#aboriginal cultures

[liskantope]

I just read the whole Chapter 2 of the book linked to in the OP (titled "The Eternal Boy", which includes some of the excerpts quoted in the OP but not the last ones) and would find it fascinating to read the whole book if I can find a time when I'm not mired in already simultaneously trying to read several works. It's really remarkable how the author's ideas about letting boys live as girls (and vice versa) match up with those of the modern transgender movement.

But. But but but. Here is yet another moment that runs me into one (of several) of my fundamental causes of skepticism of some ideas in the trans movement: the blurring between (semi-arbitrary, once strict, but nowadays very amorphous) gender roles and the Actual Essence of being a certain gender. In my more charitable moments, I imagine that there's something I'm just not equipped to understand here; in my less charitable moments, I feel that this betrays a deep confusion within the collective set of beliefs of the recent movement.

The early 20th century exhibited a dramatically different severity of and degree of enforcement of gender roles from anytime in the lifetimes of most of us here, particularly the past twenty or so years. As forward-thinking as she is on certain aspects of trans identities, note that the author (1) shows a (by today's standards) conservative set of beliefs about innate gender differences (which I don't entirely disagree with, and which also shows a great deal of nuance in acknowledging that there are exceptions everywhere), and (2) seems to follow by default the prevailing beliefs about how gender roles should be enforced (e.g. disciplining boys and girls differently, molding boys into men whose defining feature is agency and self-sufficiency) until she makes exceptions for particular boys if they show strong evidence of being exceptions, who are then thrown into the category of girl.

For her, boys are by nature tough, loud, rambunctious, and risk-taking by default, and the "boys who are really girls" (which are implied by others in this thread to map to trans girls/women) are essentially the ones who defy most or all of these stereotypes. The text implies that being timid, not wanting to get into fights, or crying easily each make a boy less of a boy. (Not to mention having longer eyelashes -- yes, this author seems to believe that the physical trait of long eyelashes is an outward sign of a girl's soul inside a boy's body!) My childhood self, which was gentle to an extreme, hated sports, preferred quiet imaginative play, and had a number of other traits (including the long eyelashes thing!) was, according to people who talk like this author, already halfway along the spectrum to being a girl in a male body. (I didn't go as far as wanting to be considered a girl or have a feminine name, although in earlier childhood I had some interest in wearing girl things like bracelets and necklaces and I do sometimes wonder, if an authority figure had offered me the opportunity to "live as a girl", whether I might have been inclined for half a moment to take them up on it.)

I've always found it offensive to my anti-gender-role sensibilities to suggest that non- traditionally masculine traits such as being gentle and nurturing or crying a lot make someone "less of a man" (and the analogous idea for women). And the thing is, the progressive subculture that seems to promote the "gender identity = affinity for gender role" definition of transness among other definitions seems completely with me on the above sentiment when very directly dealing with it -- in fact, if anything, in my experience many seem to take it perhaps further than I do (going an even longer way than I might in actively encouraging men to cry and be more vulnerable, for instance). The fact that this thread has generated a 5-digit number of notes on Tumblr, which I would assume are mostly from people eager to hold it up as an example of how current models of what transness is about were Objectively True a hundred years ago to those with keen enough perception to see it, is not evidence that this subculture secretly thinks that traditionally feminine traits make a boy less of a boy. Rather, I think the level of excitement about the OP betrays muddiness and unnoticed contradictions in how certain strains of a social movement are moving through rapid changes in the concept of gender identity.

"But you're clearly not reading what is plainly explained there: that the ultimate defining characteristic of the 'girl-boys' is that they want to live as girls." Here's the thing: their wanting to live as girls is presented as being a direct result of their completely failing to fit into the stereotypes that were strictly enforced for boys a hundred years ago. Of course it makes sense that in an environment with rigid gender roles (regardless of which ones came about through arbitrary traditions, actual innate gender differences-on-average, or somewhere else), some individuals would feel violently enough incompatible with these roles that they would prefer to live entirely as the opposite sex if it was a ticket out of those roles. (I imagine this was most likely fairly close to the case for the indigenous cultures always being brought up as having developed the concept of a certain kind of nonbinary gender, where gender roles if anything must have dictated even more about hour-to-hour behavior than they did in the early-20th-century developed world.) It makes less sense -- or at least is much trickier to explain in a coherent manner, to my mind -- for this phenomenon to be seen to justify the claims of progressives driving the modern trans movement which lives in a liberated society where enforcement of gender roles has (fortunately) been rapidly deteriorating thanks in part to those very same progressives.

I'm reading a book named "A Guide to The Correction of Young Gentlemen Or, The Successful Administration Of Physical Discipline To Males, By Females" - essentially, a fantasy femdom BDSM book, written in 1924 by Alice Kerr-Sutherland but first published in 1991.

