Re: Amerind an offensive term (was: Early Amerind assimilation
26 Aug 1996 07:52:39 GMT (Matt Silberstein) wrote:
>In sci.archaeology wrote:
>>Stephen Barnard <> wrote:
>> I have been quietly and intermittently watching this thread but
>>now I think its time for me to have my say.
>>I have seen at least one Native American who's name I can not
>>remember, try to teach, yes teach white America a thing or two
>>about Native Americans and how they view themselvs, White America
>>just can't seem to get it! It is no longer up to white America to
>>decide what is or is not offensive to anyone but white America!
>>These postings are for sci. archaeology and sci. anthopology but
>>it appears that no one is interested in learning or understanding
>>anything but their own narrow and many times arrogant points of
>Why do you feel it is acceptable to refer to "white America"? In what
>resonable way am I "white"? If we are refering only to skin color I
>prefer the term "pink". It does a better job describing the color. (I
>would love to get into a ((stupid)) discussion on whether my "pink" is
>closer to "red" than a Native American "brown".) Or do you want to
>assign certain political positions to me because of my color and want
>to assign moral guilt to me because of my color?

Well, I'll say this once again. I was just a bit irritated when
I wrote this post. I simply called it as I saw it. I think
that Steve and I are squared on this.

Are you taking what I said personally? My words were ment only
for those who fit the shoe.

Besides myself and the flat world; newspapers, magazines,
official documents etc. use the word "white". This indicates
that this is an accepted and non-offensive term, however, if
this word offends you I will be more than happy to refer to you
in any manor that is non-offensive. *You* choose.

As for "moral guilt" it makes no difference if your ancestors
arrived on the Mayflower or yesterday. We in America have all
benefited from the pain and suffering of the Native people.
Anyone who enjoys the fruit, past or present should have and
should take some moral responsibility.

The tree was planted over 500 years ago and the fruits are here
now for us to pluck but the Native American has to *shake* the
tree for theirs. Shame!

>>For starters - white America does not have American sports named
>>according to skin color or the lack thereof, white America have
>>not been hearded on to a piece of forign territory and told to
>>live, white America has not had the culture of the old world
>>ripped from memory
>The use of nicknames for teams is reprehensible. In terms of herding,
>I could swap you stories for hours. It does not make me righteous
>because misdeed were done to my ancestors.

I'm sure you can but so can the Chinese Americans, Japanese
Americans, African Americans, Native Americans.....need I
continue? They all have their stories too.

I was taught that the evil
>done to my ancestors gave me a special responsibility to not do evil

A lesson we can all learn from and thereby refer to the
indigenous people in a manor they deem appropriate!
To them not to is evil!

>>and white America has not had any of her
>>emmigrant ethnicities (tribes) become extinct.
>For this to be true you need to have a special, narrow definition of
>"white" and culture.
>>>A few people have questioned my motives in starting this thread. Well, tough.
>>Did you take any time at all to wonder WHY people questioned your
>>motives? Judging from your post you could have cared less.
>>>I'm not anti-Native-American. I *do* happen to find the hypersensitivity of
>>>some ethnic groups to nomenclature to be unfortunate. Can you believe that
>>>some white-bread Midwesterners actually think that "Jew" is an offensive term,
>>>and that you should say "Jewish person" instead?
>>Your words shoe that you are anti Native American and very smug
>>about how some of those, you know, minorities react to white
>>Americas nomenclature. My question is what kind of an American are
>>you? And as for the lack of hypersensitivity from the Indian
>>newsgroup -news flash- people will have more tolorance when they
>>are addressed or referred to in a fashion that THEY, not you, deem
>>Well the white-bread midwesterners may be on to something. Does
>>the word Hebrew ring a bell? JU-daism is a religion. Remember, the
>>one that came before Christianity and Islam, numero uno in the
>>chronology of the big three!
>So, in your opinion, who gets to decide how to refer to a group? And
>do you refer to a Cathloc person rather than a Cathloc? A Moslem
>person rather than a Moslem? Or a Protestant person rather than a

If referring to those who observe the religion of Judiasm as
Hebrews is offensive please advise and who gets to decide!
>Matt Silberstein
>What is the scariest line you know? How about:
>"My name is Number 6, what's yours?"


"Don't worry about the changes in the key
just play within the range of the idea"

Charlie Parker