So What's A White Boy To Do?

[East Coast Hustle]

Perhaps, but if it inspires them to think more positively about Native Americans (or to think about them at all) isn't that still a positive step no matter how small? I'm just trying to be realistic here. It's not gonna stop. Might as well use it constructively.

[Dildo Argentino]

I don't generally expect people to give two shits about what's culturally significant or meaningful to me. It's meaningful to me because of something in ME and how other people treat it or react to it doesn't change that. Everybody should have the right to their own cultural traditions. Nobody should be able to impede or restrict the cultural traditions of others (obvious exceptions for shit like FGM, etc.) but at the same time nobody should be expected to observe or submit to the cultural traditions of anyone else.

IMO, that's what it means to respect someone else's culture. And trying to put the "cultural tourism" toothpaste back in the tube in the 21st century is an exercise in futility. It's gonna happen. And there's no reason it has to be construed as a negative thing when people are doing it out of curiosity and/or admiration.

Aye.

[Mesozoic Mister Nigel]

Perhaps, but if it inspires them to think more positively about Native Americans (or to think about them at all) isn't that still a positive step no matter how small? I'm just trying to be realistic here. It's not gonna stop. Might as well use it constructively.

No, probably not. I mean, if someone sold porn of an ECH lookalike having furry sex, would that be good because at least it was causing people to think about you?

The reason people get into the fake-shaman business is not to raise awareness, it's to capitalize on awareness that already exists. Shysters tend to be opportunistic.

[East Coast Hustle]

Fake shamans aren't cultural tourism any more than going to Changs Mongolian Grill is cultural tourism. I think we're talking about two different things here.

[Mesozoic Mister Nigel]

Fake shamans aren't cultural tourism any more than going to Changs Mongolian Grill is cultural tourism. I think we're talking about two different things here.

It's quite possible. I don't recall ever mentioning cultural tourism, personally. Possibly someone else brought it in and I missed it.

[East Coast Hustle]

No, I used the term because it seemed like a decent catch-all term for what several people were objecting to.

[Bebek Sincap Ratatosk]

But isn't the guy selling Native American Sweat Lodge Spirituality just a snake oil salesman in the vein of a Christian Revivalist selling the healing power of the spirit to rubes? As long as people have been easily tricked by ancient/sacred/secret cures from some mysterious culture they know little about, slick Joe's have been taking their money. Is that cultural appropriation or just scam artistry? To me that seems like a wholly different issue than (for example) some model wearing a war bonnet on a runway.

At the very least I can agree that the runway thing was (IMO) in bad taste and displayed a bit of a 'tin ear' on the part of the company PR and Marketing dept. Having worked with that PR dept and Marketing group I'm not at all surprised.They're pretty out of touch and living in their own world.I think having a Native American head on this pack of Lucky Strikes, or a baseball team or a football team with some caricature of a native person... I can see how that might be offensive...

But the sacredness argument is kinda falling flat for me.

[Mesozoic Mister Nigel]

I don't think you understand the point of the "sacredness argument". Maybe because it's occurred across threads. It's just saying, it sucks that people are being duped into thinking they are buying sacred objects, when that's impossible, and it sucks that scam artists are profiting from the sale, because in the process they are disseminating the idea that natives sell sacred objects. And a lot of natives find that objectionable, because they feel it misrepresents their cultural values and gives people the wrong idea about natives.

I don't think any of that is all that complicated.

[Mesozoic Mister Nigel]

Although the difficulty of this conversation is certainly reinforcing my insight into the general frustration of the indian community I know with why the hell white people don't get what they're irritated about. I feel like there might be a more or less insurmountable cultural barrier there.

[AFK]

I'm not talking about replicas, I mean yeah, they sell the cheaply made shit to tourists who don't know any better.  Pretty much any culture that caters at all to tourists do that.  But the tribe I mentioned was selling stuff that was made by the same hands in the same manners as what they would use themselves.  In the end, the only difference is who is owning the thing and whether they use words to describe it as sacred.

