Louis Vuitton's "Navajo Moccasins"

Adrienne Keene writes:Apparently Louis Vuitton has a line of "Navajo Moccasins":

"Capturing the spirit of the authentic Indian moccasin, this on-trend design in oiled calf leather features a hand-stitched vamp, a comfortable rounded shape and a casually tied leather lace."

Um, once again, "Navajo" is not a synonym for "Generic Indian." Navajo moccasins don't even look anything like that. And did the fashion world learn nothing from the Urban Outfitters lawsuit (when they had 25+ products named "Navajo")?Some comments on this posting:Yeah, real authentic 'cause it's a well known fact that First Nation people love their Italian driving shoes....

There's nothing even generic Indian about them, let alone Navajo. They're just standard-looking preppie slip-on mocs. Garbage marketing drivel.

These things are $200, not only racially offensive but also capitalizing on it ... sick, goes to show how skewed 21st century societies can be when they still think it is OK to capitalize on the marginalization of people.

Those ugly "penny loafers" are not mocs! Not even mock mocs! They're ugly and I'm pretty sure not one Dine would be caught wearing anything like that! Navajo Nation, sue their pants off!!Comment:  For more on the Urban Outfitters case, see Navajo Nation Sues Urban Outfitters and Urban Outfitters Renames "Navajo" Products.

"In your face" approach doesn't work?

After reviewing the Urban Outfitters and Paul Frank controversies, an article suggests how to battle the ongoing prejudice:

Navajo Hipster Panties Gone Awry

By Arielle ZiontsScoggins suggests the best way to counter disrespectful appropriation of Native American fashion and culture is to educate people about Native American history and explain to non-Natives why this trend is disrespectful.

“Some people don’t know that that’s offensive…you are desensitized to it,” said Scoggins.

McGowan agrees that education on the topic should be promoted, but warns that people should not be approached forcefully about the issue.

“You just don’t go up to them and say ‘hey, don’t do this’ because then you aren’t a good ambassador…because [by doing so] you are putting on an aggressive face yourself,” said McGowan.

Anthes hopes that the movement towards the acceptance of the LGBT community can be used as a model to approach this trend.

“Twenty years ago… it was acceptable societally to make homophobic jokes, to just assume that these people were not going to hear you say these hateful things… that population has become a lot more visible so we understand and have empathy,” said Anthes. “Most people [can] go through their life without ever having to look an Indian person in the eye and say… ‘it’s fine if I’m joking about it.’”

Arguably, the best way to combat the problem of cultural misunderstanding is through fostering intercultural connections. Native Americans are a minority of the American population, and can easily be marginalized. Efforts such as Adrienne K’s Native Appropriations blog and social media campaigns are where indigenous Americans can have their voices heard.Comment:  I'm not up on my LGBT history, but it seems to me they were "in your face" as much as anyone. With gay pride parades, anti-AIDS activism, and more. Professor Anthes doesn't address how the movement worked, but I doubt it was through education only.

McGowan, who's "a senior at Claremont High School and a member of the Iowa tribe of Kansas and Nebraska," doesn't like the "in your face" approach. But we have only his opinion that it doesn't work. There's nothing resembling a fact to support his claim.

In any case, Adrienne Keene's blog often takes an "in your face" approach. As does my blog, of course. Many of the Native activists I know also take this approach.

And we have proof that this approach works: the Civil Rights movement of the '60s. Nothing was going to change until the National Guard integrated the schools, blacks occupied buses and lunch counters, and people marched in the streets. Same with Indians: Alcatraz, the Trail of Broken Treaties, and Wounded Knee II.

As someone said recently, smiles, prayers, and dances for unity aren't enough. If you want to change something, you often have to get angry and make yourself heard. America started acknowledging minority rights only when minorities thrust themselves in America's face.

For some recent protests, see McNairy Apologizes for "Manifest Destiny" T-Shirt and Winning the War on Columbus? For a discussion of protests in general, see Stereotypes Disappear "Organically"? and Do Protests Work?

