Squaw = Cunt
Todd Clark
Sue Me <pickle6...@gte.net.invalid> wrote:
> I am not Indian
Obviously.
> but my children through thier father are.
What nation specifically?
What is their father's role in their upbringing?
And is he a traditional or an apple?
> I have been reading through the different letters on the web
> concerning this issue and the one thing that has become painfully
> obvious is that women as a whole, be it Indian, caucasion
> (refered to as "cracker bitch" in one of the messages above),
> African american or whatever else are taking this and other
> similar incidents far to personally.
Your insensitivity to the degradation of your own gender is disgusting.
> I have never thought of the word squaw as anything other than
> an indian woman
Are you always this proud of your own abysmal ignorance?
> and if my daughters were to ask me what a squaw was I would
> tell them that.
And do you always make it a habit to lie to your children?
> Maybe it is the American version but we are Americans.
Define American in this context.
> I will also bring my daughters up with enough backbone
Backbone is essential. So far, so good. Backbone is what Native
Americans and women of all ethnicities are exhibiting when they stand
up against degrading terminology.
> so that they will not be offended everytime somebody
> unintentionally does or says something that is no
> longer deemed pollitically correct.
The key word here is unintentionally. Pull your head out of the sand.
--
Todd Tamanend Clark
Poet/Composer/Multi-Instrumentalist/Activist
Pennsylvania American Indian Movement
http://www.annihilist.com/cgi-bin/profiles.cgi?step=view_all
Sent via Deja.com http://www.deja.com/
Before you buy.
Todd Clark
"Douglas Long" <dkl...@mindspring.com> wrote:
> Tell it to Indians who find nothing wrong with the word *squaw*.
If there ARE any such individuals, they probably don't find anything
wrong with the word "apple" either.
> Tell it to English speakers who rarely use the word except in
> reference to the names of places and who have no idea that
> you victim-mongering missionaries have labeled the word as
> being bad.
The corpses of approximately one hundred million Native Americans lie
in mute testament to the historical fact that the victimization is
real. But then what else can we expect from a holocaust denier such as
yourself?
> >> The English language decides nothing; common usage
> >> by speakers of the English language decide a word's
> >> meaning. It isn't *arrogant*. It's just the nature
> >> of language.
What a bullshit rationalization for your own racistly sexist bigotry.
> >> The meaning of *squaw*, even in the Algonquin language,
> >> has a broader meaning than what you claim, according to
> >> some scholarly information that came my way.
Anonymous, unposted information adds nothing to your argument.
> > Talk to the speakers of Haudenosaunee languages, not the people
> > who interpret their language.
One technical correction is needed here. The Haudenosaunee languages
are Iroquoian not Algonquian.
> >> I'm not an illegal immigrant.
That remains to be seen.
> You're really kind of just burning with resentment,
> aren't you, Sheridan?
He's positively mellow compared to me.
Let's rumble.
Your grandmother is a cunt.
Your aunt is a cunt.
Your mother is a cunt.
Your sister is a cunt.
Your cousin is a cunt.
Your wife is a cunt.
Your daughter is a cunt.
Your granddaughter is a cunt.
Now how do you like it when the tables are turned?
Sipish
thus, i have taken the liberty of changing it
sipish
Sipish
s
Laktajew
> all statement made by me are in my humble opinion.
>if i offend anyone, rest assured, I really don`t give
>a s##t.
And that's exactly how most everyone feels about people who state their
oppinions while hidding from there own identity . Your words mean nothing as
even you are unwilling to stand behind them .
Carry your pathetic posterior back to your twitheaded buddies in alt.cal.
Kenn
Adam
> > Tell it to Indians who find nothing wrong with the word *squaw*.
>
> If there ARE any such individuals, they probably don't find anything
> wrong with the word "apple" either.
Hey Todd I suppose you get to define apple and decide who is or isn't? I
suppose you are also going to define traditional for us as well.
You may not like this womans opinion but please you are starting to get
crude, personal, and offensive.
Now if you want to attack me next first find out where I stand on the
issue I posted on it a long time ago.
paul
offensive terms when posting and replying......
Adam wrote in message <384C45...@hotmail.com>...
Randy
Randy
tjsnow
<wolf...@home.com> wrote:
> There are no "justified" times to use these words. They degrade
> women and
> believe it or not, Children come to this NG to learn about our
> culture, what
> message are those of you who use these words, sending out for the
> world to
> see?
> You all ought to be ashamed!
> Jimmie
An excellent point! Thank you Jimmy, and apologies to Paul and family
and others for such an abhorrent and degrading title! There can be no
justification for this!
Respectfully,
TJ
* Sent from RemarQ http://www.remarq.com The Internet's Discussion Network *
The fastest and easiest way to search and participate in Usenet - Free!
Wayne George
to my young grandson......He'd ask me why are those people talking like
that....What am I supposed to tell him? I say take your words to where ever you
think it belongs....perhaps back to your Mothers and Fathers. You come here to
learn and share.....
Wayne George, Anishinabe :-(
~~~~
Todd Clark
sip...@aol.com (Sipish) wrote:
> please have a little bit of decency.
It's called fighting fire with fire.
They needed an object lesson in what they were doing to us.
Do you always turn and attack your own warriors right in the middle of
battle?
Todd Clark
ada...@hotmail.com wrote:
> You may not like this womans opinion
Is it your contention that Douglas Long has a vagina instead of a
penis?
> but please you are starting to get crude, personal, and offensive.
Which is exactly how Long is treating Native Americans, women, and
other minorities. He was desperately begging for a dose of his own
medicine, and that is exactly what I gave him.
Sometimes racists only understand their own language, and the point of
good writing is to communicate strongly, directly, and effectively.
lunatic...@my-deja.com
I haven't been following this thread but I would ask you to consider
the words you use in your headers. I need to have people read to me
most of the time and that includes my children, now I am not so naive
to think they have never heard that word, but not from me. Not to make
you angry and with good will, could ya well I am sure you see what I
mean.
As far as the other word call my wife that and pray I get there first
if she does the speaker is in deep .........
Thanks
L_F
In article <19991206140000...@ng-fr1.aol.com>,
ClockWFT
>this header is not necessary and has no place here.
>thus, i have taken the liberty of changing it
>sipish
>
Thank you for doing so...
I found the header and both the words Clark used and his tone to be unfounded
and offensive.
Todd Clark
"paul" <p.c...@nospam.please> wrote:
> Um, hello...my kids read this group,
Is this the ONLY news group that they read?
The entirety of George Carlin's "seven deadly words" are in nearly
universal use on the vast majority of news groups throughout the
internet on a daily basis.
Do you live in an isolation tank?
> Can we please change the titles to less offensive terms
> when posting and replying ?
I find it extremely telling that you saw fit to censor "cunt" from the
topic header but did not do likewise with "squaw". The words are one
and the same in meaning, yet you only crossed out the one that offends
white persons while leaving in the one that offends Native Americans.
Please take the time to analyze if this is selective racist censorship
on your part or merely your own degree of acculturation to the corrupt
domination of the oppressive colonial system. Either way, you have some
essential deprogramming to do within your own psyche.
--
Todd Tamanend Clark
Poet/Composer/Multi-Instrumentalist/Activist
Pennsylvania American Indian Movement
http://www.annihilist.com/cgi-bin/profiles.cgi?step=view_all
Todd Clark
cloc...@aol.com (ClockWFT) wrote:
> I found the header and both the words Clark used and his tone
> to be unfounded and offensive.
I purposely designed them to BE offensive so that Long would get the
message in his own language that the disparaging term he was defending
was degrading to Native Americans.
My post was FAR from unfounded.
If, however, it was also offensive to an infamously arrogant bigot such
as yourself, then that is simply an added bonus.
Sipish
:-)
s
wft wrote:
>clockwft wrote:
>
>Thank you for doing so...
>
lenapelady
the sound of christmas elves? LL
Sipish <sip...@aol.com> wrote in message
news:19991206213144...@ng-fb1.aol.com...
bewitagos
Floyd Davidson
>Todd Clark wrote:
>
>> > Tell it to Indians who find nothing wrong with the word *squaw*.
>>
>> If there ARE any such individuals, they probably don't find anything
>> wrong with the word "apple" either.
>
>Hey Todd I suppose you get to define apple and decide who is or isn't? I
>suppose you are also going to define traditional for us as well.
>
>crude, personal, and offensive.
>
>Now if you want to attack me next first find out where I stand on the
>issue I posted on it a long time ago.
Lets see... he is arguing against a fellow who insists it is
fine to go around calling everything from geographical features
to your wife some variation on the word "cunt". So you accuse
_him_ of being crude???
There definitely is a message there! (Maybe that we don't need
to hear what your stand on it is, because nothing you say about
it should be taken seriously.)
Floyd
--
Floyd L. Davidson fl...@barrow.com
Ukpeagvik (Barrow, Alaska)
Floyd Davidson
either of you care to post an analysis of which one is more offensive,
being as they are just about the same thing.
Floyd
Sipish <sip...@aol.com> wrote:
>well, we finally agree on something.
>:-)
>s
>
>wft wrote:
>>clockwft wrote:
>>
>>Thank you for doing so...
>>
>>I found the header and both the words Clark used and his tone to be unfounded
>>and offensive.
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>
>
--
Todd Clark
> There are no "justified" times to use these words.
Unfortunately, there still are.
We learned at the beginning of the movement during the 1960's that the
taboo words of the enemy's language can be an effective guerrilla tool
of resistance in countering their domineering propaganda.
I suggest that you read noted anti-racist comedian Lenny Bruce's
autobiography "How To Talk Dirty And Influence People", as well as
various writings by such authors as William S. Burroughs, Allen
Ginsberg, and Harlan Ellison. You may also want to listen to the
recordings of The Fugs, Frank Zappa, Jim Morrison, Patti Smith, Dead
Kennedys, Ministry, Public Enemy, and Consolidated, among many others,
to see examples of how obscenities can be used in the service
of liberation.
> They degrade women
Yes, indeed some obscenities do, which was the whole point of the
context in which I used them. I admire, honor, and respect women, which
is why I was so angered by Douglas Long's continued thick-headed
degradation of them. There are very nearly six hundred posts in this
thread, the majority of which counteract his position, and still Long
continues to insult native women.
> and believe it or not, children come to this NG to learn about
> our culture, what message are those of you who use these words,
> sending out for the world to see?
It is difficult to carry on a complex, detailed discussion about
culturally relative linguistics without using the words themselves. We
cannot chill the level of internet free speech on ANY topic simply
because children MIGHT accidentally encounter it.
> You all ought to be ashamed!
Thank you at least for acknowledging that there have been several
other posters using these socially taboo slang words in addition to
myself. So far, all the other critics have gravitated to my posts
alone.
ClockWFT
>well, we finally agree on something.
>:-)
>s
>
Some things transcend "difference of opinions". And Clark's piece of verbal
sludge surely did...
