Cultural borrowing vs. appropriation

Someone posted the following article with this note:Curious to know how much of this you'd consider insightful and how much you'd consider clueless. To me, the author seems a bit tone-deaf and has trouble telling the difference between culture and fashion.The Dos and Don’ts of Cultural Appropriation
Borrowing from other cultures isn’t just inevitable, it’s potentially positive.

By Jenni Avins

My response:

I think Avins's seven recommendations are okay. The main problem is her introduction, where she belittles the idea of appropriation before she tackles it.

In her intro, her specific problem is confusing borrowing with appropriation. Appropriation is mainly an issue when people put something on display, to make a statement. This generally happens with celebrities and fashion models, not ordinary people.

In other words, I don't think anyone cares if you wear a kimono or Brazilian sandals or Navajo jewelry. Your choices have no effect on the world at large.

And if you're just eating or using a product from another country in your home, that's definitely borrowing, not appropriation. Appropriation is about claiming something as yours--i.e., in the court of public opinion. If no one knows you're doing it, it's irrelevant to the discussion. No one cares.

My choice

Even on a personal level, I'd think twice about appropriating and displaying someone else's culture. Again, I'm not talking about sneakers that were made in China or wherever.

For instance, Mom gave me a Native bolo tie that a friend gave her. Because Mom told her I was interested in Indians, I guess. It's nice, but I probably wouldn't wear it if I was ever in a tie-wearing situation.

Why not? Because I don't need or want to send a message that I'm "part Indian," "down with the Indians," or whatever. It's false advertising in a way, because it doesn't stem naturally and genuinely from my background.

If I had worked on a reservation for 10 years, then I might've adopted bolo ties as part of my style. And then it would reflect some real aspect of me. But putting it on now, it would make more of a claim than I feel I have a right to make. It would be like pretending I have a Cherokee great-grandmother.

In short, it would be appropriation. To be sure, people probably wouldn't call me on it because I do work in Native areas. But I wouldn't feel comfortable doing it. It's just not who I am.

More examples

Look at two recent examples: KTZ Copies Sacred Inuit Robe and Jennifer Lopez Wears "Tribal" Outfit. Both are arguably examples of adopting another culture's identity as one's own.

If the KTZ designer or Lopez wore the Native-inspired fashions at home, that would be one thing. But the public displays send a message. "These are mine," they seem to be saying. "I own the designs as much as the people who originated them."

If I wear a mass-produced Native t-shirt, it's pretty clear I'm borrowing it. I'm adopting a look for a few hours only. But if I step out with my own Native-inspired fashions, it's pretty clear I'm claiming ownership. I've appropriated someone else's designs as my own.

This may be what distinguishes appropriation from borrowing: the false presumption of ownership.

Do Dominican totem poles exist?

People are still talking about Miss Universe Canada's costume:

Miss Universe Canada's totem pole dress shocks First Nations people

Torontonian Paola Nunuz Valdez wore the offending dress at this week’s Miss Universe contestIn a statement, Valdez said the dress was a "misunderstanding" and that the design was meant to refer to her own heritage as a Dominican, not to reflect on Canada's aboriginal culture.

She was born in the Dominican Republic, which shares with Haiti the large Caribbean island east of Cuba. While totem poles may exist there, they don't play as prominent role in the culture as they do on Canada's west coast.

Callingbull, in a Facebook post, suggested Miss Universe Canada hire a cultural consultant in the future to avoid hanging an important symbol from a future contestant's crotch.

She also criticized the organization's attempt to cover up its error.

"I'd like to see these so called 'west coast Dominican Republic Totem Poles.' They are really trying to protect themselves and didn't even have the heart to simply apologize," she wrote.

One totem pole online

Someone posted this link and image on Facebook:

Dominican Carnival Totem Pole YAGU-TO2Hand carved and painted Dominican Carnival Totem Pole. Made from the palm trees leaf stem which is called Yauga (pronounced "Jagua").

Approximate size: 8.5x1.5

To which I responded:

This kind of proves the point. There's only one item online that matches a "Dominican totem pole" search. Totem poles aren't a part of that culture or there'd be more of them.

Also, the fact that the item is labeled "Dominican" doesn't mean it's authentically Dominican. It could've been made in Asia for all we know.

More important, it looks nothing like Miss Canada's loincloth. If it is authentically Dominican, her costume isn't.

In fact, the Dominican Creations company is headquartered in Quebec and says it'sServing Canada, United States and the Dominican RepublicThis makes it less likely the company is selling genuine Dominican artifacts. And again, even if this pole were genuine, it doesn't look like the pole on the dress.

Final comment

Someone else added this comment on Valdez's dress:Ummm...totally not the same as Dominican 'totem poles'. And last time I checked she was representing Canada. This would imply that she is misusing First Nations totem culture.Yes, it's ridiculous to say she's honoring her Dominican heritage when that has nothing to do with her role as Miss Canada. Plus her raven costume and the totem pole have nothing to do with the Dominican Republic.

Miss Canada in a totem-pole loincloth

Miss Canada and the Free Bin

By Jessica R. MetcalfeWell, I was hoping this wasn't true, but alas, Miss Canada, Paola Nuñez, wore this lil "Totem Pole" number for the Miss Universe Preliminaries held two days ago in Las Vegas. The pageant will be televised live on Sunday, Dec 20, on FOX.

The past costumers for Miss Canada seem to have an identity crisis of sorts, not really knowing how to authentically represent their unique national identity in a flamboyant soundbite of an ensemble.

What makes Canada unique? In the past, they've featured Mounties, maple leaves, and even hockey sticks, but they always come back to old standby: "the Native."An update:Well, you may or may not like what I have to say. We've found the designer of this costume. He's actually a young Dominican designer who also designed Miss Canada's evening gown and the outfit for her talent portion. In fact, she is also from the Dominican Republic and immigrated with her mother to Canada at the age of 10. As a newcomer to Canada, she was bullied and teased because of her dark skin and big lips. In addition, from reading the designer’s meaning behind this costume, it is clear that he genuinely tried to do research (if only we could all get gold stars for trying) and he found significance in the totem pole; he writes, "honoring these tribes which we pay tribute to the indigenous peoples of these Nations.”

So here we have a young lady wishing to represent Canada in the best way and make the nation proud. We also have a young designer wanting to honor Canada’s Aboriginal population through his garments. Why, then, when we have so many good intentions on the table, do we still come up shorthanded when it comes to representing Native people and our cultures appropriately and accurately? (And, as a sidebar, how does a person, who wants to win a global title, make this kind of cultural faux pas?) What’s the big hang-up? Where’s the glitch in the system? Why are we consistently excluded from having a say in how our cultures are being represented?

Some commenters on Facebook were more scathing than Dr. Metcalfe:This is ridiculous and super offensive...this is an example of why some Canadians need to learn more about our First Peoples...whoever organizes the pageant and chooses the wardrobe is obviously completely ignorant and very disrespectful!

My first problem with this is the use of a designer from the Dominican (as Miss Canada a Canadian designer should have been used). My second problem with this is if they wanted to showcase First Nations culture they should have gone with a First Nations designer. This is offensive!!