Navajo Nation sues Urban Outfitters

Last October, Urban Outfitters was in the news because of its "Navajo" products. The story isn't over yet:

Navajo sues Urban Outfitters over product names

By Felicia FonsecaThe Navajo Nation has sued Urban Outfitters Inc. months after the tribe sent a cease and desist letter to the clothing retailer demanding it pull the "Navajo" name from its products.

The lawsuit filed late Tuesday in U.S. District Court in New Mexico alleges trademark violations and violations of the federal Indian Arts and Crafts Act, which makes it illegal to sell arts or crafts in a way to falsely suggest they're made by American Indians when they're not.

The tribe has about 10 registered trademarks on the Navajo name that cover clothing, footwear, online retail sales, household products and textiles. Tribal justice officials said they're intent on protecting what they believe are among the tribe's most valuable assets.

"The fame or reputation of the Navajo name and marks is such that, when defendant uses the `Navajo' and `Navaho' marks with its goods and services, a connection with the Navajo Nation is falsely presumed," the lawsuit states.Some legal background:Susan Scafidi, who directs the Fashion Law Institute at Fordham University's law school in New York, said Urban Outfitters could point out the name changes in certain items in response to the tribe's original objections. The "Navajo Hipster Panty" and the "Navajo Print Fabric Wrapped Flask," for example, later appeared on the company's website as "printed" instead of "Navajo."

Other defenses include claiming no likelihood of consumer confusion between an authorized Navajo clothing item and the panty, using alternate spellings of "Navajo" and arguing that the contested product isn't a handicraft, she said.

But she and New York-based fashion lawyer Joseph F. Murphy Jr., agree the trademark infringement is clear. Both pointed to a history in which the Navajo Nation lost real property and now is fighting to protect intellectual property.

"That's what disgusts me about this situation," Murphy said. "I, like many people, thought it would have been resolved. But apparently Urban Outfitters declined to write the big apology and may have to write the big check."Icewine, Roquefort cheese and the Navajo Nation

By Chelsea VowelThe Navajo Nation has trademark ownership of the name ‘Navajo’, and it has the legal right to stop people from using it to describe products that have not been approved by the Navajo Nation. Just like Urban Outfitters owns the trademark to its name.

Urban Outfitters responded with this back in October:

“Like many other fashion brands, we interpret trends and will continue to do so for years to come,” he said. “The Native American-inspired trend and specifically the term ‘Navajo’ have been cycling thru fashion, fine art and design for the last few years.”

This is true, but won’t save Urban Outfitters from being held accountable for their trademark infringement. “Everyone else does it” is not a legal defence.Comment:  For more on the subject, see Urban Outfitters Renames "Navajo" Products and Jezebel Surveys "Navajo" Fashions.

Urban Outfitters renames "Navajo" products

So-Called Navajo Products Vanish from Urban Outfitters WebsiteBy Friday, the clamor seemed to have peaked, leaving us wondering “What’s Next for the Urban Outfitters Navajo Case?”

Nothing, it seemed. But today, a search on the Urban Outfitters site for “Navajo” returns no results.And:The “Navajo Print Fabric Wrapped Flask” is now the “Printed Fabric Wrapped Flask.” The “Navajo Sock” is now the “Printed Sock.”

Same products, different names. For the Navajo, Sasha Houston Brown, and others who made their feelings known, the simple Printed Hipster Panty might also be called the Righteous Undergarment of Cultural Victory.

The war isn’t over (indeed, Sasha objected to the products themselves, not just their names), but a battle has been won.

Urban Outfitters pulls ‘Navajo’ name from products on website in wake of criticismUrban Outfitters last week told The Associated Press it had no plans to alter its products. The online name changes were first reported by Indian Country Today.

The Navajo Nation Department of Justice said Wednesday the changes were “positive” and “more consistent with the corporation’s responsibilities than previously demonstrated.”

“If the company has also ceased using the Navajo name in conjunction with its merchandise in its retail stores and print-media advertising, these are encouraging steps by the company towards amicably resolving this matter,” the department said in a release.