Sipish
sip
>I'm hard pressed to see which word should be dropped first. Would
>either of you care to post an analysis of which one is more offensive,
>being as they are just about the same thing.
>
> Floyd
>
>
>
>
>Sipish <sip...@aol.com> wrote:
>>well, we finally agree on something.
>>:-)
>>s
>>
>>wft wrote:
>>>clockwft wrote:
>>>
>>>Thank you for doing so...
>>>
>>>I found the header and both the words Clark used and his tone to be
>unfounded
>>>and offensive.
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>
>>
>
>
>
Nopalito
cloc...@aol.com (ClockWFT) wrote:
> Some things transcend "difference of opinions". And Clark's piece of
> verbal
> sludge surely did...
Interesting that you found the ugly C word offensive, but haven't said
the same of the ugly S word.
You might not have agreed with Todd's employment of the C word, but all
things considered in this discussion, you might have at least tried to
see his point.
Stuart Ames
discuss Native Americans and their culture, hoping to learn and also to show
my daughter but how can I show her this site if there is someone like you on
here using such language? Are we not supposed to be sharing our knowledge
and learning from eachother? From what I know of the Native Americans and I
mean the real Native Americans, is that they are a gentle teaching people,
spiritual in their ways and they have a lot to teach us, you my friend have
nothing to teach us by writing these things, only negativity and aggression.
You are the type of person who prevents these sites giving what they are
meant to give, a connection to like minded people who can share and discuss.
But anyone new to this site would see your message and not come again and
what a shame that would be for those of us who do want to connect and share
the culture and beliefs of the Indians. If all you can share is bad language
and negativity then you are not really welcome here. It is obvious by the
replies to your message that no one is happy with it, so unless you have
something constructive to say, then I suggest that you find a site that
welcomes your style because it's really not appropriate here.
love and light,
Sammi xxx
Todd Clark <tama...@helicon.net> wrote in message
news:82gnme$hpk$1...@nnrp1.deja.com...
> Todd Tamanend Clark
> Poet/Composer/Multi-Instrumentalist/Activist
> Pennsylvania American Indian Movement
> http://www.annihilist.com/cgi-bin/profiles.cgi?step=view_all
>
>
Adam
>
> Lets see... he is arguing against a fellow who insists it is
> fine to go around calling everything from geographical features
> to your wife some variation on the word "cunt". So you accuse
> _him_ of being crude???
>
> There definitely is a message there! (Maybe that we don't need
> to hear what your stand on it is, because nothing you say about
> it should be taken seriously.)
>
Not the point I was making Floyd. I am not arguing the question I am
arguing the form. The current form is getting to where it detracts from
the argument and it also is denigrating it. How can one expect to argue
that obscenity should not be used by using obscenity?
I posted on the issue a great while ago and the long and short of it was
that the word carries derogatory, dehumanizing, animistic, and sexual
undertones, of which I related an allegory that was applicable. Clearly
this is not a tradition the U.S. ought to continue.
As for not having anything to contribute you seem to imply that unless I
am with popular opinion all the time, I am against natives. That is a
perversion of where I stand. Native people have diverse opinions and we
may dispute on any given subject or point of interest at any time. And
you Floyd, while you may speak for some, do not speak for all.
Adam
>
> Um, hello...my kids read this group, can we please chane the titles to less
> offensive terms when posting and replying...
My point exactly.
Adam
>
> Sometimes racists only understand their own language, and the point of
> good writing is to communicate strongly, directly, and effectively.
I thought you were posting in response to a woman and I was responding
to you after you followed up with a list of the dirty word. These news
readers aren't perfect you know.
I don't really think returning like for like in this case did anything
other than make you look bad. If the ultimate goal is to remove the word
squaw from geographical locations it will have to be done with majority
consent. This would preclude alienating the white folk. I understand you
are in debate but if you are trying to get 'A' to concede your point it
might take something more creative. Perhaps trying to get 'A' to shift
at least ever so slightly from their hard and fast opinion would be a
start.
Adam
Douglas Long
Todd Clark wrote:
>> Tell it to Indians who find nothing wrong with the word *squaw*.
>
>If there ARE any such individuals, they probably don't find anything
>wrong with the word "apple" either.
"Apple" seems to be one of those words like *Oreo*
that are used by the thoughtless and the missionaries
of the ethnic grievance industry to intimidate others
who might disagree with them.
>> Tell it to English speakers who rarely use the word except in
>> reference to the names of places and who have no idea that
>> you victim-mongering missionaries have labeled the word as
>> being bad.
>The corpses of approximately one hundred million Native Americans lie
>in mute testament to the historical fact that the victimization is
>real.
Congratualtions. You're *demagogue* of the week.
> But then what else can we expect from a holocaust denier such as
>yourself?
Care to substantiate that assertion?
>> >> The English language decides nothing; common usage
>> >> by speakers of the English language decide a word's
>> >> meaning. It isn't *arrogant*. It's just the nature
>> >> of language.
>What a bullshit rationalization for your own racistly sexist bigotry.
That's quite an argument you have there. Get familiar
with the terms *non sequitur* and *ad hominem*.
>> >> The meaning of *squaw*, even in the Algonquin language,
>> >> has a broader meaning than what you claim, according to
>> >> some scholarly information that came my way.
>Anonymous, unposted information adds nothing to your argument.
It's neither anonymous nor unposted.
>> > Talk to the speakers of Haudenosaunee languages, not the people
>> > who interpret their language.
>One technical correction is needed here. The Haudenosaunee languages
>are Iroquoian not Algonquian.
>> >> I'm not an illegal immigrant.
>That remains to be seen.
>> You're really kind of just burning with resentment,
>> aren't you, Sheridan?
>He's positively mellow compared to me.
And compared to you, he's sane.
>Let's rumble.
I tend to avoid dueling with the unarmed, if by "rumble"
you mean let's match wits.
>Your grandmother is a cunt.
>Your aunt is a cunt.
>Your mother is a cunt.
>Your sister is a cunt.
>Your cousin is a cunt.
>Your wife is a cunt.
>Your daughter is a cunt.
>Your granddaughter is a cunt.
You're obviously a lowlife moron.
>Now how do you like it when the tables are turned?
Maybe you could provide evidence that the word
*Squaw* has a derogatory meaning.
>Todd Tamanend Clark
>Poet/Composer/Multi-Instrumentalist/Activist
You forgot to mention self-aggrandizing zealot.
Douglas Long
Subject: Re: more from Marge Bruchac
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain;
charset="iso-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
X-Unsent: 1
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V4.72.3155.0
-----Original Message-----
Date: Thursday, December 02, 1999 12:11 AM
Subject: more from Marge Bruchac
>
>This just came through the H-AMINDIAN list five
>minutes ago:
>
>Date: Wed, 1 Dec 1999 18:15:00 -0700
>From: "H-AMINDIAN (Jeff Shepherd, J. Wendel Cox)" <am...@h-net2.msu.edu>
>Subject: REPLY: On Mascots, "Squaw," and Other Issues (2 posts)
>
>[1]
>
>Date: Mon, 22 Nov 1999 22:01:17 -0500
>From: Marge Bruchac <mbru...@javanet.com>
>Subject: REPLY: On Mascots, "Squaw," and Other Issues
>Content-Type: text/plain; charset=iso-8859-1
>Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit
>X-UIDL: fd709eb39493cd499d9a9dbad1d41aba
>
>Kwai kwai
>
>FYI for those of you who have been listening to me rant about this issue.
>After sending this email as a part of conversations with Penobscot,
>Passamaquoddy, and other Wabanaki friends and activists, as well as
>legislators, the Lewiston Sun Journal caught wind of it and asked me to run
>this as a guest editorial, given the upcoming debate in the Maine State
>Legislature to remove the word squaw from all place names in the state.
For
>your reading, here is my argument.
>
>Wli nanawalmezi,
>
>Marge
>
>- - - - -
>
>Title: Reclaiming the Word Squaw in the Name of the Ancestors
>
>Kwai kwai. Greetings. I write to you as an alnobaskwa, an Abenaki woman,
>questioning the motion to gut our original language in the name of
political
>correctness. Over the past few decades, in my travels as a traditional
>storyteller and historical consultant, I have met many indigenous speakers
>and elders who are concerned at the efforts of otherwise well-meaning
people
>to remove the word "squaw" from the English language.
>
>Squaw is NOT an English word. It IS a phonetic rendering of an Algonkian
>word that does NOT translate to a womans private parts. The word squaw,
>as esqua, squa, skwa, skwe or other variants, traditionally means
>the totality of being female, not just the female anatomy. The word has
been
>interpreted by modern activists as a slanderous assault against Native
>American women. But traditional Algonkian speakers, in both Indian and
>English, still say words like nidobaskwa = a female friend,
>manigebeskwa = woman of the woods, or Squaw Sachem = female chief. When
>Abenaki people sing the Birth Song, they address nuncksquassis, little
>woman baby.
>
>During the contact period, northeastern American Indian people taught the
>colonists the word squaw, and whites incorporated it into their speech.
>English observers described womens medicinal plants as squaw vine and
>squaw root, among many others. There are rumors about the words usage by
>the fur trade era French, among western tribes who were not Algonkian
>speakers. But the insult was in the usage, not in the original word.
>
>Any word can hurt when used as a weapon. Banning the word will not erase
the
>past, and will only give the oppressors the power to define our language.
>What words will be next? Pappoose? Sachem? Pow Wow? If we accept the
>slander, and internalize the insult, we discredit our female ancestors who
>felt no shame at hearing the word spoken. To ban indigenous words
>discriminates against Native people and their languages. Are we to be
>condemned to speaking only the King's English? What about all the words
>from other Native American languages?
>
>Let me tell you a story. A good friend, a revered New England Algonkian
>elder, gave her granddaughter a traditional name that ended in -skwa
>meaning powerful little woman. That poor girl came home from school in
>tears one day, asking, Why did you name me such a horrible name? All my
>teachers told me it's a dirty word. When our languages are perceived as
>dirty words, we and our grandchildren are in grave danger of losing our
>self-respect. That school is now being taught that squaw is NOT a dirty
>word, but an indigenous term that used to be misused and misunderstood, and
>that it is an appropriate, traditional, and honorable part of this girl's
name.
>
>Some American Indian activists have written to me saying, well, YOU can use
>the word if you want, but WE consider it obscene. This labeling of my
>indigenous language as obscene is a racist statement. It makes no sense for
>Native people to cling to, and accept, the wrong translation. We must stop,
>now, and educate, rather than tolerate the loss of our language due to
>ignorance.
>
>Historical Background
>
>Before the arrival of the colonists, the word squaw was not an insult.
>When Roger Williams spoke with the Narragansett people in 1643, he was
>informed that squaw meant woman, squawsuck = women, squashim = a
>female animal, keegsquaw = a young virgin or maid and segousquaw = a
>widow, among many other examples. Williams, as a white man, was not taught
>the specific words that describe female parts. Out of delicacy I will not
>print them here.
