Yes it does. Western culture is not threatened by Indian women's
opinions about its value system [although perhaps that wouldn't be so
bad (:-)]. If we are not even willing to take the time to understand
another culture, but just give some knee jerk reaction to every issue
that challenges our personal beliefs, then I see no hope for native
cultures. Here of all places I would hope that native peoples could
find a sanctuary for expressing their beliefs and be taken seriously.
And that means giving some benefit of the doubt.
>What you do raise here are two interesting questions. How possible is it for
>any culture to understand another? Assuming that understanding is possible,
>is it ever acceptable for one culture to make a value judgment about another?
The first question is phrased in a nonproductive manner. I would
suggest "How can we shed (or suspend) enough of our cultural biases to
find common ground." Natives have been forced for centuries to try to
understand a culture antithetical in many ways to their own. Don't we
owe it to them to try to understand their cultures?
To the second question, I would say that the reality is that it is
inevitable that we will make value judgments. The hope is that we
will take the time to try to understand before judging, and be willing
to modify our judgments over time. I've seen little of that so far.
In this vein we are indebted to Peshe, Lee Flyer, and others who have
had the patience to tell us a little about their cultures. Perhaps
here is a good place for some of us to read materials that Peshe, Lee
or other native americans think are reasonable descriptions of native
cultures.
>The discussions on this list would be very different indeed if all parties
>restricted themselves to statements of fact and refrained from any judgments
>whatsoever.
Yes, it would probably be close to vacuous for lack of interesting
consensual material, as Liam (sp?) Hudson (Cult of the Fact) has
suggested. Judgment, right or wrong, is inherent in every
communication I have ever seen, whether conscience or not. Certainly
the facts western scientists 'discover' about the world are colored by
their agenda, the questions they ask influenced by their culture.
Understanding for many of them is driven by economic significance.
>>Is it possible for an Indian man to be correct and European women to
>>be mistaken?
>
>I'm not sure that this is your real question. The substance of your reply to
>Barbara seems to suggest that it is simply unacceptable to you that a white
>female or male would disagree with you. Rather than meet issues head on, you
>sometimes seem to prefer to dismiss questions with a flick of your ethnic
>wrist.
Just for once, give the benefit of the doubt, that Peshe's question is
real. Further, assume that the answer could be yes. Are you willing
to explore the implications?
>You have raised a very challenging concept that has been good for me to
>consider - the question of Western cultural focus on the individual versus the
>traditional native focus on group identity. Is there indeed some group native
>consciousness that allows you to legitimately represent some sort of global
>native sentiment (whether about abortion or anything else)?
Wouldn't it be nice to try and find out? It doesn't seem productive
to argue the merits of society vs individualism while deeply embedded
in cultural prejudice. We have heard the Western view on these issues
ad nauseum (e.g., the abortion issue). It's obvious we cannot
understand the native view (at least Peshe's version) without a
greater understanding of native cultures as a whole. I would be
willing to bet that Peshe has a much better understanding of western
culture than any of us "whites" have of native cultures. We owe it to
natives on this net to meet them at least halfway (I would say more so
since this net is devoted to native issues).
>Assuming there is,
>it still should not be surprising that others from the "individual" tradition
>might still be skeptical.
It's not surprising, but it is unfortunate. I don't see it as a
productive use of the net to discuss the merits of western individualism.
>Barbara asks a serious question when she asks where
>are the native women.
The only point on which I agree with you. It would be nice to hear
from more native women, and particularly those who are part of a
culture that is still intact (or are they too rare?).
>>In the face of numerical white superiority, attempting to shout us down,
>>what chance do we stand, even within this forum, supposedly created to
>>seriously consider our points of view?
>
>No one is stopping your voice. But they may be having difficulty in under-
>standing it.
>Rather than dismissing Barbara's question as more oppression,
>wouldn't it be more productive to really respond to it. Tell us more about
>this culture where men and women live in spiritual/philosophical harmony, and
>why, in such a context, Barbara's question makes little sense.
>
>>Or perhaps, the aim was really to give European intellectuals a forum
>>to discuss their disposition of us without having to seriously question the
>>assumed superiority of their own personal value systems?
>
>Hopefully you are not equating "serious questioning" with having to agree with
>you. I assume that questioning is the process by which ALL individuals and
>cultures grow, and that it is sustained by respectful dialogue wherein one
>tries to understand and respond to the issues and questions of the
other.
You are assuming that serious questioning has taken place. Its hard
for me to understand how serious questioning can occur without
understanding, and here the attempt has been minimal in my opinion.
>Is this assumption "white" or is it shared by natives?
Do I detect a supercilious air?
>Bill Badgley
>W_BADGLEY@UNHH.UNH.EDU
Art Souther