Did the pageant committee set her up for fail? Why wasn't her outfit made with a tasty beaded, deerskin dress and head band. I am an Alberta native and the ugly mask outfit is an insult to my Cree heritage. The whiteman wins again.Dominican totem pole?!

Finally, the Miss Universe Canada organization offered a ridiculous explanation of its ridiculous stereotyping:

‘There’s been a tremendous misunderstanding’: Miss Universe Canada carved over totem pole outfit

By Tristin HopperBut after the 2015 contestant elicited cringes by donning a glittery totem pole costume, organizers tried to head off outrage by explaining that it was a Dominican-inspired totem pole.

“Unfortunately, there’s been a tremendous MISUNDERSTANDING regarding the context about Miss Canada’s National Costume,” reads an official statement by Miss Universe Canada.

“Yes, there are many different totem poles, NOT just First Nations totem poles.”And:On Sunday, Miss Universe Canada put out a statement responding to “all of the negative comments.”

Despite earlier claims that Miss Canada had been embracing “native culture,” the statement said that they actually meant to say that she was “embracing her ethnic heritage of being a Dominican-born Canadian.”

When a commenter pointed out that the Dominican Republic is not known for its totem poles, Miss Universe Canada responded “her costume was not meant to depict First Nations people but rather the people of the Dominican.”Comment:  Get freakin' serious, pageant people. The totem pole looks like a touristy version of typical Native totem pole. The animals appear to be an eagle, bear, and wolf--animals not found in the Dominican Republic.

Moreover, the rest of her costume resembles a giant raven--again a clearcut symbol of Canada's First Nations, not the Dominican Republic. If people realized the costume turned this revered being into a sex object, they might be even more upset.

Finally, the designer explicitly wrote that he intended to "pay tribute to the indigenous peoples of these Nations." So he lied? Or he's too stupid to realize what he said? Because his statement blatantly contradicts the pageant's statement.

Somebody's not telling the truth here. I'm guessing it's Miss Universe Canada.

For more on the subject, see Miss Universe Canada in a Headdress.

Designer uses sacred Navajo symbols

Navajos calling for apology from London designer who used sacred symbol in Fashion Week showcase

By Stephanie ClaytorIndigenous designs being showcased at New York Fashion Week has many in the Navajo Nation upset. They're calling for the designer, Marjan Pejoski, to apologize.

Pejoski's show included a dress with a Yei Bi Chei. Navajos consider the Yei Bi Chei sacred and holy, and not to be used as a fashion statement.

"I was appalled," said Jana Pfeiffer, a Navajo woman. "I was shocked to see something that I hold so sacred in our culture, to see it on the fashion runway."And:"It's an atrocity to see this designer misappropriate our cultural imagery of such an important holy being," said Morgan.

Both ladies said even they do not have the right to draw a Yei Bi Chei. Pfeiffer said Navajos have to be ordained before they can depict them on sand paintings or rugs.

That's why both of these women want the designer--Marjan Pejoski--to apologize for stealing a sacred piece of their culture.Comment:  For more fashion faux pas, see KTZ Copies Sacred Inuit Robe and Jennifer Lopez Wears "Tribal" Outfit.

KTZ copies sacred Inuit robe

KTZ fashion under fire for using Inuit design without family's consent

‘This is my great-grandfather’s sacred garment copied right down to the tee,’ says Salome Awa

By Sima Sahar ZerehiThe U.K.-based fashion label KTZ's fall 2015 men's collection includes a number of garments based on traditional Inuit designs and a sweater that appears to be a replica of a shaman's jacket, which a Nunavut woman says was used without her family's consent.

"I was in shock, I was furious, I was angry," said Salome Awa, who works as a morning show producer at CBC Nunavut.

"This is my great-grandfather's sacred garment copied right down to the tee."

It's the second year in a row that KTZ has been accused of copying a garment based on an indigenous design. Last year it came under fire for allegedly copying a dress from Bethany Yellowtail, a Northern Cheyenne/Crow designer from Montana. Twitter erupted with support for Yellowtail.Canadian retailer pulls 'stolen' sacred Inuit design from storesAfter our interview aired, we learned of a Canadian retailer that sells the KTZ sweater. The company is called CNTRBND and has stores in Toronto and Vancouver. They were selling the garment for $925 CDN.

Owner Christopher Casuga says he was personally offended when he saw the story. On Thursday, Casuga pulled the sweater from his sales floor and removed it from the company's website.

He says he didn't want to sell "anything that insinuates negativity toward native people. We want to make sure we are representing Canada in the best way possible."

On Friday, KTZ issued an apology to Awa. You can read the letter here.KTZ apology for copying sacred Inuit robe 'bittersweet'

'It's not right, they should have contacted us in the first place,' says Salome Awa

By Sima Sahar ZerehiA Nunavut woman whose great-grandfather's sacred shaman robe was copied without consent by U.K.-based fashion label KTZ, says an email apology offered to her by the design firm is "bittersweet."

"We sincerely apologize to you and anyone who felt offended by our work as it certainly wasn't our intention," stated KTZ in an email to Salome Awa this morning.

The label's fall 2015 men's collection includes a number of garments based on traditional Inuit designs, including a sweater that appears to be a replica of a shaman's jacket, belonging to Awa's great-grandfather, used without her family's consent.

"KTZ has always been inspired by and paid homage to indigenous cultures and tribes around the world," the apology said.Appropriation not a mistake

Was this appropriation an innocent mistake that happened because KTZ didn't know the parka's significance? Probably not.

In fact, probably the opposite. That is, KTZ probably knew of the coat and copied it precisely because it was famous.

Inuit shaman parka 'copied' by KTZ design well-studied by anthropologists

'It's the most unique garment known to have been created in the Canadian Arctic,' says Smithsonian researcher

By Sima Sahar ZerehiAn Inuit shaman's parka copied by KTZ, a U.K. design label, has been the subject of study for generations and is considered by experts as the "most unique garment known to have been created in the Canadian Arctic."

The fashion label's fall 2015 men's collection includes a number of garments based on traditional Inuit designs, including a sweater that has a pattern almost identical to that on a shaman's caribou skin parka that dates back to the early 1900s.

The design was used without the consent of the shaman's descendants in Nunavut. In response to a CBC News report last week, KTZ apologized to the family and pulled the sweater from its online stores.

The story has sparked interest in the origins of the parka and the meaning behind its symbolic designs.
Comment:  For more fashion faux pas, see Jennifer Lopez Wears "Tribal" Outfit and KTZ Rips Off Native Designs.

Jennifer Lopez wears "tribal" outfit

Jennifer Lopez Wears "Tribal" Outfit for American Music Awards Opening Number

By Rachel LubitzOn Sunday night, Jennifer Lopez opened the American Music Awards with a musical medley celebrating the year's top songs.

As she shook her stuff on stage, fans took note of her signature ageless glow, her perfect caramel highlights and her "tribal" jumpsuit, which she paired with a Native-inspired fur coat.

Although Lopez had several looks throughout the night—like a fun hot pink dress and a bright yellow jumpsuit—this was the one look that earned a certain kind of reaction. While most fans noted her impressive dance moves (and the fellow celebrity reactions), some viewers cited the outfit as an uncomfortable instance of cultural appropriation.There Was a Major Problem with Jennifer Lopez's Opening Performance at the AMAs

This is something we should be paying more attention to.

