Ken: Whites Have the "Right" to Buy Ceremonies

[Ken]

Snorks, I don't know if you know how the term yuppie came about. YUPpie=Young Upwardly mobile Professional. The Young part was true at the time the phrase was invented, mid 80s. So now it means Baby Boomer generation, mostly ex hippies or people once on the fringe of the hippie movement (but who usually no longer are.) In the US, that rarely meant working class, mostly meant upper middle class.It's pretty obvious this bunch, like most Nuagers, has at least a little money. She does pay to pray ceremonies. Very few exploiters are based in rural Mississippi or Harlem or East Los Angeles. They're in Sedona or Jackson Hole or Beverly Hills. Or the suburbs of DC, which is one of the most expensive places to live in the US.

Your comments seem to allude to class differences. ? As you choose to distinguish class why should one class of people be considered less entitled to pursue spirituality of their own choosing in their own way? ? What makes it less acceptable to you?

So, yes, if they have money to live in DC...and to spend on pay to pray ceremonies....most of them are Yuppies.

So you view the term "Yuppie" as based on monetary issues (again you focus on class)?

And like you point out, these are all whites in that photo. There's more than a little bit of White Privilege in the claim that "we can do whatever we want, we have the right."

A blatant racist remark. ? Are you attempting to say "whites," as you put it, do not have a right to pursue spirituality of their own choosing?

[debbieredbear]

So Ken, are you saying that yuppies should be able to pursue spirituality in a way that perverts, twists and destroys it?? Should anyone with the $$ be able to turn someone else's spirituality into a commodity to be bought and sold?? Is it also ok for them to take bits and pieces of other's spiritual beliefs in a way that offends those people they have stolen from? And if you think all these things are ok, why? Why is it ok.

[Ken]

So Ken, are you saying that yuppies should be able to pursue spirituality in a way that perverts, twists and destroys it?? Should anyone with the $$ be able to turn someone else's spirituality into a commodity to be bought and sold?? Is it also ok for them to take bits and pieces of other's spiritual beliefs in a way that offends those people they have stolen from? And if you think all these things are ok, why? Why is it ok.

Good questions and questions that should be openly discussed.

Perverted, twists, and destroys? ? This is not a meaningful question the way you have phrased it. ? Would you consider the Mormons to have perverted, twisted, and destroyed Christianity or just developed their own form of it?

The dollar question actually has multiple elements to it. ? Should a person be able to attend a sweat lodge if he can afford the asking price? ? Certainly! ? Should a person be able to attend an "authentic Lakota Sweat Lodge" for a price of admission? ? That is a question only the Lakota Sioux can answer. ? That is an area where the distinction between specific beliefs and ceremonies and similar types of ceremonies derived independent of each other comes into play. ? If someone calling herself "Mother Green-Bear" of the Eastern Mountain Clan develops a vision quest ceremony (regardless of what elements it has) and does so based on her dreams and vision inspiration, then who are we to say she is a fraud and is denegrating anyone's spirituality. ? If someone feels the calling to lead a healing ceremony for money and develop their own rituals because of their own sense of spirituality, then regarless of whose ceremonies parts of it may look like, it is perfectly OK. ? On the other hand, claiming a healing ceremony to be an "authentic Hopi healing ritual" and using Hopi rituals is not OK unless the Hopi say it is OK. ? Because Creator gave something to someone or some people at one time does not mean something will not be given to other individuals and peoples at other times. ? Some of these gifts may be the same, they may be similar, or completely different. ? If the Jews are the "chosen people" how can the Lakota be the "chosen people?" ? Perhaps all are chosen at different times in different ways. ? To make the declarations I've seen here against a race of people, to use derogatory terms such as corrupting "New Age" to "Nuage", and to deny any of this new-found spirituality is genuine to the people who believe and practice it is simply an act of hypocrisy. ? It is no less a usage than "Injun" and "Lakota-Sueem."

[educatedindian]

"As you choose to distinguish class"

  So much cluelessness, so little time.
I don't choose to, I recognize that there are classes. Only the most clueless sheltered privileged well to do person would claim there are no classes.

"why should one class of people be considered less entitled to pursue spirituality of their own choosing in their own way?"