>
>Even Indian people speaking English chose to say squaw rather than
>woman. Susanna Johnson, an English captive in 1754, wrote: . . . my new
>sisters and brothers treated me with the same attention they did their
>natural kindred, giving her a horse, for squaw to ride, and teaching her
>the occupation of the squaws. But when she got lazy, her new family
>showed no other resentment than calling me 'no good squaw,' which was the
>only reproach my sister ever gave me when I displeased her. (Note that the
>emphasis is on no good, not on squaw.)
>
>I understand the concern of Indian women who feel insulted by this word,
but
>I respectfully suggest that we reclaim our language rather than let it be
>taken over. To borrow an old proverb, let's not throw out the baby with
>the bathwater. If the water - the meaning of the word in some minds - is
>dirty, let us work together to make it clean again, instead of throwing out
>the word. There are times and places where it is necessary to distinguish a
>woman from a man, and English is problematic as well, since man is the
>root form and woman a modifier. But I identify myself as a woman despite
>the fact that even that word has been slanderously used by those who think
>that women are less intelligent, strong, or capable than men.
>
>We can do what the Institute for the Advancement of Aboriginal Women in
>Edmonton, Alberta has done with the term esquao, the northern linguistic
>equivalent of squaw - they have declared that it will no longer be
>tolerated as an insult, but will instead be recognized as a term of honor
>and respect. Their manifesto states in part: From the colonists inability
>to pronounce the word Esquao, the word 'squaw' came to be a derogatory
term.
>IAAW is claiming back the term for all Aboriginal Women to stand proud when
>we hear Esquao applied to us.
>
>Place Names
>
>Where the words Indian or chief or squaw have been used in place
>names, they usually reference some memorable person or event, without a
>negative reference implied (unless the event was a massacre of white
>settlers). Thus we have Indian Island where the Penobscot people live,
>Squaw Betty, in Bristol County, MA, recalling a local Wampanoag woman, and
>many Squaw Rocks remembering female chiefs. Many squaw place names
>recognized ancient places where women did traditional activities. Without a
>very good understanding of history, it is a mistake to erase the lives,
>stories, and voices of the women whose presence was acknowledged by the
>original naming.
>
>As a traditionalist and historian, I am deeply suspicious of how modern
>political attitudes are often applied to the past without careful
>consideration of origins. Hitler effectively slandered one of the oldest
and
>most universal sacred symbols, the world wheel or swastika, by
>appropriating it for his own purposes. Native American people who dare to
>use this traditional symbol today are scorned by the ill-informed. We, as
>indigenous peoples, must not let other cultures, even other Native
>American cultures, define, and defile, our languages and symbols. I even
>hesitate to use the term Native American, since it implies that we are
>Native citizens of a colonialist power that conquered and divided the
>original nations in this continent (none of whom were American), but
>that's another discussion.
>
>The issue of Indian mascots and appropriate usage of Indian statues,
images,
>words, names, etc. in non-Indian communities is far more complex than some
>activists wish to believe. Racist intent may be the case where the images
>are used to consciously erase, defame, misrepresent or overly romanticize.
>But in many regions, the use of Indian images and place names supports the
>historic presence of local tribal nations, many of whom have yet to be
>recognized by the federal government. Many New England Indians celebrate
>historically accurate statues and monuments and place names. That doesn't,
>however, mean they want to see a warrior with a western Plains headdress
on
>the floor of the school gymnasium.
>
>The northeastern Algonkian peoples held back the tide of colonization for
>400 years, fighting, adapting, and negotiating treaties in order to stay in
>our traditional territories. We shared our culture, foodways, stories, and
>languages to such a degree that much of what we think of as
quintessentially
>Yankee today is in fact Indian. Our complicated history included efforts
>to teach the newcomers respect while defending our land, families, and
>culture. The real issue for American Indian people today, across America,
is
>not just words and mascots, but the forging of new relationships based on
>mutual respect and understanding, in traditional homelands, beyond the
>stereotypes. And the more pressing issues, of adequate food, housing,
>shelter, and opportunity, will not be served by attacking traditional
>languages in the name of political correctness.
>
>As for the place names issue, a more useful resolution might be one that
>acknowledges and enforces respect for indigenous peoples and languages.
>Before we erase names, we must erase misunderstandings. How do we rename
>every "Squaw Rock," without forgetting the history? We can reclaim the
>original language. "Squaw Peak" might become "Ktsioskwa," "great woman," or
>another appropriate name chosen by the Wabanaki people. Indigenous people
>must publicly declare that we will no longer allow our words, names, skin
>color, beliefs, etc. to be used against us. Whenever the word squaw is
>used as an insult, my response is: "I do not accept that definition. Among
>my people, WOMEN are honored and respected. The sound "squaw," regardless
of
>its spelling, is OUR word for woman, and it is NOT to be used as an
insult!
>When I hear it spoken by Native peoples, in its proper context, I hear the
>voices of the ancestors. I am reminded of powerful grandmothers who
>nurtured our people and fed the strangers, of proud women chiefs who stood
>up against them, and of mothers and daughters and sisters who still stand
>here today. In their honor I demand that our language, and our women, and
>our history, be treated with respect.
>
>Thank you for listening.
>
>Wlibomkanni, travel well,
>
>Marge Bruchac
>
>- - - - -
>
>[2]
>
>Date: Sun, 28 Nov 1999 20:57:54 -0500
>From: Eric Brunner <bru...@world.std.com>
>Subject: REPLY: On Mascots, "Squaw," and Other Issues
>X-UIDL: 536e3789ebc1d5610fb190dd9dac61ee
>
>As a young man I learned the language of my grandfather, the language
spoken
>in the Siksika, Kainaa, and Apatohsipiikani Reserves and the
Amskaapipiikanai
>Reservation. The English name of this language is "Blackfeet" or
"Blackfoot".
>The two things that I recall was how unlike European languages our grammar
is,
>we don't have sex, and words often run to dozens of letters.
>
>In popular usage, the term "gender" is associated almost exclusively with
sex
>catagories. Like German and French, English nouns are classified as
masculine,
>feminine, or neuter, and this classification is reflected in the choice of
>singlar pronouns, "he", "she", or "it".
>
>In Siksika we classify noun stems into two groups which are often labeled
>animate and inanimate. All our noun stems belong to one of these two
classes,
>and this property of our noun stems is evident throughout our grammar. The
>US and Canadian university linguists use the term "grammatical gender" to
>convey our noun classification system to their students in terms they are
>familiar with.
>
>The import of this is that there is something quite, if not completely
>impossible to reconcile, a cognitive dissonance, when one encounters in
>recent popular Pan-Indian and Anglo-American cultures, the specific claim
>that the word "squaw" actually means an engendered body part. Nouns for
>parts of the body aren't engendered, neither are nouns for concrete objects
>such as rocks and rivers, or abstractions such as faith or truth.
>
>Siksika isn't Abenaki. The first is at the western edge of the arc of
>Algonquin languages, the second at the eastern edge of that same arc,
>between Innu and Iroquoian ranges. We share a common set of grammatical
>rules covering the parts of speech, the stems, verbs, nouns, tense, etc.
>
>We also share this view that things in the world either participate in
>the narrative emananation of creation, or not. A spoon is animate, it may
>contain soup, sand, or nothing. A knife is inanimate, it has no secret
>life of its own. To misquote a leading American, if you've seen one knife,
>you've seen them all. A spoon on the other hand is a constant surprise.
>
>In Henry Masta's Abenaki Grammar, a work written in the 1930's for the
>Abenaki Tribal School at Odenak Village, Masta employed the French term
>of convenience, "noble" and "ignoble", not the English terms of
convenience,
>"active" and "inactive", or the awkward notion of a sex that is but a
>grammatical fiction.
>
>David Walton comes to open Abenaki socials at Lewiston, and organized
>a Lenard Peltier protest in Portland, but he doesn't ask the Lewiston
>or Portland Communities of Abenaki Indians if we've any thoughts on the
>subjects of Scarboro's "Redskins" and Skowheagen's "Indians". We help
>the historic Abenaki township of Skowheagen by contributing to their high
>school curriculum at our cost, continuing the work begun three decades ago
>in Dr. Dean Bennett's "Maine Dirigo". Scarboro is another kettle of fish.
>
>Mr. Donald Socotomah, Passamaquoddy representative to Maine's Legislature
>also visits Western Maine, and like Mr. Walton hasn't asked if we've any
>concerns about the application of Pan-Tribal and American values to one
>critical word-stem in Abenaki. The subject is both loaded because "squaw"
>is about the only word non-Indians both know, and know is Indian, and go
>to the effort to define as "bad" or worthy of some non-Indian ritualism.
>
>If it were just Abenaki women who had to make a sacrifice to benefit all
>Indians by driving a stake through the heart of the linguistic rednecks
>looking for a no-cost quickie, we'd have a difficult choice, but it would
>be our decision. It is bigger than just us however, the "'k" consonant and
>"wa" diphthong, "e^kwa" in the West, and "s'kwa" in the East, is part of
>our common language -- and our languages are our cultures, and we are
>matrilineal and matrilocal -- unlike our non-Indian, and urban-based
>Pan-Indian "squaw" activist-educators.
>
>The Abenaki issue is what to do about the "S word" this year and next.
Enter
>public life in Maine at a time and on terms selected by others? Side with
>the One-Worders? Break with the Land Claims Tribes? Partition the fix along
>the Kennebec-Penobscot line? Re-bury the -skwa- stem in fully re-Abenakifed
>translations of all the place names where "Squaw" stands alone and
vulnerable
>to the One-Worders? Keep our heads down?
>
>Now that I am married into an Abenaki family, with young children, this is
>my question also. I've seen the films of Indian Island school dances, with
>everyone except the Priests and Nuns in Plains style costume, doing Plains
>style dances, happy moments of Super-8 life -- someone's Wonder Years. It's
>not the way we are taking.
>
>The word meant something in the time of Skidwaros, the same meaning it has
>in Masta, Wzokihlain, and Laurent, and later still in Day. By the time of
>George Washington, with the long Maine Indian Wars over, it took on a new
>meaning, helping to demark White-Indian marriages, or White-Indian spheres
>of external and domestic influence, and of course, White-Indian land title.
>By the early 20th century, with the Indian Problem well on its way to a
>happy assimilationist conclusion, the word was needed less and less, until
>it was stranded by the ebbing tide of American awareness of Indian
identity.
>Progressively dirtier each decade, the words signifying our Indianness,
>from "breed" to "non-citizen" finally to "part indian" are finally wiped
>out of common speech, and we, and the Americans are left with a just a road
>sign to a recreation area.