The tribe holds at least 10 trademarks on the Navajo name that cover clothing, footwear, online retail sales, household products and textiles, and said it was intent on protecting those trademarks.

But the war's not over yet:

Urban Outfitters still selling ‘Navajo’ clothing despite criticismCLOTHING CHAIN URBAN Outfitters is still selling ‘Navajo’ branded clothing in Europe, despite coming under fire from the Native American group over its use of their name.

Critics have said the line of Navajo clothing and accessories were disrespectful and offensive–and that Urban Outfitters are profiting inappropriately from the name of the tribe.

A Navajo-branded hip flask has been a particular target for anger, as the reservation has a serious problem with alcoholism. A line of women’s knickers has also been criticised as inappropriate for a Navajo culture which preaches modesty.

Urban Outfitters has removed the Navajo name from its US website, with the items in question now simply marked as “printed”. However, the name is still in use on its UK online store, which also services Ireland.Comment:  Despite the UK website, this is an awesome victory. Once again, people power kicks the butt of a corporate giant.

For more on Urban Outfitters, see Jezebel Surveys "Navajo" Fashions and Why Protest Urban Outfitters?

Jezebel surveys "Navajo" fashions

Following on the heels of the Urban Outfitters controversy, the Jezebel blog looks at The Most WTF Navajo-Inspired Clothing And Accessories:Urban Outfitters may have been the recipient of a cease-and-desist letter from the Navajo Nation, which, as the holder of several trademarks on the word "Navajo," is seeking to stop the company from using "Navajo" in its product names and descriptions, but the current vogue for "Navajo"-inspired (and Native American-inspired in general) clothing, jewelry and accessories is hardly limited to one company. From the beautiful to the tacky to the downright disturbing, here's a survey of fashion's latest problematic ethnic "trend."Comment:  These are more like typical Navajo-inspired fashions than the worst.

For more on the subject, see Why Protest Urban Outfitters? and Media Covers Urban Outfitters Controversy.

Why protest Urban Outfitters?

In What’s Next for the Urban Outfitters Navajo Case? Adrienne Keene notes some defenders of the privileged status quo:Most of the media outlets covering the back-and-forth between the Navajo Nation and Urban Outfitters wonder if Navajo even has a case, and plenty of commenters dismiss the tribe and the concerns completely:

saeda: “I don’t think anyone assumes real natives made those panties.”

night crone: “Don’t you think bringing all the media attention to this, will only draw more people to Urban and sell more? Urban doesn’t care if anyone is offended, they just want to make money, and you’ve given them lots of free advertising.”

Merthyr Bong: “As a person of Scots ancestry I am offended by Scotch tape! How dare they! Using plaid even! Where can I get my money and 15 minutes of fame for being offended?”

Lynnie123: “What—no one else in the world could come up with those patterns? They’re probably angry because the Native Americans aren’t making money on the deal.”Then she answers these critics:Jezebel posted a fabulous piece yesterday detailing the ins and outs of intellectual property law and fashion, tying in the Indian Arts and Crafts Act and other measures in place to protect Native artisans. They quote Susan Scadafi, a professor at Fordham Law, who says, of tribal trademark cases:

“It’s an issue when you have indigenous peoples…who have been subject to actual genocide, and then you come back around with what some people characterize as cultural genocide. The pillaging of land, the pillaging of personal property, followed by the pillaging of what could be considered intellectual property. It’s something that occurs against a background of a lot of other offensive actions.”

That, to me, is the root of it all. This goes far beyond an issue of trademarks or truth in advertising. This is also an issue of representation, and an issue of power. I, personally, don’t care about a pair of socks called “Navajo,” but I do care about what they represent. They represent the appropriation of Native American cultures and lifeways, and the continued stereotyping of Indigenous Peoples. Most consumers look at that sock and can’t imagine that it holds any meaning beyond its $4.99 price tag. But I, and other Native people, look at that sock and see that the painful history that has allowed the vast majority of Americans to ignore our continued existence.