There's that White Privilege and Upper Class Privilege of yours asserting itself.
Sorry Ken, there's no 1st Amendment "right" to fraud.

"you view the term "Yuppie" as based on monetary issues"

"I" don't. Anyone using the term yuppie is pretty much using a class term.
 
"Quote from educatedindian on Today at 7:02pm:

And like you point out, these are all whites in that photo. There's more than a little bit of White Privilege in the claim that "we can do whatever we want, we have the right."
 
A blatant racist remark." ?

  Was that clueless harangue supposed to make me roll over and submit? "Oh no, he called me racist! The Great White Master is telling them Dumb NDNs what is Right and True!"
All you show is that you don't understand what racism is because you've never experienced it.

"Are you attempting to say "whites," as you put it,"

Again, ?
Do you think I'm the only one on the planet who uses the word white?

I can almost hear you singing "We Are The World."

"do not have a right to pursue spirituality of their own choosing?"

There's that White Privilege again. ?

Not only are these worthwhile questions, they have been discussed many times before, including with you.
You were warned to quit sidetracking one thread after another. Your spamming, trolling, and cluelessly whining "Bigot!" anytime a Native defends Native beliefs from desecration, exploitation, and abuse are not only pointless, they show you exhorting and extolling White Privilege.

You haven't convinced anyone of anything but your own cluelessness and intent to disrupt this group and waste our time, when we could be doing things far more useful. As entertaining as you are, untintentionally, I think we're all pretty tired of trying to get through to someone so terminally dense, and utterly convinced the Great White Master knows more than them Dumb NDNs about their own cultures. Goodbye.

[Ingeborg]

Good questions and questions that should be openly discussed.

Perverted, twists, and destroys? ? This is not a meaningful question the way you have phrased it. ? Would you consider the Mormons to have perverted, twisted, and destroyed Christianity or just developed their own form of it?

The dollar question actually has multiple elements to it. ? Should a person be able to attend a sweat lodge if he can afford the asking price? ? Certainly! ? Should a person be able to attend an "authentic Lakota Sweat Lodge" for a price of admission? ? That is a question only the Lakota Sioux can answer. ? That is an area where the distinction between specific beliefs and ceremonies and similar types of ceremonies derived independent of each other comes into play. ? If someone calling herself "Mother Green-Bear" of the Eastern Mountain Clan develops a vision quest ceremony (regardless of what elements it has) and does so based on her dreams and vision inspiration, then who are we to say she is a fraud and is denegrating anyone's spirituality. ? If someone feels the calling to lead a healing ceremony for money and develop their own rituals because of their own sense of spirituality, then regarless of whose ceremonies parts of it may look like, it is perfectly OK. ? On the other hand, claiming a healing ceremony to be an "authentic Hopi healing ritual" and using Hopi rituals is not OK unless the Hopi say it is OK. ? Because Creator gave something to someone or some people at one time does not mean something will not be given to other individuals and peoples at other times. ? Some of these gifts may be the same, they may be similar, or completely different. ? If the Jews are the "chosen people" how can the Lakota be the "chosen people?" ? Perhaps all are chosen at different times in different ways. ? To make the declarations I've seen here against a race of people, to use derogatory terms such as corrupting "New Age" to "Nuage", and to deny any of this new-found spirituality is genuine to the people who believe and practice it is simply an act of hypocrisy. ? It is no less a usage than "Injun" and "Lakota-Sueem."

Certainly - even if you pretend otherwise - you do see the difference between "Creator gives something to a people" and paying for participation. If or when a spiritual aspect is given to different peoples at different times, this, according to your own words, is a gift - which is never paid for. Your conclusion: 'it may be given at different times, so as long as one can pay for it, they may do what they want' cannot work out.

Apart from that your attitude reflects a way of thinking in which everything, including spirituality, becomes a good which can be sold and bought and all it takes is the money to afford it - the fact that one is able to pay for it becoming the only justification needed. On this basis, you could even tell us slavery is not illegal because, hey, a wealthy person simply has the means to afford buying a few slaves, and such was life.

