I am not familiar with what a spirit animal is or does.
November 6, 2014 5:50 AM Subscribe

How did the concept of the spiritual guide leap from Native American tradition to Internet irony? With the help of Tumblr, the Times, and Samuel L. Jackson. Your Spirit Animal: An Investigation
posted by almostmanda (290 comments total) 29 users marked this as a favorite

Also! Some options to use instead if you're trying to purge this phrase from your vocabulary (with nods to stoneweaver).
posted by almostmanda at 5:56 AM on November 6, 2014 [8 favorites]

What is your spirit animal?
posted by sammyo at 5:57 AM on November 6, 2014 [1 favorite]

Sigh
posted by sammyo at 5:58 AM on November 6, 2014 [1 favorite]

Sigh
posted by echocollate at 6:02 AM on November 6, 2014 [10 favorites]

When I was making jokes about this in the early 00s, we were making fun of 80s-style hippie Caucasian appropriation of native American culture. It was funny for the same reason Dream Catchers were (are?) funny, or 3 Wolf Moon shirts. That horse has been whipped to near exhaustion these days, by the simple fact that the 80s were a long time ago, and making fun of hippies from 30 years back, whether affectionately or bitingly, is totally meaningless, and so the only people left making "Spirit Animal" references aren't aware of the original target of the satire and are just copying the joke from 15 years ago OR just think it's funny to pretend to be an Indian. It ain't, so quit it. Maybe there's a way for a professional to make a funny joke about spirit animals, but it's unlikely.
posted by Potomac Avenue at 6:03 AM on November 6, 2014

Some options to use instead

Missing: "My familiar"

My personal familiar is a 3 legged spectacled bear.
posted by Potomac Avenue at 6:06 AM on November 6, 2014 [6 favorites]

Author doesn't actually seem to get that the irony is necessary. That the use of "spirit animal" attempts to illustrate, performatively, the bullshit of " The deep desire to tell other people who we are by way of the things around us

It is a mocking call to an essentialist nature of the self that has been under suspicion for years and that social media is slowly revealing as false to the mainstream. ie facebook reveals that the self is merely performance.
posted by mary8nne at 6:07 AM on November 6, 2014 [6 favorites]

Sup.
posted by Potomac Avenue at 6:07 AM on November 6, 2014 [2 favorites]

Props to stoneweaver who sent me a memail a long time ago when I used it in a thread being very kind and just saying hey dude, this isn't cool ok please? And it was like oh ok and I haven't used the term since.

Anyway, the correct answer to "what should I use instead?" is patronus. As a bonus it borrows from no actual real-life religion. Patronus.
posted by phunniemee at 6:07 AM on November 6, 2014 [43 favorites]

so the only people left making "Spirit Animal" references aren't aware of the original target of the satire and are just copying the joke from 15 years ago OR just think it's funny to pretend to be an Indian. It ain't, so quit it. Maybe there's a way for a professional to make a funny joke about spirit animals, but it's unlikely.

Or maybe people just like the idea of a spirit animal. Jesus Christ not every reason someone says or does something is because they're racist or they're not in on the joke.

For the record, my spirit animal is Abe Vigoda but my patronus is a stegosaurus.
posted by echocollate at 6:08 AM on November 6, 2014 [16 favorites]

esus Christ not every reason someone says or does something is because they're racist or they're not in on the joke.

That's the only reason to say "My spirit animal is something hehehehe" in 2014 tho. Sorry if that stings, maybe try making jokes that are relevant to this decade?
posted by Potomac Avenue at 6:09 AM on November 6, 2014 [15 favorites]

PS U mad bro?
posted by Potomac Avenue at 6:11 AM on November 6, 2014 [1 favorite]

And I don't think its racist at all. Its like wearing a "What Would Jesus Do?" T-Shirt or poking fun at any spiritualist thought today. It has nothing to do with race. Its all about secularisation and disenchantent of the world through science.
posted by mary8nne at 6:14 AM on November 6, 2014 [2 favorites]

It seems like a glaring lacuna in any discussion of the popularisation of this term not to mention Johnny Cash's appearance as the Space Cayote on the Simpsons in 1997.
posted by Diablevert at 6:16 AM on November 6, 2014 [12 favorites]

That's the only reason to say "My spirit animal is something hehehehe" in 2014 tho. Sorry if that stings, maybe try making jokes that are relevant to this decade?

You're bitching about someone ironically using "spirit animal" today because it differs from how you ironically used it in the 80s, and you think I feel bad about it? Would you like to look at my music collection so you can tell me how much that sucks too?
posted by echocollate at 6:19 AM on November 6, 2014 [8 favorites]

And I don't think its racist at all. Its like wearing a "What Would Jesus Do?" T-Shirt or poking fun at any spiritualist thought today.

As a non-Christian, I wouldn't wear a What Would Jesus Do shirt, because it feels disrespectful, but there's also a punching up vs. punching down thing going on. My world is run by Christians, and there would be real consequences if I did things publicly that Christians found insulting. I could lose friends and get in trouble at work. My world is not run by people who believe in American Indian spiritual traditions, and there would probably be no real consequences for me if I appropriated their faith in ways that they found insulting or hurtful. And therefore it's on me to avoid doing that, because otherwise it's easy to hurt people who don't have the social power to prevent you from hurting them.
posted by ArbitraryAndCapricious at 6:22 AM on November 6, 2014 [84 favorites]

There are two factors here:

1. It's offensive.
This is indisputable. Native people have said it offends them. You can make offensive jokes if you want. Professional comedians in particular should feel free to test the boundaries of what's offensive. But that doesn't make it not offensive, just because you don't know any Indians personally, or because you hate religion of all kinds and want to skewer them.

2. It's not funny.
That's a matter of opinion I guess but my opinion is it's exactly as funny as Talking Like A Pirate or Random Monkeys or going "Reallly??" like Chandler or any other somewhat funny thing that is overused and now played out.
posted by Potomac Avenue at 6:29 AM on November 6, 2014 [16 favorites]

Also, the Toast is always right.
posted by Potomac Avenue at 6:37 AM on November 6, 2014 [3 favorites]

I don't think that just because something is "offensive" or "offends" certain people that its necessarily racist.

This route ends up at a world of smarm where all criticism is seen wrong.
posted by mary8nne at 6:37 AM on November 6, 2014 [3 favorites]

"Spirit Animal" -> "Patron Saint" because offensive. Heh.
posted by Leon at 6:42 AM on November 6, 2014

Sorry. Should have commented:

What is your shoulder angel?

sigh redux
posted by sammyo at 6:47 AM on November 6, 2014

As we all know, Christians are only slightly less persecuted than gamers.
posted by kmz at 6:48 AM on November 6, 2014 [18 favorites]

Every time someone on my facebook feed takes one of those ridiculous quizzes, I always respond with "Huh, I got rhubarb" regardless of the context of the original quiz. A couple of people have finally started to catch on :)
posted by surazal at 6:48 AM on November 6, 2014 [15 favorites]

I don't think that just because something is "offensive" or "offends" certain people that its necessarily racist.

I don't think that claiming "but ironic!" or "but not intended to be!" makes it not racist.
posted by rtha at 6:49 AM on November 6, 2014 [17 favorites]

Well, using the name of a holy prophet as an expletive is probably just as offensive to some, but the sharp edges of that one have gotten all rounded off ("Christ, what an asshole"). There's also "holy cow!" - a Hindu religious symbol, reduced to a G-rated expression of amazement. The fashionable lady with a turban hat isn't really mocking the Sikhs, is she? Should Zoroastrians be insulted by the eternal flame burning on a mere man's grave? Does anyone think of modern circumcision as co-opting the sacred ritual practised by Judaism? It's a very fine thing to see people willing to look at the ways we unthinkingly use other's holy symbols in a non-religious cultural way, but if you only focus on spirit animals you're going to miss the forest for the trees. It's all around you if you look.

(Oh no, I just thought of harem pants and now I have a Hammer earworm...)
posted by Mary Ellen Carter at 6:49 AM on November 6, 2014 [9 favorites]

Last month, the University of Montana, in response to protests from Native American student groups, passed a resolution against the asking of "what is your spirit animal?" in orientations and other meetings. The school cited "institutional racism" and "a need for greater cultural awareness" as causes for the change.

Does this mean "Let me sing you the song of my people" is going away too? I find it annoying but am not sure of from where it was appropriated if at all.
posted by Buttons Bellbottom at 6:49 AM on November 6, 2014 [2 favorites]

"I want to be ______ when I grow up" is my preferred substitute.
posted by Metroid Baby at 6:57 AM on November 6, 2014 [12 favorites]

I used to use "spirit animal" until about a year ago because holy shit, it is incredibly disrespectful. I use Metroid Baby's phrasing for things now, but have no idea why I haven't thought about using patronus.
posted by Kitteh at 7:00 AM on November 6, 2014

There's also the excellent Your Spirit Animal Is Here to Take You on Your Vision Quest, which made me laugh out loud and intensely reconsider/regret ever having thoughtlessly called anything my spirit animal:

One of these days — and that day is closer than you might think — everyone and everything that you’ve ever called “my spirit animal” is going to show up at your doorstep and make you go on a vision quest, and it’s going to be awful. It will last for months. You’ll be alone in the wilderness, covered in dirt, and you’ll be cold, and you’ll be hungry. You will hallucinate. Not fun Burning Man hallucinations either. Messed-up primal hallucinations, like the kind Buffy had when she dreamed about the First Slayer.

posted by yasaman at 7:00 AM on November 6, 2014 [26 favorites]

kmz: Offensive, not persecution.

Liking Metroid's phrasing.
posted by Leon at 7:04 AM on November 6, 2014

the simple fact that the 80s were a long time ago

SHUT IT SHUT IT PIEHOLE SHOULD BE QUIET LA LA LA
posted by ROU_Xenophobe at 7:06 AM on November 6, 2014 [11 favorites]

In real life as in KoL, my familiar is a sabre-toothed lime.
posted by troika at 7:08 AM on November 6, 2014 [3 favorites]

80s:Nows::50s:90s

Truth hurts
posted by Potomac Avenue at 7:10 AM on November 6, 2014 [3 favorites]

Guys, it's not rocket science - punch up, not down.
posted by Salvor Hardin at 7:16 AM on November 6, 2014 [8 favorites]

I don't think that claiming "but ironic!" or "but not intended to be!" makes it not racist.

But I didn't say its not racist specifically due to use of irony or intention. I said that it is merely offensive to those who have those spiritual beliefs. And being offensive is not enough to be classed as racist. And I would doubt that there are many who would see themselves as "racially native americans" that also still believe in "Spirit Animals" today.

Its a bit different to the use of a racial slur as a the name of a football team.
posted by mary8nne at 7:19 AM on November 6, 2014

So if you are adding to a problem of someone's culture being drowned out in ironic noise, then you are doing a bad thing. I don't care what -ism you call it.
posted by Zalzidrax at 7:21 AM on November 6, 2014 [13 favorites]

Guys, it's not rocket science - punch up, not down.

But isn't that racist or colonialist? in what sense are you saying "down", because they are more "primitive"? That we should not subject their beliefs to the same standards as our mockery of christianity?
posted by mary8nne at 7:23 AM on November 6, 2014 [1 favorite]

Are you adding to a chorus of mockery that is drowning out Christian culture where you are? If yes, yeah, lay off a bit. If no, mock away.
posted by Zalzidrax at 7:25 AM on November 6, 2014 [1 favorite]

I am saying Native Americans are down because they were subjected to 400 years of genocide, broken promises, and abuse, and are now the victims of massive, overwhelming poverty, due to a federal government that doesn't give a shit about them.
posted by Elementary Penguin at 7:26 AM on November 6, 2014 [58 favorites]

we should not subject their beliefs to the same standards as our mockery of christianity?

Yes, that's exactly it. Because we (Americans, dunno if you are but...) we destroyed their culture, murdered them by the millions, and made their religion illegal for hundreds of years, yes I think that qualifies as Up and Down. Not sure what the actual confusion is here, or if you're doing a fun I Am Socrates devil's advocate thing.
posted by Potomac Avenue at 7:26 AM on November 6, 2014 [30 favorites]

80s:Nows::50s:90s

Truth hurts

1960s, I believe you'll find. In 2014, 1984 was 30 years ago. In 1994, 1964 was thirty years ago. As you'd remember if you had been a teenager in the 90s and been treated to Boomers endlessly banging on about how great the 60s were.
posted by Diablevert at 7:29 AM on November 6, 2014 [9 favorites]

Currently London (previously Sydney)

Oh you're British/Australian. If you're unfamiliar with Native Americans you should probably read about their culture and what we did to them. You probably don't realize it, but you are saying exactly what racists say in America when they want NAs to shut up about the continued destruction and mockery of their precarious culture.
posted by Potomac Avenue at 7:29 AM on November 6, 2014 [18 favorites]

But its not drowning it out. Its absorbing it - as a little cultural museum piece. It is becoming part of the collective culture but in a form which is compatible with contemporary conceptions of the self and society.

Sure, also called appropriation, and the people whose culture is being appropriated and misused are saying, rather explicitly, that they don't like it and please stop.
posted by Think_Long at 7:29 AM on November 6, 2014 [27 favorites]

My patronus is spirit animals, nirvana, and oriental language written characters. Not so much a specific ethnic reference as the concept of noncontextual uncaring cultural appropriation.

I am seeking: someone whose patronus is society's alienation of the individual
posted by halifix at 7:35 AM on November 6, 2014 [8 favorites]

As a related subject it's the sort of thing that leads to this conflict over bereavement benefits for "spirit friends." While I can't find the link, the union's actual request was for bereavement benefits for ritual obligations regarding the death of one member of a formalized religious religious relationship between adults. (To my ignorant ears, it has characteristics of "godfather" and "recovery sponsor.") The death of a mentor requires mandatory mourning. What was a relatively reasonable request for religious accommodation got spun into benefits for dead pets.

You will hallucinate. Not fun Burning Man hallucinations either. Messed-up primal hallucinations, like the kind Buffy had when she dreamed about the First Slayer.

Ehh, here comes the woo. My experience is the visions come first and the relationship after. It's kicking in your hands and then the change happens like fireworks going off in your brain. "Hallucination" is a bad word for it because for many their primary encounter with them is through cinematic representations that are coerced into narrative sensibility. (And I've had hallucinations, this is different.) The call is putting your brain on speed and dumping it into an alien view of the world. And then you get dumped back into "normality" distinctly abnormal because what can be seen can't be unseen.

But I don't use the word "spirit animal."
posted by CBrachyrhynchos at 7:37 AM on November 6, 2014 [3 favorites]

The first ironic use of "spirit animal" may date back to August 2006

Ahahahahaha okay bye article, best of luck to you.
posted by prize bull octorok at 7:41 AM on November 6, 2014 [7 favorites]

80s:Nows::50s:90s

Truth hurts

You, too, will be old someday, and shithead kids will kick dirt in your face, too.
posted by Steely-eyed Missile Man at 7:41 AM on November 6, 2014 [1 favorite]

And I would doubt that there are many who would see themselves as "racially native americans" that also still believe in "Spirit Animals" today.

So you don't actually know, but you're perfectly willing to make up a bunch of reasons why it should be cool? We're talking about people whose cultural and religious practices were largely banned for most of American history, some of which still are today, and for whom Christianity was a weapon used against them.
posted by zombieflanders at 7:42 AM on November 6, 2014 [30 favorites]

I too worry about cultural appropriation, but also do not wish to appear juvenile. Thus I avoid the terms Spirit Animal and patronus and refer to my imaginary animal companion, Lyle the Racoon, as my familiar.
posted by fraxil at 7:43 AM on November 6, 2014 [1 favorite]

You, too, will be old someday, and shithead kids will kick dirt in your face, too.

I'm older than you and I kick dirt right back at the kids and they aren't shitheads.
posted by Potomac Avenue at 7:45 AM on November 6, 2014 [1 favorite]

mary8nne, you are basically performing a greatest hits compilation of all the specious arguments that have ever been made in favor of cultural appropriation in general and Native American cultural appropriation in particular. Nearly everything you have said in this thread I have also heard from white dudes who want to explain why it's totally fine to wear war bonnets to Coachella. Something to consider.
posted by miskatonic at 7:45 AM on November 6, 2014 [19 favorites]

I guess I missed the particular cultural boom of "spirit animal" use that the article is describing. I mean, for me, I've never needed the word, even in humor, so it was really easy to stop using.

That said, I remember a similar conversation last year and stoneweaver was fighting the good fight, and I sent them a message after that thanking them for raising my awareness of the term, because I had literally never thought about it being offensive to anyone, even though I knew it came from a loosely defined Native tradition, and I understand the history of Native subjugation of our continent. And that's part of the whole tragedy for Native Americans - when the broader culture thinks about cultural appropriation, and racism, Native issues are often the third or fourth thing we think about if we remember them at all, even though they've been here the whole fucking time!
posted by Think_Long at 7:45 AM on November 6, 2014 [11 favorites]

Guys, it's not rocket science - punch up, not down.

But isn't that racist or colonialist? in what sense are you saying "down", because they are more "primitive"? That we should not subject their beliefs to the same standards as our mockery of christianity?

No, that's not what that phrase means. Perhaps I should have elaborated.

In American society, there is a hierarchy of privilege (the collection of advantages and absences of disadvantages offered to you by individuals or societal structures because of your identity). Any given person can be located approximately along this hierarchy based on their various group memberships. For example, being white, male, Christian, wealthy, cisgender, heterosexual puts you just about at the top of the American hierarchy of social privilege. Being an African American woman who is non-Christian, impoverished, transgender, and gay puts you near the bottom of the privilege hierarchy.

