Question: Gender-neutral terms for children?
Duo Spiritus asks…
What gender neutral terms are there to speak of one’s child?
I identify as Two-spirit and my mother is really accepting, but she wants to respect my gender and use some sort of neutral term to describe our relationship. Child seems demeaning, offspring sounds detached, and spawn has a negative vibe (according to her) — so what do y’all suggest? We’re open to other languages as long as they’d be recognizable.
Please post your response in the comments below.
» Ask Genderfork «
Posted by Merritt on June 16th, 2012 at 08:00 am
Category: questions 78 comments »
June 16th, 2012 at 9:05 am |
First of all, I think it’s important to ask: Are you Native American? Using the term “two spirit” if you’re not an indigenous person can be a form of cultural appropriation. While finding names that fit our gender expressions is very important, it’s also important that we not falsely borrow someone else’s term, name, or identity.
“Child” is really the only word that comes to mind, for me. For younger people, there’s “little one,” “small person,” etc, but I can’t actually think of gender-neutral terms for the relationship between a non-youth and their parents. :/ Will think more! Maybe other commenters know!
love and struggle
-radical/rebel
[Reply]
June 16th, 2012 at 9:36 am |
Demanding to know if a person is indigenous is fairly racist, don’t you think? Probably more offensive than appropriating the term “Two-Spirited”.
[Reply]
Andronymous replied:
June 16th, 2012 at 10:35 am
No, it really isn’t. Two-spirit is most definitely an aspect of a particular cultural experience, a cultural experience that has historically been plundered endlessly, at that. Cultural appropriation is not something to be taken lightly. It has the power to belittle cultural experience in a very immediate way.
[Reply]
Anonymous replied:
June 16th, 2012 at 7:05 pm
You’re right, just like marriage is an aspect of heteronormative cultural experience and those damn queers calling their unions “marriage” belittles the heterosexual marriage experience in a very immediate way. At least that’s what those against marriage equality would have us believe and your argument is strikingly similar.
Duo’s experience of being “Two-spirit” may or may not match that of Indigenous individuals. Either way it does not interfere with or somehow invalidate anyone else’s experience.
[Reply]
radical/rebel replied:
June 16th, 2012 at 10:20 pm
wow. this is simultaneously SO WRONG, and makes me even more want to take an anti-gay marriage position.
seriously, please check your privilege, read about cultural appropriation, and do some solid learning. this comment is really disappointing.
radical/rebel replied:
June 16th, 2012 at 10:23 pm
http://fuckyeahsexeducation.tumblr.com/post/22546418652/two-spirit-identities-and-cultural-appropriation
this is from an indigenous and two-spirit person:
“being two-spirit isn’t just an idea, it’s an identity. centuries of colonization have made it real difficult for us to practice our cultures, which includes embracing queer identites as indigenous peoples…. non-native folks using it for themselves IS appropriative.”
sheesh.
Anonymous replied:
June 16th, 2012 at 11:21 pm
It’s also kind of the same logic that radical feminists use when they argue that trans women can’t use the identity “woman” to describe themselves because it devalues their personal womanhood.
Andronymous replied:
June 17th, 2012 at 4:11 am
You know what? Fine. Wear a headress while you’re at it, I guess.
radical/rebel replied:
June 16th, 2012 at 11:31 pm
These comparisons–to gay marriage, to trans women–are really just distractingly, blindingly awful and unfair.
You are missing the point of cultural genocide, the erasure of indigenous people, and what cultural appropriation is. It’s really upsetting to me that this community doesn’t have a greater awareness of racism, colonization, etc. I’m just speechless that y’all could say these things, in such an ignorant way.
[Reply]
radical/rebel replied:
June 16th, 2012 at 11:32 pm
katie: I think supporting white supremacy, the erasure of indigenous people, and not respecting indigenous identities/terms is horribly, awfully, terribly racist.
I think asking if someone who uses a word with a connotation of a PARTICULAR CULTURE (i.e., native americans/first peoples) is part of that culture is necessary.
pro tip: reverse discrimination, racism against white people, etc. don’t exist. they’re not real things.
[Reply]
Tree replied:
June 17th, 2012 at 1:34 am
As someone who has lived as a Minority white person, I can assure you- racism against white people can and does exist.
The scale to which it exists is much smaller than the whitewashing of history that has occured.
But I assure you, racism against white people exists. I have been discriminated against on basis of my race. That is racism.
[Reply]
Tree replied:
June 17th, 2012 at 1:41 am
IN fact, by even suggesting that racism can’t exist against white people sets them apart as a race, thus enforcing the “set-apartness” or “inequality” that we’re trying to eliminate.
So saying that racism can’t happen to white people is a form of discrimination, because you’re categorising white people as “incapable of being discriminated against based on race”
dis·crim·i·na·tion/dis?krim??n?SH?n/
Noun:
The unjust or prejudicial treatment of different categories of people or things, esp. on the grounds of race, age, or sex.”
So it is in fact racist to say that white people can’t be victims of racism.