Dividing into 'authentic' and 'non-authentic paid-for' apparently does not work out, since many persons selling spirituality claim to have learned from 'authentic' sources. They do not sell ceremonies with the line 'Hey, I just made up this ***, now please come along in large numbers to make me rich' - that happens to be a different market, actually.

Your various accusations of racism reveal one thing quite clearly: you are looking at racism not from the receiving end but from the comfy one. Insisting on alleged rights of buying or doing something is nothing but insisting on a right to continue exploitation and continue the tradition of white priviledge. It happens to be an aspect of WP to assume that everything must be 'shared' with those people whose behinds by pure chance were delivered in a certain light colour: 'I'm white so I have a right to everything as long as and as soon as I want it, period'.

Although one is tempted to see accusations of 'reverse' racism in a humourous light: when the priviledge ones call it racism when people criticise them, this belittles racism and denies its consequences. If you choose to run around with a huge banner that reads 'I'm a racist', fair enough, that's your choice. However, the constant manifestations do get a bit tiring.

[TrishaRoseJacobs]

Ken - the simple observation that it is mostly whites who are in attendence at these "ceremonies" and new age gatherings, is one that I challenge you or anyone else to statistically disprove. It's not a racist statement to point out that it is whites who mostly engage in this practice. And when you add in both your remarks, and those of new agers themselves who clearly feel entitled to take tribal practices and beliefs out of the context in which they were created and are properly practiced - then yes, white privledge, a social phenomenon which is grounded in racial beliefs, does come into play.

Yes, everyone has the right, and I would say even the necessity for faith of some kind. But should it then follow that everyone has the right to all spiritual practices and knowledge? I say that even non-tribal socities reject that idea. Catholicism is a prime example of this, there are echelons in the Church and a hierarchy of knowledge. The same can be said of ancient Roman "cults" (to use the word commonly assigned) as well. Judiasm - another tribal society, had and still has, the same view. Not just any Catholic is entitled to perform Mass, and not just any Jew is allowed to perform a circumscision. And certainly, it is not accepted in general society from outside of those faiths to set themselves up as ritual authorities. You can not just claim to be a Rabbi or a Priest. In the US, I believe it is even illegal to falsely claim such.

I am not going to deny that many feel as though non-natives, and even people from outside their own tribe should not have access to their tribal practices. That's not a view I share, but in my opinion there is a very large difference between a respectful non-tribal member who becomes a member of that community through work and trust, and one who simply tries to buy those practices from a fraudulent guru who isn't a member of that community either.

So, please, spare us your whinging on the subject. It doesn't fly here or in the world at large.

[Le_Weaponnier]

Quote:"Should a person be able to attend a sweat lodge if he can afford the asking price? ? Certainly! ? Should a person be able to attend an "authentic Lakota Sweat Lodge" for a price of admission? ? That is a question only the Lakota Sioux can answer. "

I think that it sets a dangerous precedent to set a dollar value to a ceremony. Once a commodity has a dollar value, then it is no longer is free and then the price rises until those that need it most, can no longer afford it.

[snorks]

My comments on the following quote:

"If someone calling herself "Mother Green-Bear" of the Eastern Mountain Clan develops a vision quest ceremony (regardless of what elements it has) and does so based on her dreams and vision inspiration, then who are we to say she is a fraud and is denegrating anyone's spirituality.  If someone feels the calling to lead a healing ceremony for money and develop their own rituals because of their own sense of spirituality, then regarless of whose ceremonies parts of it may look like, it is perfectly OK. "

Some of my family call me Squirrel because I remind them of a squirrel.  However, since I am not a member of a clan other than my family, I suppose I could say I am of the Carp Seller's Clan.  At this point, I think I would laughed out of the room.

I have been asked about vision quests for finding 'animal teachers'.  I generally tell people that I don't do them since they are religious.  If they press me, I do refer them to Loren Cruden, who wrote several books on such things.  She does it in a non-specific way.

However, if I set myself up with an Indian seeming name and association, present the idea I do vision quests, then people get the idea that I am Indian, and what I do is the real deal.  That I am the real deal.