Native Americans are somewhere in that hierarchy, and definitely not near the top.

"Punch down" refers to making jokes about people who are below you, or low down in general, on the hierarchy of privilege.

"Punch up" refers to making jokes about people who are above you, or high up in general.

So, "punch up, not down", refers to the principle that it is not only funnier, but more admirable to poke fun at those at the high end of the privilege ladder, rather than the low end.
posted by Salvor Hardin at 7:55 AM on November 6, 2014 [13 favorites]

Yeah. Thanks, stoneweaver. I didn't really realize that spirit animal was actually a Native American concept; I'd always thought of the NA cultural aspect as spirit guides, and never really considered where the pop term came from. I was probably influenced by Persona and Harry Potter.
posted by halifix at 7:55 AM on November 6, 2014

From that link in the first comment, should we not use avatar either? James Cameron/Millions of MMO players are going to cry out in agony if so.
posted by Lord Chancellor at 7:59 AM on November 6, 2014

I can completely dig why someone would want to go outside their own ethnic/cultural tradition to find some spiritual practice or symbol that's meaningful to them in a way that the practices and symbols of their own people are not. If someone wants to claim that a person, place or thing is somehow representative or emblematic of their true self in a way that's pretty deep and maybe can't be expressed in words, then, well, alright. There can, in fact, be many such people, places or things that have that sort of deep, inexpressible meaning to us.

But that doesn't mean that it's OK to claim that it's a "spirit animal" unless you really are of that culture and tradition and you really did go through that vision quest instead of just fasting for a weekend and calling a sauna a "sweat lodge" and having a weird disconnected dream that you assume must be different from all your other weird disconnected dreams and claiming that Lena Dunham must be your spirit animal because she made a cameo in it. (And while I'm at it, let's just consider how extraordinarily wrong it is to claim another person, especially a person of color, as any sort of "animal." And especially how tired and in need of retirement the "ironic" defense is.) As long as you're assembling your syncretic spiritual beliefs out of bits that you find useful, and creating something new (and therefore not of the belief(s) that it was derived from), make up your own terminology.

Therefore, let us speak of the queebus. Plural, queebi. Nobody can take your queebus (or queebi) away from you; it is something new under the sun.
posted by Halloween Jack at 8:02 AM on November 6, 2014

...and then I googled it and there's a reddit user with that name. Damnit.
posted by Halloween Jack at 8:02 AM on November 6, 2014 [2 favorites]

I've been watching a lot of Star Trek: Voyager (stay with me) and this is interesting to me because there is an episode in which Chakotay helps Janeway discover her spirit animal. I'm never sure how to feel about the treatment of this character. On the one hand, it's great to see a NA character who has a lot to do and is very proud of his heritage. On the other hand, I never know what parts of the representation are racist because I know so little about NA culture (I've heard, for example, that his beliefs seem to be taken from a variety of tribes, not just the one that he claims as his). That's something I think is really sad--so many of us (Americans) have so little awareness of these cultures that we don't know, for example, if something is a racist stereotype or a real thing or whether it would depend entirely on the tribe of the person being discussed. I really appreciate posts like this.
posted by chaiminda at 8:04 AM on November 6, 2014 [1 favorite]

And being offensive is not enough to be classed as racist.

There's a rule about this? I had no idea.

And I would doubt that there are many who would see themselves as "racially native americans" that also still believe in "Spirit Animals" today.

I think that if you don't have any idea about something, you should not just make up a thing about it. At best, you look completely thoughtless. At best.
posted by rtha at 8:05 AM on November 6, 2014 [28 favorites]

that's part of the whole tragedy for Native Americans - when the broader culture thinks about cultural appropriation, and racism, Native issues are often the third or fourth thing we think about if we remember them at all, even though they've been here the whole fucking time!

The point of genocide is erasure. It worked. I mean, smallpox did the heavy lifting, but we certainly pitched in. I don't really expect it to stop working. According to some hastily googled census facts, Native Americans are about 1.2 percent of the U.S. population. There are about twice as many adult wiccans (342K) and pagans (340k) respectively, than there are followers of Native American religious beliefs (186K), and that's with a substantial increase in their numbers over in recent years.
posted by Diablevert at 8:07 AM on November 6, 2014 [7 favorites]

For real - I twitch a little at the term Native American being used when, in another context, only German would be correct and European would be wrong.

But this may be the first time I've mentioned this.
posted by Lesser Shrew at 8:10 AM on November 6, 2014

I guess this is just shitty and racist of my family but for as long as I can remember (I mean literally since I was a young child) we've had a non-ironic concept of spirit
animal that's been deeply personal and not at all mocking. For me it's always been one of those quirky family spiritual traditions like believing in ghosts (which we also do). I guess I had seen the awful ironic version, but if spirit animal is actually, you know, a spiritual concept to me is that so wrong? I don't get to be part of mainstream religion because I don't believe those things, but I actually do hold on to this. I did not know about the offensive appropriation aspect so I guess I'm never allowed to say those words together again, but man this is kind of destroying a piece of my self identity. You can say that it's a lot crueler to have attacked this idea in native culture and you're probably right but I don't think I'm willing to give up my own genuinely held spiritual belief just because I'm doing it wrong. I'm not appropriating anything but the name and I don't think calling a patronus or some bullshit like that describes what I'm getting at here. And no, you don't get to ask me what mine is.
posted by OverlappingElvis at 8:11 AM on November 6, 2014 [2 favorites]

chaiminda: Voyager is pretty problematic in the NA department because their "Native American" consultant, Jamake Highwater, was in fact about as Native American as Forrest Carter.
posted by Halloween Jack at 8:12 AM on November 6, 2014 [2 favorites]

And I would doubt that there are many who would see themselves as "racially native americans" that also still believe in "Spirit Animals" today.

UGH.

Go read up on Native American boarding schools, the vast majority of them overt Christian missions, which were literally used as a weapon by the US government to "kill the Indian but save the man". That's a direct quote from policy. They also existed in Canada.

Also feel free to read literature written by Native Americans. There's a lot of good stuff, contemporary writers are wonderful.

Contemporary means current i.e. STILL ALIVE.
posted by fraula at 8:14 AM on November 6, 2014 [33 favorites]

That's the second guy I've heard of recently who "assumed a fake Native American identity." WTAF, people.
posted by chaiminda at 8:15 AM on November 6, 2014 [1 favorite]

~mathowie had a good post on this subject. For most white folks, this really is the sort of thing you can do unthinkingly and without malice, so it helps to be clued into why it's offensive.

For my part, I, like ~phunniemee, have taken to using patronus as a substitute. I just hope J.K. Rowling doesn't send her copyright lawyer Dementors after me.
posted by Cash4Lead at 8:17 AM on November 6, 2014 [2 favorites]

Anything that helps modern man develop spiritual kinship with other life-forms is a good thing. As for cultural appropriation, isn't the whole western spiritual tradition an appropriation of Judaism?
posted by No Robots at 8:21 AM on November 6, 2014

And let's not even start on the appropriation of the Britons' culture by the English.
posted by George_Spiggott at 8:23 AM on November 6, 2014 [1 favorite]

as a little cultural museum piece

If you wanted not just to offend but to infuriate, these are the exact words you would have chosen. Maybe you don't realize the extent to which Native Americans are presented as museum pieces to children here--characters in textbooks. I'm not alone in that the closest contact I had with Native Americans as a child was at a permanent installation in the Natural History Museum. Sure, they had artifacts from the 80s there, a strange assortment of flyers for casinos, T-shirts, beads, and cigarette ads--this would have been around 1994--but they were still set behind glass, looking as lifeless and unattached to the present world as anything else in that building. And many people--dull, perhaps, but numerable--grow up not realizing the extent to which this is a lie (no matter how depleted the NA population may be), and they continue to deny Native Americans a prominent place in the national discourse, even when that discourse is about them. Even some forward-thinking adults don't like to think on the issue, and speak as if being forced to inherit the mantle of their oppressive ancestors is a terrible burden that oughtn't to have been place upon them--as if inheriting the mantle of the oppressed is not inestimably worse.

Of all the things I expected to see in defense of this joke on MeFi, "but it's like a museum piece" was not anywhere near the list.
posted by dogurthr at 8:23 AM on November 6, 2014 [42 favorites]

I am a practicing agnostic pagan and I believe in connection to animal spirits, animal friends, the great mother and the great father, the grand mother spirit and the grandfather spirit, the many manifestations of the aspects of the compassionate divine that have taken form in various times and places, in this universe and without. I am friends the with sun, and the moon, and grandmother tree who lives in my yard. The butterflies come to sit on my hand, and lick me with their funny little mouths, the dragonflies come to see me when I call them and will sit on my finger, the roadrunner comes to sit with me, the lizards come out to see me when I go outside. The squirrel come within inches of me but the little creatures frighten me a bit. And the bunnies! The bunnies come to visit and they sit eating the grass and flowers with me. I fussed at my cat for killing the animals and she was confused she tried to bring me presents, then she started bringing them to me alive and setting them go. I was so proud of her and also felt bad because she needed to eat meat to live and she was not meant to understand the harm of it. She died soon after, and I hope transformed into a more compassionate and aware creature with good karma.

My sisters is a Lakota woman and to rebuild her spiritual heritage has been an excruciating process just for me to watch and support her going through. For that matter the christians literally slaughtered the pagan out of my European ancestors as well, executing all who dared to practice the old ways, destroying all the sacred texts. It's amazing to me how many with european ancestors will turn to buddhism, or even native american spirituality, and still shy away from visiting with our own great spirits and capacity to relate to nature. That's how deep the fear and damage of the slaughter and torturing of the fairy folk and the wild women of the woods, the healers and the intuitive, the powerful wise women, and men who new the secrets of the earth the clouds the winds.

If you want spirit animals go to your ancestors and stop mocking them and learn how it was done in your own culture because most people's ancestors once had more connection with nature than we do at present, even as beasts who often brutally consumed it or had limited intellectual capacity to understand it (which is still ever the case). And IF you're willing to concede there may be spirits, then don't think the old ways are gone, if there is a spirit realm none of it's gone, it's evolving right beside us and within us.

And yes I say all this as an agnostic, I don't know what is or is not in the realm of the divine. I do believe there is more consciousness in this reality than we understand and our lack of willingness to even consider that can cause terrible, terrible harms because we discard the feeling nature of that which we interact with and try to control and exploit- instead of forming relationships with nature and the physical world; and instead of giving and receiving with respect for reducing harms involved of such trades.

It's ever popular that people want a divine that gives them magical gifts, guidance or a sense of meaning, without asking to actually follow the hard path of people a good person or living out powerful duties to serve the great forces of compassion. In this world of suffering, choosing to take that on can be excruciating and difficult. While among the great spirits there may be some who love to hand out candy to children- you're not really practicing the compassionate arts unless you're willing to get your hands dirty, let your heart be weighed by the suffering of humans and other beings in your communities and families, and agree to use the gifts of the divine for the actual good purposes they are meant for- bringing about a healthy compassionate harmonious world for all beings.

I'm writing all this because while people are used to being bombarded with months of christmas shit, european pagan religions are considered uniquely silly, in a way that buddhism (which often has some concepts that line up with very woo principles even in some it's atheistic leaning forms) does not. People often yearn for a spiritual connection, and having discarded Christianity as many have, people then see an intact nature/spiritual tradition and crave that--- maybe because they can feel it in their bones they once had it in their european ancestors before it was beaten, slaughtered and mocked out of them too?

So for those that really feel the call of earth mother and moon mother, the animal spirit and the plant spirit, calling to them- you have ancestors. Find out what it is that's calling to you. Find your ancestors words. Everyone has them. That the europeans completely gave up on there's doesn't mean it makes sense to appropriate everyone elses.
posted by xarnop at 8:23 AM on November 6, 2014 [18 favorites]

1. It's offensive.
This is indisputable. Native people have said it offends them. You can make offensive jokes if you want. Professional comedians in particular should feel free to test the boundaries of what's offensive. But that doesn't make it not offensive, just because you don't know any Indians personally, or because you hate religion of all kinds and want to skewer them.

Quoted for truth, because I only had one fave to give.

Seriously, we had an actual, living and breathing Native person in this thread, saying this usage was offensive. Ignoring that to hang on to some nonsensical notion of "cultural museum piece" is shitty and wrong.
posted by MissySedai at 8:24 AM on November 6, 2014 [15 favorites]

Anything that helps modern man develop spiritual kinship with other life-forms is a good thing.

Calling it something other than a "spirit animal" wouldn't diminish any ability to form that connection. And we're not just talking about people who want to feel connected to nature, but people who use someone else's persecuted religious belief as a joke about what they think is cool.
posted by chaiminda at 8:27 AM on November 6, 2014 [1 favorite]

But its not drowning it out. Its absorbing it - as a little cultural museum piece.

I can't decide which aspect of this is more grotesquely horrifying to me: the actual statement itself or the casual matter-of-factness with which it was presented.
posted by poffin boffin at 8:28 AM on November 6, 2014 [23 favorites]

Yeah, making a joke about someone's spirituality is unacceptable. But this must not deter serious seekers from developing their spirituality.
posted by No Robots at 8:30 AM on November 6, 2014

Using replacement words is a better tactic than "stop talking like this entirely," because spiritual touchstone noun is a silly-but-heartfelt feeling that many people want to express, and it's better to expand the vocabulary describing it for people than to go "your feeling is stupid, stop talking about it!"

"Patronus" is the replacement noun that I'm training myself to use, because it's in that sweet spot between geekily obscure and popularly known reference that made "spirit animal" attractive in the first place. "Shoulder angel" is another favorite, though it has an additional nuance of (good or bad) of judgement. Steve Rogers would be a comforting patronus and a guilt-inducing shoulder angel.
posted by nicebookrack at 8:31 AM on November 6, 2014 [2 favorites]

I think (hope?) we've gotten the message across to mary8nne.
posted by rocketman at 8:32 AM on November 6, 2014

It seems like a glaring lacuna in any discussion of the popularisation of this term not to mention Johnny Cash's appearance as the Space Cayote on the Simpsons in 1997.

Not to mention the cave scene from Fight Club. It's not totally on point, but I think "power animal" is suitably new-age to be considered a factor in the development of this weird internet trend.
posted by enjoymoreradio at 8:35 AM on November 6, 2014 [2 favorites]

Find your ancestors words.

What if I don't have ancestors? Seriously, I don't have a traditional culture; I'm American. I guess I could get myself DNA-typed to figure out what language to use, but for me the concept I believe in is best named by the words I'm not going to say. Please don't make me use a word invented to sell books to children.
posted by OverlappingElvis at 8:36 AM on November 6, 2014 [2 favorites]

Another favorite:

When I find myself in times of trouble,
[Captain America / Jennifer Lawrence / Maru the cat / Mister Rogers] comes to me,
Speaking words of wisdom, "Let it be"

posted by nicebookrack at 8:37 AM on November 6, 2014 [10 favorites]

But its not drowning it out. Its absorbing it - as a little cultural museum piece.

Pretty much in the same way as a giant amoeba absorbs a screaming debutante in a 60's horror film.

I mean, it's always amusing to watch white people do backflips to explain why the latest racist shitty thing they're doing isn't actually racist or shitty. And by amusing, I mean daydreaming about watching them get "absorbed".

Seriously people, bottom line: do you really, absolutely need to use the term? Is your livelihood dependant on it? Will you not be able to eat today if you don't steal the term "spirit animal"? Seriously?

Using the term out of ignorance is one thing-but once the racism is pointed out, then doubling down simply means you're being determinedly racist.
posted by happyroach at 8:41 AM on November 6, 2014 [5 favorites]

Why not follow Socrates and Philip Pullman and call it your daemon?
posted by No Robots at 8:43 AM on November 6, 2014 [9 favorites]

I also got a memail about Spirit Animal. I was like, Oops, sorry. I felt bad for a second for having said something offensive and then I have never felt the need to say it again. It was actually pretty easy. I also haven't felt the need to replace it was anything, either. Yes, it was a delightful concept but fucking things up in the past is why we can't have nice things now. Deal with it.
posted by bleep at 8:47 AM on November 6, 2014 [10 favorites]

The squirrel come within inches of me but the little creatures frighten me a bit.

Ah, you have to let them eat from your hand, it's awesome.
posted by malocchio at 8:49 AM on November 6, 2014

Find your ancestors words.

My ancestors were all over the map. The ones I identify with the most strongly were pretty well appropriated by the Victorians, to typically horrible effect.
posted by George_Spiggott at 8:51 AM on November 6, 2014 [1 favorite]

I think Pullman was addressing something profound.
posted by No Robots at 8:52 AM on November 6, 2014 [2 favorites]

What if I don't have ancestors?

Don't be obtuse.
posted by MissySedai at 8:54 AM on November 6, 2014 [11 favorites]

Yeah, the idea that only "ethnic" people have cultural traditions is pretty bullshit. Just because white traditions have become the standard, possibly boring ones in American society doesn't mean that they aren't based on an ancestral culture.
posted by chaiminda at 8:56 AM on November 6, 2014 [7 favorites]

I do too, but what he (or Socrates for that matter) calls a daemon isn't the same thing as what I believe. My [redacted] isn't analogous to a soul. It's the creature that in a larger karmic sense occupies the same space in the world that I do. It's the animal that I will someday become, or that I have already been, or both at the same time (souls or life energy or whatever you want to call it I don't think are affected by linear time). Maybe I'm just mixed up, but I have a right to my own beliefs.
posted by OverlappingElvis at 8:56 AM on November 6, 2014

MissySedai, which group should I arbitrarily select as my ancestors? I'm a fucking mutt.
posted by OverlappingElvis at 8:58 AM on November 6, 2014

You know who I feel sorry for in all this? The furries. /s
posted by Leon at 8:59 AM on November 6, 2014 [1 favorite]

Sure, you have the right to your beliefs. But don't crap on those of other people should be your first rule.
posted by No Robots at 8:59 AM on November 6, 2014 [3 favorites]

Super annoying meme. The Toast makes fun of it on a regular basis.
posted by Sheydem-tants at 9:01 AM on November 6, 2014 [1 favorite]

Maybe I'm just mixed up, but I have a right to my own beliefs.

