Selling artifacts of genocide? (h/t @anishinaboy)

Former APTN reporter and Ojibway factotum Tim Fontaine Tweeted this item from a high-end auction brochure from Waddington's in Toronto.

The item description reads:

NORTHERN PLAINS INDIAN

CHILD’S TUNIC, EARLY 19TH

CENTURY

fringed and with beaded collar, showing

signs of central bullet trauma, cased, 23”

x 31” — 58.4 x 78.7 cm

That's right. It's a child's shirt. From the time when Americans were pushing westward through the Great Plains of the continent, slaughtering bison — and often, human beings —in the name of Manifest Destiny.

This artifact is one among dozens that belonged to anthropological collector Billy Jamieson, who died a few years ago.  The auction house says it was purchased originally from Tom Hampton in Santa Fe, New Mexico. How Mr. Hampton came upon it is not mentioned. But it is valued at $2-3,000.

Mr. Fontaine updates that the post is no longer on the Waddington's site. (He complained via e-mail.) 

The page on the Waddington's site with the dead child's shirt is down. Took a grab from the catalogue: pic.twitter.com/IZgWR2qB2y
— Tim Fontaine (@anishinaboy) April 28, 2014

So, why is this a problem? After all, we have no idea who shot this child. It could have been anyone, even another Native American.

No matter what the original provenance of the tunic, it is evidence of a historical murder of a child, within the context of what many consider an era of attempted genocide of Native Americans by European settlers.

It's not a historical curiosity. It is a symbol of horror. And I hope it will be repatriated soon to the unfortunate child's people for proper respect, rather than becoming a conversation piece in another rich guy's parlour.

The auction is tomorrow. Waddington's contact info is here.

Update:

Looks like the shirt has been removed from the auction: http://t.co/h4hlswtsHW (thanks to @kimpweaver for pointing this out)
— Tim Fontaine (@anishinaboy) April 28, 2014

The other two items removed were "FOUR PAIRS OF NORTHEAST WOODLANDS INDIAN
MOCCASINS, 19TH/EARLY 20TH CENTURY" and "THREE PAIRS NORTH AMERICAN NATIVE INDIAN MOCCASINS, 19TH AND 20TH CENTURIES"

You can still see the original catalogue here.

UPDATE: The issue has been picked up by mainstream media.

Native Americans call themselves many things, but not "Redskins"

Via Osocio

Recently, I was interviewed (twice) by Adweek's David Gianatasio about the highly-problematic sports brand, The Washington Redskins. I received quite a bit of blowback from diehard fans on Twitter about my contention that the name is a racist anachronism that simply has to go away.

Interestingly, here in Ottawa, a local youth league football club who had named themselves after Washington's NFL franchise have just recently changed their name to the Eagles following a formal human rights complaint by Ojibway musician Ian Campeau from A Tribe Called Red.

Mr. Campeau spent two years campaigning against the Nepean Redskins name,  and he says it taught him a lot about the continuing racism against Aboriginal peoples. "The backlash that this whole campaign has received to me tells me this is more than just football," he said. "It's about the entitlement of being able to label an oppressed people, to call somebody they have no ties to... that word."

Meanwhile, Washington Redskins owner Dan Snyder says he will never change the name of his team. But Native Americans and their allies are gaining force. The Oneida Indian Nation was first to speak out. Now National Congress of American Indians has joined in the opposition, backed by leaders from seven different groups:  Cathy Abramson, Councilmember, Sault Tribe of Chippewa Indians; Al Goozmer, President, Tyonek Native Village of Alaska; Brian Cladoosby, Chairman, Swinomish Indian Tribal Community and President, NCAI; Edwina Butler Wolfe, Governor, Absentee Shawnee Tribe of Oklahoma; Leander McDonald, Tribal Chairman, Spirit Lake Tribe; Dennis Welsh, Chairman, Colorado River Indian Tribes; Candace Bossard, Councilmember, Ponca Tribe of Nebraska. Even President Obama has weighed in.

In my opinion, this is a human rights issue, not matter of "how many people" support the NFL or other regulators taking action to force a name change. But as we have seen with other human rights issues, such as equal marriage, it doesn't hurt to get public opinion on your side.

That's where this PSA comes in. My blogging colleague Marc just posted it on Osocio:



Simple, powerful and truthful, this video released by the Oneida — right before this weekend's Super Bowl — is the "hearts and minds" campaign the cause needs, exactly when it needs it.

You, too, can take action at changethemascot.org.

Thanksgiving tanning ad thanks Native Americans for their "sexy color"

I'm almost speechless. Almost.

The Daily Mail quotes David Arnett, Marketing Director at Alabama tanning salon Club Sun Color Studios"

"We are all Americans no matter what color we are. Just because we promote a nice tan doesn't mean we are racist. 

This was an in house ad that was never intended to be taken as racist or insensitive. We were merely trying to compliment the beautiful skin "color" of Native Americans."

Mr. Arnett also claims to be Native American, which seems to have become the new "I have black friends" or "my uncle is Jewish" of refusing to apologize for casual racism.

The promotional image is no longer on their site.

Poster puts racialized sports logos in context

Some of you may have seen my comments quoted in a couple of Adweek posts, on September 11 and 30, about the Washington Redskins controversy. Basically, I said that while I understand how passionately the fans hold on to their traditions, the phenomenon of racial epithets and stereotypes in sports logos is ultimately doomed.

