Native Americans sic Wendigo on JK Rowling for "cultural appropriation"

[Toni]

You are flat out refusing to answer the question. I'm not surprised, but I am disappointed.

I thought I made it clear in my first post that I was posting in response to your inquiry in a different thread about what position you took that might be considered conservative.

Do you similarly take the same 'conservative' position on this issue as me, or do you refuse to answer the question?

Your stance on this, and indeed, some of your other stances, fall right in line with conservative and neoconservative (I'm talking American style here) writers.

Like you, I have a job to do and also a life to lead which limit my time to ferret out links and so forth.

You don't have to ferret out links. I quoted the entire article in my OP.

It wasn't meant as an insult. It's an observation. I asked for more from you in support of your condemnation because I was wondering if I was misunderstanding something.

Toni, Do the Native Americans who complained about JK Rowling have a legitimate gripe or not?

It's pretty clear we are at cross purposes here so I am
bowing out.

 

[bigfield]

So interestingly, Rowling pays them a compliment by even discussing their religion as real in her world. Jesus doesn't even get a passing mention. Not believable enough, I suppose?

Jesus is kinda dull.

If you were looking for Christian source material, then angels and demons, Yahweh and Lucifer, the Divine Comedy, Paradise Lost etc. make for better fantasy fodder than lame-ass Jesus.

 

[abaddon]

