The Grand Ronde Indians mascot

In response to the Grand Ronde chairman's defense of Indian mascots, I posted the following:

Our school has decided to call ourselves the Grand Ronde Indians. Below is our new mascot: a brave and noble warrior.

If you think it's a racist stereotype, don't worry. It's an honor...trust me!



Tribal member objects

Some people didn't get or like my little spoof. One in particular:Mr. Schmidt,

I am an enrolled member of the Confederated Tribes of the Grand Ronde. Please consider the fact that the general council of the Tribe did not get a chance to have a say in how the Tribal Council represents us in the mascot debate. I am offended that you have decided to represent me this way. I would hope you would educate yourself and represent yourself better than this. Please consider there are many sides to this issue, even within a single tribe.

Thank you.You didn't have a chance? What's stopping the council from passing a resolution now? Or holding a press conference? Or writing an editorial the way Chairman Leno did? And saying they disagree with him or whoever's responsible?

Until they make their disagreement plain, it's not my duty to do more research. It's theirs to publicize their disagreement. If it's in the news, I'll see it and share it.

I'm offended that your chairman is continuing to stereotype 5.2 million Natives. How about we do something about him, since he is the problem? Such as one of the responses I suggested. Rather than criticizing me for criticizing him?I understand you criticizing him, but that's not what you did. You criticized and grouped all members as having the same view. You used the same image to characterize those who support your work. You don't feel you need to educate yourself when making yourself a leader of a movement? That is concerning to me. I told you what you posted was offensive to me and you don't think you should apologize for that. As tribal members we are not only concerned about the mascot issue but several issues within our tribe. Unfortunately, it is not at the top of the issues we are working on. We would love to conquer it all on your time table but that is a luxury we do not have. It does not mean that we are not working on it. If you are going to continue with your poor behavior, I feel I cannot support EONM.I was spoofing Leno's belief that Indian mascots are noble warriors. Saying Leno is a jerk or whatever doesn't tell us anything about his belief. To mock his belief, I have to generalize about Indians the way he did.

I think my intent was clear, but now I've stated it explicitly: I was mocking Leno's position, not the tribe as a whole.

"You criticized and grouped all members as having the same view." Incorrect. I didn't say anything about the views of other Grand Ronde Indians in this posting. This is my view of Leno's view of Indians and nothing else.

So it's not a priority to you that Native kids around the nation are suffering because of mascots? Well, it's a priority to anti-mascot activists. We're not narrowly focused on our own interests; we're focused on all of Indian country.

How long would it take you to write a brief statement denouncing Leno...a minute? Why don't you do it so we can see your concern about this issue?

Chairman speaks for tribe

My critic wanted me to educate myself, so I did. From May 2013:

'Teach our history, keep Native mascots,' Grand Ronde tribal chairman urges: Guest opinion

By Reyn LenoThe issue of Oregon public schools using tribal mascots continues to surface in the Oregon Legislature thanks to the inattentiveness of the state Board of Education to Oregon's nine federally recognized tribes. The Confederated Tribes of Grand Ronde wants to set the record straight on the subject.

High school mascots are supposed to be inspirational. High schools do not adopt derogatory figures or slogans; they adopt admirable and inspirational figures. The banned names of tribal mascots--Indians, Braves, Warriors and Chiefs--are inspirational Native images, and the Grand Ronde tribe does not view their use as derogatory.The Grand Ronde tribe...not him personally. If he doesn't speak for the tribe, you can set the record straight here and now. Give us a statement that he's wrong and we'll publicize it for you.

Another critic joined in:Come on. Why joke about this offense? I'm not getting something. Why not post an alternative to the insult?I've posted about a thousand alternatives to this "insult" in this and other forums. The question is why not use this tactic once in a while to stir things up.

How exactly is this different from the numerous comments calling the Grand Ronde tribe "sellouts," "greedy," "corrupt," etc.? I must've missed all the criticism of those attacks and insults.

Are direct attacks and insults okay but not indirect ones? What can we say or not say in pursuit of social justice? Spell it out for us, please.

Leno the apple

A few people took my side against Leno:Wtf!! This is totally disgusting. Leno needs to be stripped of all power. F'ing apple!!

[You] hit the nail on the head. (APPLE) why do we put up with them ? No tribes I know of have a value system that says being greedy and selfish is what were about. My own tribe got rid of a chief who was as red an Apple as you can get and unfortunately George Tiger still has followers in place. If Mr Leno and Tiger want to act white turn in your CDIB and citizenship card's we won't miss you.There you go. See, that wasn't hard.

Of course, a tribal member could suffer retribution from a powerful chairman, but there are ways to speak anonymously. As far as I'm concerned, silence isn't an option.

Ecoffey and Davies downplay racism

A couple of Native journalists took activists like me to task for focusing on such "minor" issues as Adam Sandler's racist movie. Here's round 1:

Evaluating our priorities in the Native media

A note from the editor’s desk

By Brandon EcoffeyOver the past couple of weeks social media has been going absolutely nuts over an incident involving a group of Native actors walking off a Adam Sandler run movie set due to their objections to the famous actor’s grotesque depictions of Native people and culture. Although I applaud the courage of these Native actors to risk being black balled by Hollywood due to their protest, I do not understand why this particular story gained so much traction when there are real and far more pressing issues on reservations that the Native media has brushed aside.

Where is the outrage over our young people dying weekly? Where is the outrage over the absence of any type of functioning economy on reservations? Where is the outrage over the fact that many many children in Indian Country do not have access to safe drinking water? These are third-world issues that are pushed to the back page in favor of stories about people dressing up like Indians, or acting like us, or doing whatever it is that they do.

Many say that the misappropriation of our culture impacts the self-esteem and self-image of our Native youth. This may be true. But what impacts those aspects of our children even more is waking up to homes filled with mold, or abusive parents, or extreme poverty resulting from decades upon decades of failed federal policies and exploitation at the hands of predatory investors.

Although I agree that cultural appropriation is wrong I would just hope that others in the Native news industry reassess their priorities and react accordingly.My response:

"Where is the outrage over our young people dying weekly?" It's hidden by the invisibility of Natives in the mainstream media. This invisibility is shredded when an issue such as Sandler's racist movie gains traction.

Ripping apart this cloak of invisibility is a necessary precursor to generating outrage about endangered Native children. If no one knows they exist, there can be no outrage.

The MSM's choice isn't between covering the Sandler controversy and covering endangered Native children. It's between covering the Sandler controversy and doing nothing.

Only after that, when people become more aware of Indian country's ongoing problems, will the MSM turn its focus to them. Awareness comes first, and the Sandler controversy has helped raise that awareness.

Others chimed in:Rob Schmidt hit the nail on the head.

I'm sorry but many of us are outraged by all those issues as well. Many of us are fighting to better our communities also. I get so upset hearing Native people saying things like this because it makes the fight harder for ALL Native issues. We shouldn't be picking and choosing what issue to fight but we should be upset and fighting on all fronts!

You can do both. I work with Native health but still think mascots et al. are whack and should be eliminated.Right. Most of us are just reading and sharing articles. Even if you're deeply into these issues, they take up only 5% or so of your time. The rest of the time, you're working on whatever it is that you consider important.Hi. I just read the article and your question, so I'd like to share my perspective, at least in terms of mascots. A friend once said something similar. "We have more important issues to address," but it is my belief that this is one of the reasons that we have so many other issues to contend with. The dehumanizing effects of misrepresentation of our people via mascots and the various forms of appropriation have been effective enough to impact the way society views us. This in turn makes it so much easier for mainstream society to turn a blind eye to our multifaceted challenges. The cage of oppression consists of many wires, but in addressing the symptoms, we must also be diligent in addressing the root cause.
Round 2

Another column from the Native Sun News implied that movies, mascots, and related issues are a waste of time:

Indian Country must face the man in the mirror

Stop being thin-skinned busybodies

By James Giago DaviesInstead of focusing on every perceived slight, why not pour all that energy into the actual nuts and bolts reality plaguing almost every reservation—violence, poverty, alcoholism, drug abuse. Face these ugly truths, fight these ugly realities, honor the actual heroes, point fingers at the actual villains, and then if you have any energy left, and you damn well shouldn’t have energy left, knock yourself out being all offended over Johnny Depp’s Tonto.

Acculturation has left Indian America with deep, debilitating wounds, and these wounds compel Indians to hurt other Indians, to create bogeymen to hate and attack so they don’t have to face the man in the mirror. There are plenty of actual evil people hating on Indians, we don’t have to fabricate fresh ones to deflect our righteous indignation from the disheartening task of fixing what’s actually broken.

Indian culture has been oppressed to the point Indians no longer need the Wasicu to beat them down. Indians have spent the last century becoming experts at beating themselves down. Time to man up and start living in the 21st Century. Time to develop the skills and knowledge to protect the culture from destructive outside forces like Rand Paul, who wants to abolish the BIA, and even more destructive internal forces, misguided spiritual leaders, corrupt tribal administrations, bad parents neglecting and terrorizing vulnerable children.

If we could just spend one year doing that, then we would have the social gravitas forcing others to listen, then when Bill Maher said another stupid thing about Indians...well, he never would again say such a stupid thing, because it would be common knowledge all you crazy Indians are as funny as all get-out.I posted comments to Davies's column, leading to this debate with him:

Isn't Tim Giago a big advocate of eliminating stereotypical mascots? Which is the same issue as eliminating stereotypical movie portrayals. Have you told him to stop wasting his time on "trivial" issues--to "man up and start living in the 21st Century"?

Go ahead and tell him, then let us know what he says. Maybe he can explain the importance of fighting racism and stereotyping against Indians. Because clearly he understands the issue.

Are you seriously arguing that most Indians are focusing on Johnny Depp and Adam Sandler rather than the serious problems facing Indian country? Because it's the other way around, obviously.