Go for it. I don't understand what you're protesting here. Are you offended that other people are using "patronus"?
posted by kmz at 9:01 AM on November 6, 2014

I guess it doesn't matter what I call it because this is a personal belief that I've literally never discussed in public until today but for shit's sake, a term most recently popularized by a children's book (that I loved, don't get me wrong) is your first response?

Agreeing strongly with this. There is a difference between people using the term under discussion for goofy effect, and people using the term because they spiritually believe in what it means. I understand that that doesn't mean it's OK to use the term -- but when it comes time to find a replacement, I don't think it's OK to just be glib about it.

Likewise:

maybe because they can feel it in their bones they once had it in their european ancestors before it was beaten, slaughtered and mocked out of them too?

This, this, a million times this. The genocide against Native Americans and the continuing institutionalized racism are such that I defer completely to their decisions about language, traditions, religion, etc. I won't use the term in question. However, there is also a large-scale story of the expurgation of animism from human cultures wherever civilization has found them, throughout all of history. I go so far as to believe that this is the religion we're all born with, and it is re-expurgated from us with every generation, because of the spiritual framework of civilization.

For some of us, there is a nameless sense of something lost that has to be recovered. We don't have the right to use other cultures' sacred words for this project, but it's still a serious thing that has to be reinvented and rebuilt for today.
posted by overeducated_alligator at 9:02 AM on November 6, 2014 [5 favorites]

I only know the ancestry of one side of my family in its entirety; the other side is probably a mish-mash of European ancestry (mutts, if you will), but that still doesn't mean I get to use an offensive term for people who are still alive today.
posted by Kitteh at 9:04 AM on November 6, 2014 [5 favorites]

At my college, which has many Native American students, our student government just recently banned "spirit animal" jokes, which had apparently become something of a tradition - new members of the government had to say their "spirit animals" before being sworn in.

I was proud of student government for finally voting to ban those jokes, but I can't help but wonder how many Native American students decided student government was not for them while this practice was going on. I can't imagine how alienating it would be to try to get involved only to have your beliefs mocked in the swearing-in ceremony.
posted by dialetheia at 9:04 AM on November 6, 2014 [4 favorites]

Whoah, hold on a second.

"Spirit animals" are a cultural appropriation of Native American beliefs?

Really?

What are people basing this on? Where are people getting the idea that only Native Americans had spirit animals in their culture?

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Totemism

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tutelary_deity

The concept of a personal spirit animal or guide is common amongst the whole world. This is a really weird reaction.
posted by I-baLL at 9:07 AM on November 6, 2014 [16 favorites]

So it shouldn't be a huge step for you to take these strong feelings and apply them to some empathy for the people of the 566 federally recognized tribes of the USA as well as those of smaller bands without official recognition who may feel the same way.

It's not a huge step. I agree with it 100% and even said it in my original comment. But from what I'm seeing here there's no non-asshole way for me ever to use the term [redacted], even privately, without being the goddamn oppressor. And frankly I have so little to hold onto spiritually in my life that these private family beliefs actually are really important to me. I guess I didn't realize how important they were until I was told I'm not allowed to have them. Sure, I appreciate the irony, and I'm actually personally offended by the shitty hipster use of the term also, but I guess that doesn't count. Beliefs aren't a zero-sum game and my (formerly I guess) personal and private practice of them doesn't have to take away from traditional beliefs coming from other cultures. Guess I'm not allowed to talk about it in karmic terms either now.
posted by OverlappingElvis at 9:08 AM on November 6, 2014 [4 favorites]

This doesn't have anything to do with pagans or people who sincerely want to appropriate the word to mean something else. I mean it kind of does but that's not what the article is about or what the majority of people who use this phrase lazily online are doing.

It's not up to me, but I doubt anyone cares about your private spiritual beliefs. So if you want to be all #notallspiritanimals then #goodluckwiththat
posted by Potomac Avenue at 9:08 AM on November 6, 2014 [13 favorites]

From that link in the first comment, should we not use avatar either? James Cameron/Millions of MMO players are going to cry out in agony if so.

I almost choked on that too -- "avatar" has been used as a rough synonym for "embodiment" in English for decades, and it isn't used in a derogatory sense. I'd argue that its use in general English is perfectly fine. It's a foreign loan word used to describe a particular, unusual object that lacked a pre-existing English term. ("Embodiment" isn't quite the same thing.) I'd argue that's not cultural appropriation or disrespect used that way. Also, the issue of cultural overwriting is not quite the problem for Hinduism. Americans using the word in a different way cannot even attempt overwrite Indian spiritual life.

But...if you're going to proclaim on The Internet that Ron Swanson is your "avatar," yeah, okay, I could see that as being rude or disrespectful. So is "patron saint" and "guardian angel," if you want to get vigilant.

It also wouldn't make any sense, though that never stopped The Internet.
posted by Harvey Jerkwater at 9:09 AM on November 6, 2014

You know who I feel sorry for in all this? The furries.

From now on, all non-Native Americans are to use the word 'fursona' instead of 'spirit animal'

Hmm... this needs to be a firefox plugin.
posted by Zalzidrax at 9:11 AM on November 6, 2014 [6 favorites]

MissySedai, which group should I arbitrarily select as my ancestors? I'm a fucking mutt.

You and virtually anyone else whose family has been in the US longer than a minute. I repeat: Don't be obtuse.

Seriously, why are you digging in your heels to use a term that is not yours to use? You HAVE ancestors. Pick the ones you identify with most strongly, and stop acting like an entitled child.
posted by MissySedai at 9:13 AM on November 6, 2014 [6 favorites]

Potomac Avenue: It's not up to me, but I doubt anyone cares about your private spiritual beliefs.

MissySedai: Seriously, why are you digging in your heels to use a term that is not yours to use?

Right.
posted by OverlappingElvis at 9:16 AM on November 6, 2014

Like I said, some people might object to any use of the word, but they're probably objecting more to how vehement and abrupt this derail about sincere spirituality is.
posted by Potomac Avenue at 9:17 AM on November 6, 2014 [3 favorites]

If you think you might be european you could start with what's left of the pagan religions there, the poetic prose and edda, Celtic reconstructionism and the like. It's true there are few facts left, especially that weren't written through the words of christians who were trying to literally demonize the pagan religions so it's very hard to make a picture of what was going on. They recently unearthed a statue of Brigantia, also associated with Brighid, mother goddess of hearth and home.

A lot was lost, gifts our ancestors could have given us of their wisdom and learning on their journeys. If all you want of the spirit realm is spirit animals, I imagine any divine realm might be a bit offended that you believe enough to want such gifts but aren't willing to explore a bit further. Don't you think if there are spirits, there might be a bit more the spirit realm than just animal spirits that give you warm fuzzies and don't do much else... or say ask you to do actual tasks or some such?

If you just want to take one tiny concept from one tradition and you actually believe that part of the tradition is real but none of the rest is, it's a little odd and not very logically consistent. But if the term gives you warm feelings and you want to keep it, you can probably quite easily use it within your own personal space/mind and use a different term in public.

Of course no one owns the divine, you are free to make friends with, connect with, seek guidance from, or serve the divine in your own practice. And if you're living on native lands, it might make sense to want to know a bit more about the sacred spirits who govern them, and serve them too.

If so, then help restore the sacred black hills and make them open to the people who once roamed them! It is a task in the works and we need all who will help, it most certainly can be done, and the chances increase with everyone who takes even the most modest or tiny step in that direction.

If you want european pagan guidance you could start by asking brighid for intuition toward knowing your ancestors and aspects of their spiritual practice that might help you develop your own. When I did, I was suddenly able to trace my ancestors back the 1300's! Back to when the old ways were banned but not forgotten. My polish and slovenian ancestors had pretty strong pagan strongholds against the christian tyranny up through the present. Go slavic peoples, keeping it real! Your ancestors don't own the spiritual realm either, each persons practice is unique and their own, but there is no reason to re-invent the wheel, if your ancestors can share gifts and understanding they gained, you'd do to learn from it and change it to what suits you with respect that their way worked for them.

Frankly it's offensive for anyone to believe in the spirit realm that provides spirit animals while living as an immigrant in stolen lands and not be joining forces with the native people here, many of whom still maintain a stronghold of spiritual practice and connection to the land and spirits of these lands with their plights. If you can feel the spirits of the land and animals, than listen to the cries of the suffering and serve! Bring back the sacred lands to those who spent thousands of years in connection with them! We humans are torturing animals and plants and cells, do you think if you are connected to animal spirit, REAL animal spirit beyond your imagination, the plight of animal welfare should not be your own? The plight of the earth being fracked until she quakes, do you feel her?
posted by xarnop at 9:19 AM on November 6, 2014 [9 favorites]

Attn white people of indeterminate origin: chances are your ancestral culture was forcibly assimilated into the Roman Empire at some point, so consider setting up a Lares shrine.
posted by prize bull octorok at 9:23 AM on November 6, 2014 [9 favorites]

Yeah. Despite grand internet pronouncements about the 'correct' way to do things, if you're sincere and respectful and show genuine concern for other people's beliefs, you're not going to get too much crap as a white male for using the term 'spirit animal' for a sincerely held belief in a personal animal spirit. Honestly, if you think there's a possibility it might be a problem, ask first.

I think the strong negative reaction is that there are a whole lot of people who don't show genuine concern for others who announce that their sincerely held belief means they don't have to give a crap about how others feel.
posted by Zalzidrax at 9:23 AM on November 6, 2014 [4 favorites]

I almost choked on that too -- "avatar" has been used as a rough synonym for "embodiment" in English for decades, and it isn't used in a derogatory sense. I'd argue that its use in general English is perfectly fine. It's a foreign loan word used to describe a particular, unusual object that lacked a pre-existing English term. ("Embodiment" isn't quite the same thing.)

"Incarnation" is also an alternative if you want to not use the Sanskrit word.
posted by sukeban at 9:23 AM on November 6, 2014 [1 favorite]

The concept of a personal spirit animal or guide is common amongst the whole world. This is a really weird reaction.

Please, make it more obvious that you didn't bother to either RTFA .

If you're not practicing an animist religion, are taking pieces from cultures not your own willy-nilly, are making inanimate objects/celebrities/fictional characters into "spirits," or are just plain disrespecting other's cultures just because, then you're being an asshole. Doubling down on it and/or playing dumb just makes it worse.
posted by zombieflanders at 9:26 AM on November 6, 2014 [8 favorites]

Okay last one. Like I said, this is literally the first time I've ever talked about these beliefs in public or even as far as I can remember used the term [redacted] in public, and in literally my first comment I said that the legacy of appropriation and cultural destruction was a lot worse (I guess I said crueler) than anything I'm feeling. Sorry for sharing, MetaFilter. That was obviously my mistake and I sure as hell won't make that one again.
posted by OverlappingElvis at 9:26 AM on November 6, 2014 [1 favorite]

The idea that you should restrict yourself to religions your ancestors practiced seems bizarre to me. I guess if you converted to a foreign brand of ancestor-worship then they could get confused, but otherwise surely they are dead people and don't get to decide what you think?
posted by squinty at 9:28 AM on November 6, 2014 [8 favorites]

Zalzidrax: I did have a serious point beyond the sarcasm (basically, that animism is everywhere and that Furries are a modern example), but the more I think about that the less certain I am.

I can't think of any practice analogous to personal spirit animals in European traditions (lots of heraldry for families, though)... the closest I can come up with are the Loa in Vodou, and I doubt anyone here would be comfortable lifting that term for their own.

So I'm wondering if the reason this is getting push-back is that "spirit animal" is a fairly simple, descriptive English term... it's not obviously a Native American phrase, it's not even a loan word or a corruption. Interestingly, both "spirit" and "animal" are from Latin words related to breathing, so they're rather appropriate for describing your essential nature. Staking a claim on a fairly neutral phrase for one group does, at first glance, seem to be a bit over-the-top.

Essence. My essence is a budgerigar. That might work, too.
posted by Leon at 9:29 AM on November 6, 2014

I learned everything I need to know about spirit animals from Steven Segal.
posted by The Card Cheat at 9:30 AM on November 6, 2014

Like I said, this is literally the first time I've ever talked about these beliefs in public or even as far as I can remember used the term [redacted] in public

If you managed to make it all the way up to today without using it, then what's stopping you from continuing to do that?

So I'm wondering if the reason this is getting push-back is that "spirit animal" is a fairly simple, descriptive English term

No, it's getting it because the way it's being used (as described in the FPP and this thread) isn't as an honest expression of spiritualism.
posted by zombieflanders at 9:33 AM on November 6, 2014 [8 favorites]

Calling it your patronus or daemon...does that really make things better, though? I mean, it's basically the same thing you're saying, just using a different word.
posted by inturnaround at 9:37 AM on November 6, 2014

If you managed to make it all the way up to today without using it, then what's stopping you from continuing to do that?

Absolutely nothing. Like I said, I definitely learned my lesson today.
posted by OverlappingElvis at 9:37 AM on November 6, 2014

Maybe you don't realize the extent to which Native Americans are presented as museum pieces to children here

This is from my comment above. A preemptive apology is in order for bad editing: of course it's non-native children who are taught and, in some parts of the country, allowed to believe this. The default in the US is to erase or ignore NA experience, and I'm sorry to have done so, even briefly and through laziness of speech.

Though I do imagine (and realize second-hand, from conversation and literature) that it's beyond trying for NAs growing up apart from large NA populations to have to suffer through this same innuendo, that they and their living relatives belong in the past of this part of the world, not the present. And, after having been told that they are silent, to have to suffer through seeing the artifacts of their existence--and the existences of others who have been given the same lot--taken away and used in the displays and jokes of the people who have called them, in lengthier but less exact words, dead or at least remote and irrelevant.
posted by dogurthr at 9:38 AM on November 6, 2014 [1 favorite]

I think the strong negative reaction is that there are a whole lot of people who don't show genuine concern for others who announce that their sincerely held belief means they don't have to give a crap about how others feel.

In particular, an actual Native person asked that people please stop using this term, it hurt and offended them. And what do we get, but a non-Native demanding to be given a pass, and damn stoneweaver's feelings on the matter, anyway, because "my beliefs!".

It reads to me like "Fuck you, I do what I want!"
posted by MissySedai at 9:39 AM on November 6, 2014 [8 favorites]

I guess I missed the point but I thought this was about lazy jokes, not people using the term as intended.
posted by bleep at 9:41 AM on November 6, 2014 [4 favorites]

This is from my comment above. A short, preemptive apology is in order for bad editing: of course it's non-native children who are taught and, in some parts of the country, allowed to believe this.

Hey, I totally agree but you have to know for reals, it's native kids as well. Taught from a young as hell age by virtually all of society that they're mockable, disposable, worthless, a hilarious caricature of hundreds of distinct cultures amalgamated into a chief wahoo parody, and then told they should feel honored by this treatment.
posted by poffin boffin at 9:41 AM on November 6, 2014 [12 favorites]

Calling it your patronus or daemon...does that really make things better, though?

Yes. Avoiding problematic language is one thing, but the idea of feeling spiritually connected to a particular animal or thing is not one culture's inviolable intellectual property.
posted by prize bull octorok at 9:41 AM on November 6, 2014 [7 favorites]

MissySedai: I think you're putting words in people's mouths there quite a bit. Stoneweavers comments are about the common jokey usage of the phrase, not the idiosyncratic personal vision that we keep getting derailed by. I could be wrong, but I don't think they're identical usages.
posted by Potomac Avenue at 9:42 AM on November 6, 2014 [6 favorites]

The proposal that you must confine your cultural identity to your known ancestry is, let's just say, problematic. For one example, in the Americas in particular there are very large numbers of people whose detailed ancestry is all but unknowable, and they may variously embrace or repudiate bits of it they do know about. For another, anyone of Celtic ancestry, particularly on the European continent, has very little of substance to go on. The only reasonable answer is to butt out and let people think and feel what they wish, and that's a good default position to take anyway.
posted by George_Spiggott at 9:42 AM on November 6, 2014 [10 favorites]

xarnop: It's ever popular that people want a divine that gives them magical gifts, guidance or a sense of meaning, without asking to actually follow the hard path of people a good person or living out powerful duties to serve the great forces of compassion. In this world of suffering, choosing to take that on can be excruciating and difficult. While among the great spirits there may be some who love to hand out candy to children- you're not really practicing the compassionate arts unless you're willing to get your hands dirty, let your heart be weighed by the suffering of humans and other beings in your communities and families, and agree to use the gifts of the divine for the actual good purposes they are meant for- bringing about a healthy compassionate harmonious world for all beings.

My problem with "patronis" and "daemon" is exactly the same as the common use of "spirit animal." It's entirely Jungian and self-centered. My relationship with Mouse includes a bunch of dietary taboos because I can't exactly have a relationship with shrink wrap, styrofoam, and a meat diaper. While my humanness colors that relationship, that relationship is grounded on the premise that non-human beings inherently have religious and moral rights. "Spirit animal" to me reads rather like, "I'm a Disney fan." It's a symbol of self-identity, along with casual fursonas and sparkledogs.