Anonymous replied:
June 17th, 2012 at 4:26 am
To put what Tree said into different words: Saying “X shouldn’t be allowed to do Z but Y can” or “When discrimination occurs to Y it’s real but not when it happens to X” can be considered akin to othering, regardless of the social privileges or lack thereof of the groups involved.
My personal view is that it’s pretty much impossible to fight oppression with an analogous oppressive attitude, no matter how justified an individual may feel about it.
Andronymous replied:
June 17th, 2012 at 4:50 am
Racism, in a sociological understanding, is a top-down thing. It’s not just “discrimination,” it’s *institutional* discrimination. In prejudice and discrimination against all people is possible, but in a white-dominated society, racism (aka *institutional* *systematic* discrimination based on race) cannot apply to white people.
So much privilege up in here.
Tree replied:
June 17th, 2012 at 2:58 pm
Anon, it has nothing to do with that at all. At it’s base form, racism is discrimination based on race.
When you say white-people can’t be discriminated against (such as when as child, I- as a white minority- was told to play on a different playground) you’re setting whites on a different level to everyone else.
You’re REINFORCING the white-supremacy!
Andronymous replied:
June 17th, 2012 at 3:17 pm
Firstly (and I’d like to make it clear that I’m not offended but simply clarifying), it would have to be “Andron” for short. “Andronymous,” not “Anonymous” (I think I’m clever).
Secondly, I never said white people can’t be discriminated against. In fact, what I said was, “prejudice and discrimination against all people is possible,” and your reply makes me wonder if you read my post. At all.
The fact of the matter is (notepad out?), racism ? racial discrimination. Racism = *institutional* (I repeat, *INSTITUTIONAL*) racial discrimination.
So, yes, in societies not dominated by white people, white people can experience racism against them. And yes, white people (all people) can experience discrimination in all societies, no matter who is dominant. But, in a society whose institutions are white, white people cannot experience racism (aka INSTITUTIONAL racial discrimination) directed at them.
Acknowledging that I am surrounded by white power structures reinforces them no more than ignoring that I am surrounded by white power structures.
Again, in summary, white people can experience:
racial discrimination and prejudice in all societies
racism in non-white-dominated societies
and white people cannot experience:
racism in white-dominated societies.
Gib replied:
June 26th, 2012 at 12:09 pm
Folks… what is this? D: So far, I would have named Genderfork as the safest and calmest place on the web to talk about difficult things. I’ve seen different points of view on religion, gender, love and other known controversies come together, consider one another respectfully and blend seamlessly. I was actually excited to read what you all had to say about racism because your thoughts have been so valuable to me, but this… this is acidic and it hurts to see. I realize it’s a hard subject, but it’s just not necessary to be mean or sarcastic to one another in talking about it. Please, please be better than this.
[Reply]
Elle replied:
June 26th, 2012 at 6:57 pm
“and white people cannot experience:
racism in white-dominated societies.”
BULL SHIT
[Reply]
Andronymous replied:
July 19th, 2012 at 9:54 am
Well, when you put it that way, I totally see the validity of your argument. /s
Tell me how it’s possible for white people to feel institutional racial discrimination when the institutions that dole out such discrimination are white.
June 16th, 2012 at 10:59 am |
Last I checked, “two spirited” was an English phrase, so I highly doubt it was used by ANY aboriginal or indigenous tribes before colonization.
As to the actual question at hand…
– progeny
– scion (my fav)
– heir
[Reply]
Anonymous replied:
June 16th, 2012 at 11:30 am
“Last you checked” doesn’t hold weight if you’re not, yourself, entitled to use that language. There are plenty of traditions and words that only began after certain places and groups had been colonized; it’s still wrong to appropriate them.
[Reply]
Anonymous replied:
June 17th, 2012 at 3:14 pm
It’s okay, I just checked it again real quick and the phrase “two spirits” is, in fact, in the English language. “two” is the english word for a number (2), and “spirited” is an English word for “having spirit.” And we are all fluent english speakers here, so we are ….”entitled” …? To use the english language. Whatever that means.
[Reply]
Andronymous replied:
June 17th, 2012 at 3:32 pm
Did you really “check?” A quick Google search would reveal that “Two Spirit” is a twenty year old translation of centuries-old terms. But, like I said, some folks look really good in a headress, right?
shaedofblue replied:
June 18th, 2012 at 11:49 am
Ben and first anon,
Your argument makes about as much sense as saying that it would be totally appropriate for a non indigenous person to call themself “native American,” or “aboriginal,” or “first nations.”
AKA, no sense at all. Being in English show whether a word is culturally specific or not.
[Reply]
shaedofblue replied:
June 18th, 2012 at 11:50 am
* does not show
[Reply]
June 16th, 2012 at 11:32 am |
“Kid,” maybe?
Please don’t appropriate terms from languages that you don’t speak yourself! :)
[Reply]
fluffy replied:
June 16th, 2012 at 7:57 pm
Came here to post “kid” too.