A century of addressing these problems has yet to fully solve them. That's partly because most people think Indians have vanished into history.

And that's because of media portrayals--or the lack thereof. No one cares about Indians because movies such as Depp's and Sandler's tell us they're primitive people of the past. As far as most Americans are concerned, Indians and their problems no longer exist.I don't think you actually know anything about Indians, or growing up on welfare and food stamps in an Indian ghetto. Check it out.I know what Tim Giago has said about Hollywood's racism and stereotyping:

Tim Giago: Few Roles for Indians in Hollywood

Giago: Hollywood slow to tear down racist barriers against

He's argubly the most famous journalist in Indian country, and he's spent decades on these issues. I'm guessing he knows more about growing up Indian than you do.

Didn't you just spend a few hours writing about a racist nurse's video in Rapid City? How many Natives did you rescue from welfare and food stamps with that column? Why are you wasting time writing about a video when Native children are suffering and dying?

Unless you're delivering food and medicine yourself, don't bother lecturing anyone else on the subject. Nobody who's a journalist is saving lives directly.

More criticism of Davies

I love the idea of writers lecturing other writers about the pressing needs facing Indian country. If you believe what you're saying, Davies, stop writing and start helping. Get away from your computer. Get out of journalism altogether.

Instead, become a social worker. Go door to door bringing food and medicine to suffering people. Because if you don't do that, you're a flaming hypocrite.

To state the obvious, your words aren't saving lives. Therefore, quit wasting your time lecturing us about our words.

Again, others chimed in:I'll be damned if my girls or nieces have to put up with gross 'jokes' on the playground from boys who learned that those are funny things to say to native women. In this particular article, Mr. Davies forgets the fact that he is not a native kid in school and those are the people that will have to put up with the reintroduction of these disgusting stereotypes. It's already hard being a kid with a Native last name, without Adam Sandler adding fuel to the 'OMG Indian names are soooo funny and weird' fire.

There are many ways to help, and many means, if everyone would just do a little or lot wherever they are planted. If everyone quits their job to bring food and medicine to the suffering, they are gonna run out of food and medicine pretty quick. But there is always someone to help, wherever you are--journalism, computer, reserve, city core, or grocery store. (And part of life is also using what gifts and tools you have to hand and have been given, in the best way you can…to help not hurt.)

As I said, you can do both. ... I work with ancestral foods as a health measure, since we have terrible diabetes rates (and everything else) and we didn't have these rates pre-commodities. I'm putting work into improving Native health and infrastructure, but that's not easy or quick. But while I'm helping rebuild, I'd like for people to not continue to get dehumanized and made into jokes by the likes of Adam Sandler.

That’s what cracks me up about people like this Davies fellow. He’s complaining about how we are not focusing on the “real” issues, yet I wonder if he is doing anything about those issues himself? He seems pretty content to sit on his ass and belittle other Natives on the computer.All the academics, the museum personnel, the people working on cultural and language preservation, the artists and storytellers...none of you are saving lives directly. All of you must be wasting time, according to Ecoffey and Davies. Reevaluate your priorities!

Not to mention the 70% of Indians who live away from the reservation. Whatever you're doing, you're probably not protecting the endangered children of Pine Ridge. What's wrong with you? Don't you care?!

</sarcasm>I think we should be allowed to punch ANY idiot who pulls the 'more important issues' crap.Yes, the "more important things" argument is so stupid. It's mainly used to derail whatever issue is being discussed.

If you can't address the issue, spend an hour telling us what we should be doing instead. What you'd be doing if you weren't lecturing us about what we're doing.Y'know, I would love to hear Suzan Harjo's response to these "more important issues" Native guys who literally act like this is a brand new issue. Or Clyde Bellecourt or Kevin Gover's response. I mean, it's been tackled by every major NA organization since the 1960s. It's like this has caught them by surprise. Where have they been for 50 years? Or how can they dismiss the persistent and constant efforts of our leaders?Good point. Tribal leaders have protested movie portrayals for a century. AIM and the NCAI have protested mascots for half a century. Marlon Brando and Sacheen Littlefeather, Pocahontas, the Time magazine "expose" of casinos, Little House on the Prairie, the Outkast video, etc., etc.

In fact, I could list hundreds of controversies and protests without even touching the last ten years. Including those of Tim Giago, uncle of James Giago Davies, who's denounced boarding schools, mascots, and other examples of racism for decades. You could say Giago's whole career has been "talking" about problems rather than solving them hands-on.

It's just so laughable when someone says, "Why are you focusing on this 'trivial' Adam Sandler issue? None of our people ever cared about racism or discrimination against us. We were too busy saving lives.

"Now you've hijacked the news and nobody's talking about anything but Sandler. All the resources devoted to dying children are going to him instead. The media and the government would be swarming over Pine Ridge, but you've told them 'real life' doesn't matter. So a century of neglect is your fault."

As I said, this is stupid and ignorant. Funny to hear Indians dismiss or downplay racism as a serious issue confronting their people. Funny, but wrong.

For more rationalizations of racism, see Black Columnist Excuses "Redskins," Genocide and Shawnee Professor Justifies Tonto's Stereotypes.

Rob vs. "Tribal Guerrilla Warfare"

Something I tweeted December 16:

I made someone's list of "Who should Natives be wary of?": 2) White people like Rob Schmidt who disguise their financial interest. Beware!

Some responses from Facebook friends:Really?! Hahahaaaa...wow...

You have financial interests and you're not sharing them with me?!

You're white?

Lol idiots.What it's about

Without asking me, someone added me to a listserv (e-mail group) with a bunch of angry Indians. I responded to a few of their unsolicited messages. Then I received this--the full list of people Indians should be wary of:In general, who are Native Americans most wary of? I'd say three groups of people -

1 - Leaders of border town organizations who are opposed to local tribes. Examples would be heads of Water Departments, local heads of Forest Service or border town city mayors who have strong vested interests against local tribes.

2 - Whites who have very strong commercial interests in Native Americans but effectively disguise that pure commercial/financial interest with Native activism and speak for Indians all the time. One example would be Rob Schmidt of Blue Corn Comics who writes on Indian and gaming issues, and writes for Casino Journal, Indian Gaming Business, and Indian Country Today besides speaking for Indians on websites, blogs, Facebook and Twitter.

3 - This is a little controversial and I am sorry for that. To this list, I would add leaders of Indian organizations who are white-looking but enrolled members of Indian tribes while lacking any cultural Indian experience. Examples would be white-looking Indian professors who argue that there was no genocide of Natives (yes, there are a few of those) and white-looking leaders of NDN organizations like the NCAI, Assembly of First Nations (AFN), etc who speak for other Indians.

SanchezNot quite, Sanchez. I don't write for gaming magazines anymore and I speak about Indians, not for them.

Yes, I make a living working with Indians. So do millions of other people--including you, presumably.

Does that mean none of us can address Native issues? Does working in Indian country render the opinions of doctors, lawyers, teachers, and journalists invalid?

Idiocy.

I've effectively disguised my "pure commercial/financial interest" so well that I can't even see it myself. The money pouring in from my hours of blogging, posting, and tweeting is completely invisible to me.

In fact, I'm probably a millionaire now with the blind trust I set up called "How to Exploit Indians." I'll probably be able to retire to a tropical island soon and laugh at everyone who supported me.

What a pathetic joke.

People not to be wary of?

People who didn't make Sanchez's list for some reason:

1) Federal and state politicians, especially conservative ones.

2) Courts that rule against tribes and tribal sovereignty.

3) Corporations that seek to exploit Native land and resources.

4) Schools that teach only about Indians in the past tense.

5) Entertainment that treats Indians as costumed savages.

6) The media that report only on Native poverty and crime.

7) Racists of all stripes.

Other than that, great list, Sanchez!

Incidentally, if you're a Native who disagrees with Sanchez, you're probably a "white" Indian who has only a few drops of Indian blood and culture. According to his group, the only opinions that count are those of dark-skinned Indians who live on reservations. Unless they oppose mascots, that is--in which case they're stooges and sellouts too.

I guess Sanchez didn't like it when I called him a racist for saying "white Indians" weren't real Indians. Oops, my bad.

P.S. Sanchez's e-mail includes the phrase "tribalguerrillawarfare." It's meant to describe him and the listserv. Hence the title of this posting.

Debating Peter Pan Live!

While I watched Peter Pan Live!, I did a bit of live-blogging on Facebook. I didn't plan to debate the production, but a couple of people responded and we were off.

Things started innocuously enough:

Off to Neverland

Watching Peter Pan Live!--the must-see event of the year!

I have a radical new idea for a remake: Cast a teenage boy to play Peter Pan the teenage boy. You know, instead of a grown woman.

Yes, I'm brilliant, I know. Thank you, thank you.

Didn't Christopher Walken used to sound normal when he was young? Now he sounds like he's doing a Christopher Walken impression.Casting a teenage boy presents a lot of issues from a musical theater perspective.It can't be much worse than trying to convince oneself that 26-year-old Allison Williams is a teenage boy. I'm not buying it.

I bet Daniel Radcliffe could've nailed it.Of course, a 25 year old man is much more convincing...it's about the voice, for one, and the ages of the Darling children.I meant when he was a teenager. "Cast a teenage boy [such as Radcliffe when he was a teenager] to play Peter Pan the teenage boy."

Problems arise

Race in ‪#‎PeterPanLive‬: Nine of the ten Lost Boys are white. The first four of Tiger Lily's tribe look brown-skinned and ethnic.

Even if the "tribal" actors are white, they're adorned with broad stripes of brown color. This conveys the impression that they're brown.

