How offensive, exactly, is having dream catchers?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Indians sell dream catchers...how can they be racist or a micro aggression? Geez.

And I actually know Indians IRL and work with them professionally on issues affecting their communities. They are fine with the term Indian (that's how they refer to themselves).

Agree. Or you could visit the National Museum of the American Indian.

I'm pretty sure they were ok with Indian.

[Anonymous]

It is only "offensive" if you use it as an IUD for birth control!

[Anonymous]

What is a micro aggression?

Having dream catchers is not offensive.

Bindis ARE worn for fashion. Tikkas are religious.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:I have a few around the house. One friend in particular is always talking about microagressions and dream catchers. I get why wearing a bindi as a fashion piece is offensive, but I don't quite understand why I shouldn't have a dream catcher.

It's not offensive, just incredibly dorky.

[Anonymous]

I woild be okay if the phrase cultural appropriation completely disappeared from modern language. We've reached the point where two extremes meet. Either we want to live in a multi-cultural society, or we don't. You can't mix cultures together without people picking up each other's traditions, languages, dress, cuisines, etc. To hear some people talk they would like to go back to when everyone lived in their own little section of town and nary the twain shall meet. How boring.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:You are not wearing the dreamcatcher. You are not using it as a potholder. You are using it as a dreamcatcher, and it has been shared by Native American culture as such, and you have not taken it away and made it into something else for merchandising purposes. I don't see how this is cultural appropriation.

Please don't use the phrase "Native American" to describe the Indian people. That's definitely a microaggression. The preferred term is "Indian" or, better, to refer to someone by their actual tribal affiliation.

-- Signed, part Algonquin.

Serious question-why isn't "Indian" more offensive? They were first called indian mistakenly by Columbus who thought he was heading to India. Why would they still want that misplaced name? Native American, implying they were here FIRST, sounds much more respectful.

This is exactly what I was thinking.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Indians sell dream catchers...how can they be racist or a micro aggression? Geez.

And I actually know Indians IRL and work with them professionally on issues affecting their communities. They are fine with the term Indian (that's how they refer to themselves).

Agree. Or you could visit the National Museum of the American Indian.

I'm pretty sure they were ok with Indian.

That's what I was thinking; maybe this is "reductio ad absurdum" come to life.

[Anonymous]

I purchased my dream catcher at the museum of the American Indian. I thought I was doing something nice by both supporting the museum and enjoying the beauty of the piece without fully incorporating it's true meaning into my religious beliefs. Guess I was wrong.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:I woild be okay if the phrase cultural appropriation completely disappeared from modern language. We've reached the point where two extremes meet. Either we want to live in a multi-cultural society, or we don't. You can't mix cultures together without people picking up each other's traditions, languages, dress, cuisines, etc. To hear some people talk they would like to go back to when everyone lived in their own little section of town and nary the twain shall meet. How boring.

PP, I agree 1000%. The whole concept of cultural misappropriation is fundamentally illogical and incompatible with a multicultural society. Do these people think they can just keep us all in our own separate little boxes, never permitted to engage with anything that "doesn't belong" to us...

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Why is "Native American" offensive, especially when "Indian American" is just based on Columbus not knowing where he was? Genuine question.

Native American is also a name white liberals chose for us.

Indian is the name the white colonist chose.

Who is "the white colonist"? Was that Columbus? Was he the white colonist? Was he very white, if he was from Genoa? Kinda "off white"? Whitish? White-like? Pale-faced, perhaps? And how is Native American ok? Calling them "natives"? Hmm? Americans? after a random Italian explorer (a -- random shudder -- white explorer)?

Just let's get a name and stick with it, so we don't have to repeat the whole "negro" to "colored people" to "black" to "people of color" game. Messes up a whole bunch of organization names and costs everyone a fortune. Just ask the Redskins.

[Anonymous]

My 4 year old was having nightly nightmares. We got him a dreamcatcher, read two versions of the story of how dreamcatchers came to be and work, and hung it in his room. The nightmares stopped.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Why is "Native American" offensive, especially when "Indian American" is just based on Columbus not knowing where he was? Genuine question.

Native American is also a name white liberals chose for us.

Indian is the name the white colonist chose.

Why isn't it enough that there is a consensus in the American Indian community regarding their preferred nomenclature? Why can't you take them at their word?

Well my college had a large number of these students and they lived in the Native American House and took classes in the Native American Studies Department and told us that "Indian" was offensive. So please excuse the confusion...

[Anonymous]

After reading this thread, I'm inclined to engage in a macro-aggression.