[Reply]
Anonymous replied:
July 18th, 2012 at 11:37 pm
Agreed with “kid” informally, or “heir” if you have to be obnoxiously formal :)
[Reply]
June 16th, 2012 at 11:56 am |
While I see where all of you are coming from, and are probably just trying to respect culture and such..I think its important to try and be a little gentler on eachother on these things. I see a lot of the same commenters being a little too eager to start a debate, and while it is important to be politically correct and whatnot, its good to realize that most of the time people arent meaning any harm. This person probably just feels like that’s the closest way that they can discribe themselves to us. There’s a difference between jumping down someones throat about this stuff and gently letting your view be known. It was a harmless enough question, and this is a place where we are supposed to feel comfortable expressing our thoughts, let’s be abit more understanding.
[Reply]
Anonymous replied:
June 16th, 2012 at 12:21 pm
Something like “While finding names that fit our gender expressions is very important, it’s also important that we not falsely borrow someone else’s term, name, or identity” seems like the most gentle phrasing possible to me. There’s no disrespect in that, and definitely no assumption of harmful intent; it goes out of its way to validate the OP’s struggles.
[Reply]
Andronymous replied:
June 16th, 2012 at 12:46 pm
Whether or not anyone means harm by cultural appropriation is not the issue at hand. And Anon is right, people have been pretty gentle here.
Look at it however gently or firmly you like, we can’t step on other people’s rights as disadvantaged groups no matter how disadvantaged we may be. Example:
I am a leader in my school’s LGBTQIA student org, and we recently had an event where we made nearly every restroom on campus gender neutral to alert people to the problem of gendered restrooms. In preparing for the event, we were approached by several female Muslim students with concerns. The specific concern was that they used the restrooms outside of the campus prayer space to prepare for their five-times-a-day prayers, and that their beliefs dictated that they not share the space of preparation with men. That said, they greatly supported the event overall.
We were left with two disadvantaged groups (Muslims and trans students) with different needs. We made the decision to leave the women’s restroom by the prayer space gendered, because on our path to acceptance, we need to make absolutely sure that we are not standing in someone else’ way.
[Reply]
June 16th, 2012 at 12:53 pm |
We (I’m from a part-Turkish background) use ‘cuk’ (pronounced ‘jook’) in my family. It’s short for çocuk (child) and we use it as an endearing term to allow my mother to adjust to my being trans rather than forcing her to immediately switch to son. Just a thought.
[Reply]
June 16th, 2012 at 2:55 pm |
Scion! it means descendent and I love the sound of it ;-)
[Reply]
June 16th, 2012 at 6:39 pm |
This is probably only applicable if you live in the Southern/Southwestern US/Texas, but I’ve been working on my dad to use “youngun'” or “kid”. A little colloquial, and wouldn’t work for anybody who doesn’t already speak that way, but still…
[Reply]
J.D. replied:
June 16th, 2012 at 7:53 pm
I’m from Appalachia and my old man has taken up trying to use “kid”, “child” and occasionally “progeny” whilst the older guys at the bar have taken to “youngun” so its not just Texas.
[Reply]
June 16th, 2012 at 7:55 pm |
What birth order are you in?
I’m “the youngest” so when introduced- it’s “This is my eldest son, soandso, our middle son, soandso, and our Youngest, Tree”
:)
[Reply]
June 17th, 2012 at 6:42 am |
Cultural appropriation is a very real concern. It’s why I don’t use terms like “hijri”, “kathoey”, or “fa’afafine” to describe myself, because I didn’t grow up in the cultural matrices in which these terms are embedded. In short, as a white European, they are not my words to use when operating in a Western(ized) cultural context. The same holds true for Native American terms such as “two-spirit”.
It’s one thing to say “it sounds like there are parallels between that and my experience”. It’s another thing entirely to perpetuate Western erasure of colonialized cultures by using other people’s words to describe culturally-specific phenomena and identities.
As for “reverse racism”? Doesn’t exist. There is lots of *prejudice* against white people, just like any other cultural group. I’ve experienced it. It’s just that non-white people don’t have the backing power of the dominant society to make that prejudice systematic in a way that has consequence beyond just the individual experience of a particular act of bigotry.
[Reply]
pixypi replied:
June 17th, 2012 at 7:20 am
Thank you for use prejudice instead of reverse racism. I am so uncomfortable with the term. Prejudice I think is vastly better
re the question, I call my kids collectively and individually The Horde. We like zombies and monsters, and I’m pretty sure they eat my brain via osmosis or something through the day.
[Reply]
June 17th, 2012 at 8:21 am |
I’d like to thank everyone who gave helpful, valid, responses to my question (I’m liking “progeny” and “scion” because I love words that are a little off the beaten path).
I’m also vaguely ashamed and disturbed by the rudeness I saw on both sides of the argument about MY racial background and identity as it relates to MY gender identity and my right to identify as such, as a community that faces much prejudice and discrimination shouldn’t we know better than to throw hatred and judgment at each other?
