The Purity of Aboriginal Blood? Who cares?

[Smallc]

Some of those identities. You can force others to do something, and arranged marriage is very close to they line if not over it. I'm very surprised you'd defend such a practice.

Edited April 24, 2014 by Smallc

[cybercoma]

Do you not agree that societies, even inclusive multicultural ones, set norms based on what we consider acceptable?

You see, you're defending something that seems totally at odds with a free society. In Canada people have the freedom to make their own personal decisions, as protected by the Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms through the right to Liberty. Arranged marriage is counter to that, and is only barely tolerated because the Charter also protects religious freedom. Despite it's legality, it's indefensible in a free and democratic society given the principles of such a society.

You can't disagree with something that is culturally required.

People do have freedoms. If they want their marriage arranged they're free to have their parents find a partner for them. The child has every right to refuse a FORCED marriage, which is another thing altogether from an arranged marriage.

[cybercoma]

That isn't a Canadian societal norm, at least not one that most socially progressive people would support. If you think so, looks around.

look around? If a girl gets "knocked up" many people still expect marriage or at least cohabitation. A single girl gets pregnant and it's still stigmatized.

[Smallc]

We're not talking about a similar situation (and I've already said I don't support that). I don't see why it's so difficult to say that this is bad.

[kimmy]

Are you intentionally glossing over the fact that the experiences of racial and ethnic minorities are entirely different than those of white people in North America? Even if whites fall below 50% in NA, they will still hold a plurality and they still largely control the institutions and positions of power. The idea that "whites" are threatened is laughable and shows how people are blind to their privilege. There is no straight-line between whites and aboriginals here. One's culture is on the verge of extinction, the other is not. Residential Schools intentionally tried to destroy their culture. The aim was to make them more like "us." To say that actively trying to preserve your race and culture when you're a minority and clearly under attack is the same as "preserving" the dominant culture is absurdity at best. The preservation of the dominant culture and race often involves destroying all others that are different. When people talk about the end of "race," it's not literal. They mean the end of a racial hierarchy.

The discussion of race in the thread I linked was most certainly literal. Da Shwa was talking about future generations attaining a uniform golden-brown skin tone. WWWTT was talking about how genetic diversity would make interracial offspring somehow superior to those who breed within their racial group. And you yourself were pointing out how in times gone by, tribes would swap women with each other to spruce up their gene pool.

So no, people were not talking about race in a social sense, they were talking about actual genetics. Da Shwa and WWWTT both argued that the end of race would be a good thing, and you yourself argued that intermixing is a positive.

I won't address the stuff about social hierarchy and culture and so on, because it isn't relevant.

I asked earlier if you feel that maintaining distinct races has an intrinsic value, and you didn't answer. The only person who did address the question is Bob Macadoo, who simply says it's a subjective matter. Perhaps he's right. However, the arguments being put forth in favor of this aboriginal person's position are pretty much the polar opposite of the arguments that were brought forth earlier when Lictor talked about wanting to preserve his racial group.

-k

[bleeding heart]

I do think it's a retrograde idea....that it's practiced by "socially progressive" Natives and "liberal cosmopolitan Jews" (and it is) doesn't change that fact one bit. I knew a girl who was being coerced by her parents into not only marrying a Lebanese man...but he of course had to be a Christian Lebanese man. (I don't know if she acquiesced or not.)

I do think mixing and matching is the way to go....mongrelize the world....and avoid hip dysplasia and other problems inherent to "pure" breeding!

[Michael Hardner]

Arranged marriage is counter to that, and is only barely tolerated because the Charter also protects religious freedom.

To the contrary - it would be impossible to make arranged marriage illegal because in the end it's marriage between two consenting adults - albeit two who have been put together by their parents.

[cybercoma]

The discussion of race in the thread I linked was most certainly literal. Da Shwa was talking about future generations attaining a uniform golden-brown skin tone. WWWTT was talking about how genetic diversity would make interracial offspring somehow superior to those who breed within their racial group. And you yourself were pointing out how in times gone by, tribes would swap women with each other to spruce up their gene pool.