>
>I write, so this winter I'll write a story about the Zoga man. He's become
>more than just a sepia smoked figure in the Old Port, he's come to life and
>has begun to interact with Portlanders. He's at the Old Market, calling out
>crab, lobster, quohog in Abenaki, to women who calmly look at him and point
>at each saying nothing in Abenaki, women who clumsily try, and women who
>shout back at him in English. The story is in those who calmly say nothing,
>following the successful strategy of living invisibly in the houses of the
>English, the secret lives of Alnobaskwak who daily seem to be Bastoniskwak.
>
>Eric Brunner, Abenaki
>Portland, Maine
>
>Post Script
>
>An alternative to engaging in the ephemera of public strife, on an issue
>other than State (Maine) recognition of the Maine Abenaki communities, is
>to just go on about the business of being Abenaki. This means our oral and
>written arts -- some times called "language recovery" -- don't pussyfoot
>around the use of the -skwa- stem. The story "The Secret Squaws of the Zoga
>Man" (absurd working title) will be quite modest, like my abilities, but
>published under Abenaki imprimatur, joining Masta, Wzokihlain, Laurent, and
>Bruchac. Legislatures come and go, literature is more permanent, and self
>government is not just some noisy fiction about wars and taxes.
>
>End of Post Script
>
Todd Clark wrote in message <82ioml$12q$1...@nnrp1.deja.com>...
>In article <384C45...@hotmail.com>,
> ada...@hotmail.com wrote:
>
>> You may not like this womans opinion
>
>Is it your contention that Douglas Long has a vagina instead of a
>penis?
>
>> but please you are starting to get crude, personal, and offensive.
>
>Which is exactly how Long is treating Native Americans, women, and
>other minorities. He was desperately begging for a dose of his own
>medicine, and that is exactly what I gave him.
>
>Sometimes racists only understand their own language, and the point of
>good writing is to communicate strongly, directly, and effectively.
>
Laktajew
>Date: Tue, 07 December 1999 06:23 AM EST
> would ask you to consider
>the words you use in your headers.
L_F,
I just want to assure you that this was not my header and I have advocated
that it not be used and that furthermore I find it silly to let Mr Long attempt
to act as a moderator (his concept of what he is doing ) to esentially an
indian question and decision . I have allready stated that I am through with
this topic as it only serves Mr Longs needs and helps no one or nothing (imo)
Kenn
Todd Clark
"Stuart Ames" <san...@anderida79.freeserve.co.uk> wrote:
> Todd, I am shocked at you using such language,
I am shocked when people use such language as squaw, redskin, heathen,
chief, prairie nigger, injun, indian giver, honest injun, and dozens of
other racist invectives against Native Americans. I am shocked when
we are mocked by Hollywood and the capitalist sports industry. I am
shocked at the poverty, unemployment, alcoholism, and suicide rates on
the reservations. I am shocked when crimes such as rape and murder
against our loved ones go uninvestigated for decades while innocent
natives are sitting unjustly in prison. I am shocked by the
insensitivity of ignorant racist right wing posters who won't alter
their bigoted behavior no matter how many times they are politely
corrected. So I decided to teach Douglas Long and his ilk a lesson
they'll never forget.
> I came to this news group to discuss Native Americans and their
> culture, hoping to learn and also to show my daughter but how
> can I show her this site if there is someone like you on here
> using such language?
Don't use your daughter as a shield to hide behind. I am the father of
five children with number six on the way. My children are both
academically smart AND street smart. They have to be in order to
survive in this world.
> Are we not supposed to be sharing our knowledge and learning
> from each other?
That's exactly what I'm doing. It's just not the knowledge you wanted
to hear.
> From what I know of the Native Americans and I mean the real
> Native Americans, is that they are a gentle teaching people,
> spiritual in their ways and they have a lot to teach us,
Oh, brother, a another new age wannabe telling Indians to live up to
their noble redman stereotype. How are all your postings on the flying
saucer and alien vampire groups coming along? (Yes, I checked your
posting history.)
> you my friend have nothing to teach us by writing these things,
> only negativity and aggression.
Here's an educational news flash for you: Indians don't like to be told
how to be more Indian by naive long distance non-natives from the
United Kingdom or anywhere else.
> You are the type of person who prevents these sites giving
> what they are meant to give,
Secret Indian medicine handshakes and cheap imitation necklaces?
> a connection to like minded people who can share and discuss.
But only when it conforms to your phony plastic stereotypes, eh?
> But anyone new to this site would see your message and not
> come again
If you can't take the heat, get out of the kitchen. Are you genuinely
interested in learning what our lives are really like or not?
> and what a shame that would be for those of us who do want to
> connect and share the culture and beliefs of the Indians.
Most likely translation: commercially exploit our spirituality.
> If all you can share is bad language and negativity then you are
> not really welcome here.
The vast majority of my posts do NOT contain the colonial slang of our
oppressors that so offends your delicate sensibilities.
> It is obvious by the replies to your message that no one is
> happy with it,
Absolutes like "no one" automatically invalidate your point. Not only
did several posters defend the intent of my object lessons, but a
number of others thanked me in private e-mail for standing up to these
obsessive racists.
> so unless you have something constructive to say, then I suggest
> that you find a site that welcomes your style because it's
> really not appropriate here.
I have been posting here for nearly a year, and this is only the second
time I received any complaints about my vocabulary.
> love and light,
Typical cliched new age sign off.
> Sammi xxx
What do those three x's symbolize? Something pornographic?
William McLaughlin
<san...@anderida79.freeserve.co.uk> wrote:
>Todd, I am shocked at you using such language, I came to this news group to
>discuss Native Americans and their culture, hoping to learn and also to show
>my daughter but how can I show her this site if there is someone like you on
>here using such language?
Sammy:
While I share your distaste for the sort of language used in
this thread, I'm puzzled why you =expanded= the reach of these words
by adding alt.discuss.native-american to the newsgroups. (Don't
worry. I abbreviated those words in the subject header for you.)
>Are we not supposed to be sharing our knowledge
>and learning from eachother? From what I know of the Native Americans and I
>mean the real Native Americans, is that they are a gentle teaching people,
>spiritual in their ways and they have a lot to teach us, you my friend have
>nothing to teach us by writing these things, only negativity and aggression.
Hmm. Who told ya that???
While leaving aside for a moment the extreme irony of someone
in the U.K. telling an Indian how Indians are supposed to act in
newsgroups for Indians, do you really believe that Natives' primary
purpose on this planet is to teach their ways to non-Natives? Your
sole criticism of Mr. Clark seems to be that he is a failure in this
role, but where did Mr. Clark declare that he had assumed it?
I see. You have this stereotype of Indian people and then you
chastise an =Indian= for failing to live up to it.....
.....Lordy!
>You are the type of person who prevents these sites giving what they are
>meant to give, a connection to like minded people who can share and discuss.
>But anyone new to this site would see your message and not come again and
>what a shame that would be for those of us who do want to connect and share
>the culture and beliefs of the Indians. If all you can share is bad language
>and negativity then you are not really welcome here. It is obvious by the
>replies to your message that no one is happy with it, so unless you have
>something constructive to say, then I suggest that you find a site that
>welcomes your style because it's really not appropriate here.
From what I can see, you've =never= posted to alt.native
before, yet you presume to tell Mr. Clark--a regular poster here for
quite awhile--that he is not welcome??? You even presume to proclaim
the purpose of these newsgroups.....
.....Lordy!
Look, I've been here (alt.native and soc.culture.native) for
=years= and these newsgroups have always been places where Indians and
their friends discuss what =they= want to discuss. Perhaps you have
us confused with alt.native.lessons-for-wannabes or something.
>love and light,
Yeah right. Do you feel that including this somehow makes up
for the nasty, presumptious, judgmental tone of your post?
.....Lordy!
Mac
P.S. A "gentle teaching people," eh? A Kiowa who used to post here a
long time ago once told the story of an anthropologist who spent some
time learning about that Nation's customs from one of its Elders.
When his visit was over, the anthropologist asked the Elder, "Is there
a single image that, in your opinion, best characterizes the Kiowa
world view?"
"Yup," the Elder replied without missing a beat. "Dead white
man."
(Copy sent via email.)
-----------------------------------------------------
WILLIAM MC LAUGHLIN
vaga...@voicenet.com
Affiliation: Card-carrying member of the Whiteboy Tribe
Indian Name: Running Joke
Power Animal: Brontosaurus (mine's bigger!)
-----------------------------------------------------
A Criminal is a person with predatory instincts without sufficient
capital to form a corporation."
---Clarence Darrow
Sipish
s
>I purposely designed them to BE offensive so that Long would get the
>message in his own language that the disparaging term he was defending
>was degrading to Native Americans.
>
>My post was FAR from unfounded.
>
>If, however, it was also offensive to an infamously arrogant bigot such
>as yourself, then that is simply an added bonus.
>
Sipish
were inappropriate and demeaning. you chose to ignore me.
besides, you cant win a battle against an idiot.
sipish
todd wrote;
>It's called fighting fire with fire.
>
>They needed an object lesson in what they were doing to us.
>
>Do you always turn and attack your own warriors right in the middle of
>battle?
>
lenapelady
Have you ever seen the tee-shirt "housewarming"? A real favorite around
here.... LL, who believes that satirical humour is, indeed, a good
thing,,,better than rocks and clubs!
William McLaughlin <vaga...@voicenet.com> wrote in message
news:dcvp4s4bla77fuce5...@4ax.com...
Douglas Long
Todd Clark wrote:
>> I found the header and both the words Clark used and his tone
>> to be unfounded and offensive.
>I purposely designed them to BE offensive so that Long would get the
>message in his own language that the disparaging term he was defending
>was degrading to Native Americans.
I question whether the term is in fact "disparaging."
Evidently you're a totalitarian pipsqueak zealot who
goes into fits when his assumptions are questioned.
>My post was FAR from unfounded.
Your post was self-indulgent asininity.
>If, however, it was also offensive to an infamously arrogant bigot such
>as yourself, then that is simply an added bonus.
All bonuses are by definition *added*. Your use of the
word "yourself" is incorrect, as it's a reflexive pronoun
rather than an objective pronoun. You presume to
be a poet, though you're unfamiliar with the basic tools
of the occupation? And you presume to instruct others
on the use of words?
Douglas Long
Todd Clark wrote:
>> There are no "justified" times to use these words.
>Unfortunately, there still are.
>We learned at the beginning of the movement during the 1960's that the
>taboo words of the enemy's language can be an effective guerrilla tool
>of resistance in countering their domineering propaganda.
>
>I suggest that you read noted anti-racist comedian Lenny Bruce's
>autobiography "How To Talk Dirty And Influence People", as well as
>various writings by such authors as William S. Burroughs, Allen
>Ginsberg, and Harlan Ellison. You may also want to listen to the
>recordings of The Fugs, Frank Zappa, Jim Morrison, Patti Smith, Dead
>Kennedys, Ministry, Public Enemy, and Consolidated, among many others,
>to see examples of how obscenities can be used in the service
>of liberation.