And radical/rebel, asking someone to justify their race is like asking someone to justify their gender. I am of mixed HUMAN heritage (and yes, that includes a tribe of native people that has a gender that could be translated into two-spirit or something similar) and asking me to explain or justify my race is not just hurtful but rather judgmental but from what I’ve seen you comment with on other things I know that you are simply a person with a lot of strong opinions and a lot of passion about their opinions. Thank you for your passion.
[Reply]
radical/rebel replied:
June 17th, 2012 at 9:27 am
duo spiritus–
I’m sorry that I implied you might not be of native heritage. Obviously, talking about race is fairly explosive, as this comment thread shows. But I stand by what I said. If it had been otherwise, and you had been a person with no native heritage and identified as Two Spirit, I would have wanted to engage in a dialogue with you about what that identity means and what taking it on as a (solely) white person means. Not necessarily to correct you or attack you, but to get us all thinking about these things.
and, I’m glad that the comment didn’t make you dislike me entirely. Attacking people and starting hostile comment-wars isn’t what I want out of Genderfork, and I /do/ make a real effort to keep my comments at some level of civilness.
radical/rebel
[Reply]
Duo Spiritus replied:
June 24th, 2012 at 11:33 pm
I tend to err on the side of ”innocent until proven guilty” when addressing issues of identity even in cases of culture-specific identities, as long as the person using that word/collection of words seems to know and respect the history of the word/collection of words and the the culture from which it comes. I believe that in our age of mixed races and human-Hodge-podge-ery the ONLY way that a culture can survive is by spreading itself throughout other cultures, if we strive for cultural (read often as: racial) purity than all minority cultures on earth will die out leaving one or two cultures to represent all of humanity.
I do hope that made as much sense to you as it did to me, cold medicine does awful things to the mind…
Yours in Queerness,
Duo Spiritus
[Reply]
Anonymous replied:
July 18th, 2012 at 11:59 pm
This.
I let people go on these issues, but my apathy is not out of disrespect for others’ cultures. I feel apathetic-until-it-needs-to-be-pointed-out (or better worded, innocent until proven guilty) because I trust that people do research on terms before choosing them. People don’t pull phrases like “two-spirit” out of thin air; they have some awareness of the roots. If I really think the term is being abused, I’ll point it out. Otherwise, what’s the difference between that and an otaku/weeaboo? It may be an appropriation of a culture by outsiders, but those kinds of people are a separate branch that doesn’t change the original. (Yes, I know there are many more Asians than Native Americans, but bear with me.) Without weeaboos, would your parents or grandparents know what anime is? Without Westerners claiming the term “two spirit” for themselves, I would be entirely clueless on the term “two spirit” and its cultural value. It doesn’t justify cultural misappropriations, but it does have a silver lining. Fighting with people about it (especially unjustly) doesn’t change anything for the better.
June 17th, 2012 at 9:29 pm |
wow.
[Reply]
June 17th, 2012 at 10:37 pm |
I will apologise for whatever offence I am practically guaranteed to cause by posing this question, and apologise especially to Duo, who has obviously had to deal with the major derailment of the conversation away from what was actually asked to what must be something very depressing to see.
My question is this: How is policing anyone’s identity on the basis of their genes in any way different to denying the identity of any trans* person on the basis of their body?
Personally I don’t see a whole lot of difference between asking someone to prove their genetic heritage in order to prove their identity valid and asking someone to prove what’s in their pants/chromosomes/genes for the same reason.
I praise Duo’s respectful and understanding response. Had I been in the same situation I’d probably have responded with “None of your business.”
[Reply]
radical/rebel replied:
June 17th, 2012 at 11:19 pm
I’m not offended by ignorance, just frustrated. Read something about cultural appropriation. Think about race and racism. I’m not going to spend a minute more explaining why trying to counter the erasure of indigenous people is not the same as policing people’s gender expressions. The burden of education is on you, and if you’re failing to learn about cultural appropriation and the origins of the term “Two Spirit,” and how indigenous and Two Spirit people feel about non-white people using the term, that’s your fault. Your confusion is your fault. Read something.
in the hopes we can all do better.
[Reply]
radical/rebel replied:
June 17th, 2012 at 11:21 pm
that should be, “how indigenous and Two Spirit-identified people feel about WHITE people using the term ‘Two Spirit’ “. my concern is with white people appropriating the term two spirit (which Duo is not, but I asked about because I think it’s important). check.
[Reply]
Another Anonymous replied:
June 18th, 2012 at 3:00 pm
What I want to know is why you assume that if the OP weren’t of Native American heritage, this automatically means they must be white? You don’t have a problem with black people appropriating the term ‘Two Spirit’? Or Hispanics? Or anybody else?
I’m honestly not familiar enough with the term to weigh in on this debate, but for someone so concerned about cultural sensitivity, you’re being rather presumptuous.
Re: the OP’s original question, I’d probably go with ‘kid’.