By Tyler McCall[W]e recognized the costumes' details from Italian label Dsquared2's controversial fall/winter 2015 collection. Nicknamed "Dsquaw," the line came under fire from Native American groups for cultural appropriation, not just because of the name ("squaw" is an derogatory word used to refer to Native American women) but because of the theft of their cultural heritage. DSquared2's designers Dean and Dan Caten are Canadian, which means they should be familiar to such sensitivities.

This is how the original description of their line read:"The enchantment of Canadian Indian tribes. The confident attitude of the British aristocracy.

In a captivating play on contrasts: an ode to America's native tribes meets the noble spirit of Old Europe. Magic and mysterious tribal influences meld with royal references in a bold, quite eccentric aesthetic, revealing luxurious materials and high-end, artisanal details.Comment:  Brown folks in cornrows, dreadlocks, and braids! So wildly outfitted and tattooed! They're fierce...savage...tribal!

For more fashion faux pas, see Los Angeles Magazine's "Going Native" and KTZ Rips Off Native Designs.

Natives denounce Indian Lot t-shirts

Natives blast T-shirts adorned with beer bottles, dream catchers

By Kevin AbourezkSome Lincoln Native people say they are concerned a T-shirt design showcased on a website this week contains images that reinforce stereotypes of Natives as alcoholics.

The shirt features the words “Indian Lot” and an image of a Native dream catcher with beer bottles hanging from it. The company that designed it said it's meant to pay homage to the once-popular football tailgating lot behind the Lincoln Indian Center.

The Corner 3 Tees company hoped to sell the shirts to people who remember the spot that was popular before the Indian Center banned alcohol there last year after some tailgaters got out of control, a spokesperson said in an email.

“The lot in question netted the owners a great amount of profit over the years as its popularity stemmed almost entirely from the tailgating festivities, which involved a vast amount of alcohol around various Native American structures,” the company said in a statement. “We elected to profit from the lot’s reputation in a similar manner.”

'Indian Lot' T-shirts that depict beer bottles, dream catchers stir cries of racism

By Colleen FellRebekka Schlichting, a UNL graduate student and member of the UNL Inter-Tribal Exchange student organization, said the T-shirt design is a slap in the face to Native American culture.

“The dream catchers are sacred, and the beer bottles are poison in our culture,” Schlichting said. “My initial reaction to the shirts was that, ‘This has got be to be a joke, this can’t be real.’ ”

However, Corner 3 Tees, the company that was to sell the shirts—which aren’t available on the company website—doesn’t see an issue.

In a statement emailed Friday to The World-Herald, the company said, “We are confused that although the Native American community in Lincoln was and is still deeply concerned with their heritage being tied to alcohol, we found little to no outrage regarding the Indian Center being synonymous with heavy alcohol consumption on Husker game days during our research prior to creating the T-shirt design concepts.”

The statement also said, “We assumed that since the Indian Center (and the Native American community in Lincoln) had no objections to tailgaters taking part in alcohol-related festivities on their grounds, including taking pictures of bonging beers and playing beer pong near Native American structures, the community would be receptive to the T-shirts’ depiction of the very parking lot environment they sponsored.”Comment:  Yes, clearly the company is confused. That's why its explanation badly misses the mark.

For starters, the Indian Center terminated the tailgaters' use of the lot a year ago. The shirt implies drinking is still going on there. False.

Reading the complaints, I don't see anyone saying that drinking didn't occur at the lot. Or that they'd object to a t-shirt about the drinking at the lot. By that I mean a shirt with the words "Indian Lot" and a neutral depiction of drinking. For instance, an image of a set of beer bottles, or a group of non-Native tailgaters.

That isn't what the shirts show. They show a dreamcatcher, a distinctively Native symbol, with bear bottles hanging from it. The implication is that Indian Lot was a location for drinking Indians. Or that Indians in general are drinkers.

Shirt implies a connection

Another problem is the unjustified linking of the "Native American community" and the Indian Center. Who says said community approved of what went on at the Indian Center's lot? Or even knew about it? It's false and stereotypical to suggest Indians are of one mind about any particular issue.

I can think of one way Corner 3 Tees might justify these shirts. That's if the Indian Center gave the company permission to use the "dreamcatcher with beer bottles" symbol to represent the tailgating. Then the company could say, "We asked the Indians and they said okay. They explicitly authorized us to use the dreamcatcher with beer bottles to represent Indian Lot."

That didn't happen. Instead, the company used racist and stereotyping thinking to come up with its shirts. "It's a place called Indian Lot. Drinking happens there. Let's create an image that combines Indians and drinking to represent the situation."

Suppose a black church were next to a playground with monkey bars and you wanted to commemorate that for some reason. Would you create a shirt showing blacks swinging on the bars like monkeys? Because that would be equivalent to the Indian Lot shirt. The drinking has no association with Indians except the name of the lot, but the shirt implies a connection.

For more on Indians and alcohol, see Vineyard Owner "Runs with Wine" and Vans Sells "Drunken Indian" T-Shirt.

Los Angeles Magazine's "Going Native"

ICYMI: “Fall Fashion: Your Guide to Going Native”: Los Angeles Magazine Celebrates Cultural Misappropriation

By Kelly HolmesTwo days ago, Los Angeles Magazine posted an article sharing what’s trending this fall with a headline that certainly rang cultural appropriation.

The style article, which was posted under the magazine’s ‘The Clutch‘ column, displayed the apparent Native-inspired trend craze set for fall with the initial title “Fall Fashion: Your Guide to Going Native.”

The article claimed “Feathers aren’t going anywhere; fringe continues to swing. Designers look once again to the American West for inspiration,” accompanied by a Boticca feather necklace, Burberry fringe clutch, and DSquared2 sandals.

As the post came to light, Los Angeles Magazine received backlash for the offensive headline and article.

Concepción Lara @lowsell
"Going Native" implies Indigeneity is 1) chosen and 2) temporary. Utilizing Cher's photo furthers the erasure of Native people. @LA_mag

In response, the magazine changed their headline to “Fall Fashion: Feathers and Fringe” with the explanation “An earlier version of this story had a poorly phrased headline. We apologize.”

However, they did not address or remove the photo of Cher dressed as the stereotypical “Pocahottie” nor did they address their glorification of cultural misappropriation. Despite their claim of “We’ve heard your feedback, and you’re right,” they missed the point of the initial backlash, which did not escape the notice of Twitter.

Mariana @MarianaThinks
@LA_mag oh no. Take the whole article down. Why not support authentic Native American designers? Not overpriced and fake products.Comment:  The tweets above are just examples of the criticism the magazine received.

Using Cher was kind of silly since the photo was 40-50 years. It may have represented the concept of "going Native," since Cher has tried to pass as Native over the years. But it didn't represent "fall fashion" unless they meant some fall in the late 1960s.

And yes, using Cher as a "Pocahottie" only furthers the sexualization of Native women. No real Native women dress this way, so it's not "going Native" so much as "going stereotypical." It's nothing more than a white man's (or woman's) fantasy of Native fashion.

For more on Cher, see Cher in a Headdress, Again.

