Each week Justin or I will post prompt(s) to get your thoughts flowing. However, you don't need to respond to all/any of them, we just want to hear what you have to say :)
Prompts for this week:
- What does it mean to be indigenous? Can it be based on genetic testing, or is it more about being actively involved in a community?
- How has colonization impacted the disconnect between people and culture?
- How did your thoughts change (if they did) before we had our conversation to after our conversation?
- What about our conversation made you feel uncomfortable? What about it made you feel empowered?
- Did anything surprise you?
Please post responses of at least 200 words.
I really enjoyed participating in this conversation, in part because it challenged my ideas on what it means to be indigenous. I feel that one way to think about what it means to be indigenous is to instead ask yourself what it means to be another ethnicity/race. What does it mean, for example, to be Asian? In my experience, I have noticed that in society, when someone says that they are Asian when they do not actively participate in the culture, they aren’t ridiculed. Unfortunately, when people, especially those who are White-passing, identify as Native they are sometimes told that they cannot be (usually based on their appearance). This is a complicated issue because many people who have experienced White privilege all their life and are completely unconnected with their culture often claim to be Native because a very distant relative was Indigenous. While this is ok, claiming this can take away from non-White passing Natives who struggle in a White world on a daily basis. Further still, I don’t think I’ve ever heard anyone, regardless of race, claim to be very distantly (for example) Asian. I believe that this is because being Native has been romanticized in current culture.
ReplyDeleteI also enjoyed the conversation because it prompted me to think more about blood-quantum laws. I dislike the blood-quantum in part because it’s a colonizers tool to continue to suppress Native people. I agreed with the statement someone made during the discussion in which they basically said that the White system uses colonizers tools to continually suppress people of color, and that the blood-quantum laws have similarities to slave laws in which anyone who passed as Black or African (American) was automatically considered a slave. But instead of considering everyone who looks Native to be Native, the government makes it harder for people with Native heritage to be a tribe member in order to reduce the funding that the government gives tribes.
Overall, I think blood-quantum has many more negative effects than positive ones but at the same time White-passing Natives should understand that they are more privileged than their darker cousins.
Thanks for a good discussion! :) <3
ReplyDeleteTo me, being Indigenous is more about practicing your culture and traditional ways rather than just having native blood. I think genetic testing or the idea of “blood quantum” can be used to see if someone has a lineage of native blood in them, but I do not think the results of these tests mean more than that. As I previously said, I think that there is a lot more that goes into being native or indigenous then just having a test that shows you are.
Elizabeth Warren’s situation is a perfect display of this issue of what actually makes you indigenous. While Warren does have native lineage, she has never practiced cultural and traditional ways and has never been a part of her native community. I think that Warren doesn’t really have the right to claim being indigenous because she has never been connected to this culture in her past but I also feel like she has taken a lot of hits for receiving genetic testing, something very popular in today’s society. While Warren’s situation was tricky, and I think she would have received backlash no matter what she did, I think that instead of or at least in addition to receiving her genetic testing she should speak out more for native issues and be a voice for the native community, if she really wanted to do something for the community.
Personally, I believe that being indigenous is based off of the lifestyle that someone lives. I am Native Alaskan, more specifically Yup’ik Eskimo, and have lived my entire life in rural Alaska. The region in which I grew up in is predominantly Yup’ik Eskimo. In terms of genetics, I am 50% Native Alaskan and grew up living a traditional lifestyle. The reason why I believe being indigenous is based off of the lifestyle someone lives is because my best friend growing up is 100% white when it comes to his genetics but has lived a very traditional lifestyle. He went to a Yup’ik immersion school with me and learned how to speak and write in Yup’ik and learned about Yup’ik history. He lived in the same village as me and grew up hunting and fishing and also practicing other traditional practices like dancing and singing. I do believe that genetics does play a role in being indigenous but if you were to ask me I would definitely consider my white friend as Native since he has immersed himself into the culture and has lived a traditional lifestyle.