It has some genuinely fascinating stuff to say about gender, and I feel like it's worth looking at/thinking about in the context of Historical Gender Stuff. This 100 year old book has the following to say:

"The truth is that some young gentlemen would rather they had been born young ladies: they cannot admit this openly, because in the male world to confess as much would lead to instant ostracism if not worse; but they cannot conceal it either, and by preferring the company of girls, and soft, feminine clothing, and by flinching during the rough pursuits to which all boys, willing or no, are occasionally heirs, they attract opprobrium."

"Such boys weep too readily for their fellows' tastes - weeping is a great crime among boys unless it is generally admitted that circumstances left little choice - and are hounded for that reason."

"Just as there are girls who had rather been boys - we all know examples of the type - there are boys who, in a kinder world, would have been born into the gender more suited to their dispositions."

"Many young people of this sort are riven with a guilt they do not deserve but have been forced, by the conventions of society, to adopt; they are confused, ashamed and thoroughly unhappy."

"The ideal thing to do would be to treat these cases on their merits, send them to girls' schools, and so on. (The same thing should happen with those girls who would rather be young gentlemen.) Boys of this sort are girls in any case-in all respects save one."

"Most subjects of this sort have a secret name - a girl's name."

[folkfashion]

Wiradjuri woman, Marley Morgan, Australia, by Trent White

[elyserie]

Fate's Refusal to Honour (or at least properly research) Depictions of Non-Japanese Figures 2: Electric Bogaloo ft. Wandjina from the Current JP Summer Event

Disclaimer: While I am an Australian, I am NOT of Aboriginal or Torres Strait Islander descent. Therefore, I am coming at this issue from an outsider's perspective. If there is an Aboriginal person, or more specifically of the Mowanjum people from the Kimberly regions, please PLEASE correct me if I am wrong on any front.

The culprit behind the events of the current Summer story in the JP servers has recently been revealed to be Wandjina, a creator Dreamtime figure from the Mowanjum people's culture.

In any other context, I would be thrilled to have an Australian figure in FGO, but the problem here is the figure they use.

Wandjina are sacred to the Mowanjum people, and therefore one needs to go through Aboriginal Law to obtain the right to use the Wandjina's image.

In Australia, this resulted in an actual conflict between a non-indigenous artist and aboriginals. You can read more here, but one quote to note is from an Aboriginal man of the Darug people, Chris Tobin: "Aboriginal law is very specific on what you can and can't do with wan[d]jinas." Another quote on this topic is made by the owner of an Aboriginal art gallery, Adrian Newstead: "Only a few Aboriginal artists ever win the right to depict wan[d]jina, and only then after years of initiations and ceremonies..."

I am NOT attaching an image of FGO's iteration of Wandjina due to this. Not only is her appearance only Aboriginal on a surface-level with her 'dot art' aesthetic (dot art* is only a recent addition to Aboriginal culture, created back in the 1970s), having no resemblance to an Aboriginal person (note, that while many Aboriginal people are white/pale, FGO continually chooses to depict people of colour as light skinned as possible. And yes, I know she's blue, not white. There is literally no records of her being blue skinned; is this because Wandjina's are associated with rain????) but she is also not very Wandjina looking? These figures do not have mouths, have large eyes meant to resemble the eye of a storm and are typically depicted with elaborate headdresses. That little glowing boomerang on her head is not exactly elaborate. And WHY does she have a boomerang??? Because she's Australian???? By that logic, every Japanese figure needs to have a katana. #GiveMurasakiaKatana2023.

There is also the issue of Cnoc na Riabh. While it is funny to think that she's a foreigner because of an Australian influence, Yaraan-doo is also another Aboriginal figure. And it is slapped onto a white girl for a fan service event. I'd just rather Fate leave Aboriginal culture alone and just do, like, Ned Kelly or something if they're going to continue like this.

More resources and info under the read more!

You'll have noted in the quotes that I've edited an 'n' into wanjinas. This is so I didn't confuse anyone: both can be the correct spelling! I just stuck to what I thought FGO was using for their Wandjina.

Here's an overview of what wandjinas are and their inappropriate use in art: https://www.creativespirits.info/aboriginalculture/arts/what-are-wandjinas

Here's another page about an inappropriate use of Wandjinas (note: it's only a short synopsis about a documentary that covered the incident, I'm uncertain if you would be able to get access to the documentary outside of Australia): https://www.creativespirits.info/resources/movies/who-paintin-dis-wandjina

It should also be noted that the two websites I've linked above are from the website Creative Spirits. While it is run by a non-Indigenous person, the person behind it is currently transitioning it to be an Aboriginal owned and run resource. You can read more about how this site is run in his About page.

*If you want to know about dot art's origin, here and here are some resources on them. However, this article brings up something interesting that I would like to bring back to FGO Wandjina's dot art aesthetic. It notes that "the term 'dot painting' stems from what the Western eye sees when faced with contemporary Aboriginal acrylic paintings" (emphasis mine). All three articles note that dots were used to obfuscate sacred symbols and artifacts so that those who were not initiated into their cultures could not see what these figures were. In that case, what the hell is the dot art seen on Fate's Wandjina supposed to represent? In this article, it talks about the symbolism in Indigenous art. Fate's Wandjina has none.