Wouldn't you define all of the above as "the enemy",
as they're all members of white society?
>> They degrade women
>Yes, indeed some obscenities do, which was the whole point of the
>context in which I used them. I admire, honor, and respect women, which
>is why I was so angered by Douglas Long's continued thick-headed
>degradation of them. There are very nearly six hundred posts in this
>thread, the majority of which counteract his position, and still Long
>continues to insult native women.
Zealot.
>> and believe it or not, children come to this NG to learn about
>> our culture, what message are those of you who use these words,
>> sending out for the world to see?
>
>It is difficult to carry on a complex, detailed discussion about
>culturally relative linguistics without using the words themselves. We
>cannot chill the level of internet free speech on ANY topic simply
>because children MIGHT accidentally encounter it.
Self-indulgent, self-righteous, narcissistic zealotry.
>> You all ought to be ashamed!
>
>Thank you at least for acknowledging that there have been several
>other posters using these socially taboo slang words in addition to
>myself. So far, all the other critics have gravitated to my posts
>alone.
The narcissist's lament - *Quit picking on me*.
lenapelady
alias <al...@nobody.com> wrote in message > Welcome to the real world,
offensive language is common. Teach your children to
> live with it.
No.
Teach your children to reject the disreputable and disrespectful.
LL
John Baglow
yourself: 1a emphat. form of YOU. b. refl. form of YOU. [Concise Oxford
Dictionary]
Do not presume to instruct others until you wrestle successfully with your
own ignorance.
--
Cheers,
John Ka whawhai tonu matou, ake, ake, ake!
KDenn39
He can speak for me
ClockWFT
>In article <19991207011618...@ng-bj1.aol.com>,
> cloc...@aol.com (ClockWFT) wrote:
>
>> Some things transcend "difference of opinions". And Clark's piece of
>> verbal
>> sludge surely did...
>
>Interesting that you found the ugly C word offensive, but haven't said
>the same of the ugly S word.
>
>You might not have agreed with Todd's employment of the C word, but all
>things considered in this discussion, you might have at least tried to
>see his point.
>
I most definitely have tried. Unfortuynately, sinbce every compendium of
phonetically transcribed Algoquin words I have located have shown that "squaw"
refers to "femaleness", *not* to the offensive meaning presented here'bouts, I
have yet to find anything that supports his point.
ClockWFT
I've not been able to find one compendium of Algonquin words that presents
*any* definition of "squaw" as "woman's private parts". The below (much
snipped) comment certainly adheres to the definitions/meanings I've so far come
across. Can anyone here provide more information on this issue?
>>Title: Reclaiming the Word Squaw in the Name
>>of the Ancestors
>>Kwai kwai. Greetings. I write to you as an
>>alnobaskwa, an Abenaki woman, question-
>>ing the motion to gut our original language
>>in the name of political correctness.Over
>>the past few decades, in my travels as a tra-
>>ditional storyteller and historical consult-
>>ant, I have met many indigenous speakers
>>and elders who are concerned at the efforts
>>of otherwise well-meaning people to remove
>>the word "squaw" from the English language.
>>
>>Squaw is NOT an English word. It IS a phonetic
>>rendering of an Algonkian word that does
>>NOT translate to a womans private parts.
>>The word squaw, as esqua, squa, skwa, skwe
>>or other variants, traditionally means the totality
>>of being female, not just the female anatomy.
>>The word has been interpreted by modern
>>activists as a slanderous assault against
>>Native American women. But traditional Al-
>>gonkian speakers, in both Indian and Eng-
>>lish, still say words like nidobaskwa = a fe-
>>male friend, manigebeskwa = woman of the
>>woods, or Squaw Sachem = female chief.
>>When Abenaki people sing the Birth Song,
>>they address nuncksquassis, little woman
>>baby.
>>
>>During the contact period, northeastern Amer-
>>ican Indian people taught the colonists the
>>word squaw, and whites incorporated it into
>>their speech. English observers described
>>womens medicinal plants as squaw vine and
>>squaw root, among many others. There are
>>rumors about the words usage by the fur trade
>>era French, among western tribes who were
>>not Algonkian speakers. But the insult was
>>in the usage, not in the original word.
>>
I agree....just as the term "male-ness" can be twisted to refer to "penis" but
does *not* mean that.
>>What words will be next? Pappoose? Sachem? Pow Wow?
>>If we accept the slander, and internalize the
>>insult, we discredit our female ancestors who
>>felt no shame at hearing the word spoken.
Sadly some people get their jollies by twisting meaning into self-serving
knots...:o(
>>To ban indigenous words discriminates again-
>>st Native people and their languages.
"discrimination"?, balderdash...
ClockWFT
>im gonna sit back and let you handle this one wft.
>
>s
>
ClockWFT
>> I found the header and both the words Clark
>>used and his tone to be unfounded and offensive.
>
>I purposely designed them to BE offensive
I didn't assume you meant otherwise.
>so that Long would get the message in his
>own language that the disparaging term he
>was defending was degrading to Native Americans.
Well....IMO you could have either dispatched your message via e-mail or simply
stated in (ie. your use, Douglas, of swearwords is unwarranted and offensive").
>
>My post was FAR from unfounded.
>
Really?...I haven't found any substantiation for the claims being made around
here. Not one compendium of Algonquin words/terms that I've come across has
supported the contention bandied about in this neighborhood that the meaning,
or the main meaning, or a main meaning, of "squaw" refers to female genitals.
>If, however, it was also offensive to an infam-
>ously arrogant bigot such as yourself,
Well, so much for giving any credence to you above attempt to justify your
verbal gutter-speak.
ClockWFT
>offensive language is common. Teach your children to
>> live with it.
>
>No.
>Teach your children to reject the disreputable
>and disrespectful.
shown above is just another version of "live life to the lowest common
denonminator".
bewitagos
:
: Unfortunately, there still are.
I beg to differ. You speak of the enemy, yet you show them our vulnerable
areas to strike? Bigotry is just that, and this word is no better then
using the "N" word to describe a Black person. Our languages held no swear
words, and there is only one reason for that, not because we couldn't invent
them, but because the morality of our people was above the need to use them.
Is there a need to change our philosophy due to "their" outlook of us?
Jimmie
KDenn39
>supported the contention bandied about in this neighborhood that the meaning,
>or the main meaning, or a main meaning, of "squaw" refers to female genitals.
This is correct, though I will not share with you the word that does mean
female genitals, I can confirm that it does not begin with a "s" however...
lets take the issue a bit deeper
People have always changed words to make them derogitory... take for example
the word "Negro" black people never had a problem with this term, I had heard
from history (of which if it is correct or not I dont know) that the slaves
named themselves Negro... white people turned it into "nigger" which is higly
offensive.
In the Algonquin speaking people, there is a term close to "squaw"... but does
not mean genitals... once translated into English it comes close to meaning
"Father, help me" of which Indian women called out when they were raped by
white men... it has been assumed this is where the term "squaw" comes from...
of which, if true, the term is used in the support of rape to women... and
where the idea that it would connect with the genitals.
KDenn39
>words,
The first words my dad taught me to speak in Shawnee translated into "give me
whiskey" "son of a bitch" "asshole" "bastard" and "chicken shit" ... maybe it
was not the orignal language that our people had, but they soon learned it and
for my people, had those things in their langauge...
Oh.. the only thing I remembered to say out of all my dad taught me, the only
thing I remembered was "chicken shit" I had no use for the other words he had
taught me..
Ha.. no wonder he got into so many bar fights
Sipish
crafted to get a rise out of people. i find them equally offensive, but, only
now mentioned it because until now the thread was in my killfile.
Sipish
>On Tue, 07 Dec 1999 12:47:27 GMT, Todd Clark <tama...@helicon.net>
>wrote:
>
>>I find it extremely telling that you saw fit to censor "cunt" from the
>>topic header but did not do likewise with "squaw". The words are one
>>and the same in meaning, yet you only crossed out the one that offends
>>white persons while leaving in the one that offends Native Americans.
>
>Thank you for pointing this out, Todd. Of the three threads currently
>running with variations of the same subject header, I find this one
>the most troubling. The use of the word "squaw" has been respectable
>enough for use in a subject header for at least a month now with only
>academic objection, yet the minute "cunt" was added, it somehow became
>obscene. This is the real obscenity.
>Ana
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
Wayne George
people who hide behind words, wouldn't be able to see skid marks on their shorts
until it was pointed out. What "it" all boils down to is "some people" will
never admit to a "fact", and because we can not see their arrogance, they use
"words". The sad fact of some people here is they wear their arrogance like a
badge........and if some of "you people" out there think for a moment I have no
arrogance, and want to tell me so, put a sock in it....I am arrogant.
Mi'gwetch
Wayne George , Anishinabe :-)
~~~~
Douglas Long
John Baglow wrote:
>>>If, however, it was also offensive to an infamously arrogant bigot such
>>>as yourself, then that is simply an added bonus.
>>
>>
>> All bonuses are by definition *added*. Your use of the
>> word "yourself" is incorrect, as it's a reflexive pronoun
>> rather than an objective pronoun. You presume to
>> be a poet, though you're unfamiliar with the basic tools
>> of the occupation? And you presume to instruct others
>> on the use of words?
>yourself: 1a emphat. form of YOU. b. refl. form of YOU. [Concise Oxford
>Dictionary]
That's really debatable. The position of the word and
tone of the senetnece suggests the word's use wasn't
emphatic but rather erroneous.
> not presume to instruct others until you wrestle successfully with your
>own ignorance.
I wrestle with it all the time. I only wish others wrestled
more with theirs.
Douglas Long
alias wrote:
Anglo men seem to be the worst offenders at turning
>a good word into a obscenity,
Right. I try to get all my turning of good words into
bad words done in the morning so that I have the
whole afternoon for oppressing.
Adam
>
> >Floyd, while you may speak for some, do not speak for all.
>
> He can speak for me
You know Keely I wrote that because I knew you would say that. Be
carefull the power you give others. So now no one needs to hear from you
Keely because whatever you will say will be redundant. Let Floyd do the
talking.
John W. Hart
Are you American Indian or one of them plastic wannabi's? In my opinion, if
you ain't NDN, then you as a Englander got no call to tell ANY NDN on the
American continents how and what to say.
John Hart
"Stuart Ames" <san...@anderida79.freeserve.co.uk> wrote in message
news:82ir7o$ptc$1...@news5.svr.pol.co.uk...
> Todd, I am shocked at you using such language, I came to this news group
to
> discuss Native Americans and their culture, hoping to learn and also to
show
> my daughter but how can I show her this site if there is someone like you
on
> here using such language? Are we not supposed to be sharing our knowledge
> and learning from eachother? From what I know of the Native Americans and
I
> mean the real Native Americans, is that they are a gentle teaching people,
> spiritual in their ways and they have a lot to teach us, you my friend
have
> nothing to teach us by writing these things, only negativity and
aggression.