The tribesmen wear bone chokers and breastplates, and round pendants--like Indians. They tend to creep on all fours--like animals. ‪#‎PeterPanLive‬

The Lost Boys, including Michael Darling dressed as an Indian, reject Wendy's attempt to teach them how to avoid war. That's because Lost Boys, like Indian savages, are uncivilized.As near as I can tell, the Natives are also generic (tribally too unspecific).Yes, they're generic. But making them so doesn't solve the problem, it only redirects it.

The problem is that Peter's Lost Boys are wild, undisciplined, and ignorant because they have no rules, responsibilities, or parents. No law and order. In a word, they're uncivilized. And Tiger Lily's tribesmen are the same.

The message is that Lost Boys = indigenous people = savages. Whether the tribe is from the Americas, Africa, or Asia and the Pacific Islands doesn't really matter. The story is an indictment of all indigenous cultures. It suggests they're akin to children frolicking in the jungle, or animals in human form.As someone who grew up with this kind of unfounded, blatant, erroneous picture of Natives, I have only been condemning specific issues in these cases. But I am thrilled that we are finally at a place where we can finally address the broader ignorance issues that needs to be ended. Especially in popular media and entertainment.On the other hand:For heaven's sakes, it's FANTASY, it's silliness, it's choreographed -- did you notice how realistic the plants and trees were? *not*

Maybe you can go after "Santa Claus is Coming to Town" next time.Are you seriously going to argue that people haven't gotten their ideas about Indians from Western movies, sports mascots, and corporate logos--all of which are forms of fiction? In fact, people absorb messages about reality from whatever they see, including fiction. As a few centuries of novels, plays, movies, TV shows, and comic books have proved.

So we should say nothing about racist stereotypes in movies or TV shows because they're "fantasies"? How about school plays, paintings and statues, or songs? Did you miss the last ten thousand times I criticized racist stereotypes in our culture?

A blackface minstrel show is just a fantasy. As is a Halloween party with Pocahotties and "Nava-hoes." Really, you expect me to give these a pass because they're "fantasies" like Peter Pan? As the last 20 years of my work has demonstrated, that's not gonna happen.

Lost Boys = Lord of the Flies?Haven't missed a one of your criticisms, and most often agree with them (although I'm protesting your NIGA group for its abominable acronym). I guess you've protested Peter Pan for 30 or more years now?

The Halloween analogy is false -- stupid women wanting to be "Nava-hoes" doesn't compare to Barrie's play, nor the musical. And if you knew the story, you would not put = between Lost Boys and the Indians in the show -- the Lost Boys are a different group altogether.

We've had plenty of literature, that for better or worse, deals with issues like this. Do we ban it all, or do we learn? Would you remove Lord of the Flies from the libraries (after all, they were certainly "Lost Boys" who became quite savage)?The Indian savages perform the same function as the Lost Boys. They run and play in the forest, follow Peter Pan, and fight the pirates. They're different but equivalent groups.

That's why I said the message is that they're the same. Not that they're literally the same.

I didn't say my examples--the minstrel show and Halloween party--were alike in terms of "quality." But they're all examples of employing fictional or fantasy characters. They're alike in that regard.

And saying my analogy is "false" isn't much of an argument. Explain why it's false if you can.

In fact, anyone can present a racial stereotype and claim they're just "play-acting" or "pretending." If racism in "fantasy" is harmless, it's harmless whether it's a minstrel show, a Halloween party, or "Peter Pan." I say it's harmful in all these cases so the "fantasy" defense is rubbish.

I don't think the Lord of the Flies boys dressed specifically like Indians. Tiger Lily's tribe did. We're talking about characters who use racial stereotypes to represent a particular group--in this case, Indians or indigenous people. We're not talking about anyone who becomes "savage" in any way.

We're also not talking about censoring or removing Peter Pan. You invented that straw man because I didn't say a word about it. My solution is to fix the racist and sexist elements of this play and then present it.

If you want to present the original story with its racism and sexism, go ahead. You do that and I'll criticize it, just as I've done here.

Do we ban it or do we learn from it? I'm helping people learn from it by educating them about its racism and sexism. You're doing the opposite: telling people to ignore its problems and simply enjoy it as a "fantasy." Don't talk to us about "learning" when you're advocating the opposite.

P.S. My official critique of Peter Pan is 10 years old:

Tiger Lily in Peter Pan: An Allegory of Anglo-Indian Relations

I found every line about Indians in Barrie's original book to make sure I didn't miss anything. I understand his racist stereotyping well.

No doubt I mentioned the play and the Disney movie before then. And yet Peter Pan is only one of a thousand topics I've dealt with over the years. The facts prove there's no "obsession" here, so your claim is false and insulting.

You say you haven't missed my criticisms, yet you're surprised I criticized Peter Pan. Criticized it the same way I've criticized countless comic books, cartoons, video games, and other things that qualify as fantasies for children. So why are you surprised?

To reiterate, I've criticized Peter Pan and movies, TV shows, and plays like it many times before. My actions have been completely consistent so your surprise is illogical. In fact, the only surprise would be if I ignored a spectacle featuring Indians in prime-time television.

Racist and sexist, too

On the gender front, ‪#‎PeterPanLive‬ may be even worse. Girls = mothers = caretakers and servants = nags and scolds = killers of fun and freedom.

Wendy should slap some sense into Peter. "You say you want a mother, but you don't want to do anything I say? What do you think a mother is, you stupid twit?

"If you want someone to serve you, go hire a maid or a butler. I've got better things to do than to babysit babies."

Now she's singing about how she wants to kiss Peter Pan. Even a century ago, girls went for the charming bad boys who would love 'em and leave 'em. All Peter needs is a leather jacket and motorcycle to seal the deal.

Back to the racial issues:

If you want a race of animal-like savages, make them bestial for real. Centaurs, cat people, talking bears, etc. Or make them toy soldiers come to life a la Toy Story. There's really no excuse to equate savages with indigenous people. ‪#‎PeterPanLive‬

Getting a closer look at Tiger Lily's tribe as they dance. Perhaps half the actors are nonwhite. All have dark hair and several have dreadlocks. Shoes look like moccasins. Definitely an Afro-Indian vibe. ‪#‎PeterPanLive‬

And they're mixing the Wyandotte song title with "Hickory dickory dock" and "Tweedledee, tweedledum." Well, gee, thanks for making it clear that Native languages aren't just singsong nonsense words.

Not to mention the tom-tom beats and chanting that echo a thousand old Westerns. They aren't even subtle. This is obviously an "Indian" song in everything but name.

And Tiger Lily says Peter is the sun and the moon. Good thing she praised the "great white father" only once in this scene, or it would be unbearable.

Peter is mystified that Wendy, Tinkerbell, and Tiger Lily all want more from him. Why are girls so needy and clingy? Why can't they be strong and independent, like boys?! ‪#‎PeterPanLive‬Do you know when this story was written, what society was like at the time?It was written around the time when Dorothy traveled to Oz, took command of her destiny (more or less), and proceeded without any thought of clinging to a man or becoming a mother.

That was several decades after Alice had her solo adventures in Wonderland. A couple of centuries after Jane Austen's heroines showed what strong, independent women could do. Are you seriously arguing that having all three female characters long for Peter was a sign of the times? That authors like Barrie couldn't conceive of any other way of thinking?

And the producers are putting the play on in 2014, not 1902 when it was written. They're responsible for how its sexist message plays today. If you or they don't want anyone criticizing the sexism, don't put it on the air now. Leave it and the racist savages in the dustbin of history where they belong.

Next up: How Santa's message of toys for everyone obscures the structural poverty built into our society.

Tinkerbell must die

Captain Hook's "brilliant" plan to kill Peter Pan is to poison him. He puts the poison in Peter's medicine while he sits next to the sleeping Peter. How about stabbing him in the chest instead? ‪#‎PeterPanDead‬

But Tinkerbell drinks it instead! What a bumbler that Hook is!

Tweet to save Tinkerbell? #TinkerbellMustDie

Now Peter is speaking to the audience, telling us to clap if we believe in fairies. Die, you little piece of CGI fakery!!

Odd. The swelling music seems to indicate we should be filled with joy, not laughter at this silliness.You must have had a very sad childhood -- and I'm not trying to insult. That a grown man is so obsessed with a little musical that children love is worrisome. When I was a little girl, I thought Mary Martin was speaking directly to me. I found joy in the show, and still do. Lovely music, great dancing, lots of fun.As I said, I've posted critiques and analyses of thousands of Native stereotypes. I'm not sure Peter Pan is even in the top 25 or 50 of the subjects I've covered. Despite the fact that it's one of the longest-running and most prominent purveyors of Native stereotypes in existence.

If you're worried that I spent a couple of hours posting a few comments about one play, I'd hate to see your reaction to the subjects I've actually focused on. You know, things like the Washington Redskins and other mascots, The Lone Ranger and Twilight, and hipster headdresses. I guess you'd be amazed at my rock-solid opposition to racist stereotypes wherever they occur.

P.S. My childhood was stunningly normal, not "sad." I'm incredulous that you've suddenly discovered that I criticize things. If you somehow missed my last 10,000 postings, check them again. You'll see a decades-long pattern of denouncing racism, sexism, and other forms of prejudice.

If you don't like that, sorry, but that's what I do. I thought it was obvious, but now you know.

Here are some of the criticisms directed at this production:

http://nativenewsonline.net/currents/notyourtigerlily-nine-months-later-still-dont-get-point/

https://indiancountrytodaymedianetwork.com/2014/12/05/keene-why-fix-tiger-lily-why-cant-we-just-let-her-go-158155

http://americanindiansinchildrensliterature.blogspot.com/2014/12/true-blood-brothers-in-nbcs-production.html

http://www.salon.com/2014/12/05/the_boggling_mixed_signals_of_peter_pan_live_why_on_earth_did_nbc_decide_to_stage_this_show/

http://www.salon.com/2014/12/06/the_7_worst_things_about_nbcs_peter_pan_live_partner/

I guess a lot of people are "obsessed" or had "sad" childhoods. Which are obvious codewords for, "Stop criticizing my beloved fairy tale, you can't make me think about its racism and sexism, la la la la la I can't hear you!"