I'm not sure why this would be a conservative or neoconservative position?

~~~

Some other unrelated even to each other thoughts about the ideas in the OP:

I kinda wish fantasy writers took a bigger swing at the Christian and Muslim religious fantasies and didn't always focus on the smaller and more fanciful religions.
Although the more fanciful ones are certainly cooler to have in a fantasy story.

Brandon Sanderson does a pretty interesting job of continually poking at Christianity - but not quite dissing it. I haven't figured out his schtick, completely, since he teaches at Brigham Young, of all places, while writing stories that constantly dissect religion and even gets the atheist position actually fairly right. I can't figure out if he's a religionist or not.

Part of why I wish writers took a bigger swing at making fantasy of the religious fantasies would be to normalize questioning and even ridicule of things like golden plates in a magic hat, zombies rising from the grave and the idiocy of "he rose after three days! It must be a miracle and not a mistake!

I do have respect for Native traditions and find them very interesting and enriching, WHILE not believing a single bit about the fantasy bits. It's too bad I could probably never convey this to the Native bloggers well. I'm an atheist. I'm not dissing your religion because it's native or not-christian. I dis it because it is fantasy just like christianity. I had an interesting exchange in a religious discussion wherein some christians were dissing the wiccans and I chimed in that I didn't want superstitions to be part of the law. The wiccan asked if I was being a jerk by calling her religion "just a superstition" and not giving it full due. After explaining that I thought christianity was ALSO "just a superstition," she was okay with my statements. It was just that she didn't want wiccanism to be marginalized in favor of christianity. Which, I think, is the complaint here.

So interestingly, Rowling pays them a compliment by even discussing their religion as real in her world. Jesus doesn't even get a passing mention. Not believable enough, I suppose?

Is integrating religious myth into a fantasy story the same as to denigrate it?

Are “fantasy” and “falsehood” synonyms?

 

[dismal]

The OP is an example of Metaphor taking a conservative position. Or perhaps more accurately, a neo-conservative position.

What makes his position neoconservative?

If you offend a sacred in-group of the left you must have taken a position on the right.

Even if you got there by applying secular human principles supposedly we all embrace.

It's logic. If you're not for the in-group you must be part of the out-group.

 

[Tom Sawyer]

I'm not sure why this would be a conservative or neoconservative position?

Ya, I also don't see any kind of conservative slant in that position. While, in a broad sense, "not caring about the appropriation of minority cultures" could be labelled as conservative, this isn't that. It's saying that the argument being expressed by Keene is an invalid one. It's not being called invalid because it's the position of a minority culture, it's being called invalid because the OP is saying that the logic behind the argument lacks merit.

 

[laughing dog]

I think the OP topic is so trivial in every respect that I wonder why anyone bothered with it (including myself).

 

[SimpleDon]

I'm not sure why this would be a conservative or neoconservative position?

Ya, I also don't see any kind of conservative slant in that position. While, in a broad sense, "not caring about the appropriation of minority cultures" could be labelled as conservative, this isn't that. It's saying that the argument being expressed by Keene is an invalid one. It's not being called invalid because it's the position of a minority culture, it's being called invalid because the OP is saying that the logic behind the argument lacks merit.

If anything the fact that the OP presents reasonable and logical arguments in support of his position would make it less likely to be a conservative position, based on the recent examples. [/half joking]

 

[Jimmy Higgins]

A thread about being bothered by other people being bothered over something trivial. Their complaints, as presented here seem trite and not really worth much in the way of reflection. The repeated nature of threads complaining about people complaining seems a bit hypocritical. But that too is a bit trite.

Won't lose any sleep over any of this.

 

[Sarpedon]

Notice how Metaphor freaks out when he is labelled and stereotyped as a conservative as a result of his racist viewpoints, but mocks Native Americans for objecting to being stereotyped as mystical people, who have just one system of religious belief. He expects us to respect his diversity, but makes fun of others.

 

[dismal]

Notice how Metaphor freaks out when he is labelled and stereotyped as a conservative as a result of his racist viewpoints

No I did not notice that.

but mocks Native Americans for objecting to being stereotyped as mystical people, who have just one system of religious belief. He expects us to respect his diversity, but makes fun of others.

He did not make fun of "Native Americans". He made fun of a specific thing a specific person said.

 

[Nexus]

The repeated nature of threads complaining about people complaining seems a bit hypocritical.

And you complaining about people complaining about people with silly complaints is quite hypocritical.

We are not complaining about SJWs complaining. We're criticizing the stupidity of their complaints.

 

[Jimmy Higgins]

The repeated nature of threads complaining about people complaining seems a bit hypocritical.

And you complaining about people complaining about people with silly complaints is quite hypocritical.

Actually I used the word trite to point at the very concept. Too bad you seem more wanting to whine than contribute by thoughtfully reading what people post.

We are not complaining about SJWs complaining. We're criticizing the stupidity of their complaints.

Criticizing, complaining... I need a razor. Where did you get the one that you used to split that hair?

Now, if you can excuse me, the people the OP is on about will have little influence on anything. I'm going to pay a bit more attention to that guy leading the Republican polls and primaries/caucuses that is riling up the ugliest parts of our nation and is actually having an impact.

 

[Alcoholic Actuary]

I guess I'll take this on, just because it's a slow day at work.