The conflict isn't just about words, but about ontological and metaphysical worldviews. A relationship with those beings is a two-way street, and external to the self.

OverlappingElvis: What if I don't have ancestors? Seriously, I don't have a traditional culture; I'm American. I guess I could get myself DNA-typed to figure out what language to use, but for me the concept I believe in is best named by the words I'm not going to say. Please don't make me use a word invented to sell books to children.

Well, there's a fair bit of work in progress right now to reconstruct or create earth-centered spiritualities. There's Abram's neo-animist phenomenology (ignore his linguistics), Wison's agnostic biophilia, and Orr's Druidic animism. You can tap into Buddhist teachings for western audiences (such as Thich Nhat Hanh). Deep ecology, transcendentalist, and environmentalist thought might also be good working points.

But the exact phrase "spirit animal" is tainted and can be better expressed through transitive verbs: worship, venerate, respect, honor, speak with, listen to, learn from.
posted by CBrachyrhynchos at 9:43 AM on November 6, 2014 [5 favorites]

The Card Cheat: That's a great example of why it used to be kinda funny to joke about SAs. Because there were dead serious goofballs like Segal appropriating Indian culture willy-nilly and for cheap "primitive wisdom" points without any research or thought. So LOL at Stephen Segal, yes. But that movie came out 20 years ago, and was the tail end of that kind of crap. So now, when people talk about SAs, there's no referent (or the referent has diminished). Some jokes have a shelf-life, this is one. At this point the target has disappeared, so all the shots hit are the people that the joke was meant to defend in the first place. Imho.
posted by Potomac Avenue at 9:43 AM on November 6, 2014 [2 favorites]

Not sure where I heard it but someone once told me that a spirit animal is supposed to not be an animal you like but, rather, one with whom you've had some kind of difficulty. Basically, some element of nature with whom you've got karma to work out (my apologies if this is inaccurate). It bothers me that an ancient and complex concept has been co-opted by people too vapid to grow their own personalities as a way of stapling an identity to their foreheads. It's reminiscent of the bowdlerization of the concept of karma by American hippies.
posted by Mooseli at 9:44 AM on November 6, 2014 [2 favorites]

Hingeloom.

Hingeloom is the Estonian equivalent of a spirit animal (unless the person's spirit takes the form of a moth. Then it is Hingeliblikas)

I wouldn't use it as a replacement for whatever stupid joke, but it's an example of a similar concept and Estonian mythology is AMAZING.

Here, watch the tale of Suur Tõll. It's better than... lots of things.
posted by louche mustachio at 9:45 AM on November 6, 2014 [13 favorites]

I recommend going through ancestors because not all spirits are good, or united with compassion, and some serve compassion intermittently-- or at least one could imagine this is a possibility, if there were a spirit realm.

To start from scratch, you might want some sort of protection and guidance. No human serves the welfare of all life. We all eat. There is a higher order and familial order of level of duty to different types of life that most beings in this realm follow, and if you're trying to connect with spirits who govern and interact with this reality you might wonder if they don't also have some such values. When you find out your neighbor is ill you don't assume to invite them to live with you and caregive for them for years as you would do your mother. There is a protection in ancestry. It's not the same as the all loving compassion we should all have for all beings, but none of us live that way, this world does not sustain that type of love very well, at present.

We can assume that if there are spirits who interact with this realm they are either not particularly compassionate, or not all powerful, or caught up in the plight of many different beings some even beyond human consciousness who have different types and conflicting needs. You don't just walk up and the receive, the most compassionate deities have not been able to address the level of suffering here and could likely use more people in service of that cause. Family are people or beings you already built relations with, Your ancestors memories and wisdom and strengths and suffering live within you- their most compassionate sincere love that hearts suffered and died to grow over thousands of years into the human heart and mind, live within you. You were born of thousands of years of suffering of battles with terrible foes and conditions of suffering and scarcity, and still love grew through conscious efforts of you ancestors. You would be wiser, and kinder to know them.
posted by xarnop at 9:47 AM on November 6, 2014 [4 favorites]

Yes. Avoiding problematic language is one thing, but the idea of feeling spiritually connected to a particular animal or thing is not one culture's inviolable intellectual property.

So what long-standing animist culture has "Ron Swanson" as a spirit animal?

The only reasonable answer is to butt out and let people think and feel what they wish, and that's a good default position to take anyway.

Except when it's obvious it's not actually their belief. Again, I doubt anyone actually feels like Ron Swanson is guiding their path through life and speaking to them on an intimate level. They're just saying it because they have this romanticized image from someone else's culture that they want to use because they're some combination of lazy, racist (unintentionally or not), or just an asshole.
posted by zombieflanders at 9:49 AM on November 6, 2014 [1 favorite]

louche mustachio: If I wanted an English-language book on that, where would I start?
posted by Leon at 9:50 AM on November 6, 2014 [3 favorites]

So what long-standing animist culture has "Ron Swanson" as a spirit animal?

None, and I'm not trying to defend glib jokes about "spirit animals," so what's your angle here?
posted by prize bull octorok at 9:53 AM on November 6, 2014

louche mustachio: If I wanted an English-language book on that, where would I start?

I wish I knew... I've been looking for a good one myself!

This is a pretty extensive collection of folk tales that might be enlightening, but I am not sure how much it delves into pre-Christian deities and beliefs.
posted by louche mustachio at 10:00 AM on November 6, 2014 [3 favorites]

Also FYI Alex from Target is my rex Nemorensis
posted by prize bull octorok at 10:02 AM on November 6, 2014 [1 favorite]

I don't have much time because my lunch hour is almost over, but this is a good place to start reading if you don't really understand the cultural appropriation aspect.

My spirit animal is apparently a grumpy, balding, ruddily complected middle-aged white guy. :-(™
posted by Devils Rancher at 10:08 AM on November 6, 2014 [2 favorites]

If you think you might be european you could start with what's left of the pagan religions there, ....

What the hell? Why would anyone seriously want to do that. You can't go back.! I say good riddance. Traditional values and social structures were useful for a time in the middle ages or so but I'm not Edmund Burke - I don't believe I had a duty to my ancestors. I suppose I have a more structuralist / functionalist idea of the role of culture and think these attempts to artificially hold on to specific ethnic practices and beliefs are a waste of time.

There is a inexorable march towards universal culture going on, assimilation of all specificities into one monoculture that will likely be dominated by the USA media complex. You can influence the direction but I don't think any minority group will be able to hold out against it.

Also this whole thing about not "offending peoples beliefs" seems nonsensical. How else does anyone bring about change in collective consciousness?

What do you think the Gay rights movement is or the Civil rights movement? It was a battle, a struggle of one world view over another. It was specifically going out there and offending, mocking and belittling others beliefs because you think they are wrong.
posted by mary8nne at 10:11 AM on November 6, 2014 [2 favorites]

I guess anyone of european origin could say something is their heraldic animal? So basically Ron Swanson rampant dexter on field vert.
posted by poffin boffin at 10:12 AM on November 6, 2014 [21 favorites]

It was specifically going out there and offending, mocking and belittling others beliefs because you think they are wrong.

Please don't compare your personal struggle to offend native americans to the struggle of LGBT people and minorities to secure equal human rights for themselves. Thanks.
posted by poffin boffin at 10:13 AM on November 6, 2014 [45 favorites]

Why would anyone seriously want to do that. You can't go back.! I say good riddance. Traditional values and social structures were useful for a time in the middle ages or so but I'm not Edmund Burke - I don't believe I had a duty to my ancestors. I suppose I have a more structuralist / functionalist idea of the role of culture and think these attempts to artificially hold on to specific ethnic practices and beliefs are a waste of time.

So if this is what you really think, then why in the hell are you lobbying so hard for the right to use the phrase "spirit animal", which is itself borrowed from a traditional value system even older than the Middle Ages?

Or does that society's tradition not count because it's not white and so it's okay to be "ironic" about it? Is that what you're saying?
posted by EmpressCallipygos at 10:14 AM on November 6, 2014 [2 favorites]

What do you think the Gay rights movement is or the Civil rights movement? It was a battle, a struggle of one world view over another. It was specifically going out there and offending, mocking and belittling others beliefs because you think they are wrong.

What? No it was not.
posted by sweetkid at 10:15 AM on November 6, 2014 [20 favorites]

At this point I can't tell if mary8nne is trolling or actually speaking sincerely. . . but equating social movements of the marginalized for equal rights, with mockery of the collective consciousness, and also with with justifying using terms a marginalized group finds offensive . . . that's just really super weird.

Civil rights movements draw strongly on the collective consciousness and shared ideologies--of justice, fairness, and equality. People engaging in sit-ins in segregated restaurants were not "mocking white people" by so doing. I don't fight for trans rights by attacking and belittling cis gender people.

And one more time, punching up and punching down are very different things.
posted by DrMew at 10:26 AM on November 6, 2014 [9 favorites]

I just tell everyone I was bit by a radioactive capybara, giving me extra lounging powers
posted by ckape at 10:27 AM on November 6, 2014 [1 favorite]

The idea of focusing on one's own ancestral/cultural traditions and beliefs makes sense in that if one is trying to engage in a spiritual tradition of connecting with nature, one's family is part of that nature. Cutting off that connection doesn't make sense in the context of the stated goal of connecting with nature or spirit.
posted by jaguar at 10:29 AM on November 6, 2014 [3 favorites]

"So if this is what you really think, then why in the hell are you lobbying so hard for the right to use the phrase "spirit animal", which is itself borrowed from a traditional value system even older than the Middle Ages?

Or does that society's tradition not count because it's not white and so it's okay to be "ironic" about it? Is that what you're saying?"

The phrase "spirit animal" is not "older than the middle ages". It's an english word. The different cultures who have such a concept have different words for them.

Actually, I'd like to know which Native American beliefs correspond to the concept of personal "spirit animals" as, from what I understand, "totems" are guiding spirits for whole clans and are not individualistic.
posted by I-baLL at 10:30 AM on November 6, 2014

There is a inexorable march towards universal culture going on, assimilation of all specificities into one monoculture that will likely be dominated by the USA media complex. You can influence the direction but I don't think any minority group will be able to hold out against it.

So...we might as well appropriate beliefs from minority cultures because it's going to happen anyway? What?
posted by chaiminda at 10:31 AM on November 6, 2014 [1 favorite]

> Sure, you have the right to your beliefs. But don't crap on those of other people should be your first rule.

When did that happen? It never has been that way, not into the deepest past of which we have anything passing for records.
posted by jfuller at 10:36 AM on November 6, 2014

Some of my ancestors were probably Celts. I am not a Celt. I have no connection with Celtic paganism. Even my ancestors who left Ireland for this country almost 200 years ago were most likely several generations or more removed from any Celtic faith heritage if they had any to begin with. To my knowledge, I've never met a real live pagan Celt, but I've known plenty of real live honest to goodness Native Americans. If I were to embrace an animal totem as part of my spiritual beliefs, how would it be any less appropriation of another culture if I used Celtic terms that are completely foreign to me than if I used the Native American terms that I am more familiar with?

I am not defending jokes about spirit animals or casual naming of animals or celebrities that people kind of like as being their "spirit animals." But it seems a bit ridiculous to tell people with genuine beliefs in this sort of thing that it's okay to adopt a different foreign culture's faith rather than Native Americans' just because some great to the nth degree grandpa they've never heard of might or might not have practiced something similar hundreds or thousands of years ago.
posted by Dojie at 10:37 AM on November 6, 2014 [6 favorites]

There is a inexorable march towards universal culture going on

You are wrong. There might be an inexorable march toward more people learning about one another's cultures and (one hopes) respecting them and coexisting, but the Melting Pot idea of the future is way outdated.
posted by tzikeh at 10:37 AM on November 6, 2014 [6 favorites]

The phrase "spirit animal" is not "older than the middle ages". It's an english word. The different cultures who have such a concept have different words for them.

Don't be obtuse.

When did [crapping on others' beliefs] happen? It never has been that way, not into the deepest past of which we have anything passing for records.

It didn't happen in the sense of anyone being all "ha ha this spirit animal shit is stupid I'mma start saying it because it's stupid" or anything. But - there are loooooooads of examples of people, some of them in this very thread, who have said "uh, so, when you say that, where you use 'that's my spirit animal' in the sense where all you mean is 'I really dig that thing', it kind of cheapens something that is actually a thing in my religion, so it'd be great if you didn't say that, kthnx," and other people responding "don't be stupid I'mma say it however I want because who cares".
posted by EmpressCallipygos at 10:47 AM on November 6, 2014 [1 favorite]

Just seconding enjoymoreradio in that I believe the "power animal" Fight Club scene is sort of an important pop culture incident re: the phrase's popularity.
posted by Kat Masback at 10:51 AM on November 6, 2014

I think it is a good rule of thumb that if you are part of a majority (white, male, whatever) and someone of a minority tells you they are offended by X thing, you should respect that and not continue to do/say X thing even if you don't exactly understand why it is offensive, simply because you can never really understand what it is like to go through life as a member of that minority.

Just thought of an analogy for the punching-up punching-down thing:

It's like, if you're the white guy and you're using "spirit animal" just because, you're kind of coming across as the big grade school bully who goes up to a smaller kid and says "gimme your baseball hat," and the smaller kid says "no, it's my hat" and the bully says "oh, well, too bad for you, I like it" and then beats up the smaller kid and takes his hat.

It smacks of "I know you don't like it but I don't care and I'm bigger than you anyway so nyah nyah what I say goes".
posted by EmpressCallipygos at 10:51 AM on November 6, 2014 [3 favorites]

how would it be any less appropriation of another culture if I used Celtic terms that are completely foreign to me than if I used the Native American terms that I am more familiar with?

I think the logical solution is to adopt the mythology of The Highlander, but I will defer to those in the thread who seem knowledgeable about exactly what people whose ancestors came from Europe should believe in and how.
posted by Hoopo at 10:56 AM on November 6, 2014 [6 favorites]

I think it's more like , "oh, I like your hat, I'm going to get one just like it!" It's not a question at this point in history of forcing Native Americans to give up their beliefs. It's just a question of whether it's okay to copy them.
posted by Dojie at 10:57 AM on November 6, 2014 [2 favorites]

Can we just keep a running list of which demographic groups are allowed to use which words, phrases, and ideas in which contexts?

Just so I can keep up. Because I don't want to destroy other peoples' cultures, but flame threads like this just make me sick to my stomach.
posted by jeisme at 10:58 AM on November 6, 2014 [3 favorites]

Except the hat in question looks like this, and I think we as a species have agreed on the conclusion that no, you should not wear that hat.
posted by Holy Zarquon's Singing Fish at 11:01 AM on November 6, 2014 [1 favorite]

I'm not sure what's so confusing or controversial about saying "in general do your best not to deliberately mock or minimize the cultural beliefs, practices, languages, whatever, of minorities like, ever, but really especially work on not doing that if you are part of the historically oppressive majority". Add a side order of "really don't double down on your potentially accidental bigotry because you're angry/upset/confused about having been called out on it" and you'll be good to go.
posted by poffin boffin at 11:06 AM on November 6, 2014 [38 favorites]

Beliefs are not hats! And they do not have to be diminished in the sharing. But in this case especially, care is needed to make sure they are not.
posted by Zalzidrax at 11:07 AM on November 6, 2014 [1 favorite]

The idea of focusing on one's own ancestral/cultural traditions and beliefs makes sense in that if one is trying to engage in a spiritual tradition of connecting with nature, one's family is part of that nature.

>So is everyone else's family.

Yes, but again, honoring connections by denying one's own close connections, and their close connections, and their close connections, on up through the past, and denying how those connections have influenced and continue to influence you in the present, is counterproductive.

And yes, of course other things and people influence us as well, and no one's saying otherwise.
posted by jaguar at 11:08 AM on November 6, 2014

I suppose I have a more structuralist / functionalist idea of the role of culture and think these attempts to artificially hold on to specific ethnic practices and beliefs are a waste of time.

I really think you are failing to grasp that there is a difference between, like, the march of scientific and intellectual progress that distances us from outdated ideas about something like ill humors causing disease, and the deliberate genocide of Native Americans and other indigenous peoples throughout the world that has robbed many of them of the cultures and religions and histories they would otherwise have. The gross implication you're making here is that if your people are the victims of genocide, well, too bad, best let go of what's left of your culture and assimilate into that melting pot because Resistance Is Futile!

Cultural appropriation is bad, and it is especially bad when you're appropriating one of the few things left to minority cultures that the majority has done its level best to wipe out.
posted by yasaman at 11:08 AM on November 6, 2014 [12 favorites]

Can we just keep a running list of which demographic groups are allowed to use which words, phrases, and ideas in which contexts?

Do you mean that in earnest? Because you probably do have a pretty good sense of many words, phrases, and ideas that are upsetting or offensive or misused. Most people don't swear in front of the grandmas, don't tell Holocaust jokes at synagogues, and don't walk around dressed in blackface.

This is just one more thing for that list. Native Americans don't like the term "spirit animal," so find a substitute. Easy enough.
posted by maxsparber at 11:10 AM on November 6, 2014 [12 favorites]

Beliefs are not hats!

I WAS MAKING AN ANALOGY GOOD GOD
posted by EmpressCallipygos at 11:11 AM on November 6, 2014

Can we just keep a running list of which demographic groups are allowed to use which words, phrases, and ideas in which contexts?