So no, people were not talking about race in a social sense, they were talking about actual genetics. Da Shwa and WWWTT both argued that the end of race would be a good thing, and you yourself argued that intermixing is a positive.

I won't address the stuff about social hierarchy and culture and so on, because it isn't relevant.

I asked earlier if you feel that maintaining distinct races has an intrinsic value, and you didn't answer. The only person who did address the question is Bob Macadoo, who simply says it's a subjective matter. Perhaps he's right. However, the arguments being put forth in favor of this aboriginal person's position are pretty much the polar opposite of the arguments that were brought forth earlier when Lictor talked about wanting to preserve his racial group.

-k

You want to invoke genetics in a discussion about preserving a dying race/culture? Fine. But when you say the cultural argument is irrelevant, it's not. The genetic one is in this instance. Context matters. Edited April 24, 2014 by cybercoma

[Boges]

I think the writer in the OP brought genetics into it when she claimed that if she didn't marry a "status Indian" her children wouldn't be able to be classified as such.

The onus is on her to raise her children deeply rooted in culture. The cultural heritage of the father should be irrelevant. (Unless of course it's some argument about keeping the children as Status Indians)

I'd argue it's actually advantageous for a child to be raised in a family where both parents come from different culture (It's the beauty of a country like Canada actually) Where the child can learn to different world views, cuisine, languages etc.

Edited April 24, 2014 by Boges

[cybercoma]

I think the writer in the OP brought genetics into it when she claimed that if she didn't marry a "status Indian" her children wouldn't be able to be classified as such.

It's a social classification that the government decided to thinly veil in biological language, so it could seem more objective.

[Boges]

It's a social classification that the government decided to thinly veil in biological language, so it could seem more objective.

It has to be, because being a Status Indian comes with some benefits. Who cares if you're full, half, quarter or eighth of any other cultural or ethnic group.

I'd argue that these benefits are a major contributing factor for this culture being somewhat insular. Perhaps that's the intent of the creators and can be considered somewhat racist in itself.

Edited April 24, 2014 by Boges

[Argus]

it's easy to say "who cares about race and culture" when your race and culture is the reference group for all others.

Really? It seems to me an awful lot of white people are awfully concerned about race and racial purity. And I don't think you have much sympathy for them either.

[cybercoma]

I'd wager that it's one of the contributing factors. I would also wager the fact that they were here first and saw themselves as a variety of autonomous nations already is probably another reason the First Nations are so insular. This was their land and we were just borrowing it for resource extraction and trade. Independent agreements were made. Agreements, as nations make with each other. The fact that they are distinct in that way is probably why you consider them insular.

[Argus]

it's not just their blood; it's their culture, language, and heritage that's going extinct. I don't know a single white person in Canada that has to worry about that, despite what some lunatics will claim about immigrants.

So you're discounting Francophones' concern with their culture and language?

[cybercoma]

Really? It seems to me an awful lot of white people are awfully concerned about race and racial purity. And I don't think you have much sympathy for them either.

Because white people's "racial purity" arguments are thinly veiled racism about racial superiority. It has nothing to do with preserving a dying culture and heritage. And as a matter of fact, I don't care if a white person wants to marry another white person. That tends to be the norm, if you haven't noticed.

[cybercoma]

So you're discounting Francophones' concern with their culture and language?

Are we talking about Francophones?

[Argus]

those white people sound like damn morons, since the white race isn't exactly in trouble, is it?

There are a hell of a lot more 'natives' in Canada now than there was a hundred years ago. Doesn't seem like they're in much danger to me.

[cybercoma]

There are a hell of a lot more 'natives' in Canada now than there was a hundred years ago. Doesn't seem like they're in much danger to me.

I already posted a reference that indicated how many tribes and languages have been lost. Perhaps the First Nations don't seem like they're in trouble to you because you have the privilege of not having to worry about the problems they face.

[Argus]

They're so populous that many of the indigenous languages have died off or are close to dying. Is English threatened in such a way in this country? Do you have a hard time finding English speaking romantic partners? These questions are absurd because these are worries that the dominant culture doesn't have. We don't think of things like this because we don't have to. That's part of the 'privilege' of being in the dominant culture.