ReplyDeleteWhen it comes to Elizabeth Warren, I would say that having Native American ancestry helps her case of self-proclaimed indigeneity but something that would help even more is if she got more involved with her culture and learned more about the history and values/norms of the group that she is trying to be a part of.
I really appreciated and enjoyed our conversation about Elizabeth Warren’s assertion of her Native lineage through a genetic test and the question of what defines being indigenous. Though Warren acknowledged that her genetic test does not equate to citizenship to any tribe, her assertion of Native American heritage undoubtably brings up the distinction between having a Native identity and simply claiming an indigenous ancestor. Her proof of the claim that she has a distant Native ancestor cannot be equated with her having a connection to the Native community at all, and unless she makes an effect to reach out to the several tribes that have tried to sit down with her to discuss this issue, it will continue to be problematic.
ReplyDeleteNonetheless, I personally believe that the Senator from Massachusetts decided to prove her ancestry primarily to dispel the cacophony of distracting taunting from President Trump and his Republicans—not to perpetuate the false equivalence of DNA with heritage. What is significantly more upsetting to me is the absolutely outrageous and unequivocally racist lengths that her opponents have gone to mock Native American history and culture, most noticeably with Trump’s calling her “Pocahontas.” That, of course, is not to mention the denial of tribal IDs without home addresses as a valid voter identification to vote in North Dakota in the upcoming election—which could disenfranchise tens of thousands, disproportionately in the Native reservation communities. While I understand that Warren’s actions have consequences for the Native community, it should not function to distract from the other more serious transgressions against Natives that are occurring at the same time.
I was really excited to talk about this at seminar because it had been on my mind for the past few days, but I did not have a good place to discuss my thoughts. Many of the topics that have come up over the past few days are things that I have thought about before, but never formed full thoughts about. I really agree with many of Tala's points above, and I specifically am interested by the idea that very few other minorities are challenged on their validate their identity as that minority. Yet, I have been challenged to explain my identity as a Native American numerous times. “You don’t look Native?” or “What percent?”
ReplyDeleteMy ideas on Native identity have changed a lot over time. As some of you may know, my initial connection to the Native American community came from my father, who was not only estranged from me, but also adopted off of the Pine Ridge Reservation. Being involved with the Native community was probably the thing I was most excited about at Stanford. I have learned so much about what it means to be Native from my friends here, their families, and my professors. However, my own journey to my identity has made me more critical of people who claim Indigenous identity, but do not do anything to actively support or be involved with Native communities. The first 20 times I came to Native events I felt super out of place. But making the connection was important to me and so I dealt with the uncomfortableness and eventually I felt a sense of belonging. I think if you have Native “ancestry” and/or being Native is something that is important to your identity, even if you are estranged or disconnected, you will put in the work to be involved with communities and learn from people who have more knowledge of the identity.
One of the most interesting things I’ve realized about being Native is that when you are Native, you simply are. I have had trouble explaining this, but I think that being Native is a feeling and a way of being rather than a percentage or a thing you own. For example, if someone tells me “they have Native ancestry” or “their great-grandmother WAS Native” or “they’re a little Native,” I’m usually pretty skeptical to believe them because they are not really taking it on, but rather justifying or claiming it. Being Native American is an active thing. It usually means having a connection to the past AND the present. It means feeling a part of the Native community at large. Even if someone’s blood is not “100%” Native (although I personally don’t think DNA determines race…), but being Native is part of their identity it is much more active. People say things like “I AM Native,” or “I AM Lakota”
I do not think DNA or genetics can really determine race. This is because phenotype doesn’t equal race and race is a social construct developed to “other” people. Kim Tall Bear has stated that it is a privilege of whiteness to define and control everyone else’s identity. I think that giving power to DNA disempowers Natives. Further, I think a festishization of ancestry has developed among phenotypically white people. I believe this usually derives from either a way to relieve white guilt or from a desire to claim a stake in the ‘benefits’ that Native American people get…
Anyways this is getting a bit long, so I'm going to stop. Thanks for an interesting conversation!
