By all means, Rattle, mention names. It's okay. I think most people here realized who you were talking about. Guess two threads where we agreed on something was more than you could bear. Just had to start something. That's fine; let's dance.
I don't mind you quoting me, as long as you actually quote and don't ad lib.
I've openly stated the reason that I'm not enrolled; it's no secret. But, in case you missed it . . . My Cherokee ancestors left the Nation and became assimilated. I have family on the 1924 Baker Roll, but not direct descent. Aunts, uncles, and cousins don't count. As I've said many times, I must live by the decision my ancestors made.
Most people's opinions are based on their own personal experiences. How could my opinions be based on someone else's life experiences? Book knowledge? Think whatever you want, Rattle.
I have never said you're not Indian unless you've experienced discrimination. Do not put words in my mouth. I think you're referring to another discussion we had here about whether people of very distant ancestry should be allowed to be enrolled or even call themselves Indian. I said something to the effect that someone who is 1/64 and didn't grow up in their culture would not know what it is to be Indian. If they could pass for white, they would never have experienced discrimination; they probably wouldn't have to worry about diabetes, or even have chizzy elbows. I didn't say they weren't Indian unless they'd been discriminated against. Don't twist my words.
Rattle, when have you ever tried to "avoid a conflict" with me or anyone else? You live for the drama.
Edit to add: When I hear someone go on and on about feeling Indian in their heart/soul, wanting to honor their Indian ancestors, wanting to reconnect, I shake my head. This is the battle cry of every PODIA and wannabe out there. Seven of my great-grandparents were European, but I'm only going to honor my one Native American grandparent. How disrespectful is that? You're the sum-total of all your ancestors; you can't pick and choose.
If your closest relative with ties to their Nation died long before you were born, you're a descendant. You are not Indian. To call yourself Indian and think you're entitled to anything is disrespectful. You cannot demand anything; you're not entitled. Heritage groups are fine, as long as they're done in a respectful way. Associate-membership, as some have advocated, is ludicrous. You are not Indian; you are not entitled to even partial-citizenship.
By all means, Rattle, mention names. It's okay. I think most people here realized who you were talking about. Guess two threads where we agreed on something was more than you could bear. Just had to start something. That's fine; let's dance.
I didn't start anything. I simply mentioned an issue that I see many people on here do, and cited an example of it without mention of names. In doing so I placed no insults whatsoever in the posting, but rather cited what I felt was people trying to transfer their life experiences on another person based on their lives and not the lives or experiences of the other person.
You claim I was wrong in my assessment of what I read, and perhaps I was; however many people do that on here. I see a lot of people claiming since their life experience of that of another situation equated to one thing, then is must equate to another person who may have come from a family in similar circumstances.
If you want to get all emotional or angry about that, then that it is on you. I simply stated something for discussion since this thread seemed to cover a lot of different but connected issues.
I've openly stated the reason that I'm not enrolled; it's no secret. But, in case you missed it . . . My Cherokee ancestors left the Nation and became assimilated. I have family on the 1924 Baker Roll, but not direct descent. Aunts, uncles, and cousins don't count. As I've said many times, I must live by the decision my ancestors made.
I am familiar with this detail of your family, and did read you say it a couple times now. Of course I am not sure exactly why you are telling me this now???
Of course I am not sure if you think you are NDN or not because of this, but it really doesn't matter to me. I however think if you feel you are not because if it, this is not some entitlement for you to say that other people are not NDN with a similar back ground and story as yourself.
Case in point, I have read Moma Porcupine point out on several occasions how people may hold their ancestry very dear to them even if they are not enrolled and their ancestry being rather distant. The effects of colonization and assimilation are strong, but should not be used as a tool against victims of it in order to dictate to them whom they should be identifying with.
This is not to say I am in support of PODIA's running around claiming they are NDN, and at the same time thinking they are entitled to anything.
What I am saying however is that I see some on here take such a rigid approach to things in regards to topics like that, to the point it makes me wonder if their only interaction with NDN's is on line in discussion boards such as this.
I know plenty of full blooded enrolled people, including elders that will accept those who are not enrolled or even so called PODIA's on their word of who they say they are, and watch many in the community see them as NDN all the time.
I know some on here don't like such things mentioned, and not because of what I say in this regards is untrue, but rather because they don't want to educate some that such things do happen. They feel it might give them ideas on how to sneak into a community. Well that may be true, but honestly bad people with bad intentions are going to do bad things no matter what. So if this board is one about educating people, then I would say those doing the education should hit every angle. Being completely rigid about things is foolishness.