Anonymous replied:
June 18th, 2012 at 12:24 am
Yeah, I’ve read “Derailing for Dummies” too, radical. However, in the context of a constructive dialogue of any kind, the burden of proof/education/argument is always on the person espousing the viewpoint or counterpoint. That’s kind of the essence of debate of any kind. I don’t know how you expect anyone’s ignorance to change if your approach to the matter is to simply sit back and do nothing but decry others for not understanding or sharing your viewpoint, before telling them that if they don’t understand why they’re wrong it’s their fault. By all means, if you have something real to offer that explains the difference, backed up with a well-reasoned argument, feel free to present it. If not, you are offering nothing but a lot of finger-pointing and a petulant “holier-than-thou” attitude.
I did my best to research cultural appropriation and found little to resolve my question. I am sorry I am unable to “educate” myself to your standard but if you’d like to point me in the right direction I’d be happy to read any background information you have to offer. However I might ask that you avoid two-paragraph, truistic tumblr posts if at all possible.
Furthermore I’d also ask that you remember that the mere fact that someone is offended by someone else’s practices is not a valid enough reason to say that they should change. It has to be shown that said practice produces real, tangible damage to someone else, and also that not only will that damage cease upon cessation of the activity, but that no additional, tangible damage will be inflicted upon the infringing party by their act of stopping it. If these conditions cannot be met, you’ve got yourself a moral quagmire and serious discussion needs to take place to determine the best course of action.
The way I see it, this is actually a very thorny issue and I don’t believe you’re treating it with the consideration it deserves.
[Reply]
radical/rebel replied:
June 18th, 2012 at 8:46 am
wow. this is a really funny response. thanks for calling me “holier than thou”. I don’t get that one enough! good luck with learning more about the world!!
Anonymous replied:
June 18th, 2012 at 11:22 pm
I’m happy you find serious discussion humorous, radical. I’ve learned plenty about the futility of dialogue with judgemental, self-righteous indignant douchebags who think themselves above entering in discussion about their infallible views from this conversation alone. So thanks for that at least. Good luck in your quest to change the world for the better through shame and ardent bigotry.
Tree replied:
June 18th, 2012 at 2:15 pm
Well, I think Radical/Rebel just proved your point, anon.
Remember, humans. We’re all humans. As humans intermix and mingle, all cultures will have overlapping. One day the earth culture will be completely different to the one that exists today.
It’s just how humans evolve.
[Reply]
Andronymous replied:
June 18th, 2012 at 3:41 pm
Yeah, one day it won’t matter, so cultural genocide doesn’t matter right now. That’s how that works.
June 18th, 2012 at 12:19 am |
I often use “kidlet”.
[Reply]
Anonymous replied:
July 19th, 2012 at 12:01 am
So does my mom, and I’m cis! It’s such a cute term for anyone. “Kid” or “child” if you need to be a little more formal.
[Reply]
June 19th, 2012 at 1:06 pm |
radical/rebel, I do agree with you that it’s offensive to call yourself two-spirited when you have no Native American heritage. However, calling a strangers heritage into question is equally offensive. I understand you wanted to inform people, but their are plenty of appropriate times to do so that don’t involve being rudely personal.
Pro tip: Don’t be judgmental of someone unless you have evidence that person is being offensive.
[Reply]
June 19th, 2012 at 6:32 pm |
Depending on your relationship, what about Kiddo? My brother’s called me that since I was little and I still love it. :)
Also a suggestion for something any possible siblings can call you.
[Reply]
June 19th, 2012 at 8:34 pm |
My dad calls me his kid. He feels comfortable with it. My mom feels this is too unconventional and stumbles around it a lot. She has taken to not introducing me “as” her anything, but just by my name.
On the issue of cultural appropriation: We’re all learning. None of us are done learning, are we? None of us are fit to be the anti-oppression police quite yet. Let’s be gentle with the younger, the uninitiated, the questioning. They are persons like ourselves. They are usually open to learning– especially if approached with skill, compassion, and valid information. We all learn better when others work with us and let us begin where we are.
It is not enough to chuck words like “check your privilege!” at others. That in itself is not communication; it is mere exclamation. It may not even mean anything to the person hearing/seeing it.
For those who may still be confused: Two-spirit refers exclusively to those of Native American heritage. It was coined in the 90s as an English language word describing the various, and variously named cultural traditions of recognition for those outside of the man/woman binary (forgive my poor English approximation please) in Native American tribes and nations.
The concept of cultural appropriation views words and identities as cultural possessions, which can be taken–appropriated– by another culture which has more power. This can be viewed in the context of genocide– which is the destruction of a people and their culture. When you see it that way, taking an identity and using it outside of the culture it came from, takes power from that culture. Identities and words are seen as possessions. It is important to see that cultural appropriation only applies when the culture doing the taking is more powerful or privileged. Privileged cultures– like white American culture– can spread its cultural possessions all over the place and not lose power. It’s kind of like the difference between taking a poor kid’s lunch money because you’re too lazy to go home and get your own money, and going to a banquet hosted by a rich person who wants to look good by giving.
