue. If this IS new information, then please read only two fact two and then stop and educate yourself. Suggested reading: First Peoples: A Documentary Survey of American Indian History by Collin Calloway, Vanishing American by Brian Dippie, American Indian Holocaust and Survival by Russell Thornton.
Fact two: somehow, in being a historically oppressed people, it became okay to objectify us.
Think about it – when you don’t like somebody one of the things you do is pick out the parts you don’t like or that make you different, play it up, and turn it into some sort of mock adjective. Example (an overly dramatic one, at that): “OMG. She drives me nuts! She is so stupid sometimes! And her hair?? That is SO wrong for her face. Can you imagine?? If I just walked around with my hair like that?? OMG I should do that for my costume this year!!” Obviously, I don’t talk like this. But do you get the point?
Now when we take that behavior and mindset up a few notches, we get more drastic convictions, adjectives, and resulting actions. Genocide and racism works best when you can ‘otherize’ or ‘dehumanize’ another culture or people.
Now let’s take the previous conversation and change it up a bit: “OMG. They drive me nuts! They are so stupid sometimes! And their noses?? That is SO wrong for their face. Can you imagine?? If I just walked around a nose like that?? OMG I should do that for my costume this year!!” Sorry Jews, I’m sure somebody said that in Nazi Germany at some point but with less text lingo.
Now let’s change it again to represent a different holocaust: “OMG. They drive me nuts! They are so savage sometimes! And their clothes?? That is SO wrong for their face. Can you imagine?? If I just walked around with clothes like that?? OMG I should do that for my costume this year!!” Side note – I did see a white girl dressed like an Indian for Halloween this year. I do every year. Did anybody go as a Jew this year? I don’t think so. In my eyes, she might as well have been wearing a holocaust jumpsuit with a tattoo on her arm. That’s how I felt. More native Americans were killed within the first ten years of European contact than Jews in the Holocaust. And neither of us have been the same since.
I think because of our small population and our historical oppression it’s okay to objectify us because we’re not as visible and we are unique to North American culture. We represent something that had to be conquered (and for all some people know, we ARE conquered), that was wild, savage, brute, and untamable for the success of America. So what more do you want as a mascot for your football team? Think of the adjectives ‘wild’, ‘savage’, ‘brute’, and ‘untamable’ and you get…the Redskins?
Objectification had a secondary consequence that affects individual tribes and tribal members more than Natives as a whole – it took away our tribal and individual identities. We take pride in who we are, how we dress, how we eat, and how we live and that is unique to each of our tribal identities. How does a Redskin dress? What does a Redskin eat? You’ve just taken what makes us unique, melted them all together, objectified it and turned it into YOUR thing. Have you ever had your identity stolen? You wallet taken? Or even somebody wore the same prom dress to your prom? Well imagine that, but then make it a million times worse and strip yourself of all the pride you have. THAT’S how it feels. And don’t pretend like you ‘relate.’ The truth is you don’t, and you probably won’t. But at least try and understand and compromise.
Again, if this is new information, stop now. Stop reading, go back and read facts one and two again, find some of the suggested reading, and mull it over a few days THEN come back and read the rest. Suggested viewing: “Reel Injun”, a documentary by Neil Diamond and produced by Charlie Hill. Suggested reading: Honest Injun by Sandra Schulman, and look up some history on the Florida State Seminoles and NCAA mascot business. The Seminoles are unique, but the issue should be addressed on a team-by-team basis.
Fact three: at some point, it became an act of hypersensitivity to overtly react to stereotypical and oppressive images of us.
The Civil Rights era did wonders for American politics and altered the social landscape significantly. People started to realize that it’s not okay to wear blackface and treat people unequally because of the color of their skin. The word ‘offensive’ actually started to mean something and permeate American vocabulary. It wasn’t perfect, but it was a start. Somehow we’ve lost that momentum. Historical oppressions can’t be fixed, but that doesn’t mean they shouldn’t be recognized and that they should be forgotten.
Dressing like an Indian is fun again because it was a ‘long time ago.’ What the hell does that even mean?? “IT” was “A LONG TIME AGO”?? What was a long time ago? What is this IT you speak of? I’m right frickin’ here! “Oh, well it’s a joke. You can’t take a joke?” Well, your joke isn’t funny. Remember from fact two when I asked if you’ve ever had your wallet taken? Well, by standing in front of your ‘joke’ it’s like you stole my wallet and my identity all over again. The “IT” your talking about isn’t funny either. Are you trying to say that we are no longer allowed to dress in our native dress because it was a long time ago, and some of us have lost our culture because of assimilation and can’t even replicate our native language, dress, or foods and now that’s funny? Or are you trying to say that the manner in which we used to live, and survive healthily has been taken away and now that’s funny? Or are you making a comment on how you stole our land and our resources and now you can comfortably dress (and afford to dress) however you want because of your privilege that you gained at our expense and now that’s funny? Please, tell me what’s funny, because I want to know. I don’t get your joke. And don’t get mad at me because I don’t get your joke. And don’t sit back and let other people tell ‘this joke’ because you don’t want to offend them. Or you don’t want to seem like the overly politically correct jackass of the group. It’s not a matter of being politically correct; it’s a matter of respect and I WILL COMMAND RESPECT FROM YOU. I want my identity back.
Is it being hypersensitive to want your identity back? Think about it.
Fact four: that act of hypersensitivity has been internalized, where WE now think it is hypersensitive to react to such images.
In my opinion Natives that condone the use of Indian mascots either: a) don’t understand the history of their people, or b) have internalized their oppression and now find ways to talk themselves out of standing up for themselves, or c) have internalized this sense of hypersensitivity. All answers are wrong. Not that there’s a correct one, but these avenues are not the way to go about changing the status quo. And if we can’t even stand up for ourselves, how can educate others and expect things to change? The simple truth is that we can’t.
Fact five: lack of self-confidence leads to a continuation of internalized oppression.
If I am not encouraged in believing in myself because of your preconceived notions about me, then I will continue to fail at being a productive human being. If revealing a part of my identity to you, a part that defines me, will induce images of tomahawks and wigwams, then it is a hard thing to wear proudly. And if you are not receptive to my requests that you respect my culture, and acknowledge OUR history (yes, you are a part of our collective history), then that makes it hard for me to want to change things.
What you need to understand about this is that this is a DIALOGUE. Seeing people dressed as Indians for Halloween isn’t conducive to a dialogue and makes me think that this is a one sided conversation because you have silenced me from your ears. Your dominant narrative has demonstrated that dressing like an Indian is funny and you don’t have to listen to me. That takes away self-confidence, and takes away my power as an individual. Again, you’ve stolen my wallet.
One thing that I ask all white allies, and other people of color to understand, is that this generation of Native youth is unique in historical and contemporary perspective. The 1900s was an era of Indian assimilation. Most of our parents and grandparents were encouraged and sometimes forced to forget their culture, their language, and their traditions. They had been removed from their traditional lands and taught that they were bad because of where they came from. They were taught to not be proud of the color of their skin and the length of their hair. They were told that they would not become anything in life if they did not abandon their culture.
And most of them did.
What if you parents continually told you that you couldn’t be anything because of who you were, and not because of your ambition? Again, I don’t expect you to relate, but I expect you to at least try and understand.
Fact six: continued internalized oppression leads to divisions within communities, rather than equipping them with the tools they need to be successful as self-governing and self-sustaining cultures.
This is a whole separate rant, but I had to put it in here. If you’d like to know more about this, please contact me.
Fact seven: lack of education leads to a continuation of intolerance.
I can’t expect anything to change if I don’t continually talk about it and advocate for myself. Also, since the current power dynamics includes a variety of peoples and populations, I can’t change anything without including EVERYBODY in the dialogue. I also can’t expect anything to change if you don’t help me. You can help me by talking to others and spreading awareness. You can even help me by asking questions.
You can share this rant.
You can also talk to me about this rant, and if you’d like to share it but you think one of your friends won’t understand something then let me know and I will rewrite it for you.
If you think your friend doesn’t understand a certain type of language I used, or a certain concept, then I will rewrite it. I want to make sure that all of this is accessible to everybody.
Thank you for your attention and let me know if you have any comments, questions, or just want to chat. Thanks!
P.S. For you Stanford students, this is in direct response to the Fighting Harbaughs shirt. SHARE!
Fact one: we are a historically oppressed people.
The power dynamics that govern contemporary Native America are as old as first contact. Native populations were not only decimated by warfare, but also by diseases that were introduced to the new world. The rapid decline in population only reasserted European belief that they were dominant and able to control, enslave, and massacre the Natives. British, French, and Spanish empires negotiated (or coerced) Natives into compacts that outlined land settlements, resource usage, and power structures. As the “American” colonies were established, the sentiment of control and Manifest Destiny were furthered and the need to break from European practice allowed the new Americans to negate previously established agreements. After the revolution, compacts made by the British were considered null and void. At that point, American governments continued ‘treaty’ negotiations to outline definitions and restrictions for tribes. As American government and land mass expanded, so did their need to ‘deal with’ tribes. From extermination, to relocation, to assimilation – all acts of tribes were at the hand of outside forces.
Even contemporary issues that regulate tribal governments are at the hands of federal regulations. There are even cases where state rights trump tribal rights (even though that’s unconstitutional). Consider this – Native Americans are the only ethnic group in America that need document their blood quantum in order to be recognized by any governmental entity. There are also restrictions for a ‘minimum’ blood quantum to be considered part of a tribal entity.
To say that historical oppression has nothing to do with the current state of Native America is entirely naïve. Furthermore, to say that it’s in the past and that we should ‘get over it’ is extremely selfish and does not acknowledge that there is a domino effect to historical oppression.
This all should have been Native History 101, but I felt like it was somewhat relevant and necessary to establish that before I continue. If this IS new information, then please read only two fact two and then stop and educate yourself. Suggested reading: First Peoples: A Documentary Survey of American Indian History by Collin Calloway, Vanishing American by Brian Dippie, American Indian Holocaust and Survival by Russell Thornton.
Fact two: somehow, in being a historically oppressed people, it became okay to objectify us.
Think about it – when you don’t like somebody one of the things you do is pick out the parts you don’t like or that make you different, play it up, and turn it into some sort of mock adjective. Example (an overly dramatic one, at that): “OMG. She drives me nuts! She is so stupid sometimes! And her hair?? That is SO wrong for her face. Can you imagine?? If I just walked around with my hair like that?? OMG I should do that for my costume this year!!” Obviously, I don’t talk like this. But do you get the point?
Now when we take that behavior and mindset up a few notches, we get more drastic convictions, adjectives, and resulting actions. Genocide and racism works best when you can ‘otherize’ or ‘dehumanize’ another culture or people.
Now let’s take the previous conversation and change it up a bit: “OMG. They drive me nuts! They are so stupid sometimes! And their noses?? That is SO wrong for their face. Can you imagine?? If I just walked around a nose like that?? OMG I should do that for my costume this year!!” Sorry Jews, I’m sure somebody said that in Nazi Germany at some point but with less text lingo.
Now let’s change it again to represent a different holocaust: “OMG. They drive me nuts! They are so savage sometimes! And their clothes?? That is SO wrong for their face. Can you imagine?? If I just walked around with clothes like that?? OMG I should do that for my costume this year!!” Side note – I did see a white girl dressed like an Indian for Halloween this year. I do every year. Did anybody go as a Jew this year? I don’t think so. In my eyes, she might as well have been wearing a holocaust jumpsuit with a tattoo on her arm. That’s how I felt. More native Americans were killed within the first ten years of European contact than Jews in the Holocaust. And neither of us have been the same since.
I think because of our small population and our historical oppression it’s okay to objectify us because we’re not as visible and we are unique to North American culture. We represent something that had to be conquered (and for all some people know, we ARE conquered), that was wild, savage, brute, and untamable for the success of America. So what more do you want as a mascot for your football team? Think of the adjectives ‘wild’, ‘savage’, ‘brute’, and ‘untamable’ and you get…the Redskins?
Objectification had a secondary consequence that affects individual tribes and tribal members more than Natives as a whole – it took away our tribal and individual identities. We take pride in who we are, how we dress, how we eat, and how we live and that is unique to each of our tribal identities. How does a Redskin dress? What does a Redskin eat? You’ve just taken what makes us unique, melted them all together, objectified it and turned it into YOUR thing. Have you ever had your identity stolen? You wallet taken? Or even somebody wore the same prom dress to your prom? Well imagine that, but then make it a million times worse and strip yourself of all the pride you have. THAT’S how it feels. And don’t pretend like you ‘relate.’ The truth is you don’t, and you probably won’t. But at least try and understand and compromise.
Again, if this is new information, stop now. Stop reading, go back and read facts one and two again, find some of the suggested reading, and mull it over a few days THEN come back and read the rest. Suggested viewing: “Reel Injun”, a documentary by Neil Diamond and produced by Charlie Hill. Suggested reading: Honest Injun by Sandra Schulman, and look up some history on the Florida State Seminoles and NCAA mascot business. The Seminoles are unique, but the issue should be addressed on a team-by-team basis.
Fact three: at some point, it became an act of hypersensitivity to overtly react to stereotypical and oppressive images of us.
The Civil Rights era did wonders for American politics and altered the social landscape significantly. People started to realize that it’s not okay to wear blackface and treat people unequally because of the color of their skin. The word ‘offensive’ actually started to mean something and permeate American vocabulary. It wasn’t perfect, but it was a start. Somehow we’ve lost that momentum. Historical oppressions can’t be fixed, but that doesn’t mean they shouldn’t be recognized and that they should be forgotten.
Dressing like an Indian is fun again because it was a ‘long time ago.’ What the hell does that even mean?? “IT” was “A LONG TIME AGO”?? What was a long time ago? What is this IT you speak of? I’m right frickin’ here! “Oh, well it’s a joke. You can’t take a joke?” Well, your joke isn’t funny. Remember from fact two when I asked if you’ve ever had your wallet taken? Well, by standing in front of your ‘joke’ it’s like you stole my wallet and my identity all over again. The “IT” your talking about isn’t funny either. Are you trying to say that we are no longer allowed to dress in our native dress because it was a long time ago, and some of us have lost our culture because of assimilation and can’t even replicate our native language, dress, or foods and now that’s funny? Or are you trying to say that the manner in which we used to live, and survive healthily has been taken away and now that’s funny? Or are you making a comment on how you stole our land and our resources and now you can comfortably dress (and afford to dress) however you want because of your privilege that you gained at our expense and now that’s funny? Please, tell me what’s funny, because I want to know. I don’t get your joke. And don’t get mad at me because I don’t get your joke. And don’t sit back and let other people tell ‘this joke’ because you don’t want to offend them. Or you don’t want to seem like the overly politically correct jackass of the group. It’s not a matter of being politically correct; it’s a matter of respect and I WILL COMMAND RESPECT FROM YOU. I want my identity back.
Is it being hypersensitive to want your identity back? Think about it.
Fact four: that act of hypersensitivity has been internalized, where WE now think it is hypersensitive to react to such images.
In my opinion Natives that condone the use of Indian mascots either: a) don’t understand the history of their people, or b) have internalized their oppression and now find ways to talk themselves out of standing up for themselves, or c) have internalized this sense of hypersensitivity. All answers are wrong. Not that there’s a correct one, but these avenues are not the way to go about changing the status quo. And if we can’t even stand up for ourselves, how can educate others and expect things to change? The simple truth is that we can’t.
Fact five: lack of self-confidence leads to a continuation of internalized oppression.
If I am not encouraged in believing in myself because of your preconceived notions about me, then I will continue to fail at being a productive human being. If revealing a part of my identity to you, a part that defines me, will induce images of tomahawks and wigwams, then it is a hard thing to wear proudly. And if you are not receptive to my requests that you respect my culture, and acknowledge OUR history (yes, you are a part of our collective history), then that makes it hard for me to want to change things.
What you need to understand about this is that this is a DIALOGUE. Seeing people dressed as Indians for Halloween isn’t conducive to a dialogue and makes me think that this is a one sided conversation because you have silenced me from your ears. Your dominant narrative has demonstrated that dressing like an Indian is funny and you don’t have to listen to me. That takes away self-confidence, and takes away my power as an individual. Again, you’ve stolen my wallet.
One thing that I ask all white allies, and other people of color to understand, is that this generation of Native youth is unique in historical and contemporary perspective. The 1900s was an era of Indian assimilation. Most of our parents and grandparents were encouraged and sometimes forced to forget their culture, their language, and their traditions. They had been removed from their traditional lands and taught that they were bad because of where they came from. They were taught to not be proud of the color of their skin and the length of their hair. They were told that they would not become anything in life if they did not abandon their culture.
And most of them did.
What if you parents continually told you that you couldn’t be anything because of who you were, and not because of your ambition? Again, I don’t expect you to relate, but I expect you to at least try and understand.
Fact six: continued internalized oppression leads to divisions within communities, rather than equipping them with the tools they need to be successful as self-governing and self-sustaining cultures.
This is a whole separate rant, but I had to put it in here. If you’d like to know more about this, please contact me.
Fact seven: lack of education leads to a continuation of intolerance.
I can’t expect anything to change if I don’t continually talk about it and advocate for myself. Also, since the current power dynamics includes a variety of peoples and populations, I can’t change anything without including EVERYBODY in the dialogue. I also can’t expect anything to change if you don’t help me. You can help me by talking to others and spreading awareness. You can even help me by asking questions.
You can share this rant.
You can also talk to me about this rant, and if you’d like to share it but you think one of your friends won’t understand something then let me know and I will rewrite it for you.
If you think your friend doesn’t understand a certain type of language I used, or a certain concept, then I will rewrite it. I want to make sure that all of this is accessible to everybody.
Thank you for your attention and let me know if you have any comments, questions, or just want to chat. Thanks!
Sunday, October 24, 2010
Views on White Allyship from a Person of Color
Here it is. I've had some people ask me before about how white people can help with anything. This is what I came up with. Enjoy!
Rule number one: Step off.
Sometimes I think it’s nearly impossible for some white people to just chill out and not lead any groups, not spearhead any activities, or to not go out and teach people the ways of whatever culture they just learned about. We don’t need that. WE can do that. That’s what we WANT to do. Rather, you’d be much more helpful by just sitting back and stepping up when we ask for help. 500 years of colonial leadership got us in this situation in the first place, so why would we want that same power to lead our movement for community empowerment?
Rule number two: Ask people directly about what you can do.
Instead of telling others what they should do, or expressing opinions on how communities can fix themselves, why don’t you ask THEM what THEY NEED. You’d be surprised to know that most communities already know what they need and they know what makes them thrive. We don’t need 5,000 copies of Ayn Rand that you collected from your whatever drive (although if it’s a cold winter, we’ll take them!). My suggestion is to find an organization or community you’re interested in and care about and contact them to see what they need. Don’t approach communities with your ideas because they’ll probably get shot down. Also, keep in mind that ‘your part’ can be big or small. Some communities may want you to attend a rally, or to gather resources for an event. Others might simply ask you to help them by changing a part of your daily routine (ie. don’t shop at this store because the owner is doing x, y,z). Those types of contributions are okay. As long as you asked, and as long as you follow through, your contribution will not go unrecognized.
Rule number three: Don’t get butthurt.
You will be excluded from some things. You will feel left out sometimes. You will get made fun of and laughed at sometimes. But don’t get butthurt and say we hate white people and we’re racist.
It’s not racist.
And if you don’t understand that, then this isn’t the first thing you need to be doing to help out other communities. Instead, you need to educate yourself on race and power structures. Unless you do that first, you’re doing everybody a disservice. Please understand that although you are an integral part in helping communities get recognition/sovereignty/rights/resources, etc, you are not a part of the grassroots constituency served.
Rule number four: Don’t go blabbing to your friends about how cool you are because you’ve joined the ‘movement.’
It’s not your movement. It’s our movement. And don’t join it to impress other people. We expect people to be committed. Not only to whatever movement it is, but also to education, empowerment, and understanding. People that blab are the ones that set up ‘Warrior Camps’ and ‘Sweatlodges’ and think they ‘Know the way of the Indians.’ You may appear to be cool to your friends by wearing your ‘spirit object’ around your neck, but to us you just look like a jackass. The other thing that happens when you start talking to other people, is that sometimes people get misconceptions and don’t fully understand what community empowerment is. See rule number five.
Rule number five: Refer interested people/parties to the organization or community itself.
The second biggest problem to white people taking over movements started by communities of color, is white people speaking on behalf of those same communities. First off, it makes us look like we can’t speak for ourselves, which is just offensive. Secondly, we want to be the ones to finally educate others properly on issues that we think are important. Why would you take that away from us? That would take us back to square one. Thirdly, this always leads to bad news. Like whities dying in sweat lodges constructed out of noxious plastic.
So whether it’s a media representative at a rally, or an inquiring friend, ALWAYS refer them to speak with a representative from the organization/community. We know how to tell our stories best.
Rule number six: Educate yourself and be aware of your surroundings.
If you don’t understand something, just ask. Most people are more than willing to impart knowledge of why they’re pissed at something.
Also, pay attention to where you are and who is around you. And don’t pretend like you’re ‘colorblind’ or ‘you don’t see race.’ That’s bullshit. Even if you don’t see race, it sees us and it impacts the world whether we like it or not. Being colorblind is one of the most selfish things you can do. Feel free to question who is around you and always be aware of that. Ever notice that sometimes you’re the only white person in a room? How about if there are no people of color in a room? Yeah. We notice those things all the time. Now try and think about why that is. It’s okay to recognize privilege and that you have some. We don’t hate you for that. We just don’t like it when you don’t recognize it. Practice run - Why are there no or very few people of color on a golf course or ski resort? I’ll just leave that at that. We’ll see how you do on figuring out the rest.
Rule number seven: Be persistent.
Power structures and institutions cannot change without everybody involved. Thank you for your help, but it’s a long fight. Be persistent and enduring.
I’m sure there are more subtleties to the rules. And there may be amendments later. This is just a start. Please feel free to comment, question, share, whatever. Thanks!
Rule number one: Step off.
Sometimes I think it’s nearly impossible for some white people to just chill out and not lead any groups, not spearhead any activities, or to not go out and teach people the ways of whatever culture they just learned about. We don’t need that. WE can do that. That’s what we WANT to do. Rather, you’d be much more helpful by just sitting back and stepping up when we ask for help. 500 years of colonial leadership got us in this situation in the first place, so why would we want that same power to lead our movement for community empowerment?
Rule number two: Ask people directly about what you can do.
Instead of telling others what they should do, or expressing opinions on how communities can fix themselves, why don’t you ask THEM what THEY NEED. You’d be surprised to know that most communities already know what they need and they know what makes them thrive. We don’t need 5,000 copies of Ayn Rand that you collected from your whatever drive (although if it’s a cold winter, we’ll take them!). My suggestion is to find an organization or community you’re interested in and care about and contact them to see what they need. Don’t approach communities with your ideas because they’ll probably get shot down. Also, keep in mind that ‘your part’ can be big or small. Some communities may want you to attend a rally, or to gather resources for an event. Others might simply ask you to help them by changing a part of your daily routine (ie. don’t shop at this store because the owner is doing x, y,z). Those types of contributions are okay. As long as you asked, and as long as you follow through, your contribution will not go unrecognized.
Rule number three: Don’t get butthurt.
You will be excluded from some things. You will feel left out sometimes. You will get made fun of and laughed at sometimes. But don’t get butthurt and say we hate white people and we’re racist.
It’s not racist.
And if you don’t understand that, then this isn’t the first thing you need to be doing to help out other communities. Instead, you need to educate yourself on race and power structures. Unless you do that first, you’re doing everybody a disservice. Please understand that although you are an integral part in helping communities get recognition/sovereignty/rights/resources, etc, you are not a part of the grassroots constituency served.
Rule number four: Don’t go blabbing to your friends about how cool you are because you’ve joined the ‘movement.’
It’s not your movement. It’s our movement. And don’t join it to impress other people. We expect people to be committed. Not only to whatever movement it is, but also to education, empowerment, and understanding. People that blab are the ones that set up ‘Warrior Camps’ and ‘Sweatlodges’ and think they ‘Know the way of the Indians.’ You may appear to be cool to your friends by wearing your ‘spirit object’ around your neck, but to us you just look like a jackass. The other thing that happens when you start talking to other people, is that sometimes people get misconceptions and don’t fully understand what community empowerment is. See rule number five.
Rule number five: Refer interested people/parties to the organization or community itself.
The second biggest problem to white people taking over movements started by communities of color, is white people speaking on behalf of those same communities. First off, it makes us look like we can’t speak for ourselves, which is just offensive. Secondly, we want to be the ones to finally educate others properly on issues that we think are important. Why would you take that away from us? That would take us back to square one. Thirdly, this always leads to bad news. Like whities dying in sweat lodges constructed out of noxious plastic.
So whether it’s a media representative at a rally, or an inquiring friend, ALWAYS refer them to speak with a representative from the organization/community. We know how to tell our stories best.
Rule number six: Educate yourself and be aware of your surroundings.
If you don’t understand something, just ask. Most people are more than willing to impart knowledge of why they’re pissed at something.
Also, pay attention to where you are and who is around you. And don’t pretend like you’re ‘colorblind’ or ‘you don’t see race.’ That’s bullshit. Even if you don’t see race, it sees us and it impacts the world whether we like it or not. Being colorblind is one of the most selfish things you can do. Feel free to question who is around you and always be aware of that. Ever notice that sometimes you’re the only white person in a room? How about if there are no people of color in a room? Yeah. We notice those things all the time. Now try and think about why that is. It’s okay to recognize privilege and that you have some. We don’t hate you for that. We just don’t like it when you don’t recognize it. Practice run - Why are there no or very few people of color on a golf course or ski resort? I’ll just leave that at that. We’ll see how you do on figuring out the rest.
Rule number seven: Be persistent.
Power structures and institutions cannot change without everybody involved. Thank you for your help, but it’s a long fight. Be persistent and enduring.
I’m sure there are more subtleties to the rules. And there may be amendments later. This is just a start. Please feel free to comment, question, share, whatever. Thanks!
Monday, March 22, 2010
Why I dislike New Agers as much as the Cleveland Indians....(or, I have no idea what an 'american' is)
Pre-emptive note: Please let me know what you think defines an 'american,' because I really have no idea...
The Politics and Implications of Traditions
I have always pondered (and I’m sure a lot of people have) what America is, and what defines an “american.” The book “Playing Indian,” by Phil Deloria (Vine’s son), was recently recommended to me. Although not as powerful as his father, he further articulates that “american” identity lacks any structure. I have always thought that American identity is best defined by outlining what an American is not. For a long time I thought that this personal definition stemmed from my personal beliefs and assumptions of having a positive identity. I am not american, I am Navajo. At least from this reading I now know that these speculations about american identity have been pondered by others.
The rhetoric of american identity is even more important in this time of “change.” People are using the american identity to discuss politics that cater to an ill-defined section of the population known as “americans.” I am not equipped to ponder such questions and outline any semblance of an answer, but I challenge others to do so.
During this self-reflection and in my course of readings I am continually reminded of a social, political, and very personal struggle for Indigenous communities – the belief and imposition that any Native American culture must have a tradition that has been stagnated in the late 1800s to be considered ‘authentic.’ I think this is a result of a century old brew of 2 parts otherization (both savage and noble) of Native Americans, 1 part white guilt, 1 part ignorance, 2 parts paternalism, and ½ part of New Age fascination. If you take out a tad of white guilt this is also a great mix for Native American appropriations.
“Playing Indian,” among other writings, detailed the need for early american settlers to delineate Native American tradition in order to create a solid sense of otherness and to help solidify what america is not. The result was not just centuries of political oppression and social exclusion, but also a stagnation in the actual physical definition of Indianness. The colonial definition of what Indianness should be has survived and still permeates contemporary thought of identity. Personal experience has shown me that the general population has no idea that Indians still exist, and have no concept of an Indian identity – except for the colonial one taught in schools. If I only had a dollar for every instance where somebody told me that I was the first Native American they had ever met, or asked if I grew up in teepee, or requested dollarstore spiritual advice, then I might not be in the mountain of student loan debt that I’ve accrued further colonized my education.
American Indians have never had the chance to define American Indian identity to the majority of the population. We have always had tribal identities but nobody ever asks us what they are. I think in some ways we’ve been so brainwashed that we get confused about who we are and what we’re allowed to do. I have asked people what they thought Indian art is. I once put together a slideshow of art (all made by Indians) and asked people to identify the Indian art of the presentation. Alarmingly, people disregarded art that did not explicitly have Native American motifs or themes. Few were courageous enough to ask if the artists were Indian, and those that did classified all the art as Indian art. This showed me that even in our freedom of expression we are circumscribed within a colonial definition of what Indian art should be. Politically we can’t decide what an Indian should be. I’ll leave the blood quantum debate for another article, but there’s no denying that the institution of blood quantum is a colonial imposition.
We have been fooled into thinking that we can’t determine who we are, and who we should be. We have been tricked into believing that Indianness and authenticity is not allowed to evolve as the century progressed. I’m not sure which is worse – that the colonial definition has been internalized or that it’s been taken and is now used by people who genuinely what to be Indians.
I have seen a fair share of white people dawning turquoise jewelry with southwestern designs, Pendelton vets, and leather pouches around their necks. I have overheard one too many stories of sweatlodges and vision questions, and spirit animals. I once had a white roommate lead a ‘weekend warrior training camp’ for men. So weekly, I would see a hoard of middle aged white men with their leather pouches come into my house and smudge themselves. One weekend I learned that they held retreats that culminated in sweatlodges, and each new inductee received their leather pouch containing ‘a sacred Native American object.’ Of course, when they all first met me it was a mix of awkward awe and I tried so hard to bite my tongue (after all, it was actually a really nice house). In between sessions or on casual evenings they would talk Feng Shui or overseas trips or spirit water or any one of their sheddable identities that they carried around like keys on a keychain – unlocking compartments of ‘others’ that could be a quick fix to their emptiness. It pained me. No, it sickened me. It made me want to believe in the Ghost Dance so that they could vanish and leave these sacred things behind that they carried like toys. Not only did they buy into the Native American colonial definition, but they appropriated it to the extreme for ‘spiritual healing.’ They perpetuated the idea that our traditions should not evolve and they added money into that definition. They capitalized on traditions and teachings that they don’t own (which is one of the core definitions of colonization).
The glaring contrast of New Age appropriation of Indianness is best exemplified by the Cleveland Indians. It is the savage side of the colonial definition of Indian otherness and is one of the hardest monsters of offensiveness to take down. Although, it is always amusing (and ironic) to hear the phrase “The Indians are Winning,” because such declarations don’t happen in real life. I don’t entirely understand why there are not more people that find that symbolism ridiculously offensive, but now I realize how much of it has to do with the early colonial definitions of the Indian other. I don’t think it’s a coincidence that supporters of Indian mascots are also individuals that place a lot of effort into the concept of ‘moving on.’ The phrases “oh, that was in the past,” or “oh, don’t blame me, those were my ancestors” would be more powerful if they held any truth. If they want me to not be angry and to let go and move on then WHY WON’T THEY LET ME? Why do they limit the definition of who I am and who I can be? Then again, maybe circular logic is how Columbus got lost in the first place.
The difference between New Age spiritual warriors and real Indians is that New Agers have the luxury of shedding that identify whenever they wish. The rest of us are left here to create divisions amongst ourselves. The rez Indian versus urban Indian battle is one that I don’t know how to tackle. Although I think the one thing that we can all agree on is that we want to find ways to better our communities. The ‘how’ is the tricky part. I think that in many ways we are getting better at finding the balance between maintaining and recovering parts of our culture that are important to our survival and progressing in a way that best suits the needs of our people. We are not stagnant. We should not be held to colonial definitions of an ‘other.’ We are not your mascot and we are not your savior.
The Politics and Implications of Traditions
I have always pondered (and I’m sure a lot of people have) what America is, and what defines an “american.” The book “Playing Indian,” by Phil Deloria (Vine’s son), was recently recommended to me. Although not as powerful as his father, he further articulates that “american” identity lacks any structure. I have always thought that American identity is best defined by outlining what an American is not. For a long time I thought that this personal definition stemmed from my personal beliefs and assumptions of having a positive identity. I am not american, I am Navajo. At least from this reading I now know that these speculations about american identity have been pondered by others.
The rhetoric of american identity is even more important in this time of “change.” People are using the american identity to discuss politics that cater to an ill-defined section of the population known as “americans.” I am not equipped to ponder such questions and outline any semblance of an answer, but I challenge others to do so.
During this self-reflection and in my course of readings I am continually reminded of a social, political, and very personal struggle for Indigenous communities – the belief and imposition that any Native American culture must have a tradition that has been stagnated in the late 1800s to be considered ‘authentic.’ I think this is a result of a century old brew of 2 parts otherization (both savage and noble) of Native Americans, 1 part white guilt, 1 part ignorance, 2 parts paternalism, and ½ part of New Age fascination. If you take out a tad of white guilt this is also a great mix for Native American appropriations.
“Playing Indian,” among other writings, detailed the need for early american settlers to delineate Native American tradition in order to create a solid sense of otherness and to help solidify what america is not. The result was not just centuries of political oppression and social exclusion, but also a stagnation in the actual physical definition of Indianness. The colonial definition of what Indianness should be has survived and still permeates contemporary thought of identity. Personal experience has shown me that the general population has no idea that Indians still exist, and have no concept of an Indian identity – except for the colonial one taught in schools. If I only had a dollar for every instance where somebody told me that I was the first Native American they had ever met, or asked if I grew up in teepee, or requested dollarstore spiritual advice, then I might not be in the mountain of student loan debt that I’ve accrued further colonized my education.
American Indians have never had the chance to define American Indian identity to the majority of the population. We have always had tribal identities but nobody ever asks us what they are. I think in some ways we’ve been so brainwashed that we get confused about who we are and what we’re allowed to do. I have asked people what they thought Indian art is. I once put together a slideshow of art (all made by Indians) and asked people to identify the Indian art of the presentation. Alarmingly, people disregarded art that did not explicitly have Native American motifs or themes. Few were courageous enough to ask if the artists were Indian, and those that did classified all the art as Indian art. This showed me that even in our freedom of expression we are circumscribed within a colonial definition of what Indian art should be. Politically we can’t decide what an Indian should be. I’ll leave the blood quantum debate for another article, but there’s no denying that the institution of blood quantum is a colonial imposition.
We have been fooled into thinking that we can’t determine who we are, and who we should be. We have been tricked into believing that Indianness and authenticity is not allowed to evolve as the century progressed. I’m not sure which is worse – that the colonial definition has been internalized or that it’s been taken and is now used by people who genuinely what to be Indians.
I have seen a fair share of white people dawning turquoise jewelry with southwestern designs, Pendelton vets, and leather pouches around their necks. I have overheard one too many stories of sweatlodges and vision questions, and spirit animals. I once had a white roommate lead a ‘weekend warrior training camp’ for men. So weekly, I would see a hoard of middle aged white men with their leather pouches come into my house and smudge themselves. One weekend I learned that they held retreats that culminated in sweatlodges, and each new inductee received their leather pouch containing ‘a sacred Native American object.’ Of course, when they all first met me it was a mix of awkward awe and I tried so hard to bite my tongue (after all, it was actually a really nice house). In between sessions or on casual evenings they would talk Feng Shui or overseas trips or spirit water or any one of their sheddable identities that they carried around like keys on a keychain – unlocking compartments of ‘others’ that could be a quick fix to their emptiness. It pained me. No, it sickened me. It made me want to believe in the Ghost Dance so that they could vanish and leave these sacred things behind that they carried like toys. Not only did they buy into the Native American colonial definition, but they appropriated it to the extreme for ‘spiritual healing.’ They perpetuated the idea that our traditions should not evolve and they added money into that definition. They capitalized on traditions and teachings that they don’t own (which is one of the core definitions of colonization).
The glaring contrast of New Age appropriation of Indianness is best exemplified by the Cleveland Indians. It is the savage side of the colonial definition of Indian otherness and is one of the hardest monsters of offensiveness to take down. Although, it is always amusing (and ironic) to hear the phrase “The Indians are Winning,” because such declarations don’t happen in real life. I don’t entirely understand why there are not more people that find that symbolism ridiculously offensive, but now I realize how much of it has to do with the early colonial definitions of the Indian other. I don’t think it’s a coincidence that supporters of Indian mascots are also individuals that place a lot of effort into the concept of ‘moving on.’ The phrases “oh, that was in the past,” or “oh, don’t blame me, those were my ancestors” would be more powerful if they held any truth. If they want me to not be angry and to let go and move on then WHY WON’T THEY LET ME? Why do they limit the definition of who I am and who I can be? Then again, maybe circular logic is how Columbus got lost in the first place.
The difference between New Age spiritual warriors and real Indians is that New Agers have the luxury of shedding that identify whenever they wish. The rest of us are left here to create divisions amongst ourselves. The rez Indian versus urban Indian battle is one that I don’t know how to tackle. Although I think the one thing that we can all agree on is that we want to find ways to better our communities. The ‘how’ is the tricky part. I think that in many ways we are getting better at finding the balance between maintaining and recovering parts of our culture that are important to our survival and progressing in a way that best suits the needs of our people. We are not stagnant. We should not be held to colonial definitions of an ‘other.’ We are not your mascot and we are not your savior.
Wednesday, March 17, 2010
Why I'm sooooo glad that Avatar did not take home best picture (or, a rant about race, pt 3)
I can’t even express how THRILLED I am that Avatar and District 9 did not win best picture. For starters, the script is not original at all. Avatar could have been easily named “Dances with Aliens,” or “Fern Navi,” or “Eywa Talkers.” The novelty is that Avatar found a different way to “otherize” a race. Avatar could have been a great movie if it weren’t masked in colonial propaganda, which was then masked in faux environmentalism. The colonial layer is the fact that a white male (ex-military, no less) still gets to be the hero ON ANOTHER PLANET WITH ALIENS. The white guy gets to “go native” and “be one of them.” He feels drawn to and encouraged to have two lives. Lame. Although Avatar may have shown energy hogs for what they are (heartless beasts without any concern for populations affected by their energy harvesting), it doesn’t seem to have sparked any fits of environmental passion. Nor does it explain what environmental justice really is.
Don’t get me wrong, I would definitely watch this movie again for the visual effects. What startles me is it’s popularity for the storyline. I have started to ask myself – why does this same movie keep getting made? It’s not novel, it’s not super intriguing. Half of the time it’s not culturally appropriate. Why is this interesting??? It’s only interesting because it’s not normal. What disturbs me is not that it’s not normal, but rather an examination of what is considered normal. It occurred to me that you don’t see movies where people of color get to “go white.” Not because it’s not as stressful or dramatic or trying or shocking as “going native,” but because that transition is considered normal. That is what is expected of us. People don’t want to hear about assimilation into dominant culture because it’s a story we’ve been forced into for hundreds of years. For a long time we even tried really hard to fit in because it was the only way to survive. That’s the disturbing irony I see in the success of Avatar.
I’m glad Avatar didn’t win best picture not only because the storyline sucked, but also because it has the potential to inaccurately alter the discussion of race relations in the media. I read an article about people suffering from the “Navi Blues” after seeing the movie. These are people who sink into depression because they long to live on a planet like Pandora – undisturbed, pristine, and wholesome. But this isn’t new or any different from places we have today that are under indigenous control. No, I think the allure sits in a different kind of “other.” We are bored of the kinds of “others” that are human. We are not interested in the conflicts between various races or cultures that actually exist today. No, we are bored of that. We want humans vs. aliens and now risk losing out on valuable discussion concerning actual race relations. I am still wondering when the same storyline will get old. Maybe movie critics can to me why the dominant narrative is still so popular. Then again, maybe it won’t and we’ll be stuck seeing the same colonized plot on different planets. Boring.
Don’t get me wrong, I would definitely watch this movie again for the visual effects. What startles me is it’s popularity for the storyline. I have started to ask myself – why does this same movie keep getting made? It’s not novel, it’s not super intriguing. Half of the time it’s not culturally appropriate. Why is this interesting??? It’s only interesting because it’s not normal. What disturbs me is not that it’s not normal, but rather an examination of what is considered normal. It occurred to me that you don’t see movies where people of color get to “go white.” Not because it’s not as stressful or dramatic or trying or shocking as “going native,” but because that transition is considered normal. That is what is expected of us. People don’t want to hear about assimilation into dominant culture because it’s a story we’ve been forced into for hundreds of years. For a long time we even tried really hard to fit in because it was the only way to survive. That’s the disturbing irony I see in the success of Avatar.
I’m glad Avatar didn’t win best picture not only because the storyline sucked, but also because it has the potential to inaccurately alter the discussion of race relations in the media. I read an article about people suffering from the “Navi Blues” after seeing the movie. These are people who sink into depression because they long to live on a planet like Pandora – undisturbed, pristine, and wholesome. But this isn’t new or any different from places we have today that are under indigenous control. No, I think the allure sits in a different kind of “other.” We are bored of the kinds of “others” that are human. We are not interested in the conflicts between various races or cultures that actually exist today. No, we are bored of that. We want humans vs. aliens and now risk losing out on valuable discussion concerning actual race relations. I am still wondering when the same storyline will get old. Maybe movie critics can to me why the dominant narrative is still so popular. Then again, maybe it won’t and we’ll be stuck seeing the same colonized plot on different planets. Boring.
Race and Culture (or, a rant about race, pt 2)
Race vs. Culture
Nobody ever really understands what it is. And I don’t blame them. However, people are very comfortable checking boxes. In light of the 2010 Census, and as a series of race, culture, and status rants, I am presenting an argument of race and culture.
I think the first time I ever really thought about this issue was when I was in 7th grade. I distinctly remember a girl telling me “I’m not white, I’m Dutch. And if anybody ever calls me white, I’m gonna kick their ass.” That was it. My mind was blown. She looked white. She acted white. How in the hell was I supposed to know the difference between a Dutch person and a white person if I met her on the street? Little did I know that this was only the first (memorable) of a long series of oddities that confused my perception of race. That is…until I had to check boxes.
In 9th grade I think I finally understood how much of a social construct race was. I was born and raised Navajo. I am Diné. My blood shares the same story as the dirt between the four sacred mountains. But there’s no Diné box. There’s no Navajo box on standardized tests. Only “American Indian/Native American/First Nations/Alaska Native.” So I check that box. And then I thought about that girl from 7th grade. I wondered if she was upset that there was no “Dutch” box. Maybe, but she had to check the white box. So now you can blame the PSATs for my somewhat controversial and slightly convoluted ideas of race and culture. You can also blame the fact that white people never cease to amaze me (as well as acculturated Americans).
Race is a skin tone, not a culture. A culture is a way of life.
In my rantings about race, I’ve often heard what I call the “Irish Argument.” This argument often comes about to counter the presentation that minorities suffered innumerable desecrations and injustices throughout American history. This argument consists of “Well, I’m part Irish, and at the turn of the century they were treated like the scum of the earth.” This is a valid point to make, but does not reconstruct the current institution of how race and racism function. Culturally, the Irish were discriminated against, but racially, they had a leg up since they were still white. And honestly, I think the Irish argument only exists because every other race was not even allowed a part in society. At the time blacks were still slaves (maybe not legally, but practically), Asians were not even allowed into the country (thanks to the Chinese exclusion act), Native Americans weren’t citizens (even though they fought and died in WWI), and Mexicans weren’t even a problem yet. In any case, at the turn of the century, I can guarantee you that if all of those guys were in a room they would hate the white guy the least.
I think subtleties of conflating race with culture exemplify itself in very common conversations that detail one’s traveling experiences. “I walked across Africa.” “I traveled Asia.” First off, Africa is a continent, not a country. I notice in conversations that somehow pull Africa into the mix, people don’t mention specific countries or provinces. People talk about Africa like it’s just one big place, and not a conglomerate of different cultures and governments and tribes. Not to mention that each country has it’s own history of colonization that shaped whatever policies and governments that they have now. I just noticed that that happens more often with Asia and Africa than it does with Europe. Maybe that’s just leftovers from colonial education and our uncanny ability to ‘otherize’ people.
Speaking of Europe – let’s talk about where white people are from. White people, like any person, have stories in their names. Everybody has family trees and a lineage and a homeland. I don’t ask white people if they’re white, we both know that they are, but I do ask where they are from. “Oh I’m part Polish and Dutch and…” That’s cool (also, have you ever noticed that EVERYBODY is Irish on St. Patty’s Day?). But I get different questions – “Are you part Native American?” I say yes (I don’t even bother to mention that I’m full blooded because that comment is normally followed with a tirade of comments filled with mysticism, wonder, odd pride, and straight up ignorance). I realize that I am being asked to racially define myself before I can ever culturally define myself. Oh and blacks! I feel sorry for blacks sometimes because I hear you being just called black – regardless if you’re from the Caribbean, or from Africa (forget people knowing the specific country), or have a lineage stemming from the slave trade. Can you imagine if I said “I’m not Native American, I’m Navajo”? Or if a black man said “I’m not black, I’m Nigerian”? Blaspheme!!
Race is not something I defined, and as a social construct in a larger fabric, it’s not something I can change. I can’t change how racism works, or what it is either. But I think it’s important to notice these subtleties, and to understand the difference between race and culture. Referring back to my previous rant, you can’t be racist against white people, and you definitely can’t be racist against a culture. Prejudice exists in every form of our current system and prejudice does not hurt less than racism. In any case, I hope this clears up some ism questions, and ism arguments. And as always, please feel free to criticize, comment, and question as needed.
Nobody ever really understands what it is. And I don’t blame them. However, people are very comfortable checking boxes. In light of the 2010 Census, and as a series of race, culture, and status rants, I am presenting an argument of race and culture.
I think the first time I ever really thought about this issue was when I was in 7th grade. I distinctly remember a girl telling me “I’m not white, I’m Dutch. And if anybody ever calls me white, I’m gonna kick their ass.” That was it. My mind was blown. She looked white. She acted white. How in the hell was I supposed to know the difference between a Dutch person and a white person if I met her on the street? Little did I know that this was only the first (memorable) of a long series of oddities that confused my perception of race. That is…until I had to check boxes.
In 9th grade I think I finally understood how much of a social construct race was. I was born and raised Navajo. I am Diné. My blood shares the same story as the dirt between the four sacred mountains. But there’s no Diné box. There’s no Navajo box on standardized tests. Only “American Indian/Native American/First Nations/Alaska Native.” So I check that box. And then I thought about that girl from 7th grade. I wondered if she was upset that there was no “Dutch” box. Maybe, but she had to check the white box. So now you can blame the PSATs for my somewhat controversial and slightly convoluted ideas of race and culture. You can also blame the fact that white people never cease to amaze me (as well as acculturated Americans).
Race is a skin tone, not a culture. A culture is a way of life.
In my rantings about race, I’ve often heard what I call the “Irish Argument.” This argument often comes about to counter the presentation that minorities suffered innumerable desecrations and injustices throughout American history. This argument consists of “Well, I’m part Irish, and at the turn of the century they were treated like the scum of the earth.” This is a valid point to make, but does not reconstruct the current institution of how race and racism function. Culturally, the Irish were discriminated against, but racially, they had a leg up since they were still white. And honestly, I think the Irish argument only exists because every other race was not even allowed a part in society. At the time blacks were still slaves (maybe not legally, but practically), Asians were not even allowed into the country (thanks to the Chinese exclusion act), Native Americans weren’t citizens (even though they fought and died in WWI), and Mexicans weren’t even a problem yet. In any case, at the turn of the century, I can guarantee you that if all of those guys were in a room they would hate the white guy the least.
I think subtleties of conflating race with culture exemplify itself in very common conversations that detail one’s traveling experiences. “I walked across Africa.” “I traveled Asia.” First off, Africa is a continent, not a country. I notice in conversations that somehow pull Africa into the mix, people don’t mention specific countries or provinces. People talk about Africa like it’s just one big place, and not a conglomerate of different cultures and governments and tribes. Not to mention that each country has it’s own history of colonization that shaped whatever policies and governments that they have now. I just noticed that that happens more often with Asia and Africa than it does with Europe. Maybe that’s just leftovers from colonial education and our uncanny ability to ‘otherize’ people.
Speaking of Europe – let’s talk about where white people are from. White people, like any person, have stories in their names. Everybody has family trees and a lineage and a homeland. I don’t ask white people if they’re white, we both know that they are, but I do ask where they are from. “Oh I’m part Polish and Dutch and…” That’s cool (also, have you ever noticed that EVERYBODY is Irish on St. Patty’s Day?). But I get different questions – “Are you part Native American?” I say yes (I don’t even bother to mention that I’m full blooded because that comment is normally followed with a tirade of comments filled with mysticism, wonder, odd pride, and straight up ignorance). I realize that I am being asked to racially define myself before I can ever culturally define myself. Oh and blacks! I feel sorry for blacks sometimes because I hear you being just called black – regardless if you’re from the Caribbean, or from Africa (forget people knowing the specific country), or have a lineage stemming from the slave trade. Can you imagine if I said “I’m not Native American, I’m Navajo”? Or if a black man said “I’m not black, I’m Nigerian”? Blaspheme!!
Race is not something I defined, and as a social construct in a larger fabric, it’s not something I can change. I can’t change how racism works, or what it is either. But I think it’s important to notice these subtleties, and to understand the difference between race and culture. Referring back to my previous rant, you can’t be racist against white people, and you definitely can’t be racist against a culture. Prejudice exists in every form of our current system and prejudice does not hurt less than racism. In any case, I hope this clears up some ism questions, and ism arguments. And as always, please feel free to criticize, comment, and question as needed.
Monday, March 15, 2010
A rant about race... (pt 1)
So, for some reason I've seen a large number of my facebook friends posting about race lately, and for some reason, I decided to rant. Comment, criticize, and question as needed. Here goes.
Racism doesn’t exist in a vacuum. It exists within power structures. Socioeconomic power structures exist now in our everyday environment. People without power can’t be racist. People without power can be prejudiced, but not racist. Prejudice is something that you own, something that you create and hold on to. The second you let it go and act, then it becomes part of the powers that be. It becomes part of the system that determines whether or not it’s racist. White racism does not exist. There is no power structure in America that does not acknowledge the benefits that a white person has just by being white. The same goes for sexism. Sexism is an ism when a man exerts prejudice on a woman. Sexism is not sexism when a woman hates dick. We just call them FemNazis. There is no power structure that acknowledges the benefits of being a man. And heterosexism. Most people don’t even know what heterosexism is, or that it was an ism. People have an advantage of being straight. I don’t write the rules. I wish I did, but I don’t. Racism is just another ism that does not exist between two people, but rather, it exists within the structure that position two people in relation to each other. Hate has no bounds. Prejudice has no bounds. But racism can ooze down the power structure and muddy up my boots because I know a lot of white people who don’t want to get their feet dirty. And down here we can still hear the echoes of ‘yes master’ and ‘redskins.’ We still remember chains, and long walks, and internment camps, and fences. And we walk carrying a race tax that whites don’t have to pay. My loving and humorous (and white) boyfriend once told me his version of the story of white struggle – “why do we live in the suburbs and we’re still unhappy?” I don’t know. I’m not white. But I laugh anyway. Does that make me racist? No. No, I can be prejudiced. Oh but if only! If only I had that power to be racist. If only I could shoot words into the air and let them get funneled down to echo. The sad thing is that sometimes we get so tired of looking up that we forget about each other. Clawing and climbing over bodies. Climbing over black bodies and brown bodies and yellow bodies and red bodies so we don’t have to sit and wallow at the bottom. We cutting open old wounds with old (s)words. Sometimes we get stuck dreaming old dreams. But we’re not racist. We’re just tired.
Racism doesn’t exist in a vacuum. It exists within power structures. Socioeconomic power structures exist now in our everyday environment. People without power can’t be racist. People without power can be prejudiced, but not racist. Prejudice is something that you own, something that you create and hold on to. The second you let it go and act, then it becomes part of the powers that be. It becomes part of the system that determines whether or not it’s racist. White racism does not exist. There is no power structure in America that does not acknowledge the benefits that a white person has just by being white. The same goes for sexism. Sexism is an ism when a man exerts prejudice on a woman. Sexism is not sexism when a woman hates dick. We just call them FemNazis. There is no power structure that acknowledges the benefits of being a man. And heterosexism. Most people don’t even know what heterosexism is, or that it was an ism. People have an advantage of being straight. I don’t write the rules. I wish I did, but I don’t. Racism is just another ism that does not exist between two people, but rather, it exists within the structure that position two people in relation to each other. Hate has no bounds. Prejudice has no bounds. But racism can ooze down the power structure and muddy up my boots because I know a lot of white people who don’t want to get their feet dirty. And down here we can still hear the echoes of ‘yes master’ and ‘redskins.’ We still remember chains, and long walks, and internment camps, and fences. And we walk carrying a race tax that whites don’t have to pay. My loving and humorous (and white) boyfriend once told me his version of the story of white struggle – “why do we live in the suburbs and we’re still unhappy?” I don’t know. I’m not white. But I laugh anyway. Does that make me racist? No. No, I can be prejudiced. Oh but if only! If only I had that power to be racist. If only I could shoot words into the air and let them get funneled down to echo. The sad thing is that sometimes we get so tired of looking up that we forget about each other. Clawing and climbing over bodies. Climbing over black bodies and brown bodies and yellow bodies and red bodies so we don’t have to sit and wallow at the bottom. We cutting open old wounds with old (s)words. Sometimes we get stuck dreaming old dreams. But we’re not racist. We’re just tired.
Innaugural blogspot post!!
Ya'ah'teeh!
So I've been posting a lot on Facebook lately, but would like to have an open forum about race, culture, and politics that is not limited to Facebook users. I haven't copied the comments over, but would still like to have dialogue. In any case, enjoy (or at least, productive reflection time)!
So I've been posting a lot on Facebook lately, but would like to have an open forum about race, culture, and politics that is not limited to Facebook users. I haven't copied the comments over, but would still like to have dialogue. In any case, enjoy (or at least, productive reflection time)!
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
