Discrimination of Native American boys in schools

Actually, the United States Government recognizes long hair as part of the "religion" of Native American.


Shabazz v Barnauskas (1985)
Similarly, this case like the previous ones reiterate the view that the AIRFA provides no statutory protection. The native plaintiff
incarcerated in the Florida State Penitentiary charged that the prison’s regulation against long hair violated his First Amendment’s rights and
AIRFA. The court acknowledged the existence of the native religion and the importance of long hair as part of the religion. While there was First
Amendment constitutionality and AIRFA protection of religious rights, the court in the final analysis ruled that the public’s interest in maintaining
penal security outweighed the plaintiff’s First Amendment rights.1

Please note:"The court acknowledged the existence of the native religion and the importance of long hair as part of the religion."

Link here:
http://eaglefeather.org/series/Native%20American%20Series/Addendum%20Legal%20Cases%20Affecting%20Native%20American.pdf

And here again, recognizing native american "religion" and and explanation why I keep putting "religion" in quotes:

http://www.dickshovel.com/nar.html


"Native American Spirituality

Since the arrival of the "white man" to the lands of what is now known as the United States, Native Americans have been fighting to keep their spiritual practices alive. Right from the beginning, Native American religious practices were misunderstood and forbidden. Christian missionaries believed that Native Spirituality was a "worthless superstition inspired by the Christian devil, Satan."(4) The United States government tried to force Christianity upon the Indians in a desperate attempt to destroy their traditions and to assimilate them into white Christian society; but it soon became "apparent to United States political and Christian leaders that the political and religious forms of tribal life were so closely intertwined as to be inseparable, and that in order to successfully suppress tribal political activity, it was imperative that tribal religious activity be suppressed as well."(5)

As the United States government realized early on, Native American spirituality differs from Christian religious doctrine. For Christians, there is a distinct separation between religious practice and everyday activity.(6) For Native Americans, however, no such clear-cut distinction exists because religion cannot be separated from everyday life.(7) Even using the word "religion" to describe Native American spirituality is misguided, because it fails to take into consideration the inseparable connection between spirituality and culture. One cannot exist without the other. Native American spiritual observances are "guided by cycles, seasons and other natural related occurrences,"(8) and these spiritual aspects are inextricably woven into the culture itself.

Throughout the decades, United States policy in Indian affairs shifted, and eventually Congress took steps to establish certain protections for Native American religious practices. In 1978, Congress enacted the American Indian Religious Freedom Act which stated:

"t shall be the policy of the United States to protect and preserve for American Indians their inherent right of freedom to believe, express, and exercise the traditional religions of the American Indian, Eskimo, Aleut, and Native Hawaiians, including but not limited to access to sites, use and possession of sacred objects, and the freedom to worship through ceremonials and traditional rites."(9)

As promising as this Act appeared for Native Americans wanting to be free from governmental intrusion in practicing their native spirituality, it contained a fatal flaw: there was no provision for enforcement. The Supreme Court interpreted the Act to be merely a requirement that the government consult with the Indians about the potential devastating effects its actions might have on Indian religious practices.(10) For the Indian people, the Act meant absolutely nothing without provisions for enforcement. Many Native Americans ended up in prison for simply practicing their spirituality in the traditional ways that their ancestors had used since time immemorial.

Native American Spirituality In Prison

The struggle to practice native spirituality goes on each and every day inside the prisons. Most prison administrators are completely ignorant of native spirituality. They refuse to recognize that native ceremonies, spiritual teachings, and practices are not conducted on a weekly basis, as are Christian religious ceremonies,(11) but instead are "integrated into daily life, rather than reserved for a special day of the week."(12) Prison officials also fail to understand that "sacred pipes, eagle feathers, various herbs and the wearing of long hair are all integral parts of the ceremony necessary for native spiritual expression," in the same ways that church ceremonies involving the sacrament of communion and the wearing of crosses are for members of the Christian faith.(13) "


Perhaps this will help your lack of understanding. If not, then there is no longer a reason to address you.

 

Log in or Sign up to hide all adverts.

Very well said.

As a parent, I would be infuriated if someone else cut my child's hair. In fact, one time, my son's father allowed his girlfriend to give my son a haircut. A mohawk and dyed it blue. He was 7. Let's just say it came close to a physical confrontation. And she never did it again.

As native american, I understand the other aspect. Which gives this family a double slap in the face. It seems like just a simple apology face to face with a mediator of some sort would at least give the family some sense of relief. She couldn't even do that.


What bothers me the most about this, is that she turned the child to the mirror and had him look at himself and asked if it looked better. Maybe this was innocent. We don't know. But knowing the child was native american, it just seems a little malicious. In the least, destructive to promoting a child's pride in who they are and respecting a person's way of life. Even if he is a child or not. It would be like cutting a payot of a Jew. I could only imagine the outcry on that.