Sorry if my analogies are not so great, but I hope they communicate some understanding. :D
Also, another note to those who assume others are automatically white: This is oppressive. It is oppressive when a person is expressing an identity, and it is oppressive when a person is simply saying something you do not like. Non-white people do not become white simply because you disagree with them or they say something uncomfortable. Accusations of privilegedness or whiteness should never stand in for actual critique of what someone is saying. If they do, we risk doing what we claim we are NOT doing: We are saying that privilege is something to be ashamed of, to deny, and to hide. We are accusing others of privilege in a weaponized way. That is not critique.
[Reply]
Anonymous replied:
June 20th, 2012 at 2:30 am
Sir/Madam/Fantastic-Honorific-of-your-Choice, thank you kindly. You’ve cleared a few things up for me. There’s still uncertainty, but at least I now have a proper starting point and can actually sympathise with your message.
I think everyone should take heed of this beautiful example: this is how discussion ought to be done. Bravo.
[Reply]
Inquisitive replied:
July 19th, 2012 at 1:41 am
My family has Indigenous American blood and that culture was quite important in my upbringing, despite not having any Tribal connections (as there are none where we live). I disclose this to place my observations and questions in context, not to place them above anyone else’s.
However, I’m trying to understand why others view this kind of cultural appropriation as damaging to the culture. It’s pretty obvious why white people wearing “Indian” costumes is offensive. It’s a stereotype that is full of misconceptions, founded on racism, and does a great deal to further spread ignorance and keeps people from understanding actual Native culture. Factory made imitations of sacred items are insulting to anyone who understands what the actual items mean. Those ignorant images and items do erase the culture as they replace understanding and knowledge of the actual culture with misunderstanding and fallacy.
But how does the respectful and informed use of a term actually damage the culture? How is something that does not belong to the appropriator being taken? What are the original users of the term losing? How does white American culture not diminish by spreading? How do others diminish by the same process? Isn’t it the spreading, amalgamating, and assimilating nature of American culture one of the things that makes it so strong? Wouldn’t any culture be strengthened by the informed and respectful spread of its components? Doesn’t the restriction and resentment further minoritize and isolate the culture? I understand the defensiveness, given the history of the two cultures, but does the emotional reaction to this help or hinder? It seems to me that “cultural genocide” should only refer to the intentional homicidal eradication of a culture and that it is being thrown around rather lightly.
We have people who want to understand and be respectful. I think any person wishing to be respectful would refrain from using a term if they are informed that it is offending the people group they wish to respect, but being offended doesn’t mean that you are right. Some are offended by certain types of art. Are artists wrong for using images that offend? Not necessarily. Sometimes people only hurt themselves and others by being offended. Frequently these issues are compounded by people being offended on behalf of other groups of people, which while it may make those people feel better about themselves or less guilty about their culture’s previous misdeeds, it generally only escalates the tension, engendered more harsh feelings, and reinforces resentment.
There are so many unatoned for and ongoing injustices to Native people that truly deserve offense and attention. You have the right to have your feelings, but I gently suggest that to squabble over a respectfully used 20 year old term in light of all that is seriously wrong with or cultural relations is fairly petty.
The people who wish to use the term may come from another culture, but I would expect a measure of sympathy as they come from a culture with no conception or acceptance of non-binary genders. They are ostracized from their own culture and shut out and called racists when they reach out to another with which they hope to identify in some small way. That’s pretty messed up. I understand the resentment towards white culture, but do not be so hasty to marginalize individuals for the collective sins of their forefathers.
Here is a similar situation, though one that does not bring as much tension in the States, but the issue is quite related. I also have Scottish heritage and with that a deep respect and affinity for those bloodlines and Tartans. The Scots have been oppressed for much of our history and the kilt was a garment that was banned by the English. Violators were killed. Even today, wearing one can bring a fair amount of ridicule and scorn. It is a sensitive article of intense racial pride. Should non-Scots be excluded from wearing a kilt? I don’t think so. It shows support for our culture. Does it erase the culture? No, it spreads it, it increases awareness of it. If you’re wearing a family Tartan, it would be respectful to have consent from that family, but new Tartans can be created and non-family specific Tartans exist.
On a separate issue, this idea that racism is only institutional ignores numerous definitions of the word:
rac·ism
1. a belief or doctrine that inherent differences among the various human races determine cultural or individual achievement, usually involving the idea that one’s own race is superior and has the right to rule others.
2. a policy, system of government, etc., based upon or fostering such a doctrine; discrimination.
3. hatred or intolerance of another race or other races.
Only the second definition refers to institutions. The concept of reverse racism refers to racial hatred engendered by other racial hatred. Hatred breeds more hatred. Reactionary hatred isn’t justified, it merely reinforces the original hatred. Just because anti-white hatred isn’t as widespread or entrenched in this country doesn’t make it not real. Some people in this country hate white people and are therefore racist towards them (not without a long list of pretty obvious reasons). To deny that is simply to redefine words to suit one’s own argument and marginalize other people. It isn’t racist to do that (not necessarily racially hateful or intolerant), but it is discriminatory and wrong.
How do we confuse a respectful (if not potentially misguided) desire to connect with a culture with hate and intolerance? Even wearing a headdress isn’t automatically racist. You can be ignorant and insensitive without being hateful and intolerant. The race card really stops being an effective alarm for evil when it is bandied about so quickly.