What does it mean to be indigenous? Can it be based on genetic testing, or is it more about being actively involved in a community?
ReplyDeleteHow has colonization impacted the disconnect between people and culture?
How did your thoughts change (if they did) before we had our conversation to after our conversation?
What about our conversation made you feel uncomfortable? What about it made you feel empowered?
Did anything surprise you?
I believe that colonization has not disconnected people from their culture. In many ways the culture that an individual chooses is their culture regardless if it is one that is colonized, different than their blood origins, or that their community believes they should be practicing. In many ways colonization has instilled a certain rigidity in peoples understanding of religion and culture often times setting moral laws which communities and individuals feel forced to abide by.
In many ways this concept of an individuals preassigned culture based on their blood is a problematic notion. Although colonization has shifted many cultures, how they are practiced, and how individuals view themselves in relation to these cultures forcing people to perform a culture gives into the rigidity of colonialism.
Being indigenous/native means more than just a box to check or "blood quantum." My earliest memory is speaking my traditional language, wearing my traditional and ceremonial regalia, gathering my tribes' "First Foods" in our ceded territory, and was raised in the Long House where i serve my people/community since I could walk. Sure, genetic testing will tell me that I'm "East Asian & Native American," which is not necessarily true. According to the Bureau of Indian Affairs and the "Blood Quantum" requirement they impose on most federally recognized tribes, I have just above "3/4 quarters of Indian blood." But that is not who I was raised to be. My parents never said, "You are only 75% indian and 25% white." Instead I was raised as an Indian woman, who recognizes her white lineage.
ReplyDeleteColonization has FOR SURE created a disconnect between native people and their culture. Take week 2 lecture by Jaysha explaining the hardships Native Hawaiian's are facing to revitalize their culture of hula and language. I see this in my own tribal community as my language is dying out and our culture is becoming extinct. I think that it has very much motivated a certain amount of people but I also think that it's very hard to turn around.
So with the whole Elizabeth Warren situation, I think that she is doing more harm than good - especially for us native folks who are light-skinned and face colorism their whole life who struggle with "walking in two worlds." I realize that I have the privilege to present myself in the world as a while woman and will most likely never face injustice because of the color of my skin but I also face the issue of walking in my own home community and being told I'm not brown enough. Its v frustrating and annoying.
I believe that a very small part of being indigenous has to do with blood quantum. As someone who did not grow up on the land that my people are from, this was a concept that was not always clear to me. People in my hometown were constantly doubting my identity despite my immersion in my culture and I often felt as if the only way to justify myself to them was to share what blood quantum of Hawaiian I had. At this point in my life, being surrounded by other Natives at Stanford it is more clear to me than ever that I do not have to prove myself or my identity to anyone, and that percentage of Native blood is not the determinant of what makes someone Native. This feeling is due to the strong and accepting community that exists here.
ReplyDeleteWhen I relate this to Elizabeth Warren, I think about the offensive comments that Donald Trump directed her way, and how harmful this is. His blatantly racist rhetoric surrounding Native Americans and attacking her specifically by calling her Pocahontas left her no option but to respond. However, I do believe believe that she did not choose the correct way to respond as her act of getting a DNA test to prove her indigenous descent was disrespectful to the Cherokee Nation and incorrect relating to what affiliates a person to the Cherokee Nation from my understanding of the matter. I believe the more correct way to respond to this would have been to increase her involvement as well as advocacy with/for indigenous peoples. Not only would is this the right thing to do in general it would have cemented her relation to her Native American decent and specifically the Cherokee Nation in a stronger and more existent way than any DNA test every could.
On October 18th, 2018, Donald Trump visited my hometown of Missoula, Montana with the intention of supporting Matt Rosendale for Senate. While he was in my hometown, he once again referenced "Pocahontas' relating to Elizabeth Warren. I believe that had she taken a different approach to this situation that Natives would have rallied behind her in defense rather than be focused on this offense she caused.