These “Navajo” products, and the thousands like them found at shops all over the world, relegate Native peoples to a stereotype. We are nothing more than a one-dimensional fictitious “Native American culture” represented by southwestern designs, fringe, feathers, and buckskin; when in reality we are a diverse, vibrant population of over 565 tribes and communities, each with our own traditions, languages and cultures.Comment:  You could apply these comments to almost any stereotype controversy. No one is claiming that any particular mascot or stereotype is going to kill anyone. But each instance is part of a 500-year pattern of destruction and demonization. They represent the Indians' loss of power, wealth, and status, as Americans continue to neglect and marginalize them.

If Indians could restore their power, wealth, and status with a magic wand, they would. Then they wouldn't have to fight individual cases of cultural theft and misrepresentation. Since they can't do that, what do you expect them to do? Sit back and enjoy being raped and exploited?

Until we eradicate racism and stereotyping with the equivalent of a nuclear bomb, all they can do is chip away at the problems one piece at a time. That's what they're doing with these cultural battles. Not trying to eliminate "Navajo" panties and sox--at least not primarily--because these items aren't that important. Rather, reminding people that they're still here and their beliefs and wishes matter. That the destruction and demonization must stop now, because Indians aren't going to let them continue.

For more on the subject, see Media Covers Urban Outfitters Controversy and Open Letter to Urban Outfitters.

Media covers Urban Outfitters controversy

With Sasha Houston Brown's open letter getting reposted widely, the Urban Outfitters controversy is taking off in the mainstream media. Here's a report on Time.com:

Urban Outfitters Taken to Task for Faux 'Navajo' Products

By Allison BerryThis season, tribal prints have been a major trend, showing up in numerous fall runway shows, such as Isabel Marant and Proenza Schouler. Naturally, the trend has trickled down to the fast-fashion chains as well. But the ready-to-wear designers who have jumped on the Native American bandwagon have, for the most part, tried to avoid specifically labeling their clothing or marketing their collections as “Navajo.”

A key issue is whether Urban Outfitters is describing the style of the product, or suggesting that it was actually made by Navajo artisans. Currently there are 23 products labeled as “Navajo” on the company's website, as well as 13 described as the more generic “tribal.” And the trend is not limited to Urban Outfitters: Forever 21 also has 6 “Navajo” products, and a whopping 113 that are “tribal.”

Urban Outfitters has not yet issued a public response to Brown's letter.On ABC News:

Urban Outfitters Under Fire for 'Navajo' Collection

By Christina NgIn a statement to ABCNews.com, Urban Outfitters public relations director Ed Looram wrote: "The Native American-inspired trend and specifically the term 'Navajo' have been cycling thru fashion, fine art and design for the last few years. We currently have no plans to modify or discontinue any of these products."

Looram added that the company is dedicated to inspiring customers and interpreting trends.

Brown said that not only were the company's items offensive, but they may also be illegal.

On the popular Jezebel blog:

Urban Outfitters And The Navajo Nation:  What Does The Law Say?

By Jenna Sauers"The story with the Indian Arts And Crafts Act, though, is that it only protects, as you would expect from the title, 'arts' and 'crafts,'" says Scafidi. "So while there is general language [in the Act] about putting the term 'Indian' or 'Native American' or the name of a particular nation on any goods in a misleading fashion, that generalized language about 'any good' is narrowed by the description of 'arts and crafts' items in particular. Which is why things like the Jeep Grand Cherokee are not barred by the Indian Arts and Crafts Act, even though Cherokee is obviously a nation as well." A car isn't a piece of art, or a craft product.

And neither is a piece of clothing. Fashion is not considered an "art" (nor is a clothing design, under current law, copyrightable in the U.S.). And mass-produced items such as those Urban Outfitters sells are not really "crafts" either. In Scafidi's view, the fact that the Navajo Nation took the step of trademarking the name "Navajo" offers the tribe a much higher level of protection. That puts "Navajo" on the same footing as trademarks like "Chanel" or "Burberry." And the Navajo Nation has already warned Urban Outfitters to cease an desist from using the tribe's trademarks on its goods.