Vans sells "drunken Indian" t-shirt

Vans Removes 'Drunken Indian' T-Shirt From Shelves After Canadian Petition

By Jesse FerrerasThe Vans clothing company has stopped selling a T-shirt that shows a totem pole made out of beer cans over concerns that it promotes a "drunken Indian" stereotype.

Chad Girardin, a Métis man from Vancouver, launched a Change.org petition calling on the retailer to remove the "Wizard Totem" shirt.

He is also seeking an official apology from the company. "This imagery is uncalled for and very hurtful," Girardin wrote.

"By creating this shirt Vans is stating that Natives culture revolves around alcohol and that all 'Indians' are drunks," the petition reads.Comment:  For more on the subject, see "Siouxper Drunk" T-Shirts at UND and AIM Fights "Runs with Beer" T-Shirt.

KTZ rips off Native designs

Another fashion faux pas involving Native appropriations:

New York Fashion Week Designer steals from Northern Cheyenne/Crow artist Bethany Yellowtail

By Adrienne KeeneI write about cultural appropriation in fashion a lot. I’ve taken on big brands and small brands, arguing that our images and cultural property should be taken seriously. But today, things got personal. Brand KTZ’s Fall/Winter line at New York Fashion Week was “a tribute” to Indigenous peoples. There’s a lot to critique in the line (and I will), but nestled among the 45 looks was this dress:

Does it look familiar? It might, because it is a DIRECT rip-off of my friend Bethany Yellowtail’s design from her Crow Pop Collection. ... If you need a side-by-side:Notice the form of the dress is the same, with the collar, the length, the shape, and the designs are clearly “inspired” by Bethany’s. Here’s the thing. Bethany’s design is not just a collection of abstract shapes, she utilized Crow beadwork that had been in her family for generations for her design. The colors, the shapes, and the patterns have meaning, origins, and history. They belong to her family and tribe. They are cultural property, not designs that are free for the taking.And:So why is it that Indigenous intellectual property is not seen as “real” intellectual property? Yes, the boundaries are difficult to find and difficult to enforce–but if KTZ had directly ripped off images from, say Valentino, or Yves Saint Laurent, or, shoot, McDonalds or Apple or anyone else, there would be a major case to be made about violations of intellectual property rights, and people would scoff at his lack of creativity. But “primitive” or in his words, “primal” peoples are not ever given the same consideration. Our designs and cultural markers are used to “enhance” white culture, while white cultural artifacts are protected and policed.

The bottom line is this: There should be no representations of us, without us. You want to draw upon Indigenous cultures for your line? Involve Indigenous artists and designers. There is no alternative answer. You love Bethany’s Crow designs? Call Bethany. Collaborate with Bethany. Give her a chance to show at New York Fashion Week with you. The fashion world costs hella money to get a foot in the door, so if you as a designer truly want to offer a “tribute” to Native people? Bring a Native designer up with you.KTZ's Latest Collection: A Racist Ripoff

By Dr. Jessica R. MetcalfeIf you still don’t understand what the big issue is, please read Jezebel’s A Much Needed Primer on Culture Appropriation, especially when I say this little ditty:"There isn't just one Native American culture. There are hundreds. And there are millions of Native people. And we're being ignored. We're being told that we don't have rights over how we are represented in mainstream America. We are being told that we should 'get over it'–but the people who are saying this don't even know what the issues are. When people know of us only as a 'costume,' or something you dress up as for Halloween or for a music video, then you stop thinking of us as people, and this is incredibly dangerous because everyday we fight for the basic human right to live our own lives without outsiders determining our fate or defining our identities."Pejoski blatantly disregards this basic fact, and creates a mish-mash–combining Navajo weaving designs with Crow beadwork patterns, and Plains bone breastplates with Southwest turquoise jewelry.

And let’s talk about those Navajo designs: one of them is of a sacred ye’ii–the embodiment of Navajo deities–that Pejoski put on a leather corset dress. Red flag #2. There is a colonial history of stealing, selling and buying Native American sacred items.

KTZ Accused of Ripping Off Crow Designer’s Patterns

By Jihan ForbesAdrienne calls Pejoski’s interpretation a “mockery and a celebration of cultural theft.” While it is hardly a crime or an offense to be inspired by other cultures, as we know, it becomes a different animal altogether when the source of inspiration is not given the kind of credit they deserve. Still, it is difficult to say whether or not Pejoski ripped off Yellowtail’s designs (we don’t know for sure if it was Yellowtail’s particular designs or even something he saw on Tumblr or on the street that could have prompted him to design something like this). It is difficult to imagine that someone working in fashion would be ignorant of the highly sensitive nature of borrowing from other cultures, particularly Native Americans. There has been quite a bit of backlash against designers, festival goers and celebrities who choose to don headdresses or put them on a runway. Unless you live under a rock, it’s hard not to notice these instances.‘Native American-inspired’ Fashion Week collection offends and enrages actual Native Americans

By Marjon CarlosAttempting to celebrate diversity by sizably poaching the work of creatives of color sends a message that fashion’s interest is ephemeral and purely surface. But for indigenous cultures, these ornamental elements are part of a long-standing tradition, and often sacred. Style.com praised the clothes for their detailing and “spirit,” but this collection reinforces a painful history of domination, subjugation, prejudice and discrimination that has been blindly truncated into ill-conceived modifiers, such as arrows atop a model’s head. As Keene suggests, rather than ripping off Yellowtail’s designs or the traditional handwork of Native tribes, fashion designers need to actually collaborate and work with Native artisans to curve this continual mishandling and erasure. Instances like KTZ’s collection show that while cultural appropriation remains a weighted subject, what detractors really want in return is simply inclusion.

Scumbags store features skull in headdress

Brooklyn Store Under Fire for Native American Headdress Logo

By Benjamin SuttonThe clothing retailer Scumbags & Superstars, which has a storefront space in Bushwick and an online store, has come under fire for its “disrespectful” appropriation of Native American imagery in its logo and merchandise. The logo features a skull in the style of those featured in Nazi SS insignia wearing a Native American headdress, and is emblazoned on the business’s many articles of clothing as well as scores of other items that make liberal use of further Native American imagery.

“Disrespectful,” wrote Theo Van Nest alongside a link to the Scumbags & Superstars page in the “Native American and American Indian Issues” Facebook group. “These people won’t respond to my emails. They delete my comments.”

Though comments criticizing the disrespectful use of Native American iconography have indeed been deleted from the Scumbags & Superstars Facebook page, its administrator—the store’s founder and co-owner, George Rosa—posted a rambling and often contradictory statement in an attempt to justify the design.

“I wanted something very easily recognizable and very ‘American’,” Rosa wrote. “I have strong views about American politics and wanted something that was militant and defiant. I added the headdress to the skull to symbolize death and tyranny. And I chose a German WWII skull. I think the juxtaposition of the two is very powerful.”

Though most responses to the explanation on the Scumbags & Superstars Facebook page express support for the store, one, by Chris Cobb, takes issue. “That is the dumbest explanation I ever [sic] heard,” he wrote. “Just because you have some sort of hipster mash-up explanation does not mean you have the right to perpetuate racist images.”Comment:  First, a skull in a headdress is a decades-old symbol that's well-known and commonplace among hipsters. Rosa is deceiving himself or us if he's claiming to have conceived it.