I know plenty of NDN's who are full blooded and converts to Christianity. One that I know in person is soo strongly catholic that they believe the ways of their people are evil and the work of the devil. They have little to do with other NDN's, and none of their culture obviously. So maybe they are NDN by blood totally, but should I view them as more NDN then some 1/8th person who has a great deal of pride in their ancestry and for reasons known only to them is trying to learn the ways of the people they claim to be from? Especially since the idea of a lot of people on this board seems to point to the concept of being NDN means being the closest thing possible to before Columbus got here.
Most people's opinions are based on their own personal experiences. How could my opinions be based on someone else's life experiences?
Exactly, the issue with this I was getting at was for a lack of better words was maybe transference. Except in this case I am under the impression that many try and make judgments on people based on their life experience, and try to dictate that upon somebody else.
For instance. I know a Navajo elder who is full blooded, and has a grandson whom is only 1/4 Navajo. I asked her once about the concept of BQ and what she felt her grandson should identify as. She said that choice was his to make, and whatever he identified and considered himself to be she would accept. If he claimed to be Navajo then she would be fine with it. It seems on here that some would say that it would be wrong for him to claim to be Navajo, and that he must acknowledge all of who he was or he would be dishonoring his other ancestry. I think not acknowledging his other ancestry would be foolish since looking at him you would obviously know he was mixed. However being mixed does not have to be his identity, or who he is, or how he identifies himself.
In thinking of what the Navajo woman told me, and things I have been told by other people; I think about your story about your seven other grandparents that were European. You seem to think that you must also identify with them or you would be disrespecting them, and I am guessing you also mean that by saying you are NDN is doing the same disrespect???
Sorry but I don't see things that way. Sure it would be wrong to try and not acknowledge them and foolish since being mixed would obviously show in your appearance. However that does not mean you or anyone else must take on this or that identity because of being mixed. Especially in regards to topic like this which is about community and culture; the ties to it. Identity based on skin color or BQ is a European concept, like it or not. Sure it comes into play in protecting tribes from predators etc, but still the the fact remains that the concept is undeniably European.
I don't know if you consider yourself NDN or not, and it is not for me to judge. However if I knew you associated with other NDN's and were seen as NDN by an NDN community, even if it were not even Cherokee; I would consider you NDN regardless of your BQ or status. That is how I was taught to be by elders I was blessed to have in my life.
What I see you saying often times is things that are very much the opposite,and that is what makes me wonder how much interaction you have with people off of the net.
Book knowledge? Think whatever you want, Rattle.
Well when I see you say things on here that I take as more book then real life experience, what do you expect me to think??
You seem to think that everyone on here owes you details about their lives at times, but you never really say much about yourself other then your ancestry and why you are not enrolled.
This is while I have been attacked by you on several occasions with you trying to say how I am not NDN, and yet I have pointed out on just as many occasions that my family still resides in Choctaw country in Oklahoma and is seen as such. That I live in central California, and am recognized as NDN by people here, and that I do contribute to the NDN community here; my contributions both by things I have helped do as well as money out of my own pocket I have contributed are known as well.
As far as more of my thoughts about you only citing book things. I gave my arguments on pitfalls I see on words such as descendant, and in some regards even PODIA; including the pitfall of using them to say what a person is or is not. Though I might agree with a number of your opinions in regards to these terms, I often times see you being very rigid on the topic, and wonder how you can be so harsh when dealing with other people. It seems to me that you are so locked on the idea of hunting down exploiters etc at times that you might forget you are dealing with other human beings, many of which mean no harm.
It's funny, maybe right now you consider yourself a descendant because you are not enrolled; yet I wonder if you would call yourself a Cherokee if you were enrolled? Does that piece of paper in your hand dictate who you are or who you have the right in your family to acknowledge and that acknowledgment of who they are having something to do with who you are??? I personally think not.
I personally don't consider you a PODIA or a descendant, and I could care less if you or your family was assimilated or not. I see you as a Cherokee whom comes from an assimilated family, if you want to learn cultural things to wipe away that assimilation then that is up to you. Of course if you do not see yourself as I see you, then that is your choice and my beliefs on the matter are of no consequence. I don't go by looks, books or paper.
Another thing that makes me think of you and books is a constant argument you give me over BQ since I came here. What I always found odd about your arguments was that it was contradicting what I was taught by well known elders in my area.