[Reply]
dylan replied:
July 19th, 2012 at 8:08 am
Hi Inquisitive! I enjoyed reading your comment and admire the way you approach the issue even though I disagree about a few things.
I also feel that emotions can run high at times when such emotional responses are out of proportion and unhelpful. However, I’m glad and excited that we can have these discussions, even when they are about little things. I hope these little things can serve to raise consciousness about the larger issues they are connected to. You are absolutely right that cultural appropriation of an identity label by tiny numbers of non-Native genderqueer/nonbinary identified people is not comparable to killing anyone. Sometimes people say “these things are the same” when they mean “these things are related.” I think it is an effort to show solidarity, but it comes partly from emotional pain. We all carry lots of that stuff, so it’s no surprise!
Anyway, I did want to respond to you a bit because you responded to something I said (Thank you). You mentioned Scots and kilts. I would throw out lots more examples of cultural sharing: Buddhists openly encouraging new forms of Buddhism around the world, Indian mystic traditions opening their doors to non-Indians in America, workers collectives in South America selling traditional wares to American consumers. What do all of these have in common? The people belonging to that culture or religion chose to share their culture. I applaud that! I do think it can make them stronger! The fact that they have chosen to do it at all shows that they believe it will make them stronger in their particular situation.
Native Americans have not chosen to share two-spirit. I have done some internet research on this, and have only found instances of Native thinkers exploring two-spirit as a Native identity, and expressing displeasure and critique when it is appropriated by White people.
There are folks (like yourself) with less cultural immersion who feel differently,and there may indeed be people who grew up culturally Native and feel differently. But as a white person, I look to the examples provided by activists, community leaders and thinkers– People who have developed blogs and websites to speak their views and are prepared to defend and discuss them with many people. It doesn’t make your view less valid; but as an outsider I try to listen to those voices most.
They have all– without exception in my knowledge– expressed that Two-spirit is a Native identity, to be explored and understood within the context of Native histories and cultures. I do not know why Native Americans chose to keep two-spirit as a Native identity while the Indian Siddha lineage has chosen to set up ashrams around the world. Maybe it would be better if Native Americans shared the two-spirit identity, as you say. But Maybe it wouldn’t– They know their own legacy of colonialism from the inside. Who am I to make that call for them, against their will, and call it sharing? I like to share with those who like to share with me.
If my local native community– Penobscot — opened ceremonies to the public and said, please come and join native american spiritual practice, please come and join our two-spirit discussion group, I would consider, and I would do so with deep humility and gratefulness.
[Reply]
June 19th, 2012 at 10:55 pm |
Wow. I wish I was genderqueer enough to be offended by everything.
[Reply]
Anonymous replied:
June 20th, 2012 at 3:58 am
I’m offended by this statement. ;)
[Reply]
Anonymous replied:
July 19th, 2012 at 12:04 am
I wish I was genderqueer and non-white enough.
[Reply]
June 25th, 2012 at 12:28 am |
Not to disturb the holier-than-thou contest, but does anyone actually care about the perspective of a Lakota born reservation raised “Two Spirit” gay man? I can ask my friend what he thinks about this discussion, but I think I know what he’ll say, and I don’t want to bother him with this silly argument if no one else cares. Not that one opinion can represent an entire culture, but I bet it’s more accurate than our guesses about what-offends-whom.
[Reply]
Duo Spirutus replied:
July 19th, 2012 at 11:10 am
I would love to hear your friends opinion, if they are willing to share it
[Reply]
June 25th, 2012 at 12:56 am |
Here’s what I don’t understand in the above argument:
While it’s true that two-spirited is term from the history and cultue of aboriginal peoples, isn’t it possible to learn about and participate in a culture other than the one you were born in, if you are genuinely interested and respectful? I mean, if I moved to a part of the world across the globe from me, and discovered a group of people with traditions and culture that just absolutely fascinated me, perhaps spoke to me in a way that no other culture had before, could I not participate in those traditions without that being disrespectful? Obviously it’s not like I could change my skin colour, or my families heritage, etc, but I feel that no one should be defined by either of those things if they don’t want to be; we are all different shades of unique.
I guess all I’m trying to say is that if someone who is not born aboriginal is so enchanted by aboriginal culture that they want to learn about it, participate in it, celebrate it, is that really a bad thing? To me that seems like a beautiful thing, or at least vastly better than the opposite, wherein people have no interest in any culture but the one they were born into. ‘Cause that’s called ignorance, my friends! And it breeds a lot of hate.
Curious to know what others think of this? Do I have a point or am I just talking out my ass?
[Reply]
Elle replied:
June 25th, 2012 at 8:33 am
I think you put my feelings into words better than I could have done. Feeling a connection with a particular culture is not the same thing as plundering their cultural heritage. Calling yourself a Two Spirit because you like the concept and the appreciate what it means is a good thing. Calling your sports team the Redskins is a bad thing.