Do you mean that in earnest? Because you probably do have a pretty good sense of many words, phrases, and ideas that are upsetting or offensive or misused. Most people don't swear in front of the grandmas, don't tell Holocaust jokes at synagogues, and don't walk around dressed in blackface.

This - also Greg Nog has covered what you're "allowed" to do.
posted by sweetkid at 11:16 AM on November 6, 2014

mary8nne, you're working from a false premise. Maybe your use of this joke is part of a wider system of calculated mockery against all beliefs of a type you think is on its way out, but that is not where this joke comes from. At least in this part of the world--which remains deeply religious on the whole--it's just another piece in a long history of ridicule and disrespect that, in print and politics, runs in one direction only. If I'd heard the joke predominantly from anti-theists or at least agnostics, I might believe you, but I haven't. These quips are bits of thoughtless fun with beliefs that in this country are associated with marginalized peoples, by people who in many cases would take umbrage if the same were done every day to them and they had no platform from which they could defend themselves and trust that they'd be heard.
posted by dogurthr at 11:17 AM on November 6, 2014

I think the logical solution is to adopt the mythology of The Highlander

But there can be only one!
posted by octobersurprise at 11:19 AM on November 6, 2014

But there can be only one!

That's going to solve the problem of cultural appropriate real quick.
posted by Dojie at 11:21 AM on November 6, 2014 [1 favorite]

There are plenty of spiritual traditions that welcome new people from various cultures into the teachings. If you are welcomed into such teaching it's a delightful wonderful thing to share and learn from each other or develop our own practices with shared ideas and wisdom.

If you are a white person living in the US, it's in very poor taste to choose native religions here for your own personal benefit when you are not standing up to the task of actual serving the tribe or knowing what they think of that use. I think we live in a wonderful time of communication and growth and learning, we can lift each other up with wisdom and compassion from many traditions, but that should include respect of the actual living people you are borrowing from and how they feel about it.

If you believe in native spirituality than you should be fighting for the sacred lands along side the lakota who need to be lifted up right now from their spiritual brothers and sisters. IF that is what you are than be it.
posted by xarnop at 11:24 AM on November 6, 2014 [6 favorites]

The basic thrust of the original piece, "please don't use the term, it still means important things to other people and they don't appreciate the joke," is easy enough to accept. Don't be a dick, etc. But reading the comments in this thread and elsewhere get me all grumpy and defensive and want to say stupid things.

In the concrete examples, the objection seems totally reasonable, but the more abstract the arguments get, the more irritating they feel and the more I want to say stupid things in response. Weird.

Time to back away from the internet.
posted by Harvey Jerkwater at 11:27 AM on November 6, 2014 [4 favorites]

> Also this whole thing about not "offending peoples beliefs" seems nonsensical. How else does anyone bring about change in collective consciousness

Forced boarding schools, prohibiting the use of native languages, and banning native religious practices have almost done the job here in the US.
posted by The corpse in the library at 11:27 AM on November 6, 2014 [10 favorites]

Is this a belief that needs changing?
posted by maxsparber at 11:29 AM on November 6, 2014 [1 favorite]

What do you think the Gay rights movement is or the Civil rights movement? It was a battle, a struggle of one world view over another.

ok also sorry but i've been laughing about this for like 10 minutes now while imagining a bunch of white supremacists earnestly singing their own horribly offensive version of If I Had A Hammer
posted by poffin boffin at 11:30 AM on November 6, 2014 [8 favorites]

This is just one more thing for that list. Native Americans don't like the term "spirit animal," so find a substitute. Easy enough.

So all Native Americans object to non-Natives using the term, maxsparber? As far as I understand, totem animals are primarily used by tribes/nations from the Pacific Northwest. There's a lot of Native groups with religions that don't incorporate the "spirit animal" concept at all. And have we taken a poll? If the majority of people with ancestors whose religions involved spirit animals object to the use of term by anyone else (in any context, not just in intentionally derogatory ones), then I will eject the phrase from my vocabulary happily. But I'm not even sure that's the case.

Is it primarily Native Americans who are making this argument, even? I can't tell. On the internet, everyone shows up in the same font. I like it that way.

And yes, I was being a little facetious, but I would like a list. Because I earnestly don't want to offend anyone, but wading through piles of flamey crap like this thread to know what's okay is a pain in the ass.
posted by jeisme at 11:30 AM on November 6, 2014 [2 favorites]

So all Native Americans object to non-Natives using the term, maxsparber?

Does it have to be a census? How many must object for the objection to be taken seriously?
posted by maxsparber at 11:32 AM on November 6, 2014 [9 favorites]

I'm of the native american persuasion, and it is a lot of fun watching white people argue about shit like this.
posted by nerdler at 11:35 AM on November 6, 2014 [10 favorites]

Is it primarily Native Americans who are making this argument, even?

In my experience, yes, not that it necessarily matters. See the comment I made earlier about this active controversy at my university, which has many Native American students, where these "jokes" have been going on for years in a way that discouraged Native American students from engaging in student government, and which practice was finally ended after being directly challenged by Native American student groups as being offensive and hurtful.
posted by dialetheia at 11:36 AM on November 6, 2014 [7 favorites]

If you've reached the part of your argument where you are rules lawyering whether or not native americans and first nations and all the many and varied indigenous people of the americas all wholly and unilaterally agree upon a single point of contention it is probably best to instead reflect on why you can't just let it go.
posted by poffin boffin at 11:36 AM on November 6, 2014 [21 favorites]

"Does it have to be a census? How many must object for the objection to be taken seriously?"

Honestly? I'd like to see why it's offensive. I'd like to see which belief it copies. With the headdress I could find a clear and exact cultural practice that had a ton of meaning and I could see why wearing a headdress is considered to be disrespectful. But the concept of personal "spirit animals"? That is what I'd like to see an elaboration on. Which Native American tribe is offended? which native American tribe has a belief in your own personal spirit animal?

I'm also ignoring the fact that tons of cultures have the concept of personal guides and I'm ignoring the fact that people are arguing about the use of the term "spirit animal" as if that exact phrase is a Native American word.
posted by I-baLL at 11:38 AM on November 6, 2014 [2 favorites]

Honestly? I'd like to see why it's offensive. I'd like to see which belief it copies.

Here's a starting point: Native Appropriations had discussed this at length.
posted by maxsparber at 11:41 AM on November 6, 2014 [1 favorite]

maxsparber: The second link on there:

"The sweat lodge/spirit animals scene. This is the scene that irked me the most, and the movie could have been completely successful without it. The team goes in a “traditional” sweat lodge, and when they emerge, are asked what “vision” they saw. They each name an animal and are given that symbol on a necklace as their “spirit animal.” So, from my limited knowledge and research through internet friends, sweat lodges as they were presented aren’t a tradish Iroquois thing, nor are “spirit animals” (though someone said the animals were representative of the Iroquois clan systems?)–and it just felt really stereotypical and unnecessary to me."

(emphasis mine)

The first link:

"Then we’ve got the “warrior spirit” and “brings the magical spirit-medicine”–basically every line of this description reads like a bad Indian fantasy novel. We’ve got the warrior stereotype, the connected with nature and the environment stereotype, the wise teacher stereotype, the mystical healer stereotype, the musical stereotype…on and on and on."
posted by I-baLL at 11:45 AM on November 6, 2014

Good lord, white people. No one is going to haul you off to jail if you use "spirit animal" or sing along with this song. But when someone says "hey, cut it out" why can't you just fucking drop it? Nothing will happen to you! You can live the whole rest of your life unaffected by not being able to use those words. No one will deny you a job because you don't use the phrase "spirit animal." You will not live in poverty because you can't say "n*gga." You will not face additional airport screenings because you can't say something is retarded or gay. Your life will go on just as it always has.

Quit. Fucking. Whining.
posted by desjardins at 11:48 AM on November 6, 2014 [28 favorites]

I'm not clear on the point you're making, i-ball.
posted by maxsparber at 11:48 AM on November 6, 2014 [1 favorite]

maxsparber: The link you provided is filled with people saying that "spirit animals" the way people use them isn't a Native American thing and that it's a stereotype that's associated with Native Americans.
posted by I-baLL at 11:50 AM on November 6, 2014

I see louche mustachio beat me to the concept of a hingeloom. Which translates directly back into English as soul animal, as I understand: hinge (soul) + loom (animal). Which is close enough to spirit animal that I've used one in exchange for the other, for which I do apologize and will make a point to quit doing.

I don't talk much about my agnostic-panentheistic-animist leanings on Mefi, because that's.. not really a thing we do here. It's a big thing for me to learn about, traditions and myth and folklore, all the things that were erased by the Soviets and then the homogenization that happens when your family is from a Soviet-satellite country in the age of McCarthyism. None of us kids and grandkids learned the old language, except the swearing. (I'm second- or third-generation off the boat, depending on which grandparent you count from; one born in Saaremaa and the other in New York City.)

One thing that did survive though, in my family, is that EVERYBODY is welcome, so by all means take hingeloom and run with it.
posted by cmyk at 11:52 AM on November 6, 2014 [6 favorites]

EmpressCallipygos:

I'm not being obtuse. People are saying that the term "spirit animal" is offensive and asking for a different term to be used for the same concept. Except that "spirit animal" is not a Native American term so....

"It didn't happen in the sense of anyone being all "ha ha this spirit animal shit is stupid I'mma start saying it because it's stupid" or anything. But - there are loooooooads of examples of people, some of them in this very thread, who have said "uh, so, when you say that, where you use 'that's my spirit animal' in the sense where all you mean is 'I really dig that thing', it kind of cheapens something that is actually a thing in my religion, so it'd be great if you didn't say that, kthnx," and other people responding "don't be stupid I'mma say it however I want because who cares"."

Except that I've yet to see somebody explain what is actually a thing in their religion. All I've seen is that people are saying that other people find the actual term "spirit animal" offensive but nobody can point to an explanation of why.
posted by I-baLL at 11:53 AM on November 6, 2014

i-baLL, again, the students advocating against the use of these "jokes" at my university do a good job of explaining why in this link. The issue is that it trivializes their beliefs. Here's a relevant excerpt:

Mason, who is an Alaska Native, said spirit animals are very personal to her.
“It’s not something I would speak about publicly,” she said, adding the concern doesn’t just affect her.
“There are thousands of American citizens that believe things the way I believe,” she said.
Swaney, of the Hidatsa tribe, was offended because some of the traditions she grew up with involved spirit animals.
“There are specific ceremonies that are still practiced today,” Swaney said, “that I don’t think are anybody else’s business to just trivialize.”

posted by dialetheia at 11:54 AM on November 6, 2014 [4 favorites]

The link you provided is filled with people saying that "spirit animals" the way people use them isn't a Native American thing and that it's a stereotype that's associated with Native Americans.

Well, sort of. It's saying the way it was used in that instance isn't the way it is used by Native Americans, but is still held up as an example of appropriation.

Native Americans also don't use warbonnets the way white people do on Halloween, but that doesn't mean appropriation isn't happening, or that there isn't an issue with it.

Here's another resource:

Many members of the Native community possess what is known as a Spirit Animal, also called a Spirit Guide, or Animal Totem. The Spirit Animal is often considered to be a gift sent from the Creator to guide us on life’s journey. Unlike what google searches or random websites might tell you, it is impossible and cheapening to take a quiz and determine your Spirit Animal. Rather, the Spirit Animal you are meant to have will choose you.
posted by maxsparber at 11:55 AM on November 6, 2014 [2 favorites]

Late to the party, dammit.
There is a inexorable march towards universal culture going on, assimilation of all specificities into one monoculture that will likely be dominated by the USA media complex. You can influence the direction but I don't think any minority group will be able to hold out against it.

Um, some of us are actually very much against mono-culture and homogeneous societies, specifically because of the inherent weaknesses caused by those kinds of structures.

Actually, there is a growing "movement" to work towards dismantling the mono-culture, because, well, frankly it is only suited to a particular group of people (white, upper-middle class, capitalists).

The rest of us (you know, the other 6.5 billion people on the planet) kind of want to live here too. So no, you can't assimilate us. We will not let you.

If you want a universal culture, maybe think about building it around the diversity of humans on the planet, not modeled after one particular phenotype that happens to be on top at the moment.
posted by daq at 11:59 AM on November 6, 2014 [6 favorites]

dialetheia, I don't go to the UM, so I don't keep tabs on student politics, but I live 10 blocks away, and while there are plenty of Native students (whose objections deserve to be heard), I know that the student body who voted on this is primarily white.

If "spirit animal" jokes have been used by assholes in the ASUM to alienate Native students, then I support the ban. But if we're talking about people the internet using the phrase because it succinctly describes the feeling of identifying strongly with a person, thing, or animal, then I think the objections are a little ridiculous.

I don't think a census needs to be taken.I'm not going to call things "my spirit animal" anymore, but I like the concept enough that I think we should find a non-offensive alternative (I like Patronus!) but more and more I get the feeling that arguments like this on the internet are mainly driven by a minority group of people from all ethnic backgrounds who love the attention you can get when you start a fight.
posted by jeisme at 12:01 PM on November 6, 2014 [1 favorite]

I am Native. So-called “spirit animals” are part of my spiritual tradition, which is Metis-Anishinaabe ...

Yes, people around the world have and had similar traditions of spirit helpers, who are frequently animals. HOWEVER, the concept of spirit animals in popular culture came from anthropologists’ descriptions of Native American religions (see Durkheim, The Elementary Forms of Religious Life). It doesn’t matter if the ancient Celts had similar practices, because spirit animals are associated in the popular imagination with Natives, not Celts ...

The fact that spirit animals in popular culture are a bastardized form of Native traditions does not mean they are not appropriative or harmful. Why? Because the popular idea of it comes to supersede the original meaning, infantilizing our traditions. ...

posted by maxsparber at 12:02 PM on November 6, 2014 [7 favorites]

Denying that people are referring to the Native American tradition when they say Spirit Animal is ridiculous. Didn't you see that Stephen Segal clip? The fact that it's wildly inaccurate IS ITSELF PART OF WHY IT IS OFFENSIVE. The jokers don't even care enough to figure out what they are referring.

It's like someone having a "Toga Party" where you celebrate such classic Roman myths as "Hercules" and "Having a Symposium" and everyone wears Viking hats except there are bunch of real extant Romans still right there watching you do it going "Hey um yo, that's not...wait what?"
posted by Potomac Avenue at 12:02 PM on November 6, 2014 [5 favorites]

I will say that the refrain of "but I don't understand why people are offended, please educate me!!!!" gets old pretty quick. If something hurts people, it hurts people, and it's important to respect that.

this is a good point. If you step on someone's toe, and they say "ow, you stepped on my toe", you don't ask them to explain "why did my stepping on your toe cause you to experience pain?"
posted by EmpressCallipygos at 12:03 PM on November 6, 2014 [3 favorites]

I get the feeling that arguments like this on the internet are mainly driven by a minority group of people from all ethnic backgrounds who love the attention you can get when you start a fight.

there are native americans right here in this fucking thread saying that it's fucking offensive

sorry that's not enough for you i guess
posted by poffin boffin at 12:04 PM on November 6, 2014 [26 favorites]

ugh fuck this entire thread i'm not getting banned today
posted by poffin boffin at 12:05 PM on November 6, 2014 [7 favorites]

you don't ask them to explain "why did my stepping on your toe cause you to experience pain?"

Or, how do I know you have a toe? How do I know it hurt? When I step on my own toe, it feels fine. My culture has toes too. How many of your people are actually opposed to toe stepping, or are you just a minority opinion desperate for attention and getting off on being angry?
posted by maxsparber at 12:05 PM on November 6, 2014 [17 favorites]

more and more I get the feeling that arguments like this on the internet are mainly driven by a minority group of people from all ethnic backgrounds who love the attention you can get when you start a fight.

Exactly! People who want to just keep doing whatever they feel like without regard to the effect their behavior may have on others certainly do seem to love the attention they get.

But I don't think that's the group about whom you're talking.
posted by winna at 12:06 PM on November 6, 2014 [3 favorites]

So all Native Americans object to non-Natives using the term, maxsparber?

I went to a college that used to have an Indian as its mascot. I was there almost 20 years after the administration dropped it, but there were still students and many alums who insisted on their right to make the stupid war whoop at games and wear the stupid t-shirt with a "brave" on it (the t-shirt was created and given out by the off-campus conservative student paper), and every goddamn year the stupid off-campus paper insisted on running an article about how they had done a survey of [some number] of tribal leaders and how [some percent] were TOTALLY FINE with the Indian symbol blahblahblah.

Didn't matter that Native students currently at the school said "We don't like this, it's offensive and gross."

Shit. 25 years later and this shit still pisses me off.
posted by rtha at 12:06 PM on November 6, 2014 [6 favorites]

poffin boffin, this thread is more than enough to get me to stop using the term. I said so in the comment you quoted from.

I don't want to fan the flames here, but sometimes arguments about cultural appropriation get under my craw because I love a lot of different things from a lot of different cultures, and being told I can't use them respectfully because I don't have the right parents or genes hurts.
posted by jeisme at 12:08 PM on November 6, 2014 [3 favorites]

What do you think the Gay rights movement is or the Civil rights movement? It was a battle, a struggle of one world view over another. It was specifically going out there and offending, mocking and belittling others beliefs because you think they are wrong.

As someone who has repeatedly defended forms of queer activism that were and are considered "offensive" on the blue, hahahahahahahaha gtfo
posted by en forme de poire at 12:10 PM on November 6, 2014 [6 favorites]

Thanks for the resources. I have stuff to read now.