One of the common arguments is that nobody would accept the same treatment of other historically oppressed groups in sports marketing. The National Congress of American Indians however, recetly took it to the next level:

"Pro-Football's use of the 'Redskins' mark disparages Native Americans just as 'San Francisco Chinks', 'New York Jews', 'Dallas Wetbacks', 'Houston Greasers' and the 'Green Bay Crackers' would disparage other groups if they were the subject of trademark registrations," states a legal brief sent by the NCAI to the US Supreme Court. They're asking that the "Redskins" trademark be rescinded.

This mysterious poster, however, doesn't seem to appear on the NCAI site, even though it has been attributed to the organization by CBS news. All references to it, however, seem to use the same low-res screenshot posted on Tumblr, four years ago. Due to the recent re-emergence of the issue around the Washington Redskins, however, it has gained new life on the social internet.

Can anyone find the original source?

Four stupid Thanksgiving ads with the same racist headline

They're not just unoriginal, obnoxious and offensive, they're historically inaccurate. 

Back in the day, it was the pilgrims who drank beer all the time, simply because they had no reliable source of clean water. The indigenous Wampanoag people probably weren't in much of a partying mood, either, since were being decimated by novel diseases brought to their shores by the Europeans.

From a collection of native stereotyped American Thanksgiving ads at Indian Country.  Thanks to Audra Williams for sharing.

Dress your tween daughter as a "sassy squaw" this Halloween

My sister-in-law, Laura L., shared this picture from a Facebook. I'm used to Halloween being a celebration of awkward and/or offensive stereotypes, but "squaw"? Seriously?

The term was once common for indigenous North American women, entering English as a loan word from the Algonquian languages, but is now usually considered a derogatory (by some, even obscene) term.

This costume is marketed by inCharacter. Here it is in their catalogue:

The company also makes "adult" versions, but omits the "s" word:

The "Sassy Squaw" costume is also for sale at Amazon.com, Sears.com, ebay's Shopping.com and Buy.com (where it was renamed "Sassy Indian Maiden Costume") along with a number of other stereotyped native costumes for girls.

To my First Nations nieces, and all Aboriginal women: I am sorry this shit is still happening.

Gap is in social media hell for not knowing what "Manifest Destiny" is

So, apparently Gap has been selling this shirt with the words "Manifest Destiny" written on it.

As a Canadian, the first thing it made me think of was the rhetoric behind post-1812 border skirmishes with our southern neighbours. But that's just the way I learned it in history class.

FB friend Audra (a social media specialist in the not-for-profit world) made me aware of just how much shit it's causing with the real victims of the policy when she shared this post on The Belle Jar:

The term Manifest Destiny was coined by journalist John L. O’Sullivan in 1845 as part of his campaign to encourage the annexation of Texas and Oregon County. His first use of the phrase, in the 1845 July-August issue of the Democratic Review, didn’t draw much attention, but the second time he used it, in a column published in the New York Morning News on December 27th, 1845, became extremely influential: 

“And that claim is by the right of our manifest destiny to overspread and to possess the whole of the continent which Providence has given us for the development of the great experiment of liberty and federated self-government entrusted to us.” 

Manifest Destiny became the smart, fancy-sounding name for a belief that had already been around for quite some time: namely, that white folks of European descent were destined to rule the entirety of North America. These people truly believed that it was God’s will that they colonize the new world and systematically destroy any civilizations that might already be occupying the lands they wanted.

To make things worse, here's what the shirt designer had to say about it:

Via Ida Hammer

There's now a petition on Change.org that states:

GAP is selling a black shirt with the words "MANIFEST DESTINY" written on it. This article of clothing promotes a belief that has resulted in the mass genocide of indigenous people, and it serves to normalize oppression. This shirt is marketed to teens and young adults, and it gives no context for the racism and inequality that persists in our society, to this day, as a result of this doctrine. We are asking that this shirt be discontinued, and that an apology be issued.

The designer, Mark Mcnairy, is very very sorry:

Like ALL CAPS sorry.

Meanwhile, Gap have lost all control over their Facebook wall. 

Here are some choice posts.:

Seriously. Is nobody minding the store?

Native North Americans are not impressed with the cultural appropriation in your marketing

Sociological Images' Gwen Sharp just wrote an interesting post about Paul Frank's event for Fashion’s Night Out, which "reflects the widespread appropriation of Native American cultures in fashion over the last few years." She described the event as including a dress-up game with stereotyped Native American garb, and photo opportunities. It's important reading for marketers, as is the original post at the Native Appropriations blog by Cherokee writer Adrienne K.

She wrote (directly to Paul Frank), "The bottom line is this: your event stereotypes and demeans Native cultures, collapsing hundreds of distinct tribal and cultural groups into one 'tribal' mish-mash, thereby erasing our individual identities and contemporary existence."

Here's one of her screencaps:

Coincidentally, just yesterday I captured this campaign for an art exhibition at Ottawa's Gallery 101 by Joi T Arcand of the Muskeg Lake Cree Nation, Saskatchewan, called oskinikiskwēwak ("young women"). It looks at the problem of pop culture appropriation of native culture from the other side:

"Look! More Neechies!"
"Nah, it's just hipsters in headdresses."

It's part of a series of works that mock stereotypes with wit and style.

This isn't the 1950s, my friends. (Especially those of you at Red Light PR.) Native Americans and Canada's First Nations people see what you did there. And they will call you on it.