A tweet to sum up the racial issues:

Tiger Lily's tribe in ‪#‎PeterPanLive‬: brown skins, body paint, bone chokers and breastplates, crawling on all fours--but not stereotypical?!

For more on Peter Pan, see Native Stereotypes in Peter Pan Live! and Peter Pan Live! Reviewed.

Debating the "Redneck Olympics"

The news item below sparked a lively debate on Facebook last year:

Former Redneck Olympics under way in MaineDespite being forced to changes its name, the event formerly known as the Redneck Olympic Games continued its tradition Saturday of holding unorthodox competitions like lawn mower races, mud runs and tire burnouts.

A full day of events was on tap during the Maine Redneck "Blank" Games. Organizer Harold Brooks changed the name under pressure from the International Olympics Committee, but noted that "everyone knows what the 'blank' stands for."

Friday's events included a wedding and a demolition derby. Other events over the weekend included bobbing for pigs' feet, toilet seat horseshoes and a greased watermelon relay race.Brad began it with the following comments:OK Rob, I know this isn't racism, but if members of a class demean and stereotype themselves is that acceptable?

And two notes to this guy:

1) Greece IS part of the INTERNATIONAL Olympic Committee.
2) The ancient Greeks did not speak English.A Latina named Cx responded:The word "Olympic" might be trademarked, but there are other uses of the word. So the guy is right about that. It's the word OLYMPIC in contention here, not the word redneck.

"A redneck can make fun of himself.." Exactly.That's what I was trying to tell you about the PARODY that was Redneck Day at the highschool in Arizona, and like that Duck Dynasty show. If a person or group identify with or as "redneck," who do non-rednecks think they are to impose their whatever on this (or any) cultural or ethnic or racial group? Trying to impose that redneck is about racism & nothing but is big time ignorance and oppression--by people who accuse others of being "oppressive." See the futility? Round and round it goes. *Yawn.Let the debate begin

With that we were off:Brad
I see what you're saying, however this is a RADICALLY different situation than that one.

And I think you missed the point that I was only using this story to frame a discussion about the larger issue of self-degradation which wasn't the problem in the previous story.I dunno. I wouldn't encourage the Redneck Olympics, but I'm not sure it's worth criticizing. If people want to label themselves "rednecks," "white trash," or whatever, it's their problem.

What about the Nerd Olympics? Same problem as the Redneck Olympics?Cx
Self-Parody isn't necessarily self-degradation, Brad, a big picnic and games with foods of common use in that area of the country. Doesn't the image of toilet seat horseshoes crack you up? I mean cmon. And greased anything is silly fun. Neither of those things are exclusively redneck now are they. Harmless, silly fun.

Brad
Maybe it isn't in THIS case, but you're still fixating on the "redneck" thing. There's a broader question that relates back to one Rob asked the other day, whether a Native who stereotypes himself is beyond outside criticism. While few people are going to object to white people putting themselves down, I'm going to guess that there are some who do or don't fit the stereotype who aren't going to appreciate being labeled in this way.

I get that THIS event is totally protected by the 1st Amendment the same as an NAACP or Klan rally would be. However, imagine if a group of real Native people decided to throw a "hipster" pow wow with neon colored headdresses, war paint, sweat lodges, and "Indian" themed activities and invited the public to attend. Who would or wouldn't be allowed to get upset? I kind of see this event the same way to a lesser degree.It's true that this event casts aspersions on "rednecks." A member of academia or high society in redneck territory might find these stereotypes offensive and harmful.

In the case of Natives, we know they don't appreciate people from other cultures appropriating their headdresses. That presumably includes other Native cultures.

I don't know that about the rubes and bumpkins in Alabama or wherever. But if they want to protest the Redneck Olympics, I'll support them.

P.S. I'd venture to say that nothing is totally harmless. We know Barbies encourage sexist attitudes. I bet Star Wars toys encourage black-and-white thinking about good and evil. This event seems more likely to cause harm than many things we could name.Cx
Twisting things into something they're not from one's "academia" or outsider view. Speaking of "they don't...," when it comes to "they," people can speak for themselves. Not for all natives. Not for all rednecks. Not for all academics.

Opinions and beliefs differ in subgroups. You prefer to push a certain subgroup's opinion, that's your choice and shows what you prefer to believe to suit yourself, not THE final word on a topic. I take it you're neither redneck, nor native, nor did you play with Barbie dolls. As if analysts and academia get the privilege to define for others. *smh at how pitiful that is.

Bottom line: Leave people to define themselves and LEARN something. Quit stereotyping.Rob rips Cx

"Opinions and beliefs differ in subgroups."

I don't know about rednecks, but in the Native field, appearances and clothing are reasonably well-documented. It isn't an "opinion" to compare a stereotypical costume to the reality and say they don't match. It's a fact...they don't match.

The Native concern about stereotypes is also well-documented and occurs throughout the population. Indians pretty much agree that non-Indians stereotype them and it's a problem. So if you mean "most Indians" when you say "subgroup," you've got it.

"I take it you're neither redneck, nor native, nor did you play with Barbie dolls."

I don't need to have played with Barbie dolls to understand the research on the subject. You know, the research I posted that you weren't able to address? Your anecdotal experiences are irrelevant compared to the findings of researchers, many of whom also played with Barbies.

And you're sure quick with opinions about Native headdresses and Arab parade floats considering you don't belong to either group either. Not to mention what leads men to abuse and rape women--something you can't know unless you're a man, according to your "logic." Using this logic, how about if you stay out of any debate that doesn't involve Latinas, okay?

"As if analysts and academia get the privilege to define for others. *smh at how pitiful that is."

Analysts and academics who deal with Native and women's issues usually include Natives and women. I'm reporting what they say, not making up and imposing my views on theirs. If you don't understand this key point, keep rereading it until you get it. I repeat and reflect what Natives themselves say about Native stereotypes.

Bottom line: Cx is a hypocrite

"Bottom line: Leave people to define themselves and LEARN something. Quit stereotyping."

I've learned something after 20+ years in this field. Now I'm sharing what I've learned. Native stereotypes are wrong. Natives say so.

It's still not clear to me that you know what stereotyping is. I'm not stereotyping anyone when I report the facts. Native stereotypes don't match the Native reality...fact. Most Natives prefer not to be stereotyped...fact. I'm repeating the facts, not making stuff up...fact.

There's nothing stereotypical or wrong about what I'm doing. Which is why I have thousands of Native readers, I work at Pechanga.Net, I write for Indian Country Today, etc., etc. I've proved I understand these issues well enough to report on them. Natives themselves--thousands of them--say so.

But it's fascinating how you turn every debate into an attack on me. Why is that, I wonder?

I didn't say you have no business talking about rednecks because you aren't one. But I'll say it now. You're a hypocrite for chastising me for having thoughts about Natives when you've commented repeatedly on rednecks, a group you don't belong to. Stop being so hypocritical.

In related news, I don't need to be the president to comment on presidential politics. I don't need to be a pro athlete to comment on pro sports. I don't need to be a master chef to comment on cooking. I don't need to be an astronaut to comment on space travel. Etc.

Duhhh.

I ask again, Brad. Should Latinas stick to Latina issues, Natives to Native issues, whites to white issues, males to male issues, rednecks to redneck issues, etc., etc.? What do you think?

For more on the subject, see Should Non-Natives Write About Natives? and Rob = Moral Police?

Derek Royal reviews Scalped

After Gregory Burgas's review of Scalped, here's an academic take on it. This review also mentions my critique of it:

Native Noir: Genre and the Politics of Indigenous Representation in Recent American Comics

By Derek Parker RoyalMost reviewers have read Scalped within the context of crime fiction--"Sopranos on the rez," as many have called it--but perhaps a more precise way of reading the series is through the lens of noir fiction, a subgenre of crime and detective narrative. More than any comic discussed in this essay, Scalped bears the characteristic stamp of noir by almost anyone's definition. Dash Bad Horse is certainly a detecting figure, working not only to uncover the criminality of Chief Red Crow, but also to expose the amoral actions of Agent Nitz. Like many noir protagonists, he displays self-destructive tendencies--as evidenced by his growing heroin addiction--and becomes an unwitting victim of the world he inhabits. As the series evolves, Dash finds himself with shrinking options, trapped by the uncompromising demands of both Red Crow and Nitz. Against his better judgment, he is irresistibly drawn to the comic's femme fatale, Carol Ellroy, the promiscuous and drug-addicted daughter of Red Crow. She functions as a narrative doppelganger, since both of them are estranged from their one remaining parent--Dash's father and Carol's mother are introduced only in brief flashbacks--and both withdraw into themselves, and into their dysfunctional sexual relationship, as the pressures around them build. As such, the tone of the series is both alienating and claustrophobic--panels framing skewed angles and extreme close-ups are common throughout.

Guéra's art, gritty and saturated with dark, dull browns and blues, creates a foreboding atmosphere that parallels the sinister fate that seems to await all involved. Even the daylight scenes are illustrated as if under shadow. All in all, the series is one that resonates with the noir tradition established by such practitioners as Dashiell Hammett, James M. Cain, Raymond Chandler, and James Ellroy.