"There is a trademark on 'Navajo' for clothing," says Scafidi. "It mentions specifically jeans, and tops, and shirts, and sweatshirts," along with more general categories like "sportswear." Not all of the products that Urban Outfitters is selling under the name "Navajo" are enumerated in the trademark, "but you could imagine that other similar items could fall into the 'confusingly similar' category," meaning that they would also be protected from infringement. Of course, in court, "Urban Outfitters could come back and say, 'Well, if you wanted that trademark to cover panties, then you should have listed panties.'" It would be up to a judge to decide.Plus some cultural context:

Urban Outfitters’ “Navajo Hipster Panty” Is Just the Tip of the Racial Iceberg

By Jim EdwardsFashion retailers have, historically, fumbled the ball when it comes to race, with companies frequently offending their own customers by presenting stereotypes and outright racism as if they were merely styles. It was only last year that Victoria’s Secret relegated its black models to a “tribal” skit complete with animal prints and a jungle motif.

And who could forget American Apparel’s (APP) “conical Asian hat”—i.e. a rice paddy coolie hat—which was withdrawn from sale following an outcry earlier this summer?And:Back in 2003, Abercrombie & Fitch (ANF) published a catalog that featured 67 white models and not a single non-white model. It also sold T-shirts that said “Wong Brothers Laundry Service: Two Wongs Can Make It White,” and CEO Mike Jeffries told Wall Street analysts he was “delighted” to “exclude people” from his stores. An employee discrimination lawsuit followed and A&F ended up settling it for $40 million.Comment:  Once again we see the awesome power of protest. Adrienne Keene's initial posting and Sasha Brown's open letter have compelled the mainstream media to cover the issue. It's only a matter of time until Urban Outfitters caves in.

For more on the subject, see Forever 21's Columbus Day Sale and Neo-Navajo Fashion Trend.

Below:  Images from Urban Outfitters.

Open letter to Urban Outfitters

We've read a lot about fashion companies (mis)appropriating Native designs recently. For instance, in Neo-Navajo Fashion Trend and Urban Outfitters' "Native" Products. But with this open letter, the issue may be ready to explode:

An Open Letter to Urban Outfitters on Columbus Day

By Sasha Houston BrownDear Glen T. Senk, CEO Urban Outfitters Inc.

This past weekend, I had the unfortunate experience of visiting a local Urban Outfitters store in Minneapolis. It appeared as though the recording “artist” Ke$ha had violently exploded in the store, leaving behind a cheap, vulgar and culturally offensive retail collection. Plastic dreamcatchers wrapped in pleather hung next to an indistinguishable mass of artificial feather jewelry and hyper sexualized clothing featuring an abundance of suede, fringe and inauthentic tribal patterns.

In all seriousness, as a Native American woman, I am deeply distressed by your company’s mass marketed collection of distasteful and racially demeaning apparel and décor. I take personal offense to the blatant racism and perverted cultural appropriation your store features this season as “fashion.”

All too often industries, sports teams and ignorant individuals legitimize racism under the guise of cultural “appreciation.” There is nothing honorable or historically appreciative in selling items such as the Navajo Print Fabric Wrapped Flask, Peace Treaty Feather Necklace, Staring at Stars Skull Native Headdress T-shirt or the Navajo Hipster Panty. These and the dozens of other tacky products you are currently selling referencing Native America make a mockery of our identity and unique cultures.

Your corporate website claims to “offer a lifestyle-specific shopping experience for the educated, urban-minded individual.” If this is the case, then clearly you have missed the mark on your target demographic. There is simply nothing educated about your collection, which on the contrary professes extreme ignorance and bigotry.

My primary concern with your company is the level on which you are engaging in cultural and religious appropriation. None of your products are actually made by Indigenous nations, nor were any Native peoples involved in the production or design process. On the contrary, you have created cheap knock-off trinkets made in factories overseas. Selling imported plastic and nylon dreamcatchers disrespects our history and undermines our sovereignty as Tribal Nations.