You see I was taught by an elder that when somebody is in a ceremony they are recognized by their NDN ancestors regardless of their BQ. This is the same thing if and when they cross over.
Your argument was that they would be met by all of their ancestors regardless of race. Indeed you are right about this, but this debate between you and I was over identity and BQ. So in the context of that debate in which you were trying to pass judgment on others based on BQ, enrollment etc etc; I brought up the case of divinity, and you turned it right back into one about BQ.
So yea, made me wonder about you, and still does....
I have never said you're not Indian unless you've experienced discrimination. Do not put words in my mouth. I think you're referring to another discussion we had here about whether people of very distant ancestry should be allowed to be enrolled or even call themselves Indian.
Perhaps maybe, I dunno.
I said something to the effect that someone who is 1/64 and didn't grow up in their culture would not know what it is to be Indian.
Yea true, but maybe I am wrong about you; just that you come across to me as somebody who bases NDN or not on a rigid set of rules and one of those is enrollment. Oddly enough if this is the case, then are all those people with super duper low BQ getting enrolled in the CNO NDN or not? I see most as just "paper NDN's" myself. Things like that is why I base who is NDN or not more on what the community and the more traditional people say regardless of what a tribal government has to say. Especially in the case of my may dis enrolled friends out here whom are victims of casino money greed.
If they could pass for white, they would never have experienced discrimination; they probably wouldn't have to worry about diabetes, or even have chizzy elbows. I didn't say they weren't Indian unless they'd been discriminated against. Don't twist my words.
Maybe in most cases you would probably be correct, but not always. I have seen people who were only 1/4, 1/8 look enough NDN to get treated like crap by whites, and then treated like crap by NDN's for being too white.
Of course some of them who look too NDN to be considered white of low BQ just might decide to look into connecting to the people who's blood in their veins is the reason for being treated bad by whites and stumble to a place like here and get chaffed and criticized for even considering they were NDN due to lack of enough cultural awareness to consider themselves as such.
I guess we can just chalk that off to be a poor PODIA...sucks to be them no matter what they do.
Also, I used to know a NDN girl in Arizona who was only like 1/8 white and the rest was Navajo. Ironically she was dying or may even be dead now due to a genetic disease that is not found in NDN populations since it was a disease mostly found in Caucasians. She was probably the only NDN to ever have that disease. So my point here is that genetic disease knows no BQ in either direction.
heh, since you like to accuse me of not being NDN or being a PODIA; I guess I will have to chalk the diabetes that has devastated most of my family off to some other reason huh ayes??
Rattle, when have you ever tried to "avoid a conflict" with me or anyone else? You live for the drama.
Hypocrite much?
I find it odd how you accuse me of twisting your words, and yet you continue constantly make such statements about me.
This behavior from you goes above and beyond twisting words, and actually goes into you speaking about events that you have zero knowledge of.
What I seen you do time and time again is read links posted up on here concerning a conflict, and then coming back here making statements about myself and my friends based solely on those threads.
Maybe it didn't occur to you that there was much more to all of that then just what you seen?
Maybe it didn't occur to you that the events you only seen a snap shot of had been going on for years and were based on false accusations and attacks being done on a woman who did nothing wrong?
Maybe it didn't occur to you that the woman being accused of those wrong things had her name cleared of all of that by the fighting that went down and how those defending her proved it.
Maybe it didn't occur to you that some of those who were involved in making those accusation were sending me and others threats of violence because of it long after the fact until a lot of us and especially myself poked fun at them because of it.
What I see on here is you always always always making statements about myself and others based on things you obviously only know one side of the story on.
Then from there I feel as if you come here and tell lies about me when you make such comments, and then take issue when I possibly critique your positions. That my friend is hypocrisy.
You are old enough to be my mother, and maybe even my grandmother. Taking that into consideration I would expect better from you. Instead I see you make comments about me, and attacks upon me based on things you don't even know about. Never once have you ever spoken to me about any of it, and yet you think because you and I have agreed on a thing or two that I am should respect you or whatever.
Respect is earned and not given. I do not feel that you have treated me with respect in regards to many issues including those that deal with my own family in which two you know zilch about. So don't expect any from me until you do the same.
I honestly feel you owe me an apology. I was defending people I loved from attacks, and yet for doing so you make all kinds of false statements about me without ever knowing the full story. Of course if that is how you are going to behave, then I want no friendship from you anyways.
*edited to fix a typo*