Yes. Native Americans have a "right" to be offended and their culture and heritage were (in this case) misappropriated. So what?

It is also true that JK Rowling does not need to offer so much as an apology for basically stealing a fantastical story and rewriting it because no one owns the copyright to it - as far as I can tell.

What the Native Americans "get" is to be offended. The end. If they want to bitch and moan about it all over the internet, fine. It's easy enough to avoid.

I used to laugh at the insincerity of people who apologized without really apologizing: "I'm sorry you are offended" - type of thing. But I have to admit I'm starting to see the point.

aa

 

[Sarpedon]

No I did not notice that.

He started a thread to complain about it. http://talkfreethought.org/showthread.php?7637-Which-of-the-following-positions-are-conservative

He did not make fun of "Native Americans". He made fun of a specific thing a specific person said.

True, but the theme of Europeans and European Americans using Native Americans in their literature as a kind of Sambo like character is something that large numbers of Native Americans have complained about, for an awful long time. Everything from Tonto to Peter Pan, to video games, to porn movies do this. I can see how they might find that annoying at best, and somewhat threatening at worst. The fact that he quotes one specific person does not mean that the wider movement doesn't exist, and he is, by reasonable extension, mocking them all.

 

[Toni]

I'm not sure why this would be a conservative or neoconservative position?

Ya, I also don't see any kind of conservative slant in that position. While, in a broad sense, "not caring about the appropriation of minority cultures" could be labelled as conservative, this isn't that. It's saying that the argument being expressed by Keene is an invalid one. It's not being called invalid because it's the position of a minority culture, it's being called invalid because the OP is saying that the logic behind the argument lacks merit.

Which is really the same thing, in this case.

Regardless of whether one is religious in any sense, the moral and cultural tenements of various religions, relious cultures and societal cultures have and will continue to shape the views and attitudes of individuals and societies.

It's evidenced in this thread.

BTW, you are correct: not caring or dismissing concerns or outright denying the concept of cultural appropriation is very much a conservative position.

 

[J842P]

Notice how Metaphor freaks out when he is labelled and stereotyped as a conservative as a result of his racist viewpoints, but mocks Native Americans for objecting to being stereotyped as mystical people, who have just one system of religious belief. He expects us to respect his diversity, but makes fun of others.

I noticed none of these things. Instead, I noticed an argument that is hard to refute.

 

[Nexus]

Too bad you seem more wanting to whine than contribute by thoughtfully reading what people post.

You never contribute a thoughtful post about this subject. Every post I've seen of yours about this is complaining about complainers or assertions that SJW don't exist.

 

[Toni]

Notice how Metaphor freaks out when he is labelled and stereotyped as a conservative as a result of his racist viewpoints, but mocks Native Americans for objecting to being stereotyped as mystical people, who have just one system of religious belief. He expects us to respect his diversity, but makes fun of others.

I noticed none of these things. Instead, I noticed an argument that is hard to refute.

I certainly have noticed exactly the same things as Sarpedon.

Moreover there is nothing remotely like evidence offered in support of Metaphor's opinion. Which is ironic, to say the least. As is what I am starting to believe is that prevailing attitude is that the only 'correct' response to anyone's religious beliefs is mocking condemnation. To a dogmatic, faith based extent.

 

[Jimmy Higgins]

Too bad you seem more wanting to whine than contribute by thoughtfully reading what people post.

You never contribute a thoughtful post about this subject.

What? That I said that I found what has been noted as trivial isn't a contribution?

Every post I've seen of yours about this is complaining about complainers

Isn't is hypocritical or what?

...or assertions that SJW don't exist.

Yeah, that is untrue, but you don't bother to read what I write, so that is to be expected.

 

[Sarpedon]

I noticed none of these things. Instead, I noticed an argument that is hard to refute.

Then you must either have insight I lack, or have lower standards of argumentation.

His main point is that 'Skinwalkers don't exist, and you don't have a copyright on them.' Both points are true. But I frequently point out the difference between something that is trivially true and meaningfully true. These here are trivial truths. It is true that skinwalkers don't exist. However, religious people around the world believe in things that don't exist, and expect these beliefs to be treated with some degree of courtesy. Native Americans have frequently noted their own beliefs are treated differently than those of others, that others have no qualms about portraying their culture and beliefs in certain ways that they would likely find objectionable if their own culture were so portrayed. While we as atheists can dismiss claims that these supernatural things are true, we can't dismiss the unfairness that is happening. The second point about them not having the copyright is also true, but trivially true and irrelevant, as no one is suing anyone. What is happening is criticism, and everyone has a right to criticize.

Native Americans, who are still very marginalized and mistreated in this country (and Canada), are understandably concerned about media depictions of them that reinforce the stereotypes that go along with the very real mistreatment. Depictions of them as savages are of course clearly problematic. But also (in their view) are more 'positive' depictions, showing them as being magical, mystical and in tune with nature. The reason for this is perhaps a person primed with these 'positive' stereotypes, then seeing the miserable conditions that exist on many reservations, (conditions we have largely inflicted on them) might react negatively towards the inhabitants themselves, for not living up to their expectations. Perhaps they are over-sensitive, but on the other hand, no one can deny they have suffered hugely, and it seems to me that we can afford to indulge their possible over-reaction, rather than risk adding to very real and undeniable suffering.