For me, as both a mixed race person with hard to follow family history and ambiguous physical traits as well as someone who feels personally about the Trump administration, this is definitely a critical but difficult conversation to have. Blood quantum is something I see hurt Native friends and others I only know through news or scholarly writings, and something that haunted me when trying to find my place in communities at Stanford. So initially, to say that Warren has no right to claim indigenous heritage that she can trace in her family tree because of distance feels like it goes against all of the reassurance I've heard that my blood quantum doesn't matter. But that's not true. Warren, while perhaps intending to combat racism used in the media and the current administration's language, has also attempted to claim a heritage in the public as a white passing person with no effort to actually be involved in her indigenous community. Do I think she would have dropped the subject if political enemies hadn't constantly used ugly stereotypes? Yes. Does that make her video the most nuanced and efficient solution to the problem? No. It's apparent given the feedback from Native scholars and the Cherokee Tribe that hr use of DNA as proof will hurt the community. Genetics are tricky, and it is such language of genetic markers as the only proof of identity that lead to ethnic cleansing and even trans violence, as we're also seeing this week.
ReplyDeleteThis week’s conversation challenged me on my own indigenous identity, especially as a white-passing Native. I thought Elizabeth Warren was very bold to claim Native American heritage as a woman who has never been called to answer for it, but then I realized that sometimes I live that way too. I would love to represent Native culture in the world, but as I thought about it last Tuesday I found that it doesn’t mean anything unless I can bring other Natives with me. All of our experiences are very different, and without any of us, the story is incomplete. I was also very interested in everyone’s opinions on blood test to determine indigeneity, because my family had used blood test to get our citizenship. However, as the conversation went, it became clear that it was different in my case (my mom was adopted, so we had to prove our relationship to her aunt for legal reasons, not to confirm any DNA). I found it fascinating that Elizabeth Warren made the contentious choice that she did, and just how nuanced the conversation around this topic can be. I felt empowered by the knowledge that the Native community is so strong, and that I am a part of it.
ReplyDeleteWhat does it mean to be indigenous? Can it be based on genetic testing, or is it more about being actively involved in a community?
ReplyDeleteFor me being native or indigenous is about the experiences and/or the way someone chooses to live their life. I think that is is wrong that Elizabeth Warren to try to claim being native. The video that she made felt very fake and not genuine. I don’t think a DNA test can prove if someone is native or not simply because blood quantum isn’t the determinate of someone’s indigeneity. Even if she has native ancestry, I don’t think that she is native because of the way she lives her life. Her life and her experience has been that of a white woman and not a Native woman.
How has colonization impacted the disconnect between people and culture?
Colonialism has had a huge impact on Hawaiian culture. When Hawaii was illegally overthrown, laws were put in place to abolish the Hawaiian culture. This had a major impact for the Hawaiian people. They were losing their culture and identity. It was like they were losing who they were as people. Ever since Hawaii was able to revitalize their culture, Hawaii’s culture has flourished. I am happy that I am able to still practice my culture. When I came to Stanford, I thought that I would lose that part of myself but I am thankful for The Native presence on campus.
I can understand why Warren felt that she needed to respond to the allegations against her, but her insistence on the DNA test and what it represents is hurtful to Native interests.
ReplyDeleteThis all started because Elizabeth Warren listed herself as Native American in the Association of American Law Schools directory. I think this was a mistake, since she conflated having a distant Native relative with being Native. However, she may not have anticipated it becoming as public as it did once Harvard tried to use her as an example of their diversity and her senate opponent alleged that she used Native identity to get a leg up in her career.