"Swaney, of the Hidatsa tribe, was offended because some of the traditions she grew up with involved spirit animals.
“There are specific ceremonies that are still practiced today,” Swaney said, “that I don’t think are anybody else’s business to just trivialize.”"

Who is trivializing the ceremonies? The concept of "spirit animals" are not specific to Native American cultures.

"Denying that people are referring to the Native American tradition when they say Spirit Animal is ridiculous. "

Except that it's not ridiculous.

I posted 2 links above:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Totemism

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tutelary_deity

Claiming that "spirit animals" are referring to the Native American tradition is very limiting. The internet's use of the term "spirit animals" is not making fun of any Native American ritual or ceremony. How is the very concept of "spirit animal" being used offensive?

Yes, some people are offended. But i'm offended that somebody can claim that a concept that exists worldwide can be considered to be the sole property of a few groups.

This is not the headdress issue where the headdress is a ceremony practiced by certain Native American tribes and it's easy to see why it's offensive. It's more like face paint. It's like saying "We use face paint in various religious ceremonies and because you use facepaint for fun it is trivializing those ceremonies."
posted by I-baLL at 12:10 PM on November 6, 2014

Or, how do I know you have a toe? How do I know it hurt? When I step on my own toe, it feels fine. My culture has toes too. How many of your people are actually opposed to toe stepping, or are you just a minority opinion desperate for attention and getting off on being angry?

"Just to be safe, until you can answer all of those questions to my satisfaction, along with any others I come up with later, I'm going to keep stepping on your toe every time we're in the same room. It's the only way to fight censorship, which I think we can both agree is the real evil here."
posted by Holy Zarquon's Singing Fish at 12:12 PM on November 6, 2014 [19 favorites]

If "spirit animal" jokes have been used by assholes in the ASUM to alienate Native students, then I support the ban. But if we're talking about people the internet using the phrase because it succinctly describes the feeling of identifying strongly with a person, thing, or animal, then I think the objections are a little ridiculous.

That's great, and you're allowed to think it's ridiculous. Nobody is going to haul you off to the gulag! Some people may think you're an asshole if you use "spirit animal" or defend its use. I, for instance, think you sound like a bit of an asshole. It's really up to you to decide whether you care or not. That's the beauty of free speech.
posted by ArbitraryAndCapricious at 12:12 PM on November 6, 2014 [3 favorites]

while there are plenty of Native students (whose objections deserve to be heard), I know that the student body who voted on this is primarily white.

So? They only took a vote after objections by Native American student groups, and I don't really see what the race of the electorate has to do with it. It just means that the white students in ASUM are capable of responding appropriately when someone objects to a hurtful practice, which is more than I can say for some in this thread (not you though - I appreciate that you're open to dropping the phrase).

But if we're talking about people the internet using the phrase because it succinctly describes the feeling of identifying strongly with a person, thing, or animal, then I think the objections are a little ridiculous.

When someone calls Ron Swanson or a furby their "spirit animal," that is trivializing a deeply-held belief for many people. It doesn't just mean "identifying strongly with" in its appropriate usage, and that's exactly the trivializing that's at issue here.

Good to know there are other Missoula MeFites though! Yay!
posted by dialetheia at 12:13 PM on November 6, 2014 [2 favorites]

Also, can we get a consensus on what is being considered offensive here?

Is the term "spirit animal" offensive?

Is it saying that something is your spirit animal that's offensive?

" this thread is more than enough to get me to stop using the term."

This is what bothers me. People acting like the term "spirit animal" in itself is somehow taboo and offensive.

In the college it wasn't the term that was banned. It was this ceremony:

"ASUM faculty adviser Garon Smith suggested naming spirit animals as an icebreaker at an ASUM retreat in 2008, and somehow the activity snowballed. "

"“Somehow it has just become the standard question any candidate gets asked when they’re sworn in,” Smith said. “I think if somebody is offended, it’s probably time to drop it.”

That time has come. Last night, the student government passed a resolution which bars the question from being asked at any other meetings this year.

President Asa Hohman wrote the resolution after he learned the question had offended some students on campus."

There was a ceremony where you had to pick your spirit animal. That's what was offensive and got banned. The actual term though?
posted by I-baLL at 12:14 PM on November 6, 2014 [1 favorite]

Part of the problem here is we're tangling up the adoption of a belief system and spiritual practices with a cutesy internet meme.

I think if you're doing the former with any degree of sincerity as a part of improving your life, emotional health or whatever, your DNA doesn't have a thing to do with it and anyone who wants to give you grief about it can legitimately be told mind their own beezwax.

If on the other hand you're doing it as a cutesy social networking meme you're by definition doing it to get some kind of response from others -- or why do it -- so don't be surprised if some of that feedback is strongly negative, and they're not violating your civil rights by giving you an earful.
posted by George_Spiggott at 12:16 PM on November 6, 2014 [7 favorites]

ArbitraryAndCapricious, I've said it twice, I'm never going to us the S-word again! You have every right to think I'm an asshole.
posted by jeisme at 12:17 PM on November 6, 2014

Also, can we get a consensus on what is being considered offensive here?

Whose voices do you feel are currently unheard in this discussion?
posted by KathrynT at 12:17 PM on November 6, 2014 [1 favorite]

This is why I never comment...
posted by jeisme at 12:18 PM on November 6, 2014 [2 favorites]

I don't want to fan the flames here, but sometimes arguments about cultural appropriation get under my craw because I love a lot of different things from a lot of different cultures, and being told I can't use them respectfully because I don't have the right parents or genes hurts.

Unfortunately, that goes with the territory. There is a lot that you can make use of -- most of everything, in fact. There are very, very few expressions of culture that people put a velvet rope around and say "This is ours." I can speak for a few of these, as I am Jewish. Eat bagels! Tell stories about dybbuks! Learn Yiddish!

ALL THESE WORLDS ARE YOURS EXCEPT EUROPA.

The sorts of practices that wind up with velvet ropes tend to be very private, very specific, and integrally tied to a cultural identity. So let's say it's the Torah scroll in Judaism -- the meticulously-made, hand-crafted, tradition-rich text of the Bible, which is treated with such care that it is buried like a human, and such respect that it is carried in a procession around the synagogue, like an honored guest. It is such an emblematic expression of Judaism that antisemites explicitly target Torah scrolls -- they were burned in the streets during the Kishinev pogrom.

If people suddenly started wearing them as overcoats, you can bet there would be complaints. And it would not do to say "Oh, these are just representations of a foolish series of fairies tales." Neither would it due to say "Other religions have the Bible! Other religions have scrolls!" Not would it do to say "But I want it, and how rude to deny me!"

It would be disrespectful. And the Jews have been mistreated enough, including their scrolls.

This is what's going on with the spirit animal thing. We're taking the most private expression of a faith and wearing it as an overcoat.

Look, if people actually are interested in Native religions, believe it or not, it is possible to participate to a certain extent. And nobody seems to be complaining when "Spirit animal" is used within that context. It's the appropriation of the word, the stripping of its original meaning, and the stripping Native Americans of the right to determine that meaning, that is objectionable. And Native Americans, and especially their spirituality, have been mistreated enough.
posted by maxsparber at 12:20 PM on November 6, 2014 [31 favorites]

And re: the whole punching-up vs. punching down thing, regardless of which way you're punching it's better just to not punch anyone at all.

That's all I'm trying to do. I should have RTFA more closely before I said anything.
posted by jeisme at 12:20 PM on November 6, 2014 [2 favorites]

Look, if people actually are interested in Native religions, believe it or not, it is possible to participate to a certain extent. And nobody seems to be complaining when "Spirit animal" is used within that context. It's the appropriation of the word, the stripping of its original meaning, and the stripping Native Americans of the right to determine that meaning, that is objectionable. And Native Americans, and especially their spirituality, have been mistreated enough.

I totally agree.
posted by jeisme at 12:22 PM on November 6, 2014 [1 favorite]

ALL THESE WORLDS ARE YOURS EXCEPT EUROPA.

But goddammit HAL, that's my favorite Jovian moon!
posted by jeisme at 12:24 PM on November 6, 2014

"I love a lot of different things from a lot of different cultures, and being told I can't use them respectfully because I don't have the right parents or genes hurts."

Native people are currently told they can't have access to their sacred lands because they don't have the right genes. They are suffering from acts of war.

That hurts. You might want to recalibrate whose pain you are worried about or what kind of pain deserves more pressing attention right now.

Possibly if you fix the state of war on the lands of native people and access to sacred sites and help with rebuilding the community and assets and wealth of the land-- maybe you would find a more welcoming community for you to learn and take from and grow with.

Currently, on the whole, white people tend to take from native people, not give. The fact that ALL THIS fucking land is not enough-- you need a little concept you call spirit animal that doesn't even mean all that much to you because you don't even actually believe in animistic religion but maybe sort of think it's neat sometimes is totally messed up. Why do you need to use the term if you don't even believe in it? If you believe in it why aren't you sobbing in grief over the sate of these lands and the people who for thousands of years did a much better job cultivating and respecting the land here? Why aren't you rising up to do any tiny thing you could do to help restore and make things right?

Lkie the first thing, this little tiny thing, listen to actual native people in this thread and be kind instead of reactive? This thing you're being asked to do is not as painful as watching your family going insane from poverty and the effects of heinous physical abuse that has still left it's mark on many natives. It's not that bad. You're going to be ok. You're being asked for just one small moment to think that your convenience and comfort are not quite as important of lifting others up who need their voices and needs to be respected and honored by white communities.
posted by xarnop at 12:26 PM on November 6, 2014 [17 favorites]

""This is what's going on with the spirit animal thing. We're taking the most private expression of a faith and wearing it as an overcoat.

The idea of a "spirit animal" is not "the most private expression of a faith." That would be the ceremony where a spirit animal chooses you. This idea of a "spirit animal" is different from the idea of "spirit animal" used by the internet which is much, much, much closer to the Roman idea of a tutelary deity. I've posted the link before:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tutelary_deity
posted by I-baLL at 12:27 PM on November 6, 2014

Then call the thing your tutelary deity.
posted by Zalzidrax at 12:29 PM on November 6, 2014 [11 favorites]

While you're looking up definitions, I-baLL, look up "rules lawyering."
posted by maxsparber at 12:32 PM on November 6, 2014 [11 favorites]

Zalzidrax: The term "spirit animal" is not a Native American term. The term for Native American spirit animals tends to be "totem". People don't use that word because it has religious significance. "Spirit animal" is a word that applies to a multitude of concepts.
posted by I-baLL at 12:32 PM on November 6, 2014

I-baLL, you asked to be educated. What you're doing now is being the equivalent of that kid in class who argues with the professor over every single sentence. If you truly want to learn, then have the good grace to treat the people you're asking to teach you for free with some respect.
posted by KathrynT at 12:35 PM on November 6, 2014 [11 favorites]

You might want to recalibrate whose pain you are worried about or what kind of pain deserves more pressing attention right now.

EVERYONE'S PAIN DESERVES ATTENTION. I'M NOT TRYING TO MOUNT A CAMPAIGN TO STEAL SPIRIT ANIMALS.

Would someone just ban me please? I don't feel at home on MeFi anymore.
posted by jeisme at 12:37 PM on November 6, 2014 [1 favorite]

I-baLL - I don't disagree with you that, anthropologically speaking, the notion of a companion figure can be found across cultures and times. And, that said, regardless of how you perceive the phrase "spirit animal", and your knowledge of how it can be applied to many different cultures, that doesn't change the fact that, in the United States, the vast vast majority of people associate that term with Native American culture. When we say it, we think NA. Your perception is different, sure, but that doesn't change the meaning and context of the words for the rest of us.
posted by Think_Long at 12:38 PM on November 6, 2014

Unfortunately, that goes with the territory. There is a lot that you can make use of -- most of everything, in fact. There are very, very few expressions of culture that people put a velvet rope around and say "This is ours." I can speak for a few of these, as I am Jewish. Eat bagels! Tell stories about dybbuks! Learn Yiddish! ALL THESE WORLDS ARE YOURS EXCEPT EUROPA. The sorts of practices that wind up with velvet ropes tend to be very private, very specific, and integrally tied to a cultural identity.

That makes complete sense and I'm totally on board. But you know what's pathetic?

There's a little greedy, stupid part of me that says, "Hey, I'm a white American man, with all the usual cultural baggage. What of mine can't be touched? What of mine can't be appropriated? When can I say 'that's offensive, this is mine, you can't do that?'" Historically, of course, the answer to that was "pretty much everything."

But I live in 2014, not the sweep of history. I'm both a White Man in America and a silly and weak individual. And right now I can't think of a single answer to that question. Which bothers me. Can you believe that?

You don't need to tell me this is pathetic. I'm aware of that. ("But what about meeeeeee?") This pitiful resentment...ugh. But it's there. Yay human frailty!
posted by Harvey Jerkwater at 12:38 PM on November 6, 2014

I probably came off a little strong earlier in the thread but this whole discussion really reinforces the idea for me that if you really have a private and personal belief about something that could be problematic it should probably stay private. I didn't realize how problematic it was, but, yeah, it really is. After reading the Lena Dunham thread bringing up my own family history here is nothing more than kind of an inappropriate overshare in the same vein as that one story — even if my behavior or attitude isn't bad per se if you squint and look at it through a lens of "on the spectrum of weird things I do" wearing it on my sleeve is going to make people super uncomfortable and for good reason. And I never wore it on my sleeve because of that, and I'm going to continue not to.

And I still believe, and that's okay too.
posted by OverlappingElvis at 12:39 PM on November 6, 2014 [6 favorites]

But I live in 2014, not the sweep of history. I'm both a White Man in America and a silly and weak individual. And right now I can't think of a single answer to that question. Which bothers me. Can you believe that?

Serious question: what is it you have that you don't want to see appropriated?
posted by prize bull octorok at 12:43 PM on November 6, 2014

Would someone just ban me please? I don't feel at home on MeFi anymore.
posted by jeisme at 2:37 PM on November 6 [+][!]

Or you could just step away from the conversation.
posted by fiercecupcake at 12:43 PM on November 6, 2014 [7 favorites]

jeisme, I don't think people are intending to be especially harsh to you in particular - I think the escalation by other participants in this discussion (ahem) is sharpening the critique a lot here, and especially since you've said you don't want to use the term since it hurts people, I wouldn't take the criticism too personally if possible. People are trying to build an argument for why it would be better to not use that term and while they might use some of your points as a jumping-off point, I don't think anyone is trying to excoriate you personally.
posted by dialetheia at 12:44 PM on November 6, 2014 [3 favorites]

" that doesn't change the fact that, in the United States, the vast vast majority of people associate that term with Native American culture."

With shamanism and New Age stuff as opposed to Native American culture. The word "shaman' itself is from Siberia where the local medicine wo/men were called "shamans" and they had spirit animals and they had their own vision quests. Like one of the links that got posted on here to help me find out about Native American spirit animal beliefs said: it's a stereotype. Not every single Native American tribe had it. This whole thread is very, very America-centic. Most people on the internet and most young people today probably don't know where they heard the term "spirit animal" other than the internet. Because it's a generic term for a common concept.
posted by I-baLL at 12:44 PM on November 6, 2014 [3 favorites]

Jeisme, can you explain why you're personally feeling attacked?

I think everyone's seen that you've sworn not to use the term any more, and the conversation is more about convincing other people now.

I can't speak for the Native Americans in the thread, but if you want someone to acknowledge that you've resolved to give it up, I hereby acknowledge that you've resolved to give it up.
posted by EmpressCallipygos at 12:45 PM on November 6, 2014 [2 favorites]

"Hey, I'm a white American man, with all the usual cultural baggage. What of mine can't be touched? What of mine can't be appropriated? When can I say 'that's offensive, this is mine, you can't do that?'"

Well, that brings up a hard question about what whiteness is, and what its cultural expressions are. I am white, and I can't answer that question. What do I think is specifically a cultural expression of white malehood that I think is off-limits and shouldn't be touched by anything other than white males?

Nothing I can think of, although we were pretty possessive of things in the past, and they were all shitty things to claim: who gets to vote, who gets to own property, who gets to marry white women, who is considered human under the law.

We had a lot of years of that, and defended it with extreme violence when challenged. Compare it to Native Americans asking us not to make off with their cultural expressions, we were a lot more aggressive about defending ours.
posted by maxsparber at 12:45 PM on November 6, 2014 [4 favorites]

"Would someone just ban me please? I don't feel at home on MeFi anymore."

Jeisme: Just because I disagree with you on this topic doesn't mean I'm disagreeing with you as a person. That's the beauty of MeFi: Differing points of view. Sometimes you're in the majority, sometimes you're in the minority but as long as we can get our ideas across it's all good.
posted by I-baLL at 12:46 PM on November 6, 2014 [2 favorites]

The amusing/funny/exasperating thing is that there are constructs similar to "spirit animal" in European culture, you just have to go back to before Christianity. To a certain extent, that "personal connection to a spiritual figure" moved over to the Saints in Catholicism, as well.

I've become fond of the non-appropriative "what is your patronus" as the culture it draws from is a fictionalization of English contemporary culture. I have a fylgia, though, which is a Germanic animal figure who aids you if you ever sit on the High Seat and attempt to connect with the other Eight Worlds; it draws form a very different cultural base than modern European or US, however.
posted by Deoridhe at 12:51 PM on November 6, 2014 [2 favorites]

What do I think is specifically a cultural expression of white malehood that I think is off-limits and shouldn't be touched by anything other than white males?