[Reply]
Andronymous replied:
June 26th, 2012 at 5:52 am
I definitely understand your comment, but it really isn’t that simple. It’s about cultural perspective and understanding. Someone can really, really, REALLY dig the *idea* of “Two Spirit” from the Wikipedia article, but unless that person has an actual understanding of the full cultural picture of what Two Spirit means and moreover what gender means in those particular cultures, it’s really not that that person’s place.
I guess, to put it more concisely, the answer to the question “could I not participate in those traditions without that being disrespectful?” would have to be “only if you actually understand those traditions *fully* due to established, firsthand experience with the larger culture those traditions came from.”
[Reply]
Elle replied:
June 26th, 2012 at 7:27 pm
For the most part I agree with what you’re saying here.
This whole thread has been very frustrating for me. I don’t feel that I’ve been able to properly explain my feelings on cultural appropriation vrs cultural assimilation, and some of the exclusionary opinions expressed here have me very upset.
I don’t like it when people say that X can’t do something because of how and where they were born. I feel that a person can, no matter which culture they’ve been born into, join and experience a culture that they feel is appropriate for who they really are. Just as I feel a person can express and belong to the gender they choose rather than one assigned at birth.
I agree that it takes a lot more than just reading the Wikipedia article on Two-Spirit and deciding you like how it sounds before legitimately taking that label for your own. But to suggest that only a person of a certain type can ever use it is stupid.
Every culture that comes into contact with another borrows or assimilates some of the distinctiveness of that culture. Look at how many place names in the United States come from American Indian language. Look at how the introduction of horses changed many of the indigenous cultures of North America. Look at any culture living or historical and study how they changed as they encountered other groups.
We are all humans. Human culture, all of it, good and bad, is our birthright and our legacy. If separate groups are not allowed to blend, if individuals are forced to remain in groups that don’t suit them, if we keep fighting over who is the most oppressed, we’re going to keep fighting until we’re all dead.
[Reply]
Curious George replied:
June 28th, 2012 at 8:50 am
Thank you for expressing my idea better than I could! Very well put. :)
Anonymous replied:
June 29th, 2012 at 5:36 pm
This times a thousand.
June 26th, 2012 at 9:26 pm |
My apologies to the OP for not answering the posted question but instead responding to some comments.
For folks who are wanting to read more about the issue of cultural appropriation in general or more specifically of the word two-spirit, I suggest this article by Michelle Cameron: pi.library.yorku.ca/ojs/index.php/cws/article/view/6129
If you have access to a library that subscribes to JSTOR, you might try exploring American Indian Quarterly or American Indian Law Review on the subject of appropriation. Kathryn W. Shanley’s “The Indians America Loves to Love and Read: American Indian Identity and Cultural Appropriation” might be of interest or Andrea Smith’s “Spiritual Appropriation as Sexual Violence.” Hope this is helpful for those who have stated they were having a hard time researching the subject on their own. I apologize that I couldn’t find more open source PDFs on the topic, but I believe many public libraries subscribe to JSTOR if you (can) have a library card.
[Reply]
July 3rd, 2012 at 2:27 pm |
“dear white people:
we don’t deny you access to aspects of our culture because we hate you, we hate you because you feel entitled to something that doesn’t belong to you. ”
I just read this on mmmajestic.com, so I didn’t write it. but it’s relevant!
[Reply]
Andronymous replied:
July 3rd, 2012 at 8:22 pm
“OMG YOU LIKE USED THE WORD HATE AND STUFF YOU’RE SO HATEFUL THAT’S RACISM IT’S SO HARD BEING WHITE.”
Just saving some folks the time.
[Reply]
Elle replied:
July 3rd, 2012 at 9:09 pm
Thanks for the reaction. Very helpfull in defusing animosity. :P
[Reply]
July 5th, 2012 at 5:40 pm |
I honestly can’t believe so many of these comment are based around bashing Duo Spiritus’ choice to identify as something originally indigenous. Honestly, I have a lot of trouble figuring out what label to apply to myself, and if I finally found one that suited me (I think I like “Awesome”), I wouldn’t want to get bashed for it either.
My mom always called me brat. I’m 27 and she still does.
[Reply]
July 11th, 2012 at 6:54 pm |
You spoke about you and your mother and what term you could relate to her with:
How about a “Friend?”
[Reply]
November 8th, 2012 at 8:10 pm |
My mom has called me alot of things besides her “child” or whatever. She’s called me her “pumpkin,” her “baby,” her “little bambino” (or “bambina,” if you prefer. :D But those are Italian and not exactly gender-neutral.), her “darling” and her “munchkin” (‘cos I’m short =_=).
If I were you I would just use gender-neutral baby/pet names when referring to one another (e.g. “That’s Jackie, my bambino.”).
But I have to warn you; my mother calling me her “little munchkin” in public would embarrass the hell out of me. xD
(p.s.- JESUS CHRIST WHERE DID ALL THIS HATE SPAWN FROM?!! IT JUST POPPED OUT OF NOWHERE WHAT THE HELL! DX>)
[Reply]