> You are the type of person who prevents these sites giving what they are
> meant to give, a connection to like minded people who can share and
discuss.
> But anyone new to this site would see your message and not come again and
> what a shame that would be for those of us who do want to connect and
share
> the culture and beliefs of the Indians. If all you can share is bad
language
> and negativity then you are not really welcome here. It is obvious by the
> replies to your message that no one is happy with it, so unless you have
> something constructive to say, then I suggest that you find a site that
> welcomes your style because it's really not appropriate here.
> love and light,
> Sammi xxx
> Todd Clark <tama...@helicon.net> wrote in message
> news:82gnme$hpk$1...@nnrp1.deja.com...
> > In article <11f733ec...@usw-ex0101-004.remarq.com>,
> > Sue Me <pickle6...@gte.net.invalid> wrote:
> >
> > > I am not Indian
> >
> > Obviously.
> >
> > > but my children through thier father are.
> >
> > What nation specifically?
> >
> > What is their father's role in their upbringing?
> >
> > And is he a traditional or an apple?
> >
> > > I have been reading through the different letters on the web
> > > concerning this issue and the one thing that has become painfully
> > > obvious is that women as a whole, be it Indian, caucasion
> > > (refered to as "cracker bitch" in one of the messages above),
> > > African american or whatever else are taking this and other
> > > similar incidents far to personally.
> >
> > Your insensitivity to the degradation of your own gender is disgusting.
> >
> > > I have never thought of the word squaw as anything other than
> > > an indian woman
> >
> > Are you always this proud of your own abysmal ignorance?
> >
> > > and if my daughters were to ask me what a squaw was I would
> > > tell them that.
> >
> > And do you always make it a habit to lie to your children?
> >
> > > Maybe it is the American version but we are Americans.
> >
> > Define American in this context.
> >
> > > I will also bring my daughters up with enough backbone
> >
> > Backbone is essential. So far, so good. Backbone is what Native
> > Americans and women of all ethnicities are exhibiting when they stand
> > up against degrading terminology.
> >
> > > so that they will not be offended everytime somebody
> > > unintentionally does or says something that is no
> > > longer deemed pollitically correct.
> >
> > The key word here is unintentionally. Pull your head out of the sand.
lenapelady
Floyd Davidson <fl...@ptialaska.net> wrote in message
news:82k9q...@enews4.newsguy.com...
> speak for others.
>
> However, today will be one of those exceptions, and for my own
> part and that of anyone who wishes to allow me to speak
> momentarily for them, we say:
>
> Buzz off Adam.
>
>
> Floyd, and the others
>
>
>
> --
> Floyd L. Davidson fl...@barrow.com
> Ukpeagvik (Barrow, Alaska)
>
lenapelady
Douglas Long <dkl...@mindspring.com> wrote in message
news:82k5es$gnl$1...@nntp9.atl.mindspring.net...
Douglas Long
Todd Clark wrote in message <82k55o$2ip$1...@nnrp1.deja.com>...
>In article <82ir7o$ptc$1...@news5.svr.pol.co.uk>,
> "Stuart Ames" <san...@anderida79.freeserve.co.uk> wrote:
>
>> Todd, I am shocked at you using such language,
>
>chief, prairie nigger, injun, indian giver, honest injun, and dozens of
>other racist invectives against Native Americans. I am shocked when
>we are mocked by Hollywood and the capitalist sports industry. I am
>shocked at the poverty, unemployment, alcoholism, and suicide rates on
>the reservations. I am shocked when crimes such as rape and murder
>against our loved ones go uninvestigated for decades while innocent
>natives are sitting unjustly in prison. I am shocked by the
>insensitivity of ignorant racist right wing posters who won't alter
>their bigoted behavior no matter how many times they are politely
>corrected. So I decided to teach Douglas Long and his ilk a lesson
>they'll never forget.
My "ilk?" You have taught a lesson; that is, zealots don't
take well to having their beliefs questioned, no matter how
questionable their beliefs might be. Sense when does
questioning the banning of a word make someone an
"ignorant racist right wing poster?" A bit overboard,
don't you think?
Todd Clark
sip...@aol.com (Sipish) wrote:
> besides, you cant win a battle against an idiot.
I'm beginning to see the wisdom in your words.
lunatic...@my-deja.com
I am sorry, the way deja lays it out it looks like your header sorry
again, I thought it was a bit out of character for you!
L_F
In article <19991207074532...@ng-cm1.aol.com>,
lakt...@aol.com (Laktajew) wrote:
> >lunatic...@my-deja.com
> >Date: Tue, 07 December 1999 06:23 AM EST
>
> > would ask you to consider
> >the words you use in your headers.
>
> L_F,
> I just want to assure you that this was not my header and I have
advocated
> that it not be used and that furthermore I find it silly to let Mr
Long attempt
> to act as a moderator (his concept of what he is doing ) to
esentially an
> indian question and decision . I have allready stated that I am
through with
> this topic as it only serves Mr Longs needs and helps no one or
nothing (imo)
> Kenn
Todd Clark
"Douglas Long" <dkl...@mindspring.com> wrote:
> > Todd Clark wrote:
> >
> > We learned at the beginning of the movement during the 1960's
> > that the taboo words of the enemy's language can be an effective
> > guerrilla tool of resistance in countering their domineering
> > propaganda.
> >
> > I suggest that you read noted anti-racist comedian Lenny Bruce's
> > autobiography "How To Talk Dirty And Influence People", as well
> > as various writings by such authors as William S. Burroughs,
> > Allen Ginsberg, and Harlan Ellison. You may also want to listen
> > to the recordings of The Fugs, Frank Zappa, Jim Morrison, Patti
> > Smith, Dead Kennedys, Ministry, Public Enemy, and Consolidated,
> > among many others, to see examples of how obscenities can be
> > used in the service of liberation.
>
> Wouldn't you define all of the above as "the enemy",
> as they're all members of white society?
Patti Smith is Comanche, Al Jourgensen (the leader of Ministry) is
Hispanic, and Public Enemy are African-Americans. The others, while
biologically Caucasian, are among the most vocal of critics of the
state. I do not define enemy by race, but by actions, and welcome the
assistance of any ethnicity in bringing an end to oppression.
--
Todd Tamanend Clark
Poet/Composer/Multi-Instrumentalist/Activist
Pennsylvania American Indian Movement
http://www.annihilist.com/cgi-bin/profiles.cgi?step=view_all
Todd Clark
"Douglas Long" <dkl...@mindspring.com> wrote:
> > Todd Clark wrote:
> >
> > The corpses of approximately one hundred million Native
> > Americans lie in mute testament to the historical fact that
> > the victimization is real.
>
> Congratualtions. You're *demagogue* of the week.
Damn. I am crushed. I was so hoping for demiGOD of the week.
> > But then what else can we expect from a holocaust denier
> > such as yourself?
>
> Care to substantiate that assertion?
I was referring to the AMERICAN Holocaust. You deny that Native
Americans were victimized by the European Invasion of 1492.
> >> >> The English language decides nothing; common usage
> >> >> by speakers of the English language decide a word's
> >> >> meaning. It isn't *arrogant*. It's just the nature
> >> >> of language.
>
> > What a bullshit rationalization for your own racistly
> > sexist bigotry.
>
> That's quite an argument you have there. Get familiar
> with the terms *non sequitur* and *ad hominem*.
If I weren't familiar with them already, I certainly would be now since
your posts are continually hypocritically replete with them.
> You're obviously a lowlife moron.
Even if that were true, I would still have more that quadruple the
intellect that you possess.
> Maybe you could provide evidence that the word
> *Squaw* has a derogatory meaning.
It has been used in the rape, slavery, genocide, and other degradations
of native women for over three hundred years, and you're just now
finding out about it? Talk about a moron-- your picture must be in the
dictionary right next to the definition.
flail
LORDY!! Mac, that was truly funny....thank you for brightening up my evening...
flail
William McLaughlin wrote
>
> .....Lordy!
>
> >You are the type of person who prevents these sites giving what they are
> >meant to give, a connection to like minded people who can share and discuss.
> >But anyone new to this site would see your message and not come again and
> >what a shame that would be for those of us who do want to connect and share
> >the culture and beliefs of the Indians. If all you can share is bad language
> >and negativity then you are not really welcome here. It is obvious by the
> >replies to your message that no one is happy with it, so unless you have
> >something constructive to say, then I suggest that you find a site that
> >welcomes your style because it's really not appropriate here.
>
> From what I can see, you've =never= posted to alt.native
> before, yet you presume to tell Mr. Clark--a regular poster here for
> quite awhile--that he is not welcome??? You even presume to proclaim
> the purpose of these newsgroups.....
>
> .....Lordy!
>
> Look, I've been here (alt.native and soc.culture.native) for
> =years= and these newsgroups have always been places where Indians and
> their friends discuss what =they= want to discuss. Perhaps you have
> us confused with alt.native.lessons-for-wannabes or something.
>
> >love and light,
>
> Yeah right. Do you feel that including this somehow makes up
> for the nasty, presumptious, judgmental tone of your post?
>
> .....Lordy!
>
> Mac
>
> P.S. A "gentle teaching people," eh? A Kiowa who used to post here a
> long time ago once told the story of an anthropologist who spent some
> time learning about that Nation's customs from one of its Elders.
> When his visit was over, the anthropologist asked the Elder, "Is there
> a single image that, in your opinion, best characterizes the Kiowa
> world view?"
>
> "Yup," the Elder replied without missing a beat. "Dead white
> man."
>
> (Copy sent via email.)
>
> -----------------------------------------------------
> WILLIAM MC LAUGHLIN
> vaga...@voicenet.com
>
> Affiliation: Card-carrying member of the Whiteboy Tribe
> Indian Name: Running Joke
> Power Animal: Brontosaurus (mine's bigger!)
> -----------------------------------------------------
>
> A Criminal is a person with predatory instincts without sufficient
> capital to form a corporation."
>
> ---Clarence Darrow
Floyd Davidson
ClockWFT
>>Not one compendium of Algonquin words/
>>terms that I've come across has supported
>>borhood that the only meaning, or the main
>>meaning, or even a main meaning, of "squaw"
>>refers to female genitals.
>
>KDenn39 wrote:
>This is correct,
>though I will not share with you the word that
>does mean female genitals,
clockwft wrote:
Wonderful...I have no interest in expanding my vocabulary in that direction.
>I can confirm that it does not begin with a "s"
>however...lets take the issue a bit deeper. Peo-
>ple have always changed words to make them
>derogitory...
I agree. And, imo, those here who've tried to convince others that this word
("squaw") is an offensive word have tried to do just that.
>take for example the word "Negro" black peo-
>ple never had a problem with this term, I had
>heard from history (of which if it is correct or
>not I dont know) that the slaves named them-
>selves Negro...white people turned it into "nig-
>ger" which is higly offensive.
