Sweat lodges in Nottingham, UK

[Ric_Richardson]

Tansi;

Have you considered using the recent UN Declaration related to Aboriginal Rights, in efforts to encourage the park to stop the misuse of part of our Culture, to attract business?

I would think that many of the Aboriginal Peoples, who have Sweat Lodges, as part of our Culture, would agree that this "Cultural tourism" can be harmful, and at the very least, disrespectful.

As I could not find any reference to the Cultural Tradition, being "practiced", is it possible that this sauna is pretending to be Pan Aboriginal, since many of our peoples use the Lodge, as part of our Spiritual practices?

Ric

[AndreasWinsnes]

If it is decided it is Ok to use the park for an imitation non religious sweat lodge ceremony ? , then as I see it , there IS a decision being made to support the interests of one so called "denomination" over another . ?

One can only speculate about Hardy's motives. I don't think she borders on racism. Anyway, what counts are the arguments she presents. Are they good enough? I think so, at first glance at least. Public institutions need to be religously neutral. This means that they either has to forbid all kinds of religions or allow everyone under the condition that they don't pose a threat to public safety or cause public offense. I believe that is fair. The public is the majority of people in a society. The public at large in England are not offended by Sweat Lodges, so Hardy allows Sewell to go ahead.

But maybe the logic of affirmative action should be applied in this case. Native American religions have been oppressed for centuries, and still are. So public institutions in European countries have a special obligation to protect them from further destruction. ?  

If Hardy wanted, she could have told Sewell that Sweat Lodges are potentially deadly, and therefore she would not allow them in her park. But she chose not to. Either she is ignorant about how deadly Sweat Lodges actually can be in the hands of incompetent persons, or she don't care much about the feelings of Native Americans. It is probably a combination, I guess.

If this had been in Norway, I would have told the media about the danger of Sweat Lodges. Maybe that is the best thing to do in this situation.

[Moma_porcupine]

Andreas
I think you entirely missed the point  .

Quotes from the letter from the park manager

Re: Sweat lodges in Nottingham, UK
Reply #6 - 08/01/06 at 15:54:14

"I note that it is not uncommon for what I would term spiritual or philosophic techniques to be taken out of their original cultural context and used for purposes of health, relaxation, or community celebration in the West." ( con....)

"I believe that his training has taken place with Roland Torikan who works with the Mayan people in Mexico, rather than in the North American tradition." (con.... )

"The question of whether or not any payment should be asked for a sweat lodge ‘ceremony’ (to which you object on moral and cultural grounds) does not appear to be relevant here, as the event is not promoted as a spiritual ceremony, but as a technique for healing / group sharing / meditation ( con...)"

These statements show that this is NOT a non religious sauna or steam bath . It is called a sweat lodge and is acknowledged as something inspired by some sort American Indian traditions . To acknowledge this , but at the same time assert this sweat lodge 'ceremony' is not a Spiritual ceremony , so it is OK to charge , I find REALLY offensive .

Perhaps people in Britian are just unaware of how strongly MOST Native people feel about this .

The link below leads to a list of articles which provide information showing both the diversity of opinion in the Native community , and that this is not just the feelings of people posting in NAFPS or some lobby group , as is suggested in one of the letters posted above. While there is some disagreement within Native communities how to best protect these ceremonies , there is almost unanimous agreement that it is never OK to charge for ceremonies . Most Native people believe these ceremonies have little value , and can even be harmful , when they are removed from their proper context within a deeply rooted
Spiritual community .

http://www.nativeamericanlandscapes.com/wambliho/WambliHoReport_Apr2003.html

http://www.newagefraud.org/cgi-bin/yabb2/YaBB.pl?num=1144018340

Quoting educatedindian

Re: Prophecies of cooperation with New Agers?
Reply #1 - 04/03/06 at 16:32:05  
"The way Wallis talks about conflict gives a false impression, as though Lakota and other NDNs are split down the middle  "so don't worry about Native critics, dear Nuagers and pagans." What he fails to mention was the margin the tribal vote barring ceremonies to outsiders won by, more than 95% in favor."

So what is it about NO that some people do not understand ?

If a society , creates laws to protect one race of peoples rights to manage their own property ,  physical , cultural or hereditary assets , but this same society refuses to recognize these same rights in another race , there does seem to be some underlying racist assumptions   .

For example ;

I don't think anyone would assume the opinion of non-Catholic people should be taken into consideration by the Catholic Church when it decides how to manage it's property , do a ceremony,  or what basic principals need to be upheld by the Catholic community . It is generally recognized that the Catholic Church and community has an exclusive right to decide how to control its own property , and internal structure .

I also doubt anyone would think the Lakota people in general , should have any right to say how a person in Britian takes care of their family heirlooms , or how these family or cultural keep sakes should be used or protected.

In yet , somehow these standards get changed and it is assumed the British people should have a right , to have a say, in how Native American physical or cultural property is managed.