Did I mention that marketing inauthentic products using Native American tribal names is also illegal? The company’s actions violate the Federal Indian Arts and Crafts act of 1990 and the Federal Trade Commission Act. According to the Department of the Interior:

“The Indian Arts and Crafts Act of 1990 (P.L. 101-644) is a truth-in-advertising law that prohibits misrepresentation in marketing of Indian arts and crafts products within the United States. It is illegal to offer or display for sale, or sell any art or craft product in a manner that falsely suggests it is Indian produced, an Indian product, or the product of a particular Indian or Indian Tribe or Indian arts and crafts organization, resident within the United States. If a business violates the Act, it can face civil penalties or can be prosecuted and fined up to $1,000,000.”

I doubt that you consulted the Navajo Nation about using their tribal name on sophisticated items such as the “Navajo Hipster Panty.” In fact, I recently became aware that the Navajo Nation Attorney General sent your company a cease and desist letter regarding this very issue. I stand in solidarity with the Navajo Nation and ask that you not only cease and desist selling products falsely using the Navajo name, but that you also stop selling faux Indian apparel that objectifies all tribes.

Urban Outfitters Inc. has taken Indigenous life ways and artistic expressions and trivialized and sexualized them for the sake of corporate profit. It is this kind of behavior that perpetuates the stereotype of the white man’s Indian and allows for the ongoing commodification of an entire ethnic group. Just as our traditional homelands were stolen and expropriated without regard, so too has our very cultural identity. On this day that America still celebrates as Columbus Day, I ask that do what is morally right and apologize to Indigenous peoples of North America and withdraw this offensive line from retail stores.

Sincerely,

Sasha Houston Brown, Dakota
Santee Sioux NationComment:  For more on the subject, see "Navajo Wolves" Spirit Hoods and "Cherokee Chic" = Generic Hippie Look.

Urban Outfitters' "Native" products

Adrienne Keene reviews the Urban Outfitters website in her Native Appropriations blog. She notes the plethora of products with "Navajo" names.

Urban Outfitters is Obsessed with NavajosSo what's inherently wrong with using Navajo in product names? And what can tribal nations do about it?

First of all, these products represent a stereotype of "southwest" Native cultures. The designs are loosely based on Navajo rug designs (maybe?) or Pendleton designs, but aren't representations that are chosen by the tribe or truly representative of Navajo culture. Associating a sovereign Nation of hundreds of thousands of people witl a flask or women's underwear isn't exactly honoring.

Additionally, it's more than likely that Urban chose "Navajo" for the international recognition--to most of the world Navajo (and Cherokee)= American Indian (my Jamaican friend didn't even know there were other tribes in the US until she met me). This conflation of Navajo with "generic Indian" contributes to the further erasure of the distinct tribes and cultures in the US and solidifies the idea that there is only one "Native" culture, represented by plains feathers and southwest designs.And:A few months ago, they Navajo Nation Attorney General actually sent a cease and desist letter to Urban Outfitters, and there are some great quotes from the letter (I'll try and post it in full in another post):Your corporation’s use of Navajo will cause confusion in the market and society concerning the source or origin of your corporation’s products. Consumers will incorrectly believe that the Nation has licensed, approved, or authorized your corporation’s use of the Navajo name and trademarks for its products—when the Nation has not—or that your corporation’s use of Navajo is an extension of the Nation’s family of trademarks—which it is not. This is bound to cause confusion, mistake, or deception with respect to the source or origin of your goods. This undermines the character and uniqueness of the Nation’s long-standing distinctive Navajo name and trademarks, which—because of its false connection with the Nation—dilutes and tarnishes the name and trademarks. Accordingly, please immediately cease and desist using the Navajo name and trademark with your products.Comment:  The stereotype here is that some silly fashion products accurately represent the Navajo or any other Native culture. They don't.

For more on fashion appropriations, see "Native Wolves" Spirit Hoods and "Cherokee Chic" = Generic Hippie Look.

Below:  Navajo Hipster Panty.