Second, no one will recognize the skull as a German one. To most people, it'll look like a dead Indian.

Third and most important, the headdress "symbolizes death and tyranny"? And the skull with the headdress is "militant and defiant"? These claims are vague to the point of meaninglessness.

If Rosa could define his terms precisely, he'd still be wrong. A headdress doesn't symbolize anything except a tribe's reverence for its leader. Rosa doesn't get to make up meanings for the images he's appropriated.

And whatever meaning he invents, the headdress is still stereotypical. It still perpetuates a one-dimensional view of Indians as primitive people of the past. It's wrong for that reason.

For more on the subject, see "Dreamcatcher and Skull" Clothing Line and Kanye's T-Shirts Feature Indian Skulls.

Ralph Lauren's "assimilation aesthetic"

Assimilation Aesthetic

By Ruth HopkinsImagine my horror this morning, upon discovering Ralph Lauren’s latest venture. Let’s call it Assimilation Era Chic.

Old portraits of Native men from the Allotment and Assimilation Era (1887–1943) are displayed like cover models among Ralph Lauren’s latest line for the 2014 Holiday season. I did a double take for an instant, because one of the men pictured looked like my ancestor.

Hopkins explains what's wrong with this:Mr. Lauren, these stylish Native men in your pictures are not your employees, nor your slaves. They lived. They have names. They come from a proud lineage of Native peoples older than America. Each warrior pictured is someone’s grandfather, and I guarantee they suffered mightily just to survive the genocidal holocaust European invaders inflicted upon them. Why do they look so stoic? They were brave Native warriors who witnessed the massacre of innocents, had their lands stolen from them, and faced an uncertain future after the Federal government broke every treaty they ever made with Native nations in this country. They were fighting for the survival of our kind.

What many people alive today fail to realize is Natives of the Assimilation Era wore western clothes because they were forced to do so. We were hunted by cavalry soldiers and made to give up our freedom and live on reservations. Our culture and language was ripped from us. Our ceremonies and religious practices were declared illegal. My own father and uncles, who were torn from their mother’s embrace and put in boarding school, were mercilessly beaten for speaking their Native tongue. They didn’t want to wear itchy woolen vests and tight narrow shoes made for white children. They had no choice. The fashion Ralph Lauren glorifies arose from oppression.Adrienne Keene notes more problems with the ads:

Keene: Dear Ralph Lauren, Our Ancestors Are Not Your Props!

By Dr. Adrienne KeeneCultural appropriation takes away our symbols, our art and our designs, and with it, takes away our power over our cultural markers. This is dangerous, because not only is it blatantly disrespectful to the places, people, and traditions these images come from, it continues the colonial mentality that Native peoples, lands, and traditions are free for the taking.

We become commodities—objects that can be bought and sold. I mean, the heading of this page says “featured stock,” referring to the clothing, but when there are images of Native people right next to the $265 headdress t-shirt, it’s hard to separate the people from the products. Additionally, when the word is “stock,” one can’t help but think of animals (or slaves) for sale.

There’s also this piece that I can’t quite put my finger on, and don’t know if I can adequately express. The photos are all men in (mostly) western clothing, with “tribal” accents here and there. I feel like there is a subtext here of “civilizing”—even the “wild Indians” can look dignified in these clothes. You can have your Americana aesthetic without the savage overtones! It just reminds me of the "Tom Torlino—Navajo" photograph, which is representative of the cultural genocide of government boarding schools.

Finally, there is the economic piece at play here. Look at the prices. A $265 T-shirt featuring a sacred headdress, a $1,300 plaid coat, $400 sweaters—and all of this money is going straight to building Lauren’s personal wealth and empire, none of it is going to the communities he is directly exploiting to sell his product. How American of him: seeing Natives as inherently disposable and exploitable, and using Native resources to build his personal wealth, while simultaneously yearning for the romanticized past when Natives roamed the plains, and ignoring his own complicity in the ongoing settler colonial project. Pretty much the story of the United States.

Ralph Lauren backs off

Ralph Lauren apologizes for Native American ads

By Sarah LeTrentRalph Lauren's 2014 holiday ad campaign for its RRL line was raked over the coals on social media this week for its "assimilation aesthetic," featuring what appear to be antique photos of stoic Native Americans dressed in Western attire.

Now, the company is apologizing for the imagery and has since removed the images from its website.

"Ralph Lauren has a longstanding history in celebrating the rich history, importance and beauty of our country's Native American heritage," the company said in a statement. "We recognize that some of the images depicted in the RRL look book may have caused offense and we have removed them from our website."

Ruth Hopkins, a contributor to the site Last Real Indians, took issue with the campaign's use of Native Americans, claiming that the imagery is not only ignorant, it's a harsh reminder of a time of extreme oppression, and even genocide, for the nation's indigenous people.Celine Cooper: Withdrawn Ralph Lauren advertising had used offensive images of Native Americans

By Celine CooperLast week, American company Ralph Lauren debuted its Double RL & Co 2014 holiday line of clothing. The website campaign didn’t feature the usual doe-eyed teenagers wearing tweed hats and polo shirts. Nope. Instead, the advertisement was organized around old sepia portraits of Native American men and women, unsmiling and wearing Western clothes, from the Allotment and Assimilation Era in the United States as its cover models (presumably without the permission of their descendants). Beside their images was Ralph Lauren’s “New Stock” of holiday clothes—cargo pants, wool jackets, button-down shirts and purses.

Thankfully, Ralph Lauren, that doyen of classic Americana, was immediately met with an online campaign against the company’s questionable “assimilation aesthetic.” (You can read the outrage on the Twitter hashtag #BoycottRalphLauren).

The online activism worked. On Friday, the company took down the images. Although they didn’t offer an actual apology, they did release the following statement: “We recognize that some of the images depicted in the RRL look book may have caused offense and we have removed them from our website.”

Offence, indeed. Here’s the thing. What Ralph Lauren wants to sell is not the actual history of America, but an idea about America, a certain nostalgia and patriotism. Their ads were meant to evoke a pioneering spirit; the outpost, the frontier where natives were tamed and the Wild West was won. Cowboys and Indians. Classic Americana, that.A previous Ralph Lauren problem:Jessica Deer ‏@Kanhehsiio
Ralph Lauren is one of those repeat offenders of cultural appropriation. Stumbled upon this gross stuff in Feb.

And Indians from that era who weren't modeling Ralph Lauren:

Yes, He's Handsome--But He's Not Your Model. 25 Photos of Natives in European Dress

The stereotype here is that Indians were willing participants in a 19th-century fashion revolution. That they would've sat and posed for pictures to help Ralph Lauren sell its goods.

For more on the subject, see Ralph Lauren's Fetishistic Native Collection.

Trelise Cooper's models in headdresses

Fashion Week: Feathers flying

By Morgan TaitThe inclusion of an Indian-style headdresses in designer Trelise Cooper's fashion show last night has ruffled feathers and brought accusations of racism.

Dame Trelise's show, as part of New Zealand Fashion Week, featured "70s bohemian vibes" with models wearing native-American and Canadian First Nations' feathered headdresses.