>
I agree that *some* white People did come to use this term in an offensive
manner but find the implication above that all did so somewhat offensive. I
most definitely oppose actively promoting the explusion of words solely
because, despite their definitional unoffensive meaning, they have come to be
used by *some* in a demeaning manner.
>In the Algonquin speaking people, there is
>a term close to "squaw"... but does not mean
>genitals... once translated into English it comes
>close to meaning "Father, help me"
What do you mean "close to 'squaw' "? In sound?, in meaning?
>of which Indian women called out when they
>were raped by white men...
Huh? You seem to be saying that this term came to be used by all/most such
victims? How've you corroborated this belief? [And what is the term's meaning
in Algonquin?]
>it has been assumed this is where the term
>"squaw" comes from...
From what I've read this assumption is baseless. "Squaw" has its own
etimology&meaning quite separate from such supposed "connections" to other
words. In fact, the major aspect pf this thread to me is that several people
have consciously mis-defined and misrepresented the meaning of "squaw" for the
sole purpose to "create an injustice" against which they can fight.
Ableza Institute
Pacino in "Godfather 3," I keep getting pulled in...
I ask you to consider this, clock: The original meaning of the word may
indeed have been "femaleness;" I don't know. But, like many other words, it
came to be used as an offensive term, and the current accepted (among Indian
people) meaning is, indeed, offensive.
Like the term "bimbo" (to use the least offensive one I can think of right
now.) Bimbo is an old Italian name. Over the years, it has come to be used
to describe certain types of people in a derogatory fashion.
David Y.
"ClockWFT" <cloc...@aol.com> wrote in message
news:19991207142726...@ng-fc1.aol.com...
lenapelady
think I just saw Rudolph...! LL :)news:19991207150416...@ng-fc1.aol.com...
Todd Clark
mairz...@webtv.net (Mary Davis) wrote:
> If you walk like a squaw, talk like a squaw, look like a squaw,
> cook like a squaw, chances are pretty good you are indeed a squaw.
You really are obnoxiously proud of your own blatant bigotry, aren't
you? I am surprised that when you try to speak, anything other than
"oink, oink" comes from your mouth.
> This "Politically Correct" concept is killing America.
The America you're referring to should never have existed in the first
place. The same goes for all the other invasive colonial governments of
the Western Hemisphere.
bewitagos
of you is going to win....sheesh!
Jimmie
Wayne and Kristi Hintz
and hears Elves.... Big Sigh of Relief! (I was begining to wonder if I
retained ANY sanity) Stepn
lenapelady <lde...@earthlink.net> wrote in article
<LO_24.434$S4.2...@newsread1.prod.itd.earthlink.net>...
: eerrrr, ahhhhh, errrrrr, we're finally agreeing with clock? hark! was
that
: the sound of christmas elves? LL
: Sipish <sip...@aol.com> wrote in message
: news:19991206213144...@ng-fb1.aol.com...
: > well, we finally agree on something.
: > :-)
: > s
: >
: > wft wrote:
: > >clockwft wrote:
: > >
: > >Thank you for doing so...
: > >
: > >I found the header and both the words Clark used and his tone to be
: unfounded
: > >and offensive.
: > >
: > >
: > >
: > >
: > >
: > >
: > >
: > >
: >
: >
: >
:
:
:
ClockWFT
>The original meaning of the word may in-
>deed have been "femaleness;" I don't know.
Well, IMO, it is of more than passing importance just what the term *does* mean
in Algonquin.
>But, like many other words, it came to be used
>as an offensive term,
I agree...IMO in many/most cases (not "all", as you imply) this term was used
to carry a demeaning meaning. But IMO the first point should be to bring this
discussion back to the beginning. Those who have been specifically stating that
this term meant c***t are patently WRONG....and knew that from the start.
>"ClockWFT" <cloc...@aol.com> wrote in message
ClockWFT
>eerrrr,,ahhh,,,are we agreeing again? why,
>in addition to the Cmas elves, I think I just
>saw Rudolph...!
clockwft wrote:
Indeed, it appears so..
And....imagine my surprize... a note to me from LL sans insults. You *are* in
the Xmas spirit!:o)
>ClockWFT <cloc...@aol.com> wrote in message
ClockWFT
insulting header.
>Subject: Re: Squaw/Cunt Controversy
>From: cloc...@aol.com (ClockWFT)
>Date: Tue, 07 December 1999 08:57 PM EST
>Message-id: <19991207205715...@ng-cd1.aol.com>
Angela
(ClockWFT) writes:
> agree that *some* white People did come to use this term in an offensive
>manner but find the implication above that all did so somewhat offensive. I
>most definitely oppose actively promoting the explusion of words solely
>because, despite their definitional unoffensive meaning, they have come to be
>used by *some* in a demeaning manner.
>
I think in the beginning the N word derived from the
French Negre meaning black.
The spanish and portugese word for black was negro.
In Britain they were called Darkies,(probably still are in some places)
I guess you can take just about any word and make it a slur.
Gay used to be happy, Queer used to be wierd.
I think no matter what a word once was,
if it taken and used in a derogitory fashion
then it needs to be changed.
I can attest to the fact that the "s" word in Scotland
was what was thought to be the correct term for an
Indian woman, then of course the men were and probably
are still thought of as Braves.
Education is what is needed I guess. Accusing people who know
no different won't accomplish much it just makes everyone hostile.
The c-nt word by the way is a typical swear word in Scotland
and very commonly used.
I am unfortunatly quite foul mouthed when enraged
(thankfully not often) and use the F-ck word as well.
Not something I am proud of, but something I do
nevertheless.
The wierd thing is these words are less offensive to me
Than a@@hole and some American terminology.
I guess it's all in what your familiar with.
Even though I can admit to swearing the one word I find
totally offensive is , I can't even write it,lol
Fa--nypack.
Now that is what we use for female genitalia.
I am sure this contributed nothing to the thread,
but just passing on some thoughts.
Angela : )
Nopalito
cloc...@aol.com (ClockWFT) wrote:
> Apologies for reply on this thread, since it serves to perpetuate the
> above
> insulting header.
You never need to apologize for replying ... your opinions and
perspectives are no less post-able than anyone else's, no matter what
some may say about the content. It seems odd, though, that you'd re-post
the s'n'c words again while apologizing for doing so. Does your
newsreader not allow you to modify subject lines, as I've done here?
KDenn39
Yeah right.. got your crystal ball out of the repair shop aye?
KDenn39
>>does mean female genitals,
>
>clockwft wrote:
>Wonderful...I have no interest in expanding my vocabulary in that direction.
But yet you want to debate me on what my language is? Because you later write:
>From what I've read this assumption is baseless. "Squaw" has its own
>etimology&meaning quite separate from such supposed "connections" to other
>words. In fact, the major aspect pf this thread to me is that several people
>have consciously mis-defined and
>misrepresented the meaning of "squaw" for the
>sole purpose to "create an injustice" against which they can fight.
I think you missed my whole point.
You dont see the word "squaw" as a derogatory word.. however, if you were to
call me squaw and we worked together, I would have a case against you for
sexual and racial harassment.
It has happened before, it was a manager who called me "squaw" every time I
came across him, though I told him I was offended by this word, he continued...
I took my case to the human relations department, and won 17.5 thousand for the
one term.
It is not what you believe is offensive, it is when others tell you it is
offensive and ask you to stop.. when you refuse because you dont think someone
else should be offended... then you set your own self up.
Nopalito
kde...@aol.com (KDenn39) wrote:
> It has happened before, it was a manager who called me "squaw" every
> time I
> came across him, though I told him I was offended by this word, he
> continued...
What a jerk! But that's a perfect anecdote for this thread. It doesn't
matter if that man agreed with you about the word's etymology or
definition. You asked for respect on an easily-managed matter, and he
refused. To me, that's what this debate revolves around ... basic
respect.
> It is not what you believe is offensive, it is when others tell you it
> is
> offensive and ask you to stop.. when you refuse because you dont think
> someone
> else should be offended... then you set your own self up.
Right, and to be fair, I doubt that even those in this thread who've
denied that the word means what most are saying it means would continue
to use the word in person when asked to stop, in a situation such as you
describe.
Just curious ... when you dealt with your company's HR department, did
they try talking with the offender before things became litigous? If so,
what was his reaction? Was your company sued for the damages you
mentioned, or the individual who disrespected you? If you're not
comfortable elaborating, no problem, but it would be interesting to
know.
- Dean
lenapelady
here: that there is the etymology of the word, the history, (for example
tracing a word all the way back through the MIddle Ages and beyond, seeing
if it's Latin or Greek, etc. or whatever)..then you get to the ordinary
usage of the word.
And that's what defines a person's values. Now, if you were back home and I
went to visit you, I certainly wouldn't use "f-pack" in your village,
knowing what the slang meant; wouldn't use it around you even in an American
community. I mean, once someone has been told, what's wrong with being
considerate? The whole long thread on "s" astounds me, because 1) a good
dictionary supports what the NDNs here are saying 2)Indian language studies
support it in varying ways (depending on tribe and history, etc.) and 3)
because NDNS, esp. women, say "that's insulting to me."
It's too bad there's all these 1950's westerns (and before) floating around
with the word in them; but it's even worse that apparently some people, like
Doughie, are using them as their educational input.
LL
Angela <jama...@aol.comnospam> wrote in message
news:19991208013407...@ngol07.aol.com...
lenapelady
(true confession time here). I just adore big fuzzy funny "character" house
slippers and I've worn big holes in my three-year-old Sylvester the Cat
slippers (big red nose, they'er so CUTE!)...and at the Wal-Mart I grabbed
the last pair of jolly old Santa Elf shoes, with a face, a beard, the hat,
curling up from the toes to grin at you.....I mean, ya gotta see these thing
to believe 'em....LL p.s. Ali McBeal just had a good episode on about seeing
unicorns.
Wayne and Kristi Hintz <kwa...@execpc.com> wrote in message
news:384de133$0$48...@news.execpc.com...
lenapelady
bread concession...and if we can rope in a coupla others we can go for
Indian tacos, too.....we'll be RICH! Goodness, they'll probably have at
each other for a couple of days. LL
bewitagos <wolf...@home.com> wrote in message
news:CXk34.14307$Lm2.2...@news.rdc2.mi.home.com...
lenapelady
you why calling me (or anyone else squaw) could really get you more than
insults....really, can't you try....after all, Santa is making that
list...you might score big points at present time.... LLnews:19991208012433...@ng-cr1.aol.com...
bigbill756
day? I believe I do..........
A Buffalo Burger stand would be a mouth watering taste tempting treat
also! Had one at our last Powow in July...damn thems sure good
chewin'!LOL
* Sent from RemarQ http://www.remarq.com The Internet's Discussion Network *
The fastest and easiest way to search and participate in Usenet - Free!
Floyd Davidson
> "Douglas Long" <dkl...@mindspring.com> wrote:
>
>> Maybe you could provide evidence that the word
>> *Squaw* has a derogatory meaning.