My somewhat facetious, but also kind of serious answer is that the cultural expression of white malehood that is frequently viciously defended and perceived (consciously or unconsciously) as being off limits is the very status of the white male as the default. Anything that is perceived to assault that status gets a lot of push back.
posted by yasaman at 12:54 PM on November 6, 2014 [10 favorites]

My somewhat facetious, but also kind of serious answer is that the cultural expression of white malehood that is frequently viciously defended and perceived (consciously or unconsciously) as being off limits is the very status of the white male as the default. Anything that is perceived to assault that status gets a lot of push back.

I completely agree with this.
posted by maxsparber at 12:56 PM on November 6, 2014 [1 favorite]

Jeisme, can you explain why you're personally feeling attacked?

Jeisme: Just because I disagree with you on this topic doesn't mean I'm disagreeing with you as a person. That's the beauty of MeFi: Differing points of view. Sometimes you're in the majority, sometimes you're in the minority but as long as we can get our ideas across it's all good.

IDK, I got melodramatic there. I don't handle arguments well, and the point I was trying to make wasn't really about spirit animals so much as this feeling I get that the internet is getting angrier with each passing year.

I don't feel like I'm being personally attacked, but I felt like people took my words out of context, and didn't completely read my comments... I'm all for discussing differing points of view, but in general, Tweets or comments or posts that get the most attention seem to be ham-handed approaches to issues that are not simple, monolithic, or easy to parse.

I used to feel like there was more of an underlying solidarity to the arguments on different points of view on MeFi, and I don't really feel that way anymore.
posted by jeisme at 12:58 PM on November 6, 2014 [2 favorites]

"But I live in 2014, not the sweep of history. I'm both a White Man in America and a silly and weak individual. And right now I can't think of a single answer to that question. Which bothers me. Can you believe that?"

Serious question: what is it you have that you don't want to see appropriated?

Serious answer: this is why my complaint is pathetic -- it's not that there's anything in particular I want to defend as itself; I simply want to be able to say THIS IS OURS NOT YOURS AND YOU CAN'T USE IT AS YOU SEE FIT. Because it's irritating to be told that but not be able to respond in kind.

It's about claiming dominance in conversation, not substance. Slapping back with a "oh, I can't have this? Well then you can't have that! HA HA!"

I roll my eyes at myself.
posted by Harvey Jerkwater at 12:59 PM on November 6, 2014 [6 favorites]

Well, there's a history of stuff about this going on back to the 80s. Here's my understanding of some of the issues:

* Historical plunder of religious artifacts and human remains by European and white American universities and museums.

* Commercialization of religious artifacts, practices, and symbols in ways that did not give anything back to communities that are among the most impoverished in North America. This goes all the up to last year's auction of sacred Hopi artifacts. There's a fair bit of well-justified historical resentment over white anthropologists who become middle-class experts on religions practiced by people below the poverty line.

* New-Age spiritualists taking concepts from Native American communities and reframing them in terms that have more to do with psychoanalysis than the actual religion they're lifted from. And again, some of the resentment is economic with thousands of dollars into the pockets of "plastic medicine men."

* Following that, sarcastic use of "spirit animal" as a form of hippie-punching humor.

* Native American groups have had to fight harder in order to get the same legal rights regarding practice as more mainstream religions. For example, in my earlier link, requests for religious accommodation for mourning rituals were treated as frivolous superstitions.

Not surprisingly, one of the responses to this has been to define some modern Native American religions as family, community, or location focused. This shouldn't be surprising because family and community as requirements are accepted for religions like Judaism, where conversion for some groups is strongly discouraged outside of cases where a person is returning to an ancestral community or converting by marriage. I've read the argument that you can't understand contemporary Native American religions without becoming an insider to those cultures.

To counter one argument on preview. It's primarily about Native American culture because mainstream American culture is filled with kitsch derived from Native American sources but hasn't really plundered Siberian, Shinto, Southeast Asian, African, Australian, and Micronesian sources to the same extent.

George_Spiggot: I think if you're doing the former with any degree of sincerity as a part of improving your life, emotional health or whatever, your DNA doesn't have a thing to do with it and anyone who wants to give you grief about it can legitimately be told mind their own beezwax.

It's not particularly about DNA, but about language, culture, and community. How do you become a part of a religion based on a rich oral, ceremonial, and community tradition on the basis of a few hundred pages and a handful of concepts? There's a certain degree of cultural bias in the idea that conversion is a simple matter of sincerity.

The other argument I've read from Native American religious leaders on this is why do we attempt to steal crumbs from their table rather than strengthen our own Earth-based religious movements, which have literary traditions in languages that are much more accessible?

I-baLL: The idea of a "spirit animal" is not "the most private expression of a faith." That would be the ceremony where a spirit animal chooses you. This idea of a "spirit animal" is different from the idea of "spirit animal" used by the internet which is much, much, much closer to the Roman idea of a tutelary deity.

Curiously I read and correspond with Hellenic and Roman reconstructionists, and they don't use the term "spirit-animal" either.
posted by CBrachyrhynchos at 12:59 PM on November 6, 2014 [6 favorites]

culture is appropriation
posted by Sebmojo at 1:01 PM on November 6, 2014 [2 favorites]

I don't feel like I'm being personally attacked, but I felt like people took my words out of context, and didn't completely read my comments...

Even here I'm not sure why you think that, as most of the ire in this thread seems to be directed to someone totally different anyway. Like, it's not a matter of people taking your words out of context, it's a matter of people responding to someone else's words entirely. I promise, you're cool.
posted by EmpressCallipygos at 1:04 PM on November 6, 2014 [2 favorites]

culture is appropriation

Okay, someone always busts this or a comment like this out in any thread about cultural appropriation, and it is tedious. It's like commenting in a thread about chronic pain with "life is pain." Like, yeah, sure! That is not inaccurate I guess! It's also kind of insensitive in a thread where a bunch of people are talking about specific examples of cultural appropriation that cause them pain or that are disrespectful to their culture. If you wouldn't go into a thread about chronic pain where a bunch of people are talking about how much chronic pain sucks and why it sucks and why the medical establishment deals with it poorly with a tossed off generalization like "life is pain," that trivializes the whole discussion, don't do it here with cultural appropriation.
posted by yasaman at 1:13 PM on November 6, 2014 [19 favorites]

Even here I'm not sure why you think that, as most of the ire in this thread seems to be directed to someone totally different anyway. Like, it's not a matter of people taking your words out of context, it's a matter of people responding to someone else's words entirely.

It's not even that the ire's directed at me, it's just that the ire seems a little toxic to reasonable discussion, regardless of who its directed at.

Sometimes I feel like the Internet is this really cool, smart friend that I have that for some reason loves punching theirself in the face repeatedly. But I'm derailing. I'll take a break from the blue and catch y'all in a month or so.
posted by jeisme at 1:15 PM on November 6, 2014 [2 favorites]

CBrachyrhynchos: "Curiously I read and correspond with Hellenic and Roman reconstructionists, and they don't use the term "spirit-animal" either."

Well, yeah. They didn't speak English back then so they wouldn't use an English term. Genius is the term, I think. Daemon or Juno as well.

Just like the Hidatsa language also doesn't call them "spirit animals" and the Ojibwe language doesn't call them "spirit animals" but calls them "odoodem".
posted by I-baLL at 1:21 PM on November 6, 2014

Just like the Hidatsa language also doesn't call them "spirit animals" and the Ojibwe language doesn't call them "spirit animals" but calls them "odoodem".

Yes, and in France they say "eau" instead of water. and yet, somehow I and the guy from France both accept that we're talking about the same damn thing even so.
posted by EmpressCallipygos at 1:27 PM on November 6, 2014 [1 favorite]

Black people aren't literally black! White people are actually (usually) some shade of pink!
posted by desjardins at 1:31 PM on November 6, 2014 [3 favorites]

Serious answer: this is why my complaint is pathetic -- it's not that there's anything in particular I want to defend as itself; I simply want to be able to say THIS IS OURS NOT YOURS AND YOU CAN'T USE IT AS YOU SEE FIT. Because it's irritating to be told that but not be able to respond in kind.

No, we just take our own credentialism and gatekeeping for granted. Christianity ranges from drop-of-the-hat conversion to strict family and community traditions. We just didn't have a New Age craze regarding family-tradition small Baptist churches.
posted by CBrachyrhynchos at 1:33 PM on November 6, 2014

Uhm, did you guys read what I was replying to?

"Curiously I read and correspond with Hellenic and Roman reconstructionists, and they don't use the term "spirit-animal" either."

My point was what you wrote which is: yeah, obviously they won't use the exact term.
posted by I-baLL at 1:34 PM on November 6, 2014

"I-baLL - it is truly astounding how in a few short hours you have become enough of an expert that you can let us all know we're wrong. Just astounding."

Uh, what? You guys asked me a question. I can find answers. I actually do research when I'm arguing a point because I could be right like I think I am or I could be wrong and without doing research and just blindly arguing I won't find out if my point of view is correct or not.
posted by I-baLL at 1:37 PM on November 6, 2014 [1 favorite]

It's not particularly about DNA, but about language, culture, and community. How do you become a part of a religion based on a rich oral, ceremonial, and community tradition on the basis of a few hundred pages and a handful of concepts?

Yeah, I think a lot of this is the push and pull between two competing worldviews, and they have sort of defined the American experience. We are both e pluribus and unum, many and one, and there have been a couple of ways this has been interpreted.

For a lot of our history we were both relentlessly assimilationist and uncertain about who could be assimilated. And what were we assimilating into? As yasaman pointed out, the assimiliation was often into an unexamined default of whiteness. Ethnic Euopeans abandoned their ethnicity in favor of a generic whiteness, which conferred privilege but also made itself invisible, so when we speak of white culture, I am never sure what cultural expressions can be seen as "white." It's a sort of invented category of humanity, invented in opposition to non-white, to people who would not be allowed to assimilate. Groups that assimilated slowly, like the Jews, the Irish, and Catholics, received enormous pushback, even when their assimilation was stalled by prejudice. And black people and Indians were not allowed to assimilate at all, among other groups, mostly of color.

But a competing model is one in which complete assimilation was unnecessary. That you could maintain a distinct cultural identity in America, a pluralistic identity, where you were both American and something else -- Jewish-American and Irish American in my case.

But this is a challenge to an assimilationist viewpoint, and an often unwelcome one, even when pluralism is expressed by people who were never allowed to assimilate. I think it is the roots of people being irritated by black pride, or hyphenate-American self-identities, or minority languages. When you are part of a culture that encourages you to assimilate into it, and then makes itself invisible to you, other people's identity and refusal to assimilate becomes doubly visible.

And in this sort of environment, culture isn't seen as private, it is seen as part of something that we collectively own. People should not have distinct cultural practices that are off-limits to the majority, because then all we have is pluribus and where is the unum?

And if you are white and part of an ethnic or cultural group, this is often seen as a choice in America -- I remember being told on this site that I am choosing to be Jewish, which to a certain extent is true, as I could convert out of it if I wanted (never mind that I am an atheist and my identity is cultural). And if you can choose to assimilate and don't that is rebuffing the opportunity to participate in a culture of privilege, and is making that invisible culture visible. And so these cultural elements are not treated as being private and meaningful, but instead a sort of fashion decision, and anybody can take parts of it and use them for what they will. Cabala? Who needs to be Jewish, just wear a red string! St. Paddy's? Who needs to be Irish, just drink some green beer!

And I'm speaking from two groups who have been largely assimilated into the mainstream, and not from a group that has been relentlessly denied that opportunity. I can't imagine what it is like at once to be denied the opportunity to assimilate and also treated as though it is an affront that you have refused to assimilate, and have my culture treated as a bead or bauble with no intrinsic value or meaning, because such things don't have meaning in an assimilationist America.
posted by maxsparber at 1:38 PM on November 6, 2014 [14 favorites]

Uh, what? You guys asked me a question. I can find answers. I actually do research when I'm arguing a point because I could be right like I think I am or I could be wrong and without doing research and just blindly arguing I won't find out if my point of view is correct or not.

Let me give a research tip: If you're fractically doing Google searches to bolster up a point you're trying to make, you're not actually doing research, and from where I am sitting, it seems like you have mostly been trying to make the case that "Spirit animal" is not the unique property of Natives because they didn't use that term, and didn't use it in the way we do, and others had spirit animals too, and also didn't use it in the way we do.

The trouble is, when people talk about spirit animals as described in the FPP, it is Native culture they are appropriating. That's what they are referencing, even if they use the wrong language and get the idea wrong. In fact, that's why it is appropriation.
posted by maxsparber at 1:41 PM on November 6, 2014 [10 favorites]

"The trouble is, when people talk about spirit animals as described in the FPP, it is Native culture they are appropriating."

It is not. In Native American ceremonies the spirit animal chooses you. That's what was offensive about the ASUM thing: They had a ceremony where Native American students had to pick a spirit animal as opposed to the other way around. The ceremony is what was offensive and they stopped doing it. The concept of a person picking their guiding spirit whether it's an animal or a deity or a force is not a Native American concept.
posted by I-baLL at 1:49 PM on November 6, 2014

Nobody claimed the hipsters were doing it well, i-baLL.
posted by The corpse in the library at 1:51 PM on November 6, 2014

It is not. In Native American ceremonies the spirit animal chooses you.

From the FPP: The concept of the spirit animal comes, most directly, from Native American spirituality.
posted by maxsparber at 1:52 PM on November 6, 2014 [1 favorite]

It is not.

You are literally telling a person who is a part of that culture what is and isn't part of their own culture. You realize that, right?

And again, the ceremony was especially awful but what the Native American students objected to explicitly in the article, in their own words, was the trivialization of an important belief shared by their culture.
posted by dialetheia at 1:52 PM on November 6, 2014 [3 favorites]

Heraldic symbolism is for families, not individuals. Use it however you want, of course, it doesn't really matter, nobody's that invested in it. (Tartans, on the other hand....)

Personally I'm quite partial to genius loci. Water deities, mostly. I often throw a little sacrifice in when I'm crossing a bridge - makes me feel better. Little rituals.

maxsparber: I think that overcoat analogy is absolutely fantastic... we're so often like jackdaws, picking up bits and pieces of spirituality to weave brightly-coloured coats out of.

It would be disrespectful. And the Jews have been mistreated enough, including their scrolls.

That's the only bit I disagree with - I don't think suffering is a precondition for having your sacred beliefs treated with respect.

I-baLL: <chorus>Don't be obtuse.</chorus>

Just... don't be a dick. That's all.
posted by Leon at 1:53 PM on November 6, 2014 [1 favorite]

dialetheia: "ou are literally telling a person who is a part of that culture what is and isn't part of their own culture. You realize that, right? "

Ah, okay, cool, I can get a first hand answer as googling around for this is bringing up too much noise. So here's my question:

Are there Native American ceremonies where the person chooses their own Spirit Animal or do all of the ceremonies, as I've been able to find so far, involve the Spirit Animal picking the person?
posted by I-baLL at 1:56 PM on November 6, 2014

"I-baLL: Don't be obtuse."

Sorry. It's just how I'm angled.
posted by I-baLL at 1:57 PM on November 6, 2014 [2 favorites]

Folks, the I-baLL show needs to stop now, thanks.
posted by restless_nomad (staff) at 1:57 PM on November 6, 2014 [3 favorites]

I-baLL, I didn't mean myself - there are other people responding to you too - but I don't think anyone is going to be in a super good mood to answer your question since you're just going to use it to rules-lawyer them into a place where you decide they don't have the right to be offended.
posted by dialetheia at 1:58 PM on November 6, 2014 [1 favorite]

Not every culture agrees that DNA means nothing at all. It's totally possible to value a connection to your ancestors and blood relatives in a different way than others and still value universal compassion, the same way you value your spouse more than others but still can value universal compassion and respect for everyone. You might not SLEEP with everyone, but you can have compassion for them. You don't have to share ancestral connection with everyone to have compassion for them, but you might share a special connection with your ancestors that is different than you share with others, because like literally as we're finding from epigenetic research it's really NOT all the same.

I find it funny that white people can even take the idea that "DNA doesn't matter" and turn it into a concept that let's them take whatever they want from others. You can value your heritage and your ancestors and that sacred connection in your DNA with all of life and more recently with specific people who shared all your evolutionary history with you and made you what you are without being racist toward people of other cultures. Assuming that every culture in the world must accept the traditionally white liberal assumption that genes mean nothing and I can't see color, I'm colorblind, I don't see it- is also kind of pushing that on others when it let's you take their spiritual beliefs or cultural practices from them because how DARE have something that people with white DNA can't access, that's racist of them! DNA doesn't matter?

Well it DOES genetically speaking natives are dealing intergenerational trauma, and THEY CARRY the weight of what happened to their ancestors inside them, and their personal healing processes and relationship to the divine are their own sacred spaces and white people DO need to back off unless specifically invited.
posted by xarnop at 2:00 PM on November 6, 2014 [3 favorites]

The interesting thing is, as someone who took some time to get back in touch with the religion of her ancestors (my gods are not isolative gods, though, and even the most secret ceremonies were open to just about anyone who tried - re: going under the cloak to seek insight) one of the side effects is that I sometimes live or visit places where it feels like the ground doesn't want me.

Like most of Arizona. Most of it was like, "Fuck you, go away" except for the Prickly Pear Cactus, who is my friend and made me feel less alone. It was the trees where I went to college in upstate New York who were similarly kind, while the ground was screaming "go away." A dear friend brought me rocks from his native land, and I was struck by how the pitch and vibration of them when I held them was different from the ground and rocks I'm used to.

The first time this happened I was offended, and it took some time for me to realize the arrogance of my implicit belief that I should be able to go anywhere and do anything and be welcomed and honored. I still cling to those silly daydreams about somehow being found "special" by the NPC "native peoples" like all of the white people in movies and on TV who native better than the natives who saved them, and manage to rescue the natives because they're inherently better.