...

That IS the only difference.

Right, it's like ECH said, the difference is what's within the particular person in question, not the actual object.  And since the culture is willingly making and selling "sacred" objects that won't be "sacred" to the person outside of that culture, there is hardly anyone to blame for smeone misappropriating that object.  Because they aren't misappropriating it.

[AFK]

I don't generally expect people to give two shits about what's culturally significant or meaningful to me. It's meaningful to me because of something in ME and how other people treat it or react to it doesn't change that. Everybody should have the right to their own cultural traditions. Nobody should be able to impede or restrict the cultural traditions of others (obvious exceptions for shit like FGM, etc.) but at the same time nobody should be expected to observe or submit to the cultural traditions of anyone else.

IMO, that's what it means to respect someone else's culture. And trying to put the "cultural tourism" toothpaste back in the tube in the 21st century is an exercise in futility. It's gonna happen. And there's no reason it has to be construed as a negative thing when people are doing it out of curiosity and/or admiration.

If you think of it as a type of slander, it might make more sense? I don't know. I am getting a very strong impression that white people's concept of sacred is realllly different from NA people's concept of sacred. IMO taking advantage of hopeful white Americans' desire for a taste of non-McDonalds-ized cultural authenticity to sell them an illusion of belonging to a tribe by exploiting a mockery of that tribe's traditions and ritual traditions is both fraud and a type of slander.

Uh, some white dude buying an NA drum isn't because they want to be a part of the tribe, it's because they want the drum because they think it's cool.  It isn't slander even remotely.  It's just commercialism.  Commercialism that the NA are WILLINGLY engaging in. 

[AFK]

Although the difficulty of this conversation is certainly reinforcing my insight into the general frustration of the indian community I know with why the hell white people don't get what they're irritated about. I feel like there might be a more or less insurmountable cultural barrier there.

No, I won't speak for ECH, but I think our understanding is pretty clear, we just don't happen to agree with the objection.  My thing is, if the culture is purposefully and willingly selling the sacred objects or symbols, you can hardly be mad at the white guy for buying them.  The NA wanted the white guy to buy it and the white guy did.  A transaction between two consenting cultures, if you will.  Perhaps the beef should be tak en up with the members of the NA culture putting the stuff up for sale to begin with.

[Sita]

You know, I thought I had an understanding of this finally but now I'm all confused again.
Is something being sacred a personal thing or does an object have an inherent sacredness? Think that's the root of my confusion.

[AFK]

Here is how I would break it down. 

I think things can have inherent sacredness, however, I feel like once a culture decides they are going to sell those things, or allow/sanction others selling them, then not only do they lose sacredness, I think the culture loses the ability to cry foul when some asshat appropriates those things in a way that is antithetical to the item's sacred origins. 


So if a tribe sells their sacred drums, and some idiot buys a drum and uses it in a way that feels in conflict with its traditional cultural use, the tribe or anyone else can hardly complain.  If you want to reap financial gains from selling pieces of your culture, you need to be able to deal with the crass commercialism that comes along with it.


Now, if you don't sanction this, and some white middle-class guy starts making replicas, selling them all over the place, disrespecting the cultural and sacred origins of the item, then there is a legitimate beef, IMO.  Of course, in the end, unless you have some kind of patent or trademark protections, you are screwed and can't do much about it.  But, at least you do have some philosophical ground to stand on in front of the court of public opinion.

[AFK]

Another way to think about it.  I buy a Tibetan singing bowl, but I use it not to,play traditional Tibetan music.  I use them in some experimental electronic music, which clearly is not the sacred intent, so am I insulting the culture and misappropriating?  I would say no because I feel that I would be honoring the culture by wishing to incorporate something from the culture I respect and have admiration for in my own spiritual expression through my music. 


Now, maybe if I was using them to cook soup there could be a valid complaint.