The garments--which have deep cultural significance--quickly drew a backlash from show guests and online.

New Zealand film director Taika Waititi was amongst those offended by the move.

"I think I understand what Trelise means by "70s vibes"--a time when it was cool to be culturally insensitive and racism was super awesome. Nice throw back to better times, babe, we native people celebrate with you," he wrote on a photo of a headdress wearing model posted to the Trelise Cooper Facebook page.

Melbourne-based lawyer and journalist Di White took to Twitter to express her thoughts.

"Hey @trelisecooper, Indian headdresses are not yours to wear. This is cultural appropriation & super offensive," she wrote.

The message was re-tweeted more than 50 times.

Also on Twitter, Kiwi comedian Jeremy Elwood--who hails from Canada--made his distaste about the items known.

"@trelisecooper Actually I think you'll find those are racist, plagiarized, white trash hipster vibes. You should be ashamed."

What does a Native American headdress have to do with fashion in New Zealand? Kiwi designer forced to apologise after including Indian accessory in her show

Dame Trelise Cooper has caused an uproar by featuring Indian feather headdresses in her show at New Zealand fashion week

By Richard Shears and Leesa SmithA leading New Zealand fashion designer has sent critics and fans on the warpath after staging a show featuring American Indian feather headdresses.

Dame Trelise Cooper has now issued a grovelling apology for featuring the spectacular headdresses in her show as part of New Zealand fashion week, admitting it was a mistake due to her ignorance.

Critics took to social media to pan the headdress feature as culturally obnoxious, one asking if it would now be in order to bind Dame Trelise's feet like the Chinese used to do to women in times gone by.

In an apology she posted on Facebook, the fashion guru said today that she genuinely respected and honoured all cultures, races and religions.

'It was never my intention to disrespect another culture.

'It is my hope that through my mistake and ignorance, like me, people now know and are aware of the sacredness of the head dress to Native Americans,' she wrote.

'To those who I have offended, I sincerely apologise.'

The designer's Facebook page has exploded with comments opposed to the Indian theme.

'This is appallingly offensive cultural appropriation. I see you're deleting comments about this too.

'Would love to see some accountability for this--you put it on the runway, you have to defend your poor choices,' Morgan Ashworth posted after Cooper's apology.

Designer apologises for using headdressA Maori United Nations advocate and a board member of a native American organisation, Carl Hutchby of Te Atihaunui-a-Paparangi, said ignorance was not an excuse in this day and age.

He said he was offended for his First Nation brothers and sisters that it happened in Aotearoa, and said Maori felt the pain of other indigenous people when their culture was used inappropriately.

Mr Hutchby said he had spoken to a Cherokee elder, Mashu White Feather, who was disgusted with the use of the ceremonial headdress. He said as far as he understood, it was not appropriate for women to wear them.Trelise Cooper’s apology labelled ‘disingenuous’But Dr Peter Shand is questioning her apology, saying that there's been plenty of fashion events overseas that have recently made headlines for the misuse of 'war bonnets'.

"lf she's going to claim ignorance of what's gone on overseas that means she's not in touch with international fashion, for one of the leading fashion designers in New Zealand, that would seem highly unlikely."

Auckland Mayor Len Brown, who was sitting in front row of the show yesterday, says he believes "her apology is an absolute indication of her integrity.Comment:  For more on the subject, see Natives Protest Nugest in Sturgis, Vogue Editor in a Headdress, and Mayonnaise Manager Dresses as "Indian."

Vogue editor in a headdress

Anna Dello Russo Posts Photos Wearing A Native American Headdress

By Aimee HoeflerAnna Dello Russo, editor-at-large and creative consultant for Vogue Japan, posted images to her Instagram account where she is wearing a Native American headdress.

As Stylecaster pointed out, for someone that is so in-tune with fashion and even fashion controversies, what could have been her thought behind posting these images?Comment:  The article doesn't provide any clues about what she was thinking or whether she's aware of the controversy.

You'd think fashion people would be hip to the growing complaints about the misuse of Native headdresses. Instead, they seem to be more clueless than anyone.

Undoubtedly it's another case of white privilege in action. In their minds, these people don't follow trends. They do what they want and that becomes the trend.

Recall that these are the same people who hire predominantly white models. Who think "culture" means wearing tribal prints in some vaguely "wild" setting. Clearly they're as ignorant as the average person, if not more so.

For more on the subject, see Festival Bans Hipster Headdresses and SF Giants to Ban Headdresses?

Ralph Lauren's fetishistic Native collection

Earth to Ralph Lauren: American Indian Iconography is a Hotbed for Scandal

By Abe Sauer[T]ailing the football team is a wagon train of scandals involving celebrities and brands criticized for recently using Native American headdresses as fashion accessories. These cases make Ralph Lauren's ongoing obsession with using Native American headdress iconography all the more confusing. Is the brand just begging to be added to the criticism?

Those who have found themselves apologizing for the misuse of Native headdresses include music icons Pharrell and Gwen Stefani. Chanel "deeply apologized" after its headdress scandal and Victoria's Secret "sincerely apologized" after a similar event. Even lesser-knowns have come under fire, such as the daughter of Oklahoma's governor.

One would think that after all of the media attention, it would be common sense to avoid a fashion statement that clearly is an insult to a large group of people. But apparently Ralph Lauren doesn't read the news, because the brand has a whole new collection so heavily reliant on American Indian iconography that it almost seems fetishistic.Comment:  For more on the subject, see Kanye's T-Shirts Feature Indian Skulls and Humboldt Republic's "Chief Life" T-Shirts.

Samantha Barks in a headdress

You must be Barking! Samantha and boyfriend Richard Fleeshman wear controversial Native American headwear for Corrie star's birthday bash

By Jason ChesterUp until now they’ve enjoyed a low-key romance, largely conducted away from the spotlight--but there was no missing Richard Fleeshman and Samantha Barks when they stepped out in Manchester on Saturday evening in contentious Native American headdresses.

The couple were making a less than subtle appearance at Coronation Street star Ryan Thomas’s 29th birthday celebration at Victoria Warehouse Hotel--and they caught the eye thanks to their feathered headwear.

Samantha, 23, teamed hers with a striking butterfly sequinned crop-top and zebra print skirt ahead of the Burning Man themed bash, while red tinted Aviators an ethnic cuff bracelet added to a rather eccentric ensemble.

The singer and actress--a former contestant on BBC talent show I’d Do Anything--rounded of the outfit with a pair of chunky white trainers, distinctive by virtue of the LED lights embedded into each sole.Comment:  For more on the subject, see Pharrell in a Headdress and Emerson Windy in a Headdress.

Pharrell apologizes for headdress

Pharrell On Elle Cover Controversy: "I Am Genuinely Sorry"

The artist and producer apologized for wearing a Native American headdress on the cover of the fashion mag’s UK edition.

By Reggie UgwuOn the cover of the July edition of Elle UK, Pharrell Williams replaced his usual headline-grabbing headwear with a traditional Native American headdress.

Many Native Americans and others were upset about the appropriation of the garment, which is considered to be the sacred garb of chiefs and warriors. They created the “#NotHappy” hashtag on Twitter.