Yet, what is perhaps most significant about Scalped is its narrative use of indigenous predicaments as a way into the noir genre. More times than not--and as demonstrated by critics such as Sheyahshe, Pewewardy, and King--when not represented in the historical past and in Western settings, Native Americans are typecast as superheroes. And usually it is those characteristics most stereotyped, such a shamanistic connection to the spiritual world or the extraordinary ability to "read" nature, that find expression within that genre. Some even claim that Scalped, as is the case with many superhero comics, does harm to Native Americans by playing into common stereotypes. Schmidt, for example, condemns what he sees in the series as an "ultra-negative portrayal of life on the rez," "a grotesque look at reservation life," and a tendency to "tak[e] the worst possible scenario and presen[t] it as the norm." He bluntly concludes that "[t]o portray Indians worse than the reality isn't 'realistic.' It's a textbook example of unrealistic. Since [Scalped] reinforces a thousand previous portrayals of Indians as drunks, savages, and killers, it's stereotypical as well as unrealistic" (Scalped).

What is apparently at issue in Schmidt's critique is the need for verisimilitude. As with most studies on Native American comics, the assumption here is that the value of a comic should be based largely on the writer's and artist's accuracy of representation. That is, the more "true" one is in one's rendition of Native culture, the better the comic. But faithfully illustrating contemporary reservation life has never been Jason Aaron's primary concern. In his response to Schmidt's review--one that judged the new Vertigo series solely by its first issue--Aaron stated, "I'm not writing Scalped with any sort of agenda in mind, and I'm not nearly pretentious enough to think that I'm here to educate the country on the state of Native life." Instead, he set out to write "a crime series, so it's obviously going to focus on criminal elements" (qtd. in Schmidt, Scalped). Given Aaron's sentiments, the question then becomes, why base the crime (or noir) series in a reservation setting? Aaron has stated elsewhere that Native American history is "just one of those things I'd always read about, especially the American Indian movement and the Red Power movement of the '70s, and the Leonard Peltier story. So all that just kind of worked together with my desire to do a crime series. ... I wanted to do, like, a familiar genre, but something that was a little different" ("Sticking with Scalped"). In essence, the comic book has its genesis in Aaron's fascination with generic forms: "It all really came from me loving both westerns and crime stories and wanting to combine the two" (qtd. in Rozier).

Questions of ethnic stereotyping in Scalped are certainly open for discussion. Whether intended or not, Aaron's representation of indigenous contexts could strike some readers as unflattering or even insensitive, and this matter has sparked quite a bit of debate on blogs and networking sites devoted to comics and pop culture.Rob replies

A few points here:

It's quite common to review the first issue of a series, so let's not pretend it's something strange or unusual.

I addressed the issue of Jason Aaron's agenda when I wrote:Also, you've said in interviews that you want people to learn about conditions in Indian Country, or words to that effect. That again implies the situation in Prairie Rose is typical or representative. No, it isn't.Even if Aaron denied his own words and claimed Scalped was pure entertainment, it wouldn't change my point. Someone can have a conscious agenda or an unconscious one he isn't even aware of. For instance, gaining fame and fortune by portraying people in a dark, ugly way.

I'd say Aaron's agenda is something along those lines. He's exploiting Indians to tell tales of depravity and doom and score points with fans and critics. And I'm pointing out this exploitation.

Verisimilitude is an important factor in almost every kind of writing. In stories set in an unfamiliar place and time, it's imperative to make the setting realistic so people will suspend their disbelief. Even in pure fantasies, most things operate just as they do in the real world.

I don't think I've ever said verisimilitude is the primary factor in fiction--something that determines the "value of a comic." Rather, I expect the plots, characters, themes, settings, and other elements of fiction to work together to produce optimal stories. Verisimilitude is a thread that weaves through all these factors, strengthening and enriching them. Other things being equal, a believable story is almost always better than an unbelievable one.

Suppose we concede that "faithfully illustrating contemporary reservation life has never been Jason Aaron's primary concern." Not being faithful to reality means using racist and stereotypical tropes to tell one's fantasies of modern-day Indian savages. If we agree that Aaron is doing this, what's the problem? I say Aaron uses racist stereotypes and his defenders don't deny it. End of story?

You see, you can't have it both ways. Either Aaron is being "unfaithful" to reality and using negative stereotypes or he isn't. If he is, I'm criticizing him for it. Period.

False and stereotypical depictions of a particular race are racist by definition. Racist portrayals done in the name of art are still racist portrayals. I for one will never defend or excuse racism for any reason, including "art."

Any questions?

For more on Scalped, see "Native Spiritual Adviser" Warns Rob and Aaron on Ending Scalped.

Below:  Chairman Red Crow shoots it out with Hmong gangsters for control of his casino? Because Indians are modern-day savages no different from the thieves and killers around them. And reservations are lawless hellholes akin to a post-apocalyptic wasteland.

Tittler the Internet troll

A few days ago, political activist Michele Tittler said she found the message of the "Got Land? Thank an Indian" offensive. CBC quoted Tittler uncritically, making her sound like the voice of the opposition.

Activists slammed CBC for not looking into and disclosing her background. Now CBC has published this:

Racially charged Internet trolling draws harsh criticismAggressive online trolling by Michele Tittler, a Vancouver woman who posts inflammatory comments about Aboriginal issues and people, has led to at least two police probes—although the most recent case has been halted according to RCMP.

Tittler's rants, last week, on the Facebook page of First Nations teenager Tenelle Starr led police in Saskatchewan to open a file.

Starr, 13, was posting updates on her experiences from early January when she wore a "Got Land? Thank an Indian" sweatshirt to her Balcarres, Sask., school.

Tittler leapt onto the teen's page to denounce the message of the sweatshirt. In an interview with CBC News, Tittler admits to posting harsh, race-based comments on the teenager's Facebook page, considered a form of trolling. None of her words included physical threats.And:Meanwhile, CBC's ongoing examination of the woman, a 52-year-old mother of two, reveals Tittler has a history of harassing people. In 2006, a criminal court judge in B.C. granted a peace bond against Tittler after a neighbour complained of harassment. A peace bond is similar to a restraining order. In order for a judge to grant a peace bond, the neighbour would have to show "fear on reasonable grounds." In the B.C. case it was not clear whether the fear was that Tittler would cause personal injury or damage property. The imposition of a peace bond does not result in a criminal record. Tittler admits to other confrontations in which the police were called.

In September 2013, Tittler registered a not-for-profit organization with Industry Canada called ERBL Inc., or End Race Based Law Inc. Its Facebook page has 3,100 likes. In an interview with CBC, Tittler explained that she is unemployed and spends most of her time on-line denouncing Aboriginal treaties, posting rants on YouTube and engaging in caustic debates with vocal critics. She's registered several domain names containing the words "Idle No More" to intercept web traffic from the actual site of the group. She has also filed formal complaints against people to Facebook and internet providers alleging that some sites are promoting racism.

"It got to the point that my hair was falling out of my head," Tittler told CBC News about the energy she has expended. "[I] was going to sleep for a few hours, then waking up and reporting [people]. Then I'd go to sleep for a few hours, then I'd wake up and report. My whole 2013 life was reporting."

Tittler defends her decision to troll a teenager's Facebook page, insisting it's a public space.

Tittler's ERBL has been dubbed an "online hate group" by Idle No More organizers, many of whom have filed their own formal complaints to Facebook, domain name registries and police.An excellent posting describes what was wrong with CBC's initial approach. It's worth quoting at length:

CBC’s interview with Tittler reveals the problem with “objectivity”

By Kyle FarquharsonAfter locating Tittler, CBC journalist Bonnie Allen interviewed the 59-year-old. The eventual result was a radio segment and an online article in which Tittler’s views were broadcast, with little objection raised to the views she expressed. In the written piece, Tittler’s views are simply described as “intense criticism.”

I understand what Allen and her colleagues were striving to accomplish. Journalism is a medium driven by narrative tension. In order for a story to be compelling, there must be at least two sides, and there must be conflict. There is also an accepted ethical principle, particularly in North American journalism, that hard news stories should be “objective” and “balanced”: that is, the facts and opinions they convey should be completely unadulterated by the journalist’s own opinion, and both sides of the conflict should receive roughly equal airtime.

However, the problem with this approach becomes obvious in situations where one party to a conflict is correct, and the other is wrong.

No journalist in h/er right mind (at least, I sincerely hope not) would publish a story reflecting both sides of a “debate” on whether or not the Holocaust happened—the historical evidence of that genocide is unquestionable, and those members of our society who continue to deny it are rightly considered pariahs. And though it has taken some time, many television news organizations have yielded to the overwhelming scientific consensus on climate change by declining to offer equal weight to both a climatologist and a climate denier or skeptic, which for many years was common practice.

Though the lesson from these examples is clear, the credo of balance and objectivity still leads many journalists woefully astray. Where CBC’s coverage of Tenelle Starr’s sweater is concerned, the only real conflict is between reality and nonsense.

Let’s examine the question of whether the message on Starr’s sweater is racist, as Tittler claims. Though racism is a notoriously imprecise term, it is commonly understood to be the notion that one’s own race is superior to others. However, while anyone may hold racist attitudes, in the North American context, institutions that enforce various forms of racial discrimination and racial privilege are dominated by white people. Thus, even if a First Nations person or group were to hold racist views against white Canadians, the detrimental consequences to our ethnic group would be negligible.

However, Starr’s sweater does not express the view that her race is superior. Rather, it recalls the undisputed historical fact that Indigenous peoples populated this land for thousands of years before the settler-colonial experiment called Canada took shape. As the Canadian enterprise has evolved and expanded, various treaties between settlers and Indigenous peoples have granted the Crown access to vast expanses of land and a wealth of resources. There are also many areas of the country, including Tittler’s hometown of Vancouver, where treaties have not yet been established. In either case, it is the Indigenous population’s acquiescence to the presence and activities of newcomers (in some cases willingly, in others under duress) that enabled Canada to not only exist, but to become one of the most prosperous countries on earth. Far from “racist,” the fact that some Indigenous peoples should desire a measure of gratitude is warranted.