If I say I am Blue Squirrel of the Carp Tender's Clan doing the vision quest that my mother taught me, what does that make me?  A silly person at best.  And if I charge money, then I am treading between fraud and harm.  I don't know what I am doing in the first place.  In the second place, I being vague so that people think that I am an Indian.  I don't deter them from that thought.

However, if someone sues me, I certainly will be found guilty of fraud, even though I 'never' said I was Indian.

[AndreasWinsnes]

those that need it most, can no longer afford it

I agree, new agers charge people like they were lawyers or something, up to 100 dollars for a healing session, or even more. They are the capitalists of the spirit realms.

[Raven_Walkingstick]

I don't want to become long winded here, so I will keep this as short as possible.
Sitting here and reading through the threads, it gets pretty old sifting through the side tracking Ken.
What amazes me most is that you are about 10 yrs older than me, however your words speak like that of a 20 yr. old. It is very immature, you manipulate and twist what other people say. I don't like the fact that you use everyone here for your entertainment, because that is what is going on.
Many here work very hard to obtain information that is not always easy to get and when they post, then you seem to have to play devil's advocate with them.
I don't find it entertaining at all, in fact it is pretty pitiful. This is not about having the upper hand on everyone, we are here to work together, team work do you know what that is?
I am not impressed with the over compensating of what or how much you know.
Come visit me and my family for awhile, find out what we go through for just basic rights. It would be a good learning experience for you and you may take this site a little more serious.
I am not attacking you, I am only sharing what I see and feel when I come in here. And if I see it, then it makes me wonder what the guests think when they come in and read it.

[Prairie Fairy]

Your comments seem to allude to class differences.  As you choose to distinguish class why should one class of people be considered less entitled to pursue spirituality of their own choosing in their own way?  What makes it less acceptable to you?

I consider this an appropriation of the activist tradition. Textile workers in New York City didn't get us the eight hour day so Ken could make comments like this.

Ken also claims the identification of white people in a photograph and the use of the term "white privilege" are forms of racism. They are not. It is the context that determines the stigmatizing effect of simple identifications like noticing the racial makeup of a group. As an anti racist white person who supports this effort I do not feel stigmatized. The term "white privilege" is a tool to illustrate how pervasive racism is so we can stop it. The fact that Ken was willing to focus on this illustrates to me that he is unwilling to have open eyes to the racism he has no doubt witnessed against non white people. If you are that invested in denying the realities of racism you certainly have no business calling anyone racist.

I know this is an old thread. I'm just sayin'.

[Defend the Sacred]

The fact that Ken was willing to focus on this illustrates to me that he is unwilling to have open eyes to the racism he has no doubt witnessed against non white people.

I doubt Ken has ever noticed racism against people of color. I doubt Ken has ever noticed anything besides his "right" to cry "I'm the one who's REALLY oppressed" whenever someone disagrees with him or calls him on his oppressive behaviour.

Classic, disgusting, boring old white privilege.

[Prairie Fairy]

Every white person has witnessed racism. If they lied to themselves about it, they lied to themselves about it.

[Defend the Sacred]

Every white person has witnessed racism. If they lied to themselves about it, they lied to themselves about it.

Oh, I'm sure he's witnessed it. I'm sure he's perpetrated and perpetuated it, as well.

He seems to me to be so fundamentally racist that he has probably never bothered to think about any of these things beyond not wanting his white privilege infringed upon.

[earthw7]

Well Ken, I guess this is one subject where I would have to disagree with
I wonder if these people who buy thing understand the nature of what they want to buy
Is it a peace of mind for the harm they do forgiveness for the problem they cause.
what ?

When a white person claim to have a vision and start their own ceremony and charges for it. It is their way. 

example....The great Mark Smith had a vision of everyone should own boat that is his.
We don't care

The minutes they start with It is a native belief/vision/culture it is fraud
The minute they start with I adopted by or learned from Native person it is fraud
The minute they take native names for the pratice it is fraud
The minuted the use our names it is fraud
The minutes they charge money with any of the following it is fraud

Because it is a lie and if they sell a lie then where is the spirituality??

What happens when you sell lies good people get hurt.

Bad people get rich to me this is not the way to save oneself
from damnation

Spirituality is not for sell and one can't buy salavation