Ashley Mocosa @mocosamoments
I'm seriously disappointed in @Pharrell for wearing a war bonnet on the cover of @ELLEmagazine #nothappy

Aparna Balakumar @OnceAPARNATime
Urgh. Why does the fashion industry insist on turning sacred cultural items into fashion props? #NOTHappy @ELLEUK
And:In a statement responding to the controversy, Pharrell has apologized, saying he meant no disrespect.

“I respect and honor every kind of race, background and culture,” Pharrell says. “I am genuinely sorry.”

Elle UK has not yet responded to a request for comment.Pharrell Williams sorry for wearing First Nation headdress

Singer faces backlash after fans take to social media to say cultural appropriation is 'not cool'

By Connie WalkerThe American singer is just the latest artist to be accused of cultural appropriation. After donning traditional First Nation gear in a music video last year, Gwen Stefani was also forced to apologize.

Chanel, Victoria's Secret, H&M, Urban Outfitters and Paul Frank have also come under fire for inappropriately using First Nations symbols or imagery in their fashions.

Although, offenders are often quick to apologize and claim they are attempting to honour First Nations culture, some say it is insulting and perpetuates stereotypes of indigenous people.Comment:  For more apologies for wearing a headdresss, see Windy Apologizes for Headdress and Coyne Apologizes for Dog Headdress.

Pharrell in a headdress

Not Happy! Natives Pan Pharrell's Headdress Look on Elle UK CoverPharrell Williams appears on a special-edition cover of Elle UK's July issue wearing a feather headdress, and Natives are not at all "Happy" about it. In fact, they're tweeting their disgust on Twitter using the hashtag #NOThappy--a reference to Pharrell's mega-hit "Happy."

Pharrell earned smirks in January for wearing an enormous "Mountie"-style hat to the Grammy Awards--but he stuck with the look and it became a signature style. Which makes Elle UK all the more proud of themselves: "we persuaded ELLE Style Award winner Pharrell to trade his Vivienne Westwood mountie hat for a native American feather headdress in his best ever shoot," reads promotional copy on the mag's website. The photos were taken by Doug Inglish.

The preview image was posted to Elle UK's Facebook page, and has racked up hundreds of comments within a few hours. Offended Facebookers have also taken their complaints to Pharrell's own page:

Taino Ray: How can you do something so stupid and disrespectfulll.. you are not a Chief Pharrel.. The eagle feathers are sacred... Even if you are part Native the headdress is off limits... Its for Warriors and people of the plains culture.. You don't have the right to wear that Pharrel... neither does Cher or Emerson Windy... You guys don't get it.... You will learn the hard way by us Natives telling you so...

Gail Lichtsinn: You have no right to wear a headress that is so sacred to native people..Those headresses are earned and not worn to make a buck or draw attention..They have meaning and are worn by our men with pride and dignity..This is a mockery of a proud people..We are not a joke and take these things very seriously..Go back to wearing your OWN clothes

Sandy Johnson: I love your music! BUT...please don't insult our Indigenous People by wearing a headdress. They are earned one Eagle feather at a time through acts of selflessness and bravery. Thank you.


Pharrell Williams wears new headgear--but is it an improvement?

Some tweets on the subject:

Dr. Adrienne K. @NativeApprops · Jun 3
Another celeb in a headdress just makes me tired. How many ways can I/we explain why it's wrong and hurtful? I've run out. @Pharrell

david treuer @DavidTreuer · Jun 4
@Pharrell headdresses and war bonnets are the auto-tune of the fashion world. #nothappy @NativeApprops

Teej T @Halfrican_One · Jun 4
Pharrell's open ignorance of Native appropriation fits so well into his belief in being a post-racial "new Black." Postracial doesn't exist.

BlueCornComics @bluecorncomics · Jun 4
If @Pharrell is part Native, he should know better than to put a war bonnet on. DNA isn't a license to stereotype. http://thinkprogress.org/culture/2014/06/04/3445104/dear-pharrell-this-is-why-you-shouldnt-wear-native-american-headdresses/

Comment:  For more on ignorant pop stars, see Emerson Windy in a Headdress and New Zealand PM's Daughter in a Headdress.

Kanye's thunderbird jackets

Kim Kardashian and Kanye West Wear Thunderbird Jackets After WeddingIn photos released to E! Entertainment Television, power couple Kim Kardashian and Kanye West are seen wearing leather jackets that feature a thunderbird design and the words "Just" (on Kanye) and "Married" (on Kim). The two were wed in a ceremony in Italy on Saturday.

The thunderbird is a character in stories told by Native Americans for centuries, and artistically speaking it's one of the most widespread symbols in Native culture, a component of the iconography of numerous Indian tribes. According to Complex.com, the jackets were made by Schott and the thunderbird design was created by Wes Lang, an artist whose work mashes up images from a familiar set of sources, including tattoo culture, pinup art, and Grateful Dead aesthetics. And yes, American Indians are among Lang's obsessions--merchandise he designed for Kanye's "Yeezus" tour included t-shirts featuring a skeleton wearing a feather headdress.

Lang's works on paper are typically a mixture of painting and drawing, and sometimes have elements of collage. Here's a typical example, "The Pagent" (from weslang.blogspot.com), which features tipis, a tomahawk, and the lightning bolt (also a feature of the thunderbird design) in addition to portraits of Indians and an Indian skeleton.

The jackets seem like innocent examples of appropriation until you look at designer Lang's artwork (below). Dani Miller spells out the problems here:

Kimye Appropriation Representative of U.S. Pop Culture’s Obsession with Native American Extinction

By Danielle Miller“The only good Indian is a dead one”… Although Native Americans are alive and thriving celebrities and fashion companies would rather depict Natives as extinct while continuing to commit appropriation of various tribal cultural items and symbols.

“Kill the Indian save the man” along with the previous quotation were both sentiments upheld by Richard Pratt, the man who opened Carlisle boarding school in 1879 and implemented assimilation of Native Americans.

I questioned how aware of this history Kanye was with the Yeezus shirt picture which included the caption “God Wants you” under a Native corpse. I fail to see how anyone can interpret this depiction or any other works by Wes Lang of as acts of “good intentions.” Pratt was good intentioned in his relations with Natives so that proves just how lethal “good intentioned” romanticism can be.

While many claim our nation has come far from this horrible period in history the obsession to erase Native people continues.And:The most recent escapade of Kim and Kanye was the appropriation of the thunderbird symbol on their jackets depicted in one of their wedding photos. The hypocrisy of the situation was reinforced when Kanye went on his usual tirade to criticize the way the media depicted him through tabloids and SNL skits. If he wants people to empathize with his family being misrepresented why can’t he do the same for the Native communities he appropriates from?

And what is up with Kanye’s choice to uphold racism by Wes Lang, who has not only created artwork offensive to Natives, but has also used blackface?

In one interview Lang revealed his reasoning behind the images along with his privileged sense of entitlement:

“I like to take American history and then completely ignore it. I come at it visually, taking images and telling my own story. I did a bunch of blackface stuff a couple of years ago. That was a little touchy. I wasn’t doing it to piss people off. I was doing a work about Abraham Lincoln, and I came across these images of little mammies. The images were striking and simple, and I was attracted to them.” DC: So you’re attracted to loaded imagery? WL: I’m covered in it, personally. [indicates his tattoos of women, skulls, crosses, and Indians] I’ve always been a collector of weird imagery, even when I was little.” DC: Do you think you’re challenging the audience when you draw a figure in blackface? Do you trust that they’ll know where you’re coming from? WL: I’m taking it out of its context and putting it into my context and hoping that people can understand that I’m not glorifying this stuff.”