>
>It has been used in the rape, slavery, genocide, and other
>degradations of native women for over three hundred years, and
>you're just now finding out about it? Talk about a moron-- your
>picture must be in the dictionary right next to the definition.
At the beginning of these threads a number of dictionary
references were cited to Dougie to demonstrate that the word is
in fact commonly recognized as an insult and well documented by
those who chronicle the meaning of words. He simply covers his
eyes, plugs his ears, and says that no dictionary is valid if it
does not agree with him.
Hence we can assume that his picture may well provide an
extensive definition of "moron" (a picture is worth a thousand
words and all...). However, by the nature of what a moron is,
or we could say the nature of what a Douglas Long is, he won't
understand.
But then again... maybe a thread should be started with a
subject line which refers to Douglas by the same kind of name.
"Doug = Penis". But that of course be obscured to protect
innocent women and children, "D = P".
Let it be...
Floyd
Douglas Long
Todd Clark wrote:
>> This "Politically Correct" concept is killing America.
>
>The America you're referring to should never have existed in the first
>place. The same goes for all the other invasive colonial governments of
>the Western Hemisphere.
Okay. Now what?
lisa dillon
I have been on vacation for over a weak
completely unpluged in the most beaulieful
place Molokai. I come back to the Same "S"
thread, I read only a few posts and it dawned on me "I know I am
offended by the word. I
know of no other woman who would not be
offended by th word. Now I look at all the
men who keep this offensive word posted!
In my face if I come to this site. Imagine for
a moment your mother or father comming
to this site wanting to learn this hight teck
native voice for the first time. Only to see
what is a profoundly disgusting word over
and over. We for the most part here do not
use foul words for me it is out of respect for
Elders and Children and others who would
be offended by such launguge....Lisa D....
tjsnow
<big...@netsync.net> wrote:
> Don't I still have rights to the Indian Taco stand from Graeme
> Butler
> day? I believe I do..........
Greetings bigbill,
Yes, you most certainly do, except they were strictly tacos from the
whaling franchaise we were setting up!!!!
> A Buffalo Burger stand would be a mouth watering taste tempting
> treat
> also! Had one at our last Powow in July...damn thems sure good
> chewin'!LOL
whatchamight call a 'sacred' chew, enit???...hehehe.
wasn't burger king trying to franchaise it that way....
:oP
TJ
Douglas Long
Todd Clark wrote:
>> > The corpses of approximately one hundred million Native
>> > Americans lie in mute testament to the historical fact that
>> > the victimization is real.
>> Congratualtions. You're *demagogue* of the week.
>Damn. I am crushed. I was so hoping for demiGOD of the week.
Your aspiring to divinity seems grander than that, actually.
>> > But then what else can we expect from a holocaust denier
>> > such as yourself?
>> Care to substantiate that assertion?
>I was referring to the AMERICAN Holocaust. You deny that Native
>Americans were victimized by the European Invasion of 1492.
I never addressed the issue in any way, as it's irrelevant
to the subject. But now that you ask, I find the word *victimized*
to be simplistic as a description of the clash of cultures that
lasted hundreds of years. Has any group of people not been
*victimized* by invasion and conquest at some point in history?
I certainly don't deny that Indians were invaded and conquered
and treated poorly. But that's a theme constant in human history.
And nobody alive today had anything whatsoever to do with
any of it. So what's the relevance?
>> >> >> The English language decides nothing; common usage
>> >> >> by speakers of the English language decide a word's
>> >> >> meaning. It isn't *arrogant*. It's just the nature
>> >> >> of language.
>> > What a bullshit rationalization for your own racistly
>> > sexist bigotry.
>> That's quite an argument you have there. Get familiar
>> with the terms *non sequitur* and *ad hominem*.
>If I weren't familiar with them already, I certainly would be now since
>your posts are continually hypocritically replete with them.
Care to substantiate that claim?
>> You're obviously a lowlife moron.
>Even if that were true, I would still have more that quadruple the
>intellect that you possess.
I see.
>> Maybe you could provide evidence that the word
>> *Squaw* has a derogatory meaning.
>It has been used in the rape, slavery, genocide, and other degradations
>of native women for over three hundred years, and you're just now
>finding out about it? Talk about a moron-- your picture must be in the
>dictionary right next to the definition.
Again, maybe you could provide some evidence.
Adam
>
> >You know Keely I wrote that because I knew you would say that. Be
>
> Yeah right.. got your crystal ball out of the repair shop aye?
No Keely you're just predictable. I saw you say the smae thing twice
before when someone said that so I figured you'd trot out the same line.
And you did.
Adam
>
> Adam <ada...@hotmail.com> wrote:
> >KDenn39 wrote:
> >>
> >> >Floyd, while you may speak for some, do not speak for all.
> >>
> >> He can speak for me
> >
> >You know Keely I wrote that because I knew you would say
> >needs to hear from you Keely because whatever you will say will
> >be redundant. Let Floyd do the talking.
>
> That won't work, because except for rare occasions, I decline to
> speak for others.
>
> However, today will be one of those exceptions, and for my own
> part and that of anyone who wishes to allow me to speak
> momentarily for them, we say:
>
> Buzz off Adam.
>
> Floyd, and the others
Floyd you go straight for the insult instead of the bulk of my
statements. Good 'Floyding' hence a new term for anyone that does that;
they've committed a 'Floyd'.
Adam
The use of the word "squaw" has been respectable
> enough for use in a subject header for at least a month now with only
> academic objection, yet the minute "cunt" was added, it somehow became
> obscene. .
The problem has been to linguistically prove that squaw actually means
the English equivelant of a dirty word for women's privates. The burden
of proof on that is fairly high. It is much easier to argue that the
word has marginilizing and sexualy demeaning undertones.
Douglas Long
Todd Clark wrote:
>Patti Smith is Comanche, Al Jourgensen (the leader of Ministry) is
>Hispanic, and Public Enemy are African-Americans. The others, while
>biologically Caucasian, are among the most vocal of critics of the
>state. I do not define enemy by race, but by actions, and welcome the
>assistance of any ethnicity in bringing an end to oppression.
You're a regular True Believer, aren't you. Who are the
oppressors?
KDenn39
You dont know me very well
Adam
>
> >No Keely you're just predictable.
>
> You dont know me very well
you can tell a woman is that she is predictable, but predictable you
are. I've observed the pattern in you before, I set the bait, and you
went hook, line, and sinker right into the bucket. Yuk Yuk your so
predictable I could set my watch by you.
Adam
Adam
> you Have your sensitivities pricked no matter which way you go.
>
> Does that mean it would be OK to call you a prick for talking
> about it?
>
> Is there really any question about what it means?
>
> Floyd
Well yeah there is a question about what it means. I seriously doubt you
are well versed in Algonquin so my guess is you are getting your
information, just as i am, from a secondary source.
I think the issue has taken on a life of its own and has taken on a
cause celabre` for activists wanting to keep the oppression and
subjugation of natives at the forefront as an issue. Not a bad idea
except that it lack integrity and drags well meaning folks into an empty
fight. So my point being, is that we should be looking at the modern
meaning of squaw to see what it means today and not what the Dutch and
French trappers perverted it to mean.
My sources say the historical meaning had to do with a woman as an
entity much like the Greek word gyno referred to women. Today anything
that says gyno with it we largely take to refer to the female
reproductive system but that wasn't always so was it? Now the word squaw
was used positively by Algonquins-negatively by trappers and such, and
by modern Americans, wittingly and unwittingly, in a way that
marginalizes women. Now I think it apropriate to remove the word from
geographical locations based on the latter explanation.
Wicakpi
wasichu grab the mike and say all these things in the middle
of a real huge Indian crowd. Wouldn't you, Todd? Creates a
real gratifying image, enit? LOL
Wic
Todd Clark wrote in message <82lurt$ahq$1...@nnrp1.deja.com>...
>In article
<24409-38...@storefull-213.iap.bryant.webtv.net>,
> mairz...@webtv.net (Mary Davis) wrote:
>
>> If you walk like a squaw, talk like a squaw, look like a
squaw,
>> cook like a squaw, chances are pretty good you are indeed
a squaw.
>
>You really are obnoxiously proud of your own blatant
bigotry, aren't
>you? I am surprised that when you try to speak, anything
other than
>"oink, oink" comes from your mouth.
>
>> This "Politically Correct" concept is killing America.
>
>The America you're referring to should never have existed
in the first
>place. The same goes for all the other invasive colonial
governments of
>the Western Hemisphere.
>
>--
>Todd Tamanend Clark
>Poet/Composer/Multi-Instrumentalist/Activist
>Pennsylvania American Indian Movement
>http://www.annihilist.com/cgi-bin/profiles.cgi?step=view_al
l
Todd Clark
> > clockwft wrote:
> >
> > From what I've read this assumption is baseless. "Squaw" has
> > its own etimology & meaning quite separate from such supposed
> > "connections" to other words. In fact, the major aspect of
> > this thread to me is that several people have consciously mis-
> > defined and misrepresented the meaning of "squaw" for the sole
> > purpose to "create an injustice" against which they can fight.
Typical right wing diarrhea of the mouth designed solely to abort any
forward momentum in the arena of minority civil rights.
> I think you missed my whole point.
He WANTED to miss it. It serves his spiteful agenda not to get it.
> You don't see the word "squaw" as a derogatory word... however,
> if you were to call me squaw and we worked together, I would have
> a case against you for sexual and racial harassment.
You certainly would.
> It has happened before, it was a manager who called me "squaw"
> every time I came across him, though I told him I was offended by
> this word, he continued...
Much like Douglas Long.
> I took my case to the human relations department, and won 17.5
> thousand for the one term.
Absolutely excellent.
> It is not what you believe is offensive, it is when others tell
> you it is offensive and ask you to stop...
Exactly.
> When you refuse because you don't think someone else should be
> offended... then you set your own self up.
Just as all these right wing posters are doing in this thread.
Todd Clark
"Douglas Long" <dkl...@mindspring.com> wrote:
> > Todd Clark wrote:
> >
> > I am shocked by the insensitivity of ignorant racist right
> > wing posters who won't alter their bigoted behavior no matter
> > how many times they are politely corrected. So I decided to
> > teach Douglas Long and his ilk a lesson they'll never forget.
>
> My "ilk?"
On this news group (alt.native), your ilk would include ipm, ClockWFT,
Graeme Butler, and Scott Weiser, among others.
> You have taught a lesson; that is, zealots don't take well to
> having their beliefs questioned, no matter how questionable
> their beliefs might be.
You are engaging in the proverbial pot-kettle-black syndrome.
> Sense when does questioning the banning of a word make someone
> an "ignorant racist right wing poster?" A bit overboard,
> don't you think?
Don't go acting all innocent on us, Dougie. It is my understanding that
you have an extensive prior history of bigoted behavior.
Desecrated any Mexican graves lately?