[newguineatribalart]

Aboriginal symbols used in carving and painting

[diana-andraste]

(Vanished Scenes) from an Untouched Landscape #12, James Tylor, 2018

“The removal of Aboriginal cultures due to colonisation has left the appearance that Australia was ‘Untouched’ before European arrival.” —James Tylor

[hasellia]

Okay apologies for hopping on tag trending train but I have an important request.

If you don't know about the history of Aboriginal genocide in Australia, watch this program.

It's a very very hard watch but one that is important.

If you're outside of Australia, make sure to set your VPN to Aus. You may also need to set an acount for SBS but it's free viewing.

I would also recomend most of SBS's docos through NITV, as they're the National Indigenous broadcast station.

A little update on the warnings before I forget. I'm a little pressed for time so this is from my DM's with someone I've shared with.

I just wanted to give a heads up that the show contains footage of a mourning ceremony (with the grievers's permission from what I remember). There is also a segment where stolen remains are returned to their families but there is no appearence of the remains themselves on screen. From what I can tell/remember these scenes are treated with care and gravitas but I don't think I can be the one to say whether they were treated appropriately. Anything on colonialism is a hard watch, but this doco particularly follows on the unglamourised brutality of the frontier wars as well the lack of recognition on the wars from the Australian government/military and from the wider Australian public. That's on me for not disclosing that properly in the post.

[tredawakandan]

Decided to do a remake of AbTheLegend original post(1st pic) .. Us in America who descend from the indigenous people existing here Pre 👨🏻‍🦱 European arriving in mass/Colonization were talking amongst other groups and mixing with them as they arrived. This history is often hidden or ignored by mainstream. But luckily folks are starting to listen to them less and less😅. Hell the period of slavery also added some more of this as you may be aware of.Anyways these five main groups are Africans(North Africans,West&Central) , Pacific Islanders, South Americans , Black 👨🏿‍🦱Europeans and of course North Americans. Like other groups everywhere they mixed but what was important is they kept their identity/heritage. Something I amongst others is helping to revive. Me myself I call it the Through Line(See the reblog for more indepth use of what I made it mean) All being said hopefully you learned something 💯

[taylors-a-goblin]

I wrote this but my employers were too nervous about the swear words, so I published it myself :)

[bun-fish]

underrated movie, underrated queen. 7 y/o me had the biggest crush on her. (still do)

[bayofwolves]

i have to say, the fact that spirit animals borrowed multiple real-life dreamtime stories to use in stetriol's mythology but never once showed an aboriginal stetriolan character is just disrespectful.

[flokali]

I knew Natlan would disappoint in terms of diversity but damn… this is so bad I can’t even lie (TT)

[lottiestudying]

31.12.2023—almost New Year’s Day here in australia, so happy new year 🥳 thank u for all the love and support over the last 12 months, it’s been a crazy ride. some snaps from a museum we visited today.

[folkfashion]

Aboriginal Australian mother and child, Australia, by Trent White

[cartoonybus]

pnf revival hope: no more of this shit

[newguineatribalart]

Indigenous australian art by Billy Stockman Tjapaltjarri

[chernayawidow]

Indigenous Australians ARE BLACK. I’ve just come from tiktok after seeing lots of Americans say that First Nation people are not black. THERE ARE OTHER PLACES AND CULTURES IN THE WORLD OUTSIDE OF THE USA.

I myself am white, so if any Indigenous Australians are uncomfortable with me saying any of this please let me know and I’ll take it down. Or if any terms/information needs correction please please please let me know.

I have friends who are light skinned Indigenous and they should NOT have to defend their heritage against a country of ignorant fools. My primary example is Malakai and Missy from Heartbreak High, an AUSTRALIAN show, who are having their heritage erased because they’re not “black enough”. How the fuck are people saying that in 2023?

If your country cared enough to acknowledge the existence of others in the world, you would know that Indigenous Australians were subjected to the Stolen Generation. What’s that, you ask? Where Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander children were stolen from their families by governments, churches and welfare bodies to be raised in institutions, fostered out or adopted by non-Indigenous families, as a way of white washing them and erasing their culture and heritage.

TW: Racism, Death/Murder, Abuse - sexual and physical - (not graphic but mentioned)

They were abused, killed and raped by white people, as well as being forced to have their children as a way of “breeding out the black”. So when you guys say “they’re not black enough”, it’s one of the most disgusting and insensitive things you can say. The amount of pain Indigenous Australians have suffered is astounding, and they’re finally getting some on-screen representation. But here come you Americans, just shitting all over them. African American representation is extremely low, now guess what? Indigenous Australian representation is even lower. To the point where you guys don’t even know they exist.

To this day, they experience systemic racism at the hands of government, and especially the police. Not only that, but Australia is still fighting to change the date of “Australia Day” so that it doesn’t fall on Invasion Day. They’re trying to reclaim land that is rightfully theirs, as well as protect and maintain the preservation of what little history they have left. So before you go shitting on the oldest and longest running Indigenous culture in the world, do your fucking research.