 

Log in or Sign up to hide all adverts.

My tribe is open to light skinned indians if that is what you are referring to. Or if it's open to other's learning their culture and heritage, they do that to. They actually go out and educate the community, as well as invite the community in from time to time.

 

Log in or Sign up to hide all adverts.

I grow tired of your implications that it is somehow me who needs to be educated.

Reflecting on the above Act. True or false. Bald men or men with short hair are allowed to practice all traditional ceremonials and rites in Native Am. religious ceremony equally with other members of that function?

 

And somehow by you, this proves that long hair is not a part of a native american's "religion"? You DO NEED TO BE EDUCATED.

First of all, through all the things I have shown to you, no where's does it say that bald men or men with short hair cannot practice their ways. In fact, there are different reasons for the men who do cut their hair short.

Let's start here.

Usually it is done to honor the death of a loved one.
Some chose to do it when they have gone through a very rough time, perhaps a divorce or even overcoming addictions. The reason for this is to start over a new person, almost like a cleansing and fresh start.

There are some who chose to conform with the outside world of the tribe. Some haven't been taught in the ways and do not understand the signifigance and connection long hair has to the spirituality within ones self.

Not only do men do all the above, but so do women. You don't hear about it because it is socially acceptable outside the tribe for women to wear long hair. But their feelings on the matter are just the same.

Listen here. I AM NATIVE AMERICAN. I AM LOWER UMPQUA, PART OF THE CONFEDERATED TRIBES. I DO NOT NEED TO BE EDUCATED. I was attempting to educate YOU, even providing United States LAWS that passed, written word, and video about how NATIVE AMERICANS feel that the connection of their long hair is part of their "religion", their way of life. I have told you of what I know, which is the indian way. The way we teach by word. Yet, talking to you is like trying to force the salmon downriver as they are on their way to spawn. You are much like my exhusband (and yes, I cut my long hair after leaving his ass). Once you think you have a point, no matter how much someone tries to show you that there is another way to look at it, you will not bend in the slightest. You want to prove your point. Sorry, but on this, you are misinformed.

The facts are that even the United States government recognizes that the long hair of native american is spritual to them, a part of their life and "religion". The fact that yes, men and women do cut their hair short, but usually there is a signifigant reason for it. No, tribes are not going to hold it against a member if they become bald, either from genetics or illnesses. Yes, there are some that do not embrace the way to the fullest, some who have not been taught or raised in the way, not understanding the full signifigance. Native Americans have been persecuted as well by christians and the "white man" and many tried, some suceeded in disorganizing the tribes, forcing and shaming them out of their heritage, their pride, their way of life, their "religion". Many of us are trying to get back to our roots, the ones who have been disassembled. We call it genocide. Why? Because we lost our homes, families, were raped, murdered, many many were forced to give up their names, their hair was purposely cut off. Even the settlers of those days understood the signifigance of having long hair then , so much it was one of the first things they did. To cut it off. To cut their spirit, their connection within ones self to Mother Earth. My god, native americans were the last to have their rights protected. Women gained the right to vote, blacks were liberated before we had any protection. I am not taking away from those two groups I mentioned. Just saying we were the last to be recognized by the government and obtain full rights. Yet, as shown, we still have to fight for them. Even something as silly as being able to wear our hair long in schools.

Please understand. I do not hate white people or blame those of today for what happened to my people. That was in the past. Indian way is to honor and respect all things on earth, nature and it's people.

And yes, if you do ask, I can provide you with proof of all I have said. I just find it tedious that you look for the tiniest of tiny things, taking it out of context to prove your "point". Your point has been shown over and over again false or misunderstood. I have tried to enlighten you to a different culture, way of life, different "religion". You continue to close your eyes so you can be right in a point that keeps on changing up slightly so, as I suspect, in the end you will try to say I proved you right. Not going to happen, so move on.

I think after dealing with you, I need to cut my hair again.:shrug:

 

NOTE quote below has been altered some with strikethrough and italics that are mine

So the answer is Hair length is a personal decision and not a religious mandate.

The OP was specifically about hair cutting and religious freedom. I happen to know why the vague terms "traditional First Nations dancing" were used. It is often competition, not a religious ceremony. Yes some religious aspects are involved, but we dont know if this boy would be a part of that aspect or just the competition part. Cultural? Yes. Religious? Not verified.

Football players often gather to pray before the game. That does not protect football as a religious ceremony (though some fans would argue its a religion for them).

From texas:
""I'm an Indian," Adriel says. "How long my hair is, it tells me how long I've been here.""

Superstition not religion. The length of hair is not a measure of age (peoples hair does not grow the same and bald men still have an age) and a measurement of age is not a religious teaching. A measurement of age may allow someone to participