JinJer & Felicity 44: The Glossy Veneer is Slipping

[TeaELSee]

Jeremy looks older than his brother, he looks at least 35 to me. Maybe it is just that picture or what he is wearing but he looks like he’s aged more than I would have expected.

edited to add: He looks more like a fuddy-duddy than a handsome athlete.

[Four is Enough]

On 10/3/2018 at 6:29 PM, tabitha2 said:

@patsymae How do you feel about a white South African wearing those items and celebrating Kwanzaa? Not ever person born in Africa is black after all. 

I struggle with Kwanzaa because it's totally made up. I suppose if it has comfort for people, I should just drop it. I don't celebrate it after all, but there are some good features and ideas from it, and if people feel they get something from it, I guess they should.

 

On 10/9/2018 at 4:15 PM, HereticHick said:

I tried, and failed, to find a polite way to say this.

I'm a Cherokee American. I'm also a Native American. I'm also an American. 

I don't care if you live in Alabama, Austria, or on a moon of Saturn--you do not have permission to tell me what to call myself. 

And I am an American. My people have been here since BEFORE there was a US, a Continental Congress, a Revolution.. I can point to the cemetery plots where my ancestors were buried before 1700. To me, that makes me a Native American... and that is why I offer "First Nations"or "First People" as a name for consideration for our indigenous              peoples.  I do wish to be respectful of their place and their home and their influence.. and would wish to rectify the harm done by the settlers.

I don't wish to tell anyone what to call themselves, and I expect that privilege to be extended to me. So while I have Scottish, Irish, German, Welsh ancestors, I am an American, not a hyphenated one.

 

And women wear arisiads, not kilts.

[HerNameIsBuffy]

14 minutes ago, Four is Enough said:

I struggle with Kwanzaa because it's totally made up. I suppose if it has comfort for people, I should just drop it. I don't celebrate it after all, but there are some good features and ideas from it, and if people feel they get something from it, I guess they should.

Thanksgiving as we know it was made up in the 20th century, from a magazine writer.   Santa as we know him came from a Coca-Cola ad.

It's just a matter of when things are made up.

[HerNameIsBuffy]

20 minutes ago, Four is Enough said:

And I am an American. My people have been here since BEFORE there was a US, a Continental Congress, a Revolution.. I can point to the cemetery plots where my ancestors were buried before 1700. To me, that makes me a Native American.

I, too, come from people who were here before 1700...including the Mayflower in one instance, on my mother's side.

I have distant cousins still living on land that's been in our family since it was granted to our great-whatever grandfather for his service in the Revolutionary War. 

My father was born in Germany and I am a first generation American that way.

The only difference is when they got on their respective boats.  I'm still an American descended from European immigrants regardless of century.   My colonial ancestors are no more Native American than my father's people.

Of course you are an American.  You are an American with colonial roots, as am I and millions of others.  But in our current language that is not what Native American means.  

 

[PlentyOfJesusFishInTheSea]

41 minutes ago, Four is Enough said:

 To me, that makes me a Native American... and that is why I offer "First Nations"or "First People" as a name for consideration for our indigenous              peoples.  I do wish to be respectful of their place and their home and their influence.. and would wish to rectify the harm done by the settlers. 

Um, good luck with that!

I agree that as a 3rd-plus generation white Canadian, I don't feel at all attached to where my ancestors came from and would not identify as English-Scottish-Irish-Welsh-French Canadian. But I'd call myself Canadian, not Native Canadian.

[Rachel333]

Jeremy posted this about Jim Bob:

 

[HereticHick]

11 hours ago, Rachel333 said:

Jeremy posted this about Jim Bob:

 

Thanks for the preview of this Sunday's sermon, Jeremy. 

[Seculardaisy]

11 hours ago, Rachel333 said:

Jeremy posted this about Jim Bob:

 

It’s actually a nice thought.

Jim Bob sucks of course but I do like the sentiment here.

[Carm_88]

1 hour ago, PlentyOfJesusFishInTheSea said:

I agree that as a 3rd-plus generation white Canadian, I don't feel at all attached to where my ancestors came from and would not identify as English-Scottish-Irish-Welsh-French Canadian. But I'd call myself Canadian, not Native Canadian.

Yes. I, however, think that Canadians are slightly different about this than Americans. I don't feel like we say that we are "French Canadian" unless we're from Quebec or New Brunswick. I feel like we tend to say "I'm Canadian but my ancestors came from..."

My family has been in Newfoundland for a long time. The first generation of both sides was mostly Irish with a tad of English mixed in. We haven't been Irish in a very long time, we have been Newfoundlanders for generations, we are learning to be Canadians more and more.

[SamiKatz]

2 hours ago, Four is Enough said:

And I am an American. My people have been here since BEFORE there was a US, a Continental Congress, a Revolution.. I can point to the cemetery plots where my ancestors were buried before 1700. To me, that makes me a Native American... and that is why I offer "First Nations"or "First People" as a name for consideration for our indigenous              peoples.  I do wish to be respectful of their place and their home and their influence.. and would wish to rectify the harm done by the settlers.

I don't wish to tell anyone what to call themselves, and I expect that privilege to be extended to me. So while I have Scottish, Irish, German, Welsh ancestors, I am an American, not a hyphenated one.

 

Your family may have been here for a long time, but not as long as actual Native Americans have been, so you know.  Not quite sure how to respond to you on this one.

Here in Canada, we call our indigenous peoples either First Nations or Indigenous.  

[Georgiana]

Muscogee Creek here*.  Family walked Trail of Tears.  Whole 9.  This post is about to be a bit difficult, but I feel it needs to be said and with firmness.  I tried to write this in as neutral a tone as possible to truly be informative.  I'm sorry if I occasionally failed, as this does stir up some emotions in me.  

Native American (in the US) = Indigenous American Peoples.  In this case, the word "Native" specifically means "one of the original inhabitants of a country, especially a nonwhite as regarded by European colonists or travelers."  That's where we get that from.  I think we would all like to move to something better and self-determined in the future, but we are not there yet, and there still is a real need for us to be able to be identified uniquely as a group and at a higher level than on a tribal basis.  Native American is the term that is best able to do that right now in the US.  If you try to take this term and use it for yourself, you will be inserting confusion that will harm Indigenous groups in this country when they have a need to clearly identify themselves on a high level because THEY have no other widely accepted term to use.

Which is not the case when it comes to talking about White people who came to the Americas before the founding of the US.  I know, because I am ALSO descended from Colonists! Bet you knew exactly who I was referring to there, because that's an EXCELLENT and widely understood term for white people who settled the original American colonies.  There are other, alternative words if you want to avoid Colonial.  I call my Salem/Connecticut  ancestors "Settlers" usually when discussing them, which was also the preferred term by Theodore Roosevelt.  There are tons of widely accepted and understood terms for white colonial settlers in the Americas.  I occasionally call those family members Tories (my family were), Puritans, Pilgrims, or just early New Englanders.  One line of them were French fur-trappers and frontiersmen, which are some other good terms if your ancestors are non-Anglo.  I've certainly never had trouble finding ways to describe that side of my family to others with full understanding (an ease that I do not have when discussing my Native roots, which is something that I think is hard to understand for those who have never experienced trying to succinctly convey the details of non-white ancestry).  

What I am saying is you have LOTS of options that work.  The people you are trying to take from have very few.  You may WANT option #101 for how to describe your roots, but that doesn't mean the people you want to take that term from can afford to lose it as being exclusively theirs.  My argument is that Indigenous peoples in the US STILL NEED "Native American" because we don't truly have other terms we can use to the same effect, and we already deal with enough confusion when trying to identify ourselves and our shared history that we cannot bear the additional confusion of you using it too.  Also, you have no such need as you already have many options at your disposal.  You have a want, certainly, but not a need.

Sidebar: you are also asking for this term to refer wholly to those who are dead.  We need this term to continue to refer to groups that STILL EXIST.  The dead don't care what you call them, how accurate it is, or how it sounds.  The living do.

Because even if you hate all of the options available to describe your ancestors, that doesn't give you the implied right to take or re-appropriate  term already in use by other people just because you like how it sounds when you use it for yourself and your own.  Honestly, it's actually deeply offensive that you might "offer" us other names to call ourselves, because frankly, you don't get to decide what we call ourselves and you have no idea whether those terms meet the needs we have that are currently covered by the term "Native American" (again, I would say no).  You ESPECIALLY don't get to do so simply so you can lay claim to something we have that you want without confronting the imbalanced nature of the exchange.  That reeks of colonialism because essentially it is colonialism.  

If you really want to use Native American to describe yourself, cool.  But instead of TAKING a term already in use by others, try to understand the issue from alternative perspectives.  WORK to help Indigenous Groups find their own agreed-upon term.  PROMOTE and ADVOCATE for use of that term.  Understand that this is not being done for you and may not be done on your timeline.  Understand that if you attempt to use the most widely accepted term for Indigenous peoples to refer to your non-Indigenous ancestors before an alternative term for those Indigenous groups is widely in use, you will (unintentionally, perhaps) be participating in and aiding efforts at Indigenous erasure from the wider cultural and historic context (which is, naturally, super harmful and something Native Americans already fight SO hard against).  Fight against that as much as you are able, making sure to advance efforts that seek to recognize Indigenous/Native groups and cultural heritage whenever you have the opportunity.  This method seeks to address the underlying issue in order to solve a common problem for the betterment of both groups.

And then when "Native American" falls out of favor because there is a BETTER term that fits the same needs AND is already in widespread use, you can start to re-define it to be something you can use    Having an alternative, accepted term will make that all the easier.

But don't just take something from another group because you want it, especially without understanding how your doing so could NEGATIVELY impact that group.  This is really the core of cultural appropriation and when it is harmful: it's harmful when only ONE side of the exchange is considered.  When the only side that matters is the White side.  What about the other side?  What about how this exchange impacts the other group?  This is a hangover from colonialism because colonial cultures DELIBERATELY disregard the impact of the exchange on the colonized group and focus only on how the exchange will BENEFIT the colonizing interests.  

And I know it's hard to stomach the thought that someone else should be able to have a say in what you call yourself, but I would counter that this is ONLY the case when you want to call yourself something that is already taken.  NO ONE will stop you if you want to call your ancestors "Squeedly-spooches" or "Vorpals".  In that case, you do you.  But if you want something that's already claimed, then yes, other people get a say because your taking will impact them.

In a similar vein, while normally I wouldn't allow anyone to decide what hat I can wear, if a group comes to me and says "This hat is a hat we wear, we give it meaning, and it is wrong for you to wear it", I will listen all day.  My tribe does not have cool headdresses and War Bonnets are 10000% cooler and yeah, I'd LOVE to wear one, but it would be a dick move for me to do so.  It's not mine, I haven't been freely given one, and that's not my call to make whether I am entitled to one or not.   

 

*This is a complicated topic, but I generally identify as "white" racially because most people consider me White.  I look white-ish, I am treated like a white person, for most racial considerations, I am white.  This does not mean I am not ALSO Muscogee Creek or connected with Indigenous issues or able to provide that perspective.  It just means that unless I identify myself as such, I'm largely considered a white person.  We're a country full of mutts, but our racial dichotomies allow limited space for mixed race persons.  

[HerNameIsBuffy]

30 minutes ago, Georgiana said:

We're a country full of mutts, but our racial dichotomies allow limited space for mixed race persons. 

I only snipped for space.  You so eloquently discussed a serious point with passion yet without rancor that I hope everyone reads it and takes your words to heart.

So well put.

[Bad Wolf]

3 hours ago, HerNameIsBuffy said:

Thanksgiving as we know it was made up in the 20th century, from a magazine writer.   Santa as we know him came from a Coca-Cola ad.

It's just a matter of when things are made up.

Dammit, Buffy. are you saying Santa is made up? I've only just got over Derick saying Santa isn't real. *Goes into corner and sobs.*

[DaisyD]

 I trace one line all the way back to Jamestown. There are even registered historical sites with their names on them (ever heard of the Bacon Rebellion?). I've lost count of the number of my ancestors that fought in the Revolution. All of that is part of what makes me an American, but most certainly does NOT make me Native American. I'm very proud of most of my ancestors, but none of them had to endure the things that the Native Americans did. It would completely disingenuous (not to mention extremely inappropriate given the history there) to say that, because my family has been here a long time, that makes me a Native American. 

@Georgiana said it way better than I can, but that's how I see it. 

[Bad Wolf]

I'm taking my citizenship test at the end of the month. I'll just call myself American. (Presuming i pass.)

[SilverBeach]

5 hours ago, Four is Enough said:

And I am an American. My people have been here since BEFORE there was a US, a Continental Congress, a Revolution

Likewise, blacks have been in the US since before the mayflower, which is the name of Carter G. Woodson's seminal book about black history. There are non-blacks in my family tree also. Fuck it, I'm just American.

[cascarones]

Thank you for your eloquence @Georgiana. Native American is defined, accepted and for some of us the best fit to identify with, because we are multi-tribal. It's a heritage that many have and are connected to in various degrees of depth. I also have both indentured servants and slaves in my ancestry during the same time frame, but I would never use the same terminology for the two groups. One ancestor worked down his debt for his freedom, the other side absolutely did not have that option and never knew freedom. The words are defined and not interchangeable.

My father's family calls me Winnie, short for Winnepesaukah, it technically means rippling rapids, but is an amusement park in Georgia, so for a hyper water eyed toddler and old Winnie near her end, I became my generations' Winnie. It's uncomfortable for me when other people try to call me it, given it has nothing to do with my real name and they're baffled by why I even have an extra name to begin with. The women in my family carry extra water names to remember ours who walked the Trail of Tears and the crying brides who stayed behind at the discretion of their white husbands.   It's not just a name, it's a name that carries a deep shared meaning for us. There are other Winnies out there and I would never impose on how they view their names, I just ask that they respect and understand how I view mine and the boundaries around it.

[SilverBeach]

3 hours ago, Georgiana said:

We're a country full of mutts, but our racial dichotomies allow limited space for mixed race persons.  

Your entire post was amazing, but it is this sentence that captures, to me, what is wrong with the US.

[hoipolloi]

5 hours ago, Four is Enough said:

I can point to the cemetery plots where my ancestors were buried before 1700. To me, that makes me a Native American

What a crock. To me, this statement makes you look stupid and arrogant.

The widely used and accepted definition of "Native American" does not include people like your ancestors who were Euro-American Whites ("Scottish, Irish, German, Welsh"). People who came to North America from the countries you mention are immigrants, settlers, or colonists -- they are not Native American. Maybe you should adapt your own suggested labels to better describe your ancestors -- "First Colonizers," "First Immigrants," or whatever.

 

 

[AussieKrissy]

4 hours ago, Seculardaisy said:

It’s actually a nice thought.

Jim Bob sucks of course but I do like the sentiment here.

I thought the same thing, and as someone who has been stranded, it is nice to receive help.

Jim Bob may be a dick, but if he pulled over to help me, I would accept his help and be grateful, he may try and annoyingly save my soul but in this day and age i would just be grateful he isn't someone who was going to try and murder me when I am in a vulnerable position. 

[WhatWouldJohnCrichtonDo?]

10 hours ago, AussieKrissy said:

I thought the same thing, and as someone who has been stranded, it is nice to receive help.

Jim Bob may be a dick, but if he pulled over to help me, I would accept his help and be grateful, he may try and annoyingly save my soul but in this day and age i would just be grateful he isn't someone who was going to try and murder me when I am in a vulnerable position. 

I agree, but I would still prefer a nice AAA tow truck driver, locksmith, or what-have-you. My annual AAA membership is my favorite Christmas present every year. 

[Knight of Ni]

4 hours ago, WhatWouldJohnCrichtonDo? said:

I agree, but I would still prefer a nice AAA tow truck driver, locksmith, or what-have-you. My annual AAA membership is my favorite Christmas present every year. 

For a little while I was wondering if AAA was worth it, and then came the day that I really needed it and they helped. So worth it. 

[TeaELSee]

My family can be traced back to the Mayflower, (John Alden), I would NEVER consider myself a Native American.

[zee_four]

On 10/11/2018 at 12:55 PM, Georgiana said:

Muscogee Creek here*.  Family walked Trail of Tears.  Whole 9.  This post is about to be a bit difficult, but I feel it needs to be said and with firmness.  I tried to write this in as neutral a tone as possible to truly be informative.  I'm sorry if I occasionally failed, as this does stir up some emotions in me.  

Native American (in the US) = Indigenous American Peoples.  In this case, the word "Native" specifically means "one of the original inhabitants of a country, especially a nonwhite as regarded by European colonists or travelers."  That's where we get that from.  I think we would all like to move to something better and self-determined in the future, but we are not there yet, and there still is a real need for us to be able to be identified uniquely as a group and at a higher level than on a tribal basis.  Native American is the term that is best able to do that right now in the US.  If you try to take this term and use it for yourself, you will be inserting confusion that will harm Indigenous groups in this country when they have a need to clearly identify themselves on a high level because THEY have no other widely accepted term to use.

Which is not the case when it comes to talking about White people who came to the Americas before the founding of the US.  I know, because I am ALSO descended from Colonists! Bet you knew exactly who I was referring to there, because that's an EXCELLENT and widely understood term for white people who settled the original American colonies.  There are other, alternative words if you want to avoid Colonial.  I call my Salem/Connecticut  ancestors "Settlers" usually when discussing them, which was also the preferred term by Theodore Roosevelt.  There are tons of widely accepted and understood terms for white colonial settlers in the Americas.  I occasionally call those family members Tories (my family were), Puritans, Pilgrims, or just early New Englanders.  One line of them were French fur-trappers and frontiersmen, which are some other good terms if your ancestors are non-Anglo.  I've certainly never had trouble finding ways to describe that side of my family to others with full understanding (an ease that I do not have when discussing my Native roots, which is something that I think is hard to understand for those who have never experienced trying to succinctly convey the details of non-white ancestry).  

What I am saying is you have LOTS of options that work.  The people you are trying to take from have very few.  You may WANT option #101 for how to describe your roots, but that doesn't mean the people you want to take that term from can afford to lose it as being exclusively theirs.  My argument is that Indigenous peoples in the US STILL NEED "Native American" because we don't truly have other terms we can use to the same effect, and we already deal with enough confusion when trying to identify ourselves and our shared history that we cannot bear the additional confusion of you using it too.  Also, you have no such need as you already have many options at your disposal.  You have a want, certainly, but not a need.

Sidebar: you are also asking for this term to refer wholly to those who are dead.  We need this term to continue to refer to groups that STILL EXIST.  The dead don't care what you call them, how accurate it is, or how it sounds.  The living do.

Because even if you hate all of the options available to describe your ancestors, that doesn't give you the implied right to take or re-appropriate  term already in use by other people just because you like how it sounds when you use it for yourself and your own.  Honestly, it's actually deeply offensive that you might "offer" us other names to call ourselves, because frankly, you don't get to decide what we call ourselves and you have no idea whether those terms meet the needs we have that are currently covered by the term "Native American" (again, I would say no).  You ESPECIALLY don't get to do so simply so you can lay claim to something we have that you want without confronting the imbalanced nature of the exchange.  That reeks of colonialism because essentially it is colonialism.  

If you really want to use Native American to describe yourself, cool.  But instead of TAKING a term already in use by others, try to understand the issue from alternative perspectives.  WORK to help Indigenous Groups find their own agreed-upon term.  PROMOTE and ADVOCATE for use of that term.  Understand that this is not being done for you and may not be done on your timeline.  Understand that if you attempt to use the most widely accepted term for Indigenous peoples to refer to your non-Indigenous ancestors before an alternative term for those Indigenous groups is widely in use, you will (unintentionally, perhaps) be participating in and aiding efforts at Indigenous erasure from the wider cultural and historic context (which is, naturally, super harmful and something Native Americans already fight SO hard against).  Fight against that as much as you are able, making sure to advance efforts that seek to recognize Indigenous/Native groups and cultural heritage whenever you have the opportunity.  This method seeks to address the underlying issue in order to solve a common problem for the betterment of both groups.

And then when "Native American" falls out of favor because there is a BETTER term that fits the same needs AND is already in widespread use, you can start to re-define it to be something you can use    Having an alternative, accepted term will make that all the easier.

But don't just take something from another group because you want it, especially without understanding how your doing so could NEGATIVELY impact that group.  This is really the core of cultural appropriation and when it is harmful: it's harmful when only ONE side of the exchange is considered.  When the only side that matters is the White side.  What about the other side?  What about how this exchange impacts the other group?  This is a hangover from colonialism because colonial cultures DELIBERATELY disregard the impact of the exchange on the colonized group and focus only on how the exchange will BENEFIT the colonizing interests.  

And I know it's hard to stomach the thought that someone else should be able to have a say in what you call yourself, but I would counter that this is ONLY the case when you want to call yourself something that is already taken.  NO ONE will stop you if you want to call your ancestors "Squeedly-spooches" or "Vorpals".  In that case, you do you.  But if you want something that's already claimed, then yes, other people get a say because your taking will impact them.

In a similar vein, while normally I wouldn't allow anyone to decide what hat I can wear, if a group comes to me and says "This hat is a hat we wear, we give it meaning, and it is wrong for you to wear it", I will listen all day.  My tribe does not have cool headdresses and War Bonnets are 10000% cooler and yeah, I'd LOVE to wear one, but it would be a dick move for me to do so.  It's not mine, I haven't been freely given one, and that's not my call to make whether I am entitled to one or not.   

 

*This is a complicated topic, but I generally identify as "white" racially because most people consider me White.  I look white-ish, I am treated like a white person, for most racial considerations, I am white.  This does not mean I am not ALSO Muscogee Creek or connected with Indigenous issues or able to provide that perspective.  It just means that unless I identify myself as such, I'm largely considered a white person.  We're a country full of mutts, but our racial dichotomies allow limited space for mixed race persons.  

Ahhhhhh this. I guess technically I'm not "Native American" I'm half Native Hawai'ian, different census box and everything. But as far as life experiences, we're essentially Native American. My dad is 100% kanaka Maoli and my mom is Canadian. I consider myself biracial but but I can't tell you how many people who've tried to fight me with this. I'll say oh I'm Native Hawai'ian and this super white person is like oh so is my cousin! Me- Like Native Hawai'ian from Hawai'i . Them- Oh yeah they're from there too. Me- No I'm brown, indigenous, kanaka maoli, Native American. my people were there before white people. Them- Oh that's like the same right? Me- >.>

I've had neocons try to fight me and say that's like them saying they're biracial because their mom was born in California. Yeah not even remotely close. Now with "Fed Wreck" (Rec) about establishing blood quota for tribal membership for kanaka it's a big deal. I get the problems with it but I'd qualify. I was raised around all kanakas, was raiseed with kanaka culture. Being born in a place and being from an indigenous group are two totally different things.

[CaricatureQualities]

24 minutes ago, zee_four said:

Ahhhhhh this. I guess technically I'm not "Native American" I'm half Native Hawai'ian, different census box and everything. But as far as life experiences, we're essentially Native American. My dad is 100% kanaka Maoli and my mom is Canadian. I consider myself biracial but but I can't tell you how many people who've tried to fight me with this. I'll say oh I'm Native Hawai'ian and this super white person is like oh so is my cousin! Me- Like Native Hawai'ian from Hawai'i . Them- Oh yeah they're from there too. Me- No I'm brown, indigenous, kanaka maoli, Native American. my people were there before white people. Them- Oh that's like the same right? Me- >.>

I've had neocons try to fight me and say that's like them saying they're biracial because their mom was born in California. Yeah not even remotely close. Now with "Fed Wreck" (Rec) about establishing blood quota for tribal membership for kanaka it's a big deal. I get the problems with it but I'd qualify. I was raised around all kanakas, was raiseed with kanaka culture. Being born in a place and being from an indigenous group are two totally different things.

Wow, that must be exasperating. I would have never imagined that the distinction between "from (the state of) Hawai'i" and "Native Hawai'ian" was that difficult to grasp...or get across to those who aren't grasping it.