View Single Post
Old 09-28-2018, 04:46 PM   #18
OLChemist
Pow Wow Committee
 
OLChemist's Avatar
 
Items ElephantPresent
User InfoThanks / Tagging InfoGifts / Achievements / AwardsvBActivity Stats
OLChemist has a reputation beyond reputeOLChemist has a reputation beyond reputeOLChemist has a reputation beyond reputeOLChemist has a reputation beyond reputeOLChemist has a reputation beyond repute
OLChemist has a reputation beyond reputeOLChemist has a reputation beyond reputeOLChemist has a reputation beyond reputeOLChemist has a reputation beyond reputeOLChemist has a reputation beyond reputeOLChemist has a reputation beyond reputeOLChemist has a reputation beyond reputeOLChemist has a reputation beyond reputeOLChemist has a reputation beyond reputeOLChemist has a reputation beyond reputeOLChemist has a reputation beyond reputeOLChemist has a reputation beyond reputeOLChemist has a reputation beyond reputeOLChemist has a reputation beyond reputeOLChemist has a reputation beyond reputeOLChemist has a reputation beyond reputeOLChemist has a reputation beyond reputeOLChemist has a reputation beyond reputeOLChemist has a reputation beyond reputeOLChemist has a reputation beyond repute
Join Date: May 2002
Posts: 3,353
Credits: 0.00
Savings: 0.00
Quote:
Originally Posted by ches View Post
...I would like your opinion.
That is probably unavoidable, LOL.

Quote:
Originally Posted by ches View Post
I was just repeating what I read in a history book.
Well, to the victor goes the history books. Historical narratives and the dominant culture tend to view Native women through three lenses: Princess, Slut and Drudge. There are (too) many hundreds, maybe thousands, of murdered and missing Native women who've been crushed under this legacy.

You need to remember that most 16th-18th century first person narratives of Native people were written by military men and male explorers. Often there was little overlap between these men's understandings of proper gender roles and those of the various Native peoples they documented. For example, upperclass Victorian men thought women unsuited for any type of rigorous physical exertion and those who by circumstance or choice engaged in such were somehow defiled. How do you think those men viewed women who skinned and processed large game, or cleared fields and sowed crops, especially when their men were engaged -- in domestic sphere -- in activities viewed as less strenuous?

How would you think an enemy soldier would be greeted in the village or home? Do you think they saw people on their normal behavior? I can just image some ancestress, cut from the same cloth as my mom, demanding the entire household demonstrate to this wasicu visitor exactly how civilized people behave. Her husband would have been scared to do much more that sit there with his bowl of soup making sure he minded his table manners, and the kids wouldn't have dared to move, LOL.

In societies with greater separation between male and female spheres do you think these men could talk with freely with women. Imagine them asking a woman about premarital relations. Think that question would get answered, honestly? At all? Look what happened to Margaret Mead, and she was a woman asking such questions. Instead, they would have talked to other men about such things. You've been on here long enough to get a taste of Indian humor. Imagine the above exchange getting written into an explorer's journal as fact. How many of those "observations' in those accounts were hearsay about a neighboring, possibly enemy, people?

In my experience, there is a range of attitudes and behavior patterns. There were 500+ cultures in the continental US. The entire range of human sexual behaviors could be found, with differing cultural blessings and sanctions.

When I'm not supposed to be working, we'll discuss views female sexuality, sexual violence and the colonial enterprise.

Last edited by OLChemist; 09-28-2018 at 04:51 PM..
OLChemist is offline   Reply With Quote Share with Facebook