There is another, more profound issue at play here, however. Michele Tittler is not merely a citizen with a point of view. She is an ideological campaigner who advocates a specific set of policies—namely, the abrogation of treaties, reserve lands, and legal rights that apply specifically to Indigenous peoples in Canada. This idea is not unique to Tittler; since the foundation of the Canadian state, various efforts have been made to integrate the Indigenous “other” into the mainstream of Canadian society—including residential schools and the Trudeau white paper.

Historically, and today, there are many Canadians who sympathize with aspects of Tittler’s message, despite her marginal status. Even among those who reject the contention that the message on the “Got Land?” sweater is racist, there are some—including current and former members of our federal government—who hold that the “special” or “race-based” rights accorded to Indigenous peoples ought to end. These individuals typically dismiss or fail to appreciate the importance of Indigenous concepts of nationhood, sovereignty, and connection to the land, in favour of a “solution” that involves assimilation/integration, and nullification of Indigenous rights that pre-date European contact, and have been affirmed by the United Nations.

To most people, geography is a key component of identity. For example, if the land of France ceased to exist, the claim of French nationality would be rendered meaningless; the French would become a rootless diaspora. This is so to an even greater extent for Indigenous peoples. The earliest inhabitants of Turtle Island already face extraordinary hostility from Canadians over their desire to preserve their heritage, traditions, and rights. By amplifying the voice of Tittler, and offering little in the way of challenge, our country’s public broadcaster has done Indigenous peoples a grave disservice.Comment:  I believe I responded to the Facebook posting shown below. To be fair, Tittler didn't say "I hate Indians," or list Tenelle Starr's address, in that posting. Unless it was in the comments, which I didn't read in detail. I don't know for sure that she did either of these things.

Also, this article says Tittler is 52, while the previous article said she's 59. I don't know which it is.

"Native spiritual adviser" warns Rob

I received the following phone message August 11:Robert,

I am a Native American spiritual adviser. What are you doing writing a comic book about us Native Americans? This is wrong...spiritually wrong. You do not need to do this. You are making fun of us Indians--making us look like a bunch of hoodlums, thugs. I don't like this, and us Native Americans do not like this. This is wrong...spiritually wrong. We are not like this.

There is going to be problems with this. We will all gather up and protest this. Go as far as we can with it. This is wrong.

My name is Linda Haddaway. My number is (xxx) xxx-xxxx if you have comments on this. Thank you.Comment:  I ignored this message, since Haddaway obviously hasn't read my comics and is some sort of crackpot.

The phrase "hoodlums, thugs" suggests she might have read my Scalped page. And assumed that someone was criticizing my stories rather my criticizing Jason Aaron's.

Hoodlums and thugs, lady? Not in the first two issues of Peace Party, which you almost certainly haven't read. If you're not a liar or an idiot, tell us which page of which issue shows an Indian as a hoodlum or a thug. Go ahead, we'll wait.

Who is Haddaway?

The woman spoke in a halting and slightly slurred fashion, as if she were old or drunk or reading off a script she wasn't sure of. Her area code suggested a southern Texas location, where there are few if any Indians.

Indeed, I have only her message to assure us she's Native. She could easily be a wannabe or an "Indian" with a tiny amount of Native blood.

I Googled her and found a Linda Hadaway who's a romance writer in Washington state. She might be the person who called, but I'd guess not.

I think Sherman Alexie's recent tweet about the spiritually minded applies here:When a person identifies him/herself as "a spiritual seeker," I seek a quick exit from his/her company.Get a clue, lady

Here's what else I might say to Haddaway if we spoke:

One, you're more than two decades too late. Maybe you could use a time machine to go back to 1990 and undo everything I've done.

Two, I suggest you focus on Scalped, which has about a thousand times the readership and clout of Peace Party. It actually portrays Natives negatively, unlike my comics.

For more on Scalped, see Aaron on Ending Scalped and Aaron Looks Back at Scalped.

Blackfeet critic jailed for Facebook comments

Great Falls man arrested on Blackfeet reservation for Facebook commentsA Great Falls man has been jailed for comments he made on Facebook about the Blackfeet Tribal Business Council.

According to witnesses, Bryon Scott Farmer was arrested on Friday for violating Tribal Ordinance 67. The law protects members of the tribal council from “allegations of threats, slanderous material and misleading information,” according to court documents.

As of Tuesday, Farmer was still in jail in Browning. Farmer is an enrolled tribal member and often comments on a Facebook page called “Blackfeet Against Corruption,” according to his aunt, Carol Grant of Browning.

Farmer has been a staunch critic of the current tribal council, which has been mired in controversy since last year. Last summer, the ruling council led by Chairman Willie Sharp Jr. suspended five other councilors and more than two dozen tribal employees. Since then, only five councilors have been in office, and critics on the reservation contend that does not constitute a quorum to conduct business.Blackfeet arrest man critical of tribal councilBlackfeet authorities have arrested a tribal member who has been critical of the tribe's governing council, accusing him of violating a law that protects council members from threats, slanderous material or misleading information.

Relatives of Bryon Scott Farmer say the Great Falls man was arrested Friday while attending a family gathering in Browning for doing nothing more than expressing himself.

"I felt violated by what the police did," Farmer's aunt, Carol Grant, said. "Because the only thing Bryon has done is exercise his First Amendment right, his right to freedom of speech."Blackfeet Nation man arrested for posting on Facebook groupThe tribe's prosecutor charged Farmer on June 28. But he wasn't arrested until Friday, a day before the parade for the North American Indian Days.

Farmer remained jailed for the entire weekend while the events took place. He was apparently released late Tuesday.

"Guess whos back?" Farmer said on Facebook. "I love all my people who prayed for me while I was in jail, I felt your prayers, and remember jesus went to jail for his people. CHANGE is coming and we are all part of it on this site. BAC ROCKS!"Comment:  Actress Misty Upham, Blackfeet, is one of those protesting corruption in the Blackfeet tribal government. I hope to hear more about it from her.

For more on the subject, see Blackfeet Indicted for Musicians' Hunt.

Responses to Sleepless Entertainment's tribal cosplay

As you may recall, I criticized Sleepless Entertainment's Racist "Tribal Cosplay" in a recent posting. Perhaps foolishly, I shared the link with Sleepless's fans on their Facebook page. I got a slew of angry responses.

Here are some of their comments and my replies:wow.... you have GOT to be one of the biggest MORONS for writing this garbage... you MUST not have much of a life ...seriouslyI earn my living writing and disseminating news about Indians. I've been invited to speak in schools and museums. My work is quoted in books and articles. If that's "not much of a life," I'll take it.

Terminology, mascots, and pollsALSO you look quite ignorant calling native americans "indian"

You keep using the word "Indian" which is almost derrogatory.I've been writing about Indians for 20-plus years, bright boys. Unless you have more experience than that, you should keep your mouths shut.

You're ignoramuses if you think Indians don't call themselves Indians. Check out the thousands of tribes and tribal organizations with the word "Indian" in their name.

Here, educate yourself on the subject so I don't have to:

"Indian" term dying out?
"American Indian" vs. "Native American"
"Indian" vs. "Native American"

Heck, check out the comments by the so-called Reservation Rats (quoted directly below). Why don't you two groups debate whether "Indian" is proper or not and get back to me with your answer?The obsession with protesting mascots and names like Redskins is an obsession of white Indians. They protest mascots, children dressing up on Halloween and other silly things because it makes them feel Indian. It lets them scream racism.It's funny to see the Rats, who admit being a nearly defunct group of Indians, call other Indians "white." Especially since the Rats want Indians to stop protesting mascots and accept the white man's position. It's hard to be "whiter" than agreeing with the white majority.

As for the Rats' arguments, check out the hundreds of tribes and tribal organizations that have denounced Indian mascots. From my e-mail exchanges with the Rats, I've learned that's one fact they can't or won't touch.

Native orgs that oppose mascots

The pro-mascot polls are biased or misleading, as many of us have explained before. Read up on the subject rather than regurgitating what the mainstream media tells you.

Online Redskins poll demonstrates bias
AP poll on Redskinsis flawed
Annenberg's "Redskins" survey

And this posting isn't about mascots, so stick to the subject. Next time you post a bunch of irrelevant comments, I may delete them.

Fire-twirling and tiki masksIt is funny how you don't realize the disrespectful way you have presented tribal cultures aside from Native Americans.

"The fire-twirling and tiki-style mask aren't part of any American Indian culture, although they might qualify as Native Hawaiian. In any case, they're exotic customs not practiced by civilized people. Barbaric people wear strange costumes, do strange dances, and worship strange gods."Apparently you weren't clever enough to realize I was conveying Sleepless Entertainment's message, not my own. Here, I rewrote the passage so even a child couldn't misunderstand it:

Sleepless Entertainment is telling us all indigenous people are the same. The company's view is that they're barbaric people who wear strange costumes, do strange dances, and worship strange gods.ONE WHO PERFORMS FIRE KNIFE is a Polynesian, including Samoans, Tongans, Niueans, Cook Islanders, Tahitians, Hawaiians, Marquesans and Māori, are genetically linked to indigenous peoples of parts of Southeast Asia including those of Taiwan.Which is why I wrote:

The fire-twirling and tiki-style mask aren't part of any American Indian culture, although they might qualify as Native Hawaiian.

What part of this statement do you disagree with, Angry Tahitian? In what way is it wrong to say these things aren't Native American?It is so easy for you to judge the mockery of Native Americas... But you are blindingly disrespecting and limiting my culture to that of the Americas... any True educated person would know very few Polynesians are Native to Hawaii.Do you know what "might"--as in "they might qualify as Native Hawaiian"--means? It's a conditional claim, not an absolute. You can't disprove it unless you prove no fire-twirling and tiki-style masks exist anywhere on the Hawaiian Islands.