But she's not looking for someone who speaks her native language, but someone who has indigenous blood. That means he's likely to not speak her language anyway. Do I preserve my English language and heritage by marrying an Italian?

Canada's Aboriginal population is growing faster than the general population, increasing by 20.1% from 2006 to 2011[1]. This is due to a higher fertility rate among Aboriginal women than among other Canadian women. Of the three Aboriginal groups (First Nations, Métis, Inuit), First Nations had the largest population growth, with an increase of 22.9% between 2006 and 2011.

So much for endangered natives.

http://www4.hrsdc.gc.ca/[email protected]?iid=36

[Argus]

When a group is demographically challenged, yes.

Natives are not demographically challenged.

[Argus]

Are you intentionally glossing over the fact that the experiences of racial and ethnic minorities are entirely different than those of white people in North America? Even if whites fall below 50% in NA, they will still hold a plurality and they still largely control the institutions and positions of power. The idea that "whites" are threatened is laughable and shows how people are blind to their privilege. There is no straight-line between whites and aboriginals here. One's culture is on the verge of extinction, the other is not.

Except that most of us moved here from other places, and that inevitably meant that our children and grandchildren would have less and less regard for those old cultures. And we didn't care. Are Scottish Canadians concerned their kids aren't interested in bagpipes and don't want to wear kilts? Are Irish Canadians concerned their kids don't speak Gailic? Do German Canadians makes sure their kids know all about the history of Germany and the Germanic people? What do English Canaian kids whose great grandfathers came here from England, know about English history they didn't see in Hollywood movies or on TV shows?

White Canadians in general have put little emphasis on hanging onto old cultural baggage, and no one seems to feel that's wrong. So why is it so dramatically important for native groups to hang onto theirs?

[Argus]

No, that isn't the issue.

Your interest in 'Fixing' the conditions in a place that is not yours to fix is part of the bigger problem.

With respect, it is not your community and not yours to fix. How would you feel if those First Nations people from the reserve came to your town and got all paternalistic about the problems that appalled them?.

"Integration" is viewed by many of those being "integrated" as being cultural genocide.

Are you suggesting first nations people who move to 'white' cities and towns should not be allowed to vote or take part in the political process? After all, it's not 'their' community, even if they live there.

Edited April 24, 2014 by Argus

[cybercoma]

But she's not looking for someone who speaks her native language, but someone who has indigenous blood. That means he's likely to not speak her language anyway. Do I preserve my English language and heritage by marrying an Italian?

Canada's Aboriginal population is growing faster than the general population, increasing by 20.1% from 2006 to 2011[1]. This is due to a higher fertility rate among Aboriginal women than among other Canadian women. Of the three Aboriginal groups (First Nations, Métis, Inuit), First Nations had the largest population growth, with an increase of 22.9% between 2006 and 2011.

So much for endangered natives.

http://www4.hrsdc.gc.ca/[email protected]?iid=36

Footnotes are important: "Some factors should be taken into account when comparing the 2006 Census and the 2011 National Household Survey data (e.g., differences in methodology in the 2011 NHS, wording of Aboriginal questions, etc.)." Did you take those factors into account?

Edited April 24, 2014 by cybercoma

[cybercoma]

White Canadians in general have put little emphasis on hanging onto old cultural baggage, and no one seems to feel that's wrong. So why is it so dramatically important for native groups to hang onto theirs?

It might have something to do with excluding them and systematically trying to destroy their culture. But you're not looking for an actual answer, are you?

[Argus]

Are you serious? What exactly are acceptable social norms? Maybe we should be checking in with you first? Canada is a multicultural society. Do you know what that means?

No, it's actually not. Canada has an overriding culture which allows for a wide degree of variation. However, it does not allow other, imported cultures to veer very widely in terms of the laws which our culture has imposed on behaviour. Ie, we don't care what your culture says about drug use, about rape, about spousal assaults or child abuse. You will abide by our cultural norms on these things or be punished.