The underlying assumption that the opinion, or even laws of the British people should mean anything in this debate , does seem to be based in an underlying racist assumption that somehow American Indian peoples , social organizations and ways of doing things , are not quit REAL .  It seems all too often indiginous people are seen as "cute" but not real enough to enjoy the same rights assumed by others , in the same society - such as the recognition and protection of their exclusive rights to control their own property , heirlooms and culture.

[Ric_Richardson]

Tansi;

I am sorry, but forgot to include a website where the UN Declaration of Indigenous Peoples Rights is.  It is http://daccessdds.un.org/doc/UNDOC/LTD/G06/125/71/PDF/G0612571.pdf?OpenElement

I am sure that some of the areas are applicable to situations such as this.

Hope it helps!
Ric

[AndreasWinsnes]

Hardy is totally wrong when she says that Sewell's ceremony is not spiritual, of course it is, and all new ageres wil say it is. But the question of money is not important from the perspective of a public institution who tries to stay religiously neutral. ? Such institutions should not judge if money from spiritual services are right og wrong, because then they will not be neutral.

It is generally recognized that the Catholic Church and community has an exclusive right to decide how to control its own property , and internal structure .

That is correct when it comes to property protected by law. But religious ceremonies are not protected by law. The Protestants, for instance, have copied much from Catholic ceremonies. And it is difficult to protect cultural property without patent and copyright laws, because nations often borrow from each other. Much of what is considered "Norwegian" today actually comes from other European countries.

I agree that indigenous cultural and religious property should be protected by law, but what should public institutions do as as long as this is not the case?

The underlying assumption that the opinion, or even laws of the British people should mean anything in this debate , does seem to be based in an underlying racist assumption that somehow American Indian peoples , social organizations and ways of doing things , are not quit REAL .

I agree with much of this. However, if one want to forbid a practice, one should do so by law, and not by arbitrary decisions. But it is a kind of structural racism when a society don't recognize the rights of indigenous people. Laws should be neutral, but they should also protect vulnerable indigenous cultures. Affirmative action is a way to do this. It is difficult, however, for public officials like Hardy to decide by herself that Native American ceremonies should be protected when politicans have given no guidelines about how this should be done. The problem is that politicans and the public at large in Western countries are pretty blind to the rights of indigenous people. This blindness is a kind of racism. But it is difficult to judge if Hardy personally is guilty of such racism.

[Moma_porcupine]

Thanks Ric .  The weblink you gave does not work for me , and says I am not authorized to enter that website , but I did find this other link which goes to something similiar .
--------------
http://www.cwis.org/drft9329.html

"This is the latest version of the Draft United Nations Declaration on the Rights of Indigenous Peoples. ---As soon as a new draft is released we will update this page to reflect the changes made by the Working Group." (con....)


"PART III
Article 12
Indigenous peoples have the right to practise and revitalize their cultural traditions and customs. This includes the right to maintain, protect and develop the past, present and future manifestations of their cultures, such as archaeological and historical sites, artifacts, designs, ceremonies, technologies and visual and performing arts and literature, as well as the right to the restitution of cultural, intellectual, religious and spiritual property taken without their free and informed consent or in violation of their laws, traditions and customs.

Article 13
Indigenous peoples have the right to manifest, practise, develop and teach their spiritual and religious traditions, customs and ceremonies; the right to maintain, protect, and have access in privacy to their religious and cultural sites; the right to the use and control of ceremonial objects; and the right to the repatriation of human remains.

States shall take effective measures, in conjunction with the indigenous peoples concerned, to ensure that indigenous sacred places, including burial sites, be preserved, respected and protected.

Article 14
Indigenous peoples have the right to revitalize, use, develop and transmit to future generations their histories, languages, oral traditions, philosophies, writing systems and literatures, and to designate and retain their own names for communities, places and persons.

States shall take effective measures, whenever any right of indigenous peoples may be threatened, to ensure this right is protected and also to ensure that they can understand and be understood in political, legal and administrative proceedings, where necessary through the provision of interpretation or by other appropriate means. "

-----------------------------
Andreas , I was refering to the type of racism that is sits largely unnoticed in the collectivly held assumptions of a group , and while this does get acted out by the individual parts , I did not mean to suggest any individual has it completely within their power to change this . My words were not aimed at any one person . That being said , there often is some power held by the individual parts,  and I think it is good to challenge these assumptions when they are being acted out in a specific situation .

[AndreasWinsnes]

The draft is very good, especially the parts highlighted. It should be sent to Hardy together with a list of persons who have been killed in Sweat Lodges arranged by new agers. I hope that many states will make the UN convention a part of their national laws, that would make it much easier for public institutions to stop exploiters.

[Ric_Richardson]

Tsnsi;

I am sorry that the last link I posted didn't work!  The Declaration passed by a vote of 30 for to 2 against.  Unfortunately, Canada was one of the two to vote against this.

Please try this link to the Working Group of Indigenous Peoples for links to the Declaration http://www.iwgia.org/sw248.asp

There are numerous areas of this Declaration, which I believe could be useful in efforts to stop Cultural and Spiritual Abuse, by organizations, such as have been previously described.

Good Luck!
Ric