The narrative is omnipresent and racist. It's still really damn hard to shake.

But at least Ms. Prickly Pear Cactus likes me.
posted by Deoridhe at 2:11 PM on November 6, 2014 [4 favorites]

Both the term and the contemporary concept came out of a new-age publishing mashup in the 80s and 90s of multiple types of shamanism and pop-Jungian psychology with Native American kitsch. They used this to sell dreamcatchers, smudge sticks, books, t-shirts, and divination cards. I'd say that particular linguistic horse left the stable along with PC, hacker, web, and literally. I don't see a reason why I should shut the barn door after the fact when I can just describe my religious relationships with animals in about the same number of words.
posted by CBrachyrhynchos at 2:12 PM on November 6, 2014

dialetheia: "I didn't mean myself - there are other people responding to you too - but I don't think anyone is going to be in a super good mood to answer your question since you're just going to use it to rules-lawyer them into a place where you decide they don't have the right to be offended."

I'm not rules lawyering. The people in this article: http://www.montanakaimin.com/news/article_cb2e0c76-54da-11e4-9144-001a4bcf6878.html

would they be offended if the same ceremony continued but instead of the word "spirit animal" the word "herald animal" or "personal guide" was used? I believe so because they were offended at the ceremony of picking one. And you know what? Yeah, I can see that being offensive. Having to do a ceremony that goes against your religious beliefs can be offensive. However people picking their own spirit animals by themselves, of their own free will, and not forcing those students to do it? I can see that as not being offensive.

It might seem that I'm rules lawyering because I'm trying to figure out what people mean from the few small quotes we are given. Since I can't ask the people directly I have to work with what I have in order to base my opinion on it. There is too much simplifying and generalizing in the world that leads to a lot of misunderstanding so I always try to make my understanding of things be as clear as possible even though it sometimes comes off as me being obtuse and, yes, I know I come off in a weird way.
posted by I-baLL at 2:13 PM on November 6, 2014

I really like the term used above: heraldic animal. I think it's usually more accurate to talk about what we mean (an animal whose characteristics wish wish to display or internalize), it's connected to multiple European cultures that many American's can draw ancestry and connection to, it has a geekiness to it, it still is historically situated so it doesn't feel as silly as patronus, and I don't think anyone will object. In addition, I think most people can figure out what it means and what cultural connotations it's supposed to have quickly.

Words have meanings. If you can't put a "Count", a "Baron" or a "Duke" in front of your name, or a puny "Esq." behind, and you don't have a pretty scroll from the appropriate heraldic authority in your country that says you have the right to bear this coat of arms, you do not have a heraldic animal.

Your ancestors were most probably peasants, like mine. They weren't noblemen. Deal with it or just make up a Westerosi House sigil.
posted by sukeban at 2:19 PM on November 6, 2014 [2 favorites]

The people in this article...

... explicitly said that they were upset that their beliefs were being trivialized.

Swaney, of the Hidatsa tribe, was offended because some of the traditions she grew up with involved spirit animals.
“There are specific ceremonies that are still practiced today,” Swaney said, “that I don’t think are anybody else’s business to just trivialize.”

I'm stepping away, I can't imagine you're arguing in good faith at this point.
posted by dialetheia at 2:22 PM on November 6, 2014 [3 favorites]

Words have meanings. If you can't put a "Count", a "Baron" or a "Duke" in front of your name, or a puny "Esq." behind, and you don't have a pretty scroll from the appropriate heraldic authority in your country that says you have the right to bear this coat of arms, you do not have a heraldic animal.

Nothing can stop me now because I'm the Duke of Earl.
posted by maxsparber at 2:23 PM on November 6, 2014 [10 favorites]

Your ancestors were most probably peasants, like mine. They weren't noblemen.

Nonsense. You are clearly descended from the Baron von Killjoy. Can I at least pick a heraldic root vegetable or something?
posted by prize bull octorok at 2:25 PM on November 6, 2014 [6 favorites]

Anyway, I'm an O'Brien and a Monaghan. My family were tiny kings of tiny squares of a tiny Island, and we have bullshit crests to prove it.
posted by maxsparber at 2:27 PM on November 6, 2014

dialetheia: "... explicitly said that they were upset that their beliefs were being trivialized."

Yes. Their beliefs were being trivialized by a ceremony that got banned.

To be more accurately, by a question asked during the ceremony:

"ASUM faculty adviser Garon Smith suggested naming spirit animals as an icebreaker at an ASUM retreat in 2008, and somehow the activity snowballed.

“Somehow it has just become the standard question any candidate gets asked when they’re sworn in,” Smith said. “I think if somebody is offended, it’s probably time to drop it.”

That time has come. Last night, the student government passed a resolution which bars the question from being asked at any other meetings this year. "

"President Asa Hohman wrote the resolution after he learned the question had offended some students on campus."
posted by I-baLL at 2:28 PM on November 6, 2014

For what is worth, after all these centuries, real coats of arms are a visual mess.
posted by sukeban at 2:29 PM on November 6, 2014 [1 favorite]

To clarify, because I can see where a bit of the confusion is coming from on re-read, they are especially upset that this is being used in the swearing-in procedures, but they are also separately upset that something very meaningful to them from a very meaningful ceremony (whose details are beside the point) is being trivialized by people saying that e.g. a furby is their spirit animal.

Would it be fair to say that Metafilter is largely a bunch of white folks arguing, "Colored folks are like this." And the others going, "No, colored folks are like that."?

Not touching this with a ten-foot pole.
posted by dialetheia at 2:29 PM on November 6, 2014 [2 favorites]

I mean, it's cute that you think a coat of arms is Object A on Field of Color B, but it hasn't been that way since the Renaissance because noblemen liked to combine ancestries like their shields were Voltron.
posted by sukeban at 2:30 PM on November 6, 2014

Yes. Their beliefs were being trivialized by a ceremony that got banned.

And therefore....why should anyone continue to talk about it? Why is this thread happening? A ceremony got banned and therefore the problem is solved? What is your point with this?

If you don't want to sound like you're rules-lawyering, don't keep rules-lawyering. You've got 20 comments in this thread! If we're really all so dense that we can't comprehend your point by now, maybe just give up on us already. We're probably beyond help.
posted by rtha at 2:52 PM on November 6, 2014 [4 favorites]

To expand on my clarification, they weren't solely upset that "spirit animal" was being used in a ceremony outside of its provenance; they were upset that a) their culture was being trivialized by people naming random animals, objects, and celebrities as their "spirit animals", and b) that engaging in that trivialization of their culture was effectively a requirement of joining the student government, which absolutely discouraged Native American students from participating. Part b certainly intensifies the wrongness of the situation, but part a, the trivialization of their beliefs by people who have no idea about that culture whatsoever (and who have in fact largely caused and materially benefited from its decline), is the thing that nearly everyone in this thread is arguing against.
posted by dialetheia at 3:02 PM on November 6, 2014 [6 favorites]

Your ancestors were most probably peasants, like mine. They weren't noblemen. Deal with it or just make up a Westerosi House sigil.

But I'm not talking about creating coats of arms™ which are certified by houses of old. I'm talking about taking a concept that nobility once used, modifying it greatly, and adapting it for use by everyone. If anything, this is the power of the people to take the prerogatives of the primogeniture-proceeding princes of the past.

European aristocracy is hardly an oppressed group. I think they can take it if the common people have heraldic animals.
posted by Lord Chancellor at 4:33 PM on November 6, 2014 [5 favorites]

There is a inexorable march towards universal culture going on, assimilation of all specificities into one monoculture that will likely be dominated by the USA media complex.
This is the most naive and stupid thing I've ever read on Metafilter. So: you actually never have stepped out of your comfort zone then? Never been to China, never been to Nigeria, never been to Brazil, never been to Wales for chrissake? You think white mainstream US culture represents some sort of global majority? In 50 years it won't even be a majority in the States.
posted by glasseyes at 8:08 PM on November 6, 2014

Late to the thread but
I think it's more like , "oh, I like your hat, I'm going to get one just like it!"
Or maybe it's more like seeing a veteran in uniform with his medals and saying "Wow, that's a gorgeous Victoria Cross, I think I'll wear one too."

This has been such a cross day on the internet :-[
posted by glasseyes at 8:16 PM on November 6, 2014 [2 favorites]

This is one of those times where I do a 180 on something, because I come into the thread and start seeing "Spirit animal isn't really cool because..." and I think to myself, "Huh. Well, I don't think it's a problem because..."

And then I see the comments defending it. And I'm like, "Changed my mind! Cool with avoiding that term forever lololololol." People trying to defend messy shit does more to convince me than people explaining why it's messy in the first place, I swear to god.

Also my patronus is Tina Belcher.
posted by supercrayon at 8:26 PM on November 6, 2014 [13 favorites]

Me too, supercrayon. I took a reference to "Spirit animal" out of my profile. I didn't really know about the offense, now I do, so I will avoid the word.

Thanks Metafilter!
posted by sweetkid at 8:44 PM on November 6, 2014 [3 favorites]

I'm Sicangu Lakota. Spirit animals aren't really a part of my (admittedly pitiful and still-as-yet-in-progress) spiritual tradition but when a very lovely and smart woman I was dating declared that her spirit animal was an overactive golden retriever desperate for affection, I'm not gonna lie: I was very put off. It felt wrong. I couldn't laugh. It was the jokey, flippant tone coming from a white, Christian liberal woman who probably should have known better. Spirit animals are sacred in some aboriginal American cutures. Why the jokey meme? Oh, because aboriginal American culture is just free for the taking. That's oppression in action.

OverlappingElvis's use of "spirit animal" is not offensive to me. It sounds like a deeply held, family tradition that's practiced in private. They are not playing it for the lulz. Therein, I think, lies the difference.

It's not unlike my devotion to some Catholic saints. My grandfather was (taken from his family to a boarding school at six years old and forcibly converted) Catholic and he loved all the saints. I'm not Catholic but I buy the candles and light them. At home. In private.

I don't run around telling people St Martha is my patron saint.
posted by blessedlyndie at 9:35 PM on November 6, 2014 [17 favorites]

ME: There is a inexorable march towards universal culture going on, assimilation of all specificities into one monoculture that will likely be dominated by the USA media complex.
-

This is the most naive and stupid thing I've ever read on Metafilter. So: you actually never have stepped out of your comfort zone then? Never been to China, never been to Nigeria, never been to Brazil, never been to Wales for chrissake? You think white mainstream US culture represents some sort of global majority? In 50 years it won't even be a majority in the States.

I don't know, have you actually been to these places?
Cause when I was in China I was surprised at just how Western parts of it are. And Nigeria is a crazy place and all, but there is a lot of influence culturally there in the attitudes of young people, and desires and the cultural references, although I was hanging out with the more "middle-class" locals, so that may have messed with my sample.. I've never been to South America but I eat a lot of foods that originated there.

Its not exactly that US media culture will obliterate all other cultures but that this new global internet hipsterism will slowly assimilate all ethnicities in a kind of watered down way as a particular baguette, noodle, vegetable. Cultural Memes are already becoming very globalised.

... but also I would like to say that I don't think I have ever in my life called something my "spirit animal".
posted by mary8nne at 1:25 AM on November 7, 2014

also I would like to say that I don't think I have ever in my life called something my "spirit animal".

Not sure what the actual confusion is here, or if you're doing a fun I Am Socrates devil's advocate thing.

Yeah. Not super useful with a contentious subject like this.
posted by Potomac Avenue at 8:39 AM on November 7, 2014 [6 favorites]

There is a inexorable march towards universal culture going on, assimilation of all specificities into one monoculture that ~~will likely be dominated~~ is assumed by anyone under the influence of the USA media complex.

FTFY.

Cause when I was in China I was surprised at just how Western parts of it are.

Quoth the Westerner.
posted by Celsius1414 at 9:15 AM on November 7, 2014 [3 favorites]

But I'm not talking about creating coats of arms™ which are certified by houses of old. I'm talking about taking a concept that nobility once used, modifying it greatly, and adapting it for use by everyone. If anything, this is the power of the people to take the prerogatives of the primogeniture-proceeding princes of the past.

And that's why I said that you might as well call it your House sigil, because that's not European heraldry for sure.
posted by sukeban at 10:04 AM on November 7, 2014

Seriously, why are you digging in your heels to use a term that is not yours to use? You HAVE ancestors. Pick the ones you identify with most strongly, and stop acting like an entitled child.

Yeaah, hmm, I can't agree with that. Almost all religions are based on "appropriation" or "aggregation" Katamari Damacy style and I'm not getting into "no true Scotsman" stuff with religion. And ultimately this is more of a general damnation of the entire "New Age" meta-appropriation efforts that begun decades ago. Tone-deaf, clumsy in its well-meaning (usually) intent? Yes.

With culturally loaded terms like "spirit animal" formed from words of a whole 'nother culture (English) it becomes more about social grace and sensitivity to me.

I personally give anyone permission to use the word "spirit animal" all you want in your personal spiritual sphere, with your family and friends, and encourage you not to publicly broadcast your love of the term until further notice, to be sensitive to the dominant culture associated with "spirit animals" in our (US) context, and the fact that they are culturally subjugated and largely powerless with a long history of humiliation. It's not a demand, you don't have to keep it to yourself, I'm just saying, it makes you look bad, and if you think that's unfair, I'm sorry, it is what it is, if you feel that your cultural past is also filled with bloodshed and conquest, that's true, but we're talking about a RECENT wholesale invasion and conquest of an entire hemisphere so give our new "hosts" some respect.

The key to me is simply to be aware that it's not a word to bandy about ironically, and like most family / personal spirituality, in polite company you won't bring it up at all. I agree with Jesus that public displays of spirituality are essentially hypocritical because they are performative and egocentric, and all spirituality in my estimation needs to involve a dissolution of the ego into a greater consciousness. But that's my own bias and Jesus or his narrators probably had his own interpretation too. I would ask whether stepping into this conversation to say "But I use the term respectfully and nobody really knows about it until now and I didn't realize!" becomes borderline performative at a certain point, but I think it's mostly a good-faith effort to understand with an excess of indiscretion (you don't have to lead off with "I refuse any alternatives" even if you quietly do) and defensiveness.

It's not an "n-word" level slur, it's not a slur at all which is why it falls into this "what did I do" gray area -- it's a statement of insensitivity when used in a certain way, and it's best not to use it in public just as you might not refer to your favorite names of Satan if your practice LaVeyan Satanism, which is in historical terms barely any less mature than Wicca and more brashly appropriating than the typical "New Age."

The thing is, "New Age" is all about appropriation and "New Age" people simply have to keep it to themselves to avoid sounding insensitive and tone-deaf, much of the time.
posted by aydeejones at 7:56 PM on November 7, 2014

Almost all religions are based on "appropriation" or "aggregation" Katamari Damacy style and I'm not getting into "no true Scotsman" stuff with religion.

I am not sure what you mean by appropriation here, but even if you're right, the use of spirit animal here doesn't seem to be about a new religion drawing inspiration from Native sources, but a sort of generalized internet meme that borrows a Native concept.
posted by maxsparber at 8:35 PM on November 7, 2014

The thing is, "New Age" is all about appropriation and "New Age" people simply have to keep it to themselves to avoid sounding insensitive and tone-deaf, much of the time.

Even worse - If it was just New Age folk using it, that'd be one thing. But it's become a hipster language meme and an internet meme as well.
posted by EmpressCallipygos at 1:45 AM on November 8, 2014

mary8nne, I wanted to say, thanks for answering me politely when I was intemperate. The global wired-up elite may be becoming homogenized, they are a tiny minority of the world. It is a bubble that is hard to step out of when you belong to it - safe to say everyone posting here does by virtue of that fact - but some people have a foot in another camp and so the bubble is pierced. It is not anywhere near as pervasive as you think it is. I personally find it very dislocating to be where my (Western) assumptions and preoccupations are just not on anybody's horizon, and even more dislocating to make the jump back. I do not think you could say this: this new global internet hipsterism will slowly assimilate all ethnicities in a kind of watered down way if you had ever done the same.
posted by glasseyes at 5:47 AM on November 8, 2014

"New Age" is an interesting sort of thing because there is a lot of appropriation and fabrication without the language to name it, and people tend to get stroppy if you point out they are, for example, replicating quasi-Lakota practices without the Lakota - both the people and the name. It makes it very difficult to find the roots of what they are doing, which part of me wonders if that is part of the point. One of the more interesting teachers was in the Incan tradition. His practices were markedly different from "Native American" practices because they were specifically Incan; it offered up a sharp contrast with the Indian peace pipes being sold in the next room

Though I have to admit, I miss going and reading about how the ancient Egyptian magic of Solomon can cleanse your chromosomes (play spot the errors for fun!), and how for enough money you could meditate with an Authentic Crystal Skull. I used to volunteer at a New Age conference, and it was a blast - and now and then you'd run into someone who had roots that went back further than appropriation and reinterpretation, which was cool.
posted by Deoridhe at 1:22 PM on November 8, 2014 [1 favorite]

« Older Tubular poesy | jaunty jackets register at the Shah Abbas Newer »

This thread has been archived and is closed to new comments

MetaFilter

I am not familiar with what a spirit animal is or does.
November 6, 2014 5:50 AM Subscribe

Tags

Share

I am not familiar with what a spirit animal is or does. November 6, 2014 5:50 AM Subscribe

Tags

Share

I am not familiar with what a spirit animal is or does.
November 6, 2014 5:50 AM Subscribe