Polynesian culture came with the Polynesians who first colonized Hawaii. If they didn't bring fire-twirling and tiki-style masks, later Hawaiians appropriated these things from their Polynesian ancestors. However these things came to Hawaii, I'm pretty sure they're part of Hawaiian culture now.

If you think I said Polynesian culture is not part of America's melting pot, you're wrong. To reiterate, Polynesian culture isn't part of any American Indian culture. Sleepless's tribal cosplay falsely implies it is.

Criticizing racism is racist?!The ONLY ones that are coming off racist here is you and the people who are following you and your groups that you belong to.It's almost inevitable that racists who don't like being called "racist" hurl the term back at their critics. This is stupid beyond belief, since I didn't say anything about the race of Sleepless's founders or performers.

Go ahead and tell us the definition of "racist" so we can laugh at how far off the mark you are. I'm betting you can't do it. You're crying (reverse) racist when you literally don't know what it means.Cosplay is dressing up AS ANYTHING.So the hell what? Halloween and make-believe are "dressing up as anything" also. This doesn't inoculate people from charges of racism. The intent is irrelevant; only the outcome matters.

Racism occurs when you dress up, imitate, and mock one particular race. Your reasons for doing so are irrelevant. People who engage in cosplay or Halloween or make-believe are all guilty of racism when they discriminate based on race...period.The owner of Sleepless Entertainment who created this theme is actually 100% Native AmericanIs she? What's her name? What tribe is she a member of? Etc. Until you provide details, this claim is worthless.

Heck, it's worthless anyway. Native people can be guilty of stereotyping themselves--as we see with Native fans of the Washington Redskins. Therefore, the ethnicity of the owner and everyone else at Sleepless Entertainment is irrelevant.Posting this has made her and her family ASHAMED to share the same race as you because of how non-peaceful and racist YOU GUYS are.I'm the only person here, dummy. There are no "you guys."

And I'm not Native--as most people know, and some of the newcomers figured out. If the owner is Native, she and I are of different races.

Rob ignores other stereotypes?!?

Again, you clearly don't understand what "racist" means. You also don't understand what "non-peaceful" means. In case you haven't heard, "Names will never hurt you." Pixels on a screen cannot harm you physically--unless you call eye strain "violence."

Nor have I advocated any kind of violence. I haven't advocated anything; I've informed you of your racist behavior. Period.

Fact is, you don't like being criticized, so you've labeled peaceful comments "non-peaceful." Well, go suck your thumb and hug your security blanket if you can't take criticism without crying. If you can't take the heat, you big babies, stay out of the kitchen.Sleepless Entertainment are accepting of ALL PEOPLE and to say they are making a mockery of your culture.. well you might as well start protesting at EVERY elementary school.. because come thanksgiving guess what? THEY ARE ALL HAVING FAKE STORE BOUGHT INDIAN COSTUME PARTIES! OHHH MYYY GODDD AHHH!!!! And what about Football teams? If anything they should be mockering your "barbaric" ways."Mockering"? No such word.

What, you think I haven't protested Halloween costumes, Thanksgiving pageants, and Indian mascots? I have whole pages devoted to these subjects, you dumb bunny.

It's hysterical how ignorant you are of my 20-plus years of work. How stupid do you have to be to spout off without knowing a thing about me? Pretty damn stupid.FIRST OF ALL this event even says that it was not limited to ANY one native tribe. It was a collaboration of all things tribal themed... and sorry to be the barer of bad news here.. but heres a wake up call... YOUR NOT THE ONLY "TRIBAL" CULTURE THAT EXISTS!I said Sleepless Entertainment used the Native word "pow wow" and Native accouterments such as the Plains headdress. These are specific to American Indians. Stamp once if you understand this, twice if I need to explain it again.

If you didn't catch this point, learn to freakin' read. Acting as if Indians are part of some global tribal village is part of the problem. It suggests that all indigenous people are the same. You've taken thousands of distinct cultures from around the world and merged them into one.

Again, you're stereotyping Indians as primitive people of the past. And you're suggesting that "Samoans, Tongans, Niueans, Cook Islanders, Tahitians, Hawaiians, Marquesans and Māori" are equally primitive. According to Sleepless's cosplay, they're all half-naked savages.

Batting 1.000% so far...of course you weren't at the event so I wouldn't expect you to know that along with 90% of the other bullshit you made up just to make a post.So far you ignoramuses haven't found a single flaw in my arguments. If at first you don't succeed, try, try again.You know what.. If they were to do that kind of event.. i'm sure those people would have better things to do with their lives than posting it on the internet.See comments above about how I earn my living with 20-plus years of work. And let's note your obvious avoidance technique. You can't address my arguments so you attack me instead. Pathetic.You are a disgrace to your own kind who were once sought upon as "peace making" people, and you are just making yourself sound equally as dumb talking about something you have NO IDEA what you are even talking about.Again, I'm white. But I love the vaguely insulting phrase "your kind."

If I were Native, other Natives wouldn't necessarily be "my kind." That's the point, dumbass. In contrast to your stereotypical cosplay, which portrays one big homogenized mess, every indigenous culture is different.

And again, you haven't identified a single problem in my posting. All your carping amounts to: "We don't like to be criticized, so stop it! Waaaah!"Why don't you focus next on all of the Halloween costume manufactures that are making sexy Indian outfits?Why don't you click on the search terms Halloween, princess (as in sexy Indian Pocahotties), and savage Indians and see how many times I've blogged about them? Then you can apologize for your profound ignorance.I am sure the " America's 566 federally recognized tribes " Really don't give a eff. I am sure they are all living it up on Casino money and Federal Paychecks.You're sure Indians don't care about racist stereotypes? Wrong:

NMAI symposium on racist mascots
Indians testify about negative images
Legal briefs files against Redskins

I'll give you a bonus point for getting the number of federally recognized tribes right. But I have to take it away for the racist stereotypes that follow. "Living it up on Casino money and Federal Paychecks"? Thanks for demonstrating the ignorance your tribal cosplay has promoted. "Savages" like Sleepless's performers are too crude and primitive to hold jobs, so they get by with handouts.

The legal issueAs the photographer of these images i do NOT grant you the permission of using my photos for your blog. They are copy written and you don't have any rights to use them. Remove them asap.

Please give me the contact information of your lawyer, I'll have a field day.This is a good time to note Sleepless Entertainment removed its "tribal" album from public view on Facebook. What are you afraid of, chickens? If you're convinced you're right, why would you remove the album? Could it be because you finally realized how racist this performance was?

I'm already having a field day laughing at your ignorance of copyright law. But I'll tell you what. Find a lawyer who's equally ignorant of the law. Have the person write me a letter explaining why you think the fair-use exception doesn't apply. E-mail me the letter.

If it's not a complete joke, I'll forward it to one of my legal colleagues. That lawyer will explain fair use to you and your lawyer, since you clearly don't understand it. If you're not embarrassed to pieces, and still think you have a case, we'll proceed from there.

Go head, crybaby. I'm calling your bluff. Pay a lawyer to write me a letter, or shut the hell up and take my criticism like an adult.

Conclusion

With your whining about how stereotypes aren't important, "Indian" is derogatory (wrong), I'm a moron, etc., etc., none of you have actually addressed the issues. So let's do that now.

For starters, are the tribal costumes stereotypical: yes or no? Go ahead and answer that, anonymous cowards, and then we'll discuss it.

If you can't or won't answer, get lost. Who cares if your feelings are hurt? Not me. The racism you're perpetuating is infinitely more important than your "freedom" to portray indigenous people as savages.

Finally, freedom of speech protects this posting too. If you don't like it, go cry somewhere else, you bawling brats. Your juvenile name-calling and lack of intelligent arguments are a waste of everyone's time.

For more on the subject, see Top Three Native Stereotypes and Mithlo's TEDx Talk on Stereotypes.

Depp Derangement Syndrome

Sunday I posted a link on Facebook's NativeCelebs page about Disney selling Tonto costumes. My caption read:Dress up as an authentic Comanche for Halloween! With a bird on your head! Because Johnny Depp respects Indians! #disneyfailMost people joined in the criticism, while a few defended Depp. But someone named Joe Ratley went off the deep end.

He and other Depp lovers are suffering an irrational obsession with their lord and master. I call it Depp Derangement Syndrome.

Here's my exchange with Ratley:I'm really getting angry at whoever is posting these digs accosting Johnny Depp's Native identity on the NativeCelebs header above. It's obvious that you are NOT someone of intelligence, compassion, and fairness. There are many of your ilk; I'm a Cherokee in Oklahoma and I hear this same kind of PREJUDICE all too often from other SMALL people trying too cut someone else down to their own size, or motivated by some other EVIL reason. Whoever you are you do a malignant disservice to the health and futures not only of individual Native Americans, but to our collective, synergistic futures. Damn you, damn you. Show your face, let us know the traitor among us. Now all you do is sully the reputations of all you are associated with at NativeCelebs. One doesn't have to possess some "card", or your approval to exist as the Creator has fashioned them/us. Snake, mean snake! Go get somebody some coffee and clean the restroom after you're done.Most of the people here disagree with you, Joe. Maybe you should think about why you're in the minority on this issue.

I've stated the reason for criticizing Depp many times. In case you weren't paying attention, here it is again: We want authentic Native roles for authentic Native actors. Johnny Depp's Tonto is neither. It's an affront to anyone who wants genuine Native celebs to succeed and the public to appreciate them.

Depp doesn't have a card, a proven Native ancestor, or any evidence whatsoever that he's Native. Until he does, it's a fact that he's non-Native, not an opinion. If you don't like this fact, too bad.

My name is Rob Schmidt. I'm one of the people who runs this page. And I stand behind my criticism 100%. If you don't like it, leave.

Ratley can't handle the truth

And apparently you have nothing to say about the substance of this posting. Namely, the fact that Disney is selling a costume that 1) will let kids dress up as phony Indians like minstrel performers in blackface, and 2) will further the misunderstanding of today's modern Indians.