While Lang recognizes that he is placing it in his “own context” he is completely disregarding the fact that it is not his place to appropriate racist images or to “reframe” them; by doing so he trivializing racism and white washing history. Just the concept of reframing racism from colonial white lens is problematic in itself.

The way Lang describes “Indians” as part of the imagery he listed as “weird” shows his complete disconnect with Native people. Categorizing Natives with skulls crosses and weird imagery is just as bad as the way people categorize Natives with other fictional groups to justify their stereotypes.Comment:  Saying you're "taking things out of context" and using them in art doesn't absolve you of responsibility. Lang's appropriations aren't much different from a racist's view of Indians as dead and gone. They're the umpteenth example of the vanishing Indian stereotype.

Even if Lang is commenting on the mainstream view of Indians, he's doing it poorly. His headdresses and teepees reinforce the ignorant beliefs held by most people. They're akin to posting pics of Indians mascots and saying, "Look!" As if that alone would tell us something.

I'm not seeing much difference between the work of Lang and any ignorant stereotyper. As I always say, if you can't tell the difference, there is no difference. Lang's depictions of dead Indians, "little mammies," or whatever are problematical at best and racist at worst.

That Kanye continues to use this problematical artist's work suggests what he thinks about Indians. If you endorse someone with an ignorant view of Indians, what does that make you? An ignoramus also?

For more on the subject, see Kanye's T-Shirts Feature Indian Skulls.

"Siouxper Drunk" = hostile and abusive

Several commenters blame the "Siouxper Drunk" t-shirt incident on UND's Fighting Sioux nickname and mascot. Rightly so, I'd say.

Super Dumb at UND: It's Hard to Shake the Racism You've Enabled For So Long[A]s recent events show, these things never go away without resistance from nostalgic students and alumni who profess the name and image aren't racist. "It's a tribute to Native Americans," is a typical argument from those who'd keep names and imagery that many Natives find objectionable, whether it's the Fighting Sioux or the Washington Redskins.

But it's hard to claim a bunch of white kids wearing "Siouxper Drunk" t-shirts is a tribute to anything. This illustrates a point sometimes lost in debates over Native mascots: The players, coaches and school administrators (or in the case of the Washington Redskins, team brass and owner Dan Snyder) may sincerely feel they do not bear American Indians any ill will. But they're only part of the story--a team name or mascot doesn't just belong to the team and its authorized representatives. It also belongs to the fans. And by using a mascot that is based on someone's racial identity, the organization is setting the stage for fan behavior that is undoubtedly racist.

"Siouxper Drunk" t-shirts, fans attending games in redface, opposing fans comparing a football game to the Trail of Tears, restaurants touting team pride with talk of "scalping" and "firewater"--these are all things that fans do, unsanctioned by the school or pro team they profess to like. And they're all racist.

And they could all be avoided if the organizations would do the responsible thing and abandon their Native team names and imagery.After offensive T-shirt incident, UND administration tries to respond to demand for action

By Anna BurlesonThe University of North Dakota has held plenty of events promoting diversity, but Damien Webster, a senior majoring in Indian studies, said the only time he has seen big crowds is when student attendance was mandatory.

“There needs to be a lot of education across the board,” he said. “We all stick to our own and we need to open up.”

He is among many American Indian students on campus asking the administration to mandate sensitivity training and toughen consequences for racially insensitive acts, such as the “Siouxper drunk” T-shirts worn Saturday at an event popular with students.

It was the latest of several high-profile incidents over the years that have embarrassed the university and upset Indians on campus.And:At UND, many Native Americans have long made the connection between racially insensitive incidents and the university’s Fighting Sioux nickname and logo, which were retired at the end of 2012 because the NCAA considers them offensive. Indians on campus continue to ask the administration to denounce the nickname and logo.

That argument has echoed far beyond North Dakota. Recently, the popular animated comedy show “Family Guy” had a throw-away gag where “Drunky the Indian,” a fictional mascot from “Dakota University,” appeared at a college fair, yelling out “Look how drunk I am! This is important for sports!”

Johnson said UND has no control over clothing and other merchandise bearing the nickname and logo that were manufactured before the university forbade it. Some of that merchandise continues to be sold. “There’s nothing we can do about that,” he said.

The administration did seem to anticipate some of the recent troubles, though.

It decided to hire the diversity executive last year, months before the latest incident. According to Johnson, Sandra Mitchell’s job when she starts in a few months will be to devise a plan to establish concrete ways to make UND a more inclusive campus.

Does the use of Native American mascots lead to racist debacles like ‘Siouxper Drunk’?

By Abby PhillipThe episode comes just two years after the university retired its Fighting Sioux nickname and Indian head logo in the wake of intense NCAA pressure. But after more than 80 years of using the mascot, it is perhaps no surprise that these old habits are dying an embarrassingly painful death.

North Dakotans were dragged kicking and screaming to the realization that it was time to retire their mascot. The NCAA determined in 2005 that “hostile and abusive” mascots such as UND’s needed to become a thing of the past; the State of North Dakota sued on behalf of the North Dakota state board of higher education and UND to keep the “Fighting Sioux,” and the state legislature passed a law forbidding the school from retiring the name. The state’s law was eventually reversed.And:The “Siouxper Drunk” controversy is just one of several recent incidents on the UND campus that prompted a group of Native students to write a scathing letter that blamed the university for being “complicit” in acts of racial insensitivity on campus, and for failing to put forward concrete solutions.

“The problem,” the letter said, “is clearly systemic.”

But the incident highlights the difficulty of policing “appropriate” uses of Native imagery and names. Can sports teams claim to use them without racist intent, but still distance themselves from the people who do?Thanks for a perfect example of the "hostile and abusive" environment the NCAA criticized, #SiouxperDrunk students. Case closed on how the harm goes beyond the playing field--how it permeates the student body, the alumni, the entire community.

More charges of racism

Drunk College Students Mock Native Americans In Most Offensive Way Possible

By Smriti SinhaThe behavior exemplified by the UND students, coupled with the reappropriation of Native American cultural traditions common in entertainment and fashion, highlights a continued ignorance and insensitivity among Americans regarding Native Americans. Last year, for example, an Alabama high school put up a big banner saying, "Hey Indians, Get Ready to Leave in a Trail of Tears, Round 2."

These types of references aren't clever, they're not cute and they're certainly not funny.“Siouxper Drunk” T-Shirts Helped Fighting Sioux Nickname Opponents

By Dr. Erich LongieAs far as racism goes, it doesn’t get much uglier than the “Siouxper drunk” T-shirts incident that happened at UND over the weekend. As proof of the extreme racist nature of the incident, conservative, talk show hosts, bloggers, and other non-Indians are coming forward to vigorously and stridently defend this shameful and disgusting incident. In typical fashion, they will try to drown out voices who disagree with them.