I haven’t found any sources where Elizabeth Warren tried to announce a claim on Native identity, although she has very publicly and persistently defended her claim on having Native heritage. I think that right now, all she is saying is that she has a distant relative who is Native, which seems to be true. But bringing this up is pretty meaningless and unconstructive. While I don’t think she’s trying to benefit from Native identity, I think that she is trying to defend a mistake made a long time ago that she should just admit was a mistake. I think releasing these DNA test results doesn’t say anything about her actually being Native, but it speaks volumes that she’s more focused on touting the DNA test than on actually speaking out on Native issues from her position of influence.
Also, her emphasis on not being viewed as Native throughout the hiring process has negative implications for those who are minorities and are hired at institutions like Harvard. There seems to be a belief that follows minorities that they would not have been hired/admitted if they weren’t of minority status or that they can’t be on par or better than non-minority candidates, and this is just absolutely false. I think Warren felt it necessary to prove Trump’s accusations wrong, but she inadvertently reinforces harmful beliefs about minorities by belaboring her hiring as a white woman.
(continued)
DeleteIt’s still hard for me to discern what it means for someone to be indigenous, probably because I’m not indigenous. I can only listen to the indigenous people around me and think about it from the perspective of what it means for someone to be Asian, which is different since we don’t have to deal with people trying to regulate whether we’re Asian or not. I could be totally wrong about this, but it seems like there may be a greater proportion of white-passing Natives than white-passing Asians. That makes it easier for white people to claim Native identity, but it also makes it harder for white-passing Native people to be accepted as Native. This is a unique struggle that makes Native identity even more complicated.
Something I remember coming up a lot in House Sem was that a lot of people saw practicing culture and tradition as essential to Native identity. This was interesting to consider because I think Asian American identity is less connected to tradition and more a way of experiencing the world I guess. I was definitely raised by parents with strong Asian values, but as a second-generation American, I wouldn’t say I engage in Korean culture on a regular basis, especially when I’m away from family.
I think my experience has been one of Korean American culture more than Korean culture since a defining part of my experience growing up was the clash of cultures and struggle for acceptance in white spaces, which is one of the reasons my parents were concerned about giving me a Korean first name or having Korean language interfere with my English. So much of my experience growing up as an Asian kid in America was just worrying about how Asian I was perceived as, knowing it’s one of the first things apparent about me. So it was really weird and awesome to come to California and be surrounded by so many Asian people. The subconscious pressure to emulate whiteness was lifted and I was empowered to discover new sides of Asian American culture.
But this has gotten really off-topic so back to Elizabeth Warren. Basically I think she’s undermining Native interests and tribal sovereignty by bringing DNA tests and blood quantum back into the conversation about Native identity, knowing white people have used these measurements in the past to deny Native people their rights and tribal citizenship. To her credit though, she did acknowledge “DNA and family history has nothing to do with tribal affiliation or citizenship, which is determined only—only—by tribal nations.” But the damage has been done and TLDR I defer to Dr. Kim TallBear who articulated the implications of Warren’s actions really well (https://www.facebook.com/photo.php?fbid=10217248387865557&set=a.4902643367733&type=3&theater).
I would like to say that I am surprised that a politician would use culture and ethnic identity as a way to further their own goals. However, this is not the case. The advertisement Mrs. Warren produced is not one fueled by a moral grounding or consideration for the rights of Native American citizens. Rather, the video read like something more akin to a political ad for election, with a plethora of socially respectable professors singing Mrs. Warren's praises, denying that her supposed ancestry had any bearing on her success. And I do acknowledge it is a difficult position to be put in. Republicans as a whole, like Trump, have used Mrs. Warren's supposed heritage as a springboard for hatred and mockery, followed suit by fellow republicans. To her credit, in the video , Mrs. Warren does briefly speak out against these vicious attacks. However, instead of using the situation as a whole as an opportunity for growth and discussion with members of the Native community, she instead focuses on her own history and struggles. In this way, she is failing to include the Native community in a conversation that should by all rights and accounts include them. Based on this, I would not be shocked if we did not see her run for president.
ReplyDelete