None of this has anything to do with Depp's identity. I guess you're the one lacking in intelligence since you don't understand this and can't address it.

As for compassion, you want us to have compassion for a multi-millionaire actor? How about you have compassion for the 5 million-plus Native Americans he's stereotyping? And fairness? My criticism is perfectly fair and justified and you haven't shown otherwise. Your whining tells me you're a big baby who can't handle reasoned debate.Fuck you, asshole. And while you're at it, "Rob Schmidt", get a clue as to who's in the minority about this issue. You are no different from the Nazis who scourged Europe with their racism in the name of blood purity. While you drooling your "opinions", I'd like to know just what "position" you hold at NativeCelebs? And if you are in a position to speak for "NativeCelebs", and IF you ARE, well then NativeCelebs would be just another rock around the feet of OUR people TRYING, yet failing, to hold us back. You're a small person with a small heart and a small mind. Johnny's Depp's CULTURAL, ECONOMIC, AND ARTISTIC CONTRIBUTIONS to OUR people outshine you like the sun. You're a nobody, "Indian card" or not. Change your name to "Custer", you venomous snake. "Modern Indians"?! Yeah, sure.If you're too dumb to count the comments on this posting, Joe, that's your problem, not mine. The majority agree with me.

"Fuck you" is your response? Wow. Clearly you lack the intellect to address the issues I raised. Here they are again:

Disney is selling a costume that 1) will let kids dress up as phony Indians like minstrel performers in blackface, and 2) will further the misunderstanding of today's modern Indians.

Depp's alleged contributions to Native people in other areas don't excuse his minstrel-show performance in The Lone Ranger. Not to mention Disney's promotion of this false and stereotypical representation of Indians via a Halloween costume. They're unrelated issues. Duhhh.

My position is that I volunteer to help Annie, who owns this page. You can send her a private message about firing me if you wish.

Since this issue has come up dozens of times before and she hasn't fired me yet, I doubt anything will come of it. Presumably because she understands that criticizing Depp's Tonto means promoting authentic Native roles by authentic Native actors.

But you never know. Give it a try and see what happens.

Meanwhile, my contributions to this page outshine your whiny criticism that continues to avoid the issues I raised. What's the matter, Joe? Are you afraid to debate the authenticity of Depp's costume? Or the broader issue of dressing as fake Indians in Halloween costumes? What are you waiting for?

P.S. I'm not Native at all, so I don't have an "Indian card." But I have worked in the Native media for about 20 years. I'm a freelance writer for Indian Country Today and an editor at Pechanga.Net.

And when I began volunteering at NativeCelebs, I believe it had only 7,000 or 8,000 likes. The fact that it's now approaching 20,000 likes suggests I'm doing something right.

Mocking Ratley

Ratley began soliciting people on NativeCelebs to send him info about me. That quickly got him banned from the page.

He also began sending me private messages on Facebook. I began sharing and commenting on them with my Facebook friends:

Someone named Joe Ratley is now threatening me because I criticized Johnny Depp. Here's his (formerly) private message to me:Hey "KoreaTown", expect someone to step into you and read you the Riot Act. The signal has been given. - Boo RadleyIt would be tough to get me fired since I'm self-employed. I'm not even worried about an IRS audit, since my taxes are totally straightforward and honest. Really, I'm dying to know who's gonna try to shut me up and how.

"Boo Radley" aka Joe Ratlike explains his "Koreatown" reference:With "friends" like you, Asshole. Who needs enemies? "KoreaTown", Jerk, refers to YOU dressing up like a Native American. Everyday is Halloween for you.He says I've "gathered attention" to myself for criticizing Depp. Yeah, because this is the first time I've criticized anyone in my 20+ years of writing about Native issues.

Woe is me...I'm in trouble now. Millions of Natives who revere Johnny Depp are gonna turn against me!

Now "Boo Radley" aka Joe Ratlike is soliciting my home address and phone number on the NativeCelebs page. He claims I've libeled Johnny Depp and, I guess, he's gonna sue on Depp's behalf.

Ratlike apparently needs to buy a clue about such legal concepts as "public figure" and "injured party." Fanboys don't get to sue on a celebrity's behalf. And celebrities don't get to sue over criticism they don't like.

I think the "libel" I'm accused of is saying Depp is a white man. Really? Even if he were federally enrolled, I think I could state my opinion that he doesn't have enough blood or culture to be a real Indian.

Correct me if I'm wrong, lawyers. I know it's not libel in Depp's case. But if a public figure were federally enrolled and I challenged his Indian-ness, would he have a viable libel suit against me?

I say no, obviously. It would be like saying, "I don't agree with Joe the Scientist who says global warming is real. He must be lying because his claim is false." If you sincerely disagree with the facts, I think you can say that without fear of repercussion.

As long as you're talking about a public figure or policy issue, that is. Obviously, you're at risk "disagreeing about the facts" with public comments about a private citizen. You can't say, "Joe the Scientist says he's faithful to his wife but I think he's a philanderer."

Q: What's the greatest thing Johnny Depp has done for Indians? 1) Remade The Lone Ranger with Tonto in a bird hat. 2) Donated $25K to Navajo scholarships. 3) Worn an AIM t-shirt in public. 4) Other.

Ratley the wolf boy

Ratley finally found my phone number, called me, and left me a message. Incredibly, he demanded that I publicly apologize to Depp in the pages of Variety and the Hollywood Reporter.

He also continued to send me private messages, which I continued sharing:

Boo-boo Ratlike begins to threaten violence:Fritz, the Cultural Thief, your my special project now, but I share you with all my Native brothers and sisters who want to "play" with you. The marvelous thing about the Internet and gizmos like Google Earth is that when hunting vermin like you, it's as easy as your favorite java joint, your grocery store, your neighborhood bar, your local post office, ad nauseum, etc. Let's call it your rat labyrinth. We Tsa-la-gi are excellent trackers, even the coyote fear us, because we run in packs like wolves. Fritz, you're in some hazy wonderland where you think that you have Native American benefactors, and you fantasize that somehow the paternalistic noblesse oblige that you dream you have lavished upon us gives you some sort of Donald Trumpian power, some free ride among the hounds, some shelter from the storm. Our generous and talented brother, Johnny Depp, doesn't have the time, or the inclination to shine some light on your pathetic 15 minutes of "fame". Dominick Dunne wouldn't waste his time on you. It could be a fast car; don't jaywalk! or a mean dog, Nice Kitty, here Kitty-Kitty ... or some strange and unaccountable seizure, watch your waiters, and don't forget to tip. Yeah, when your time comes, the "circumstances" might be suspicious, or you might pass away quietly in your "sleep". So when you meet The Creator, shall your spirit be clean? And the most that might be accused of me might be cyber-stalking. Fritz, I take some of what I've said back. You might wind up on Law and Order SVU. I could produce and write the screenplay, and Adam Beach would solve the murder. You, Big Guy, would make an excellent corpse. Your Hollywood dog, Joe Ratley"...your favorite java joint, your grocery store, your neighborhood bar, your local post office." Uh, if you hang out at one of the four grocery stores I frequent, you might see me once a month. You won't see me at any of the other places.

I look forward to meeting a thug who's willing to wait a month in a grocery store to meet me. Hope you enjoy the wait, Boo-boo!

Let's see...read me the Riot Act? Nope. Libel lawsuit? Nope. Variety apology? Nope. Now we're down to pure thuggery. Way to represent the Cherokee, wolf boy.

He found my phone number on the Internet after begging people to help him find it. That's some tracking!

I may or may not leave my condo tonight. If you want to mug me, please wait outside in the cold and dark for a few hours. Try to intercept my car, which you may or may not recognize. You may get lucky!

I like the idea that Cherokees all think alike and all love Johnny Depp. That they're a pack of wolves who will hunt someone down a thousand miles away if the big ol' alpha dog gives the order.

I think I dropped some underwear on the way to the laundry. Any of my Native friends with wolf-like senses...do you think you could find it for me? I understand y'all are great trackers.

Ratley turns ugly (uglier)

After I got back from the inaugural Indian Country Online conference, I posted more on Ratley Wednesday:

Boo-boo Ratley sent another couple of messages Monday and Tuesday. His latest insults are "Judas" and "Skinwalker." "Judas" implies I'm betraying my own people, Indians. "Skinwalker" implies I'm pretending to be an Indian. Both insults are comically off the mark, like calling me "Shorty" or "Fatso."

I just learned Boo-boo has been tweeting about me too. By my count, an incredible 76 times, most of them Sunday and Monday. Can you say "lunatic"?

Boo-boo contacted several people whose tweets I retweeted, including Sherman Alexie. Yeah, because Alexie et al. really want to hear from a stranger that someone named Rob Schmidt is criticizing Johnny Depp. That's probably right up there in the top one million things they're concerned about.

Almost no one has replied to Boo-boo. Hilariously, one tweet generated 5-6 responses, but they thought he was talking about Rob Schmidt the horror director. Way to go, Boo-boo!

Unfortunately, his tweets include threats like this:@bluecorncomics Rob Schmidt, Skinwalker. Hunt at will. Bounty offered. Same as skunk. Need pelt to cash in. Culver City, CA verminSo I've reported him to Twitter and will have a lawyer write him a letter.

To my Twitter followers: I apologize to anyone who's received a tweet from Joe Ratley, a lunatic who's upset because I criticized Johnny Depp for his Tonto costume.

Here's the public apology Boo-boo Ratley has been demanding from me.

Sheesh. Someone should write about the Native fascination with Depp, who has demonstrated no more Native blood than Elizabeth Warren, Ward Churchill, or Iron Eyes Cody. It's deranged.

For more on Johnny Depp, see Inside Scoop on Lone Ranger and Depp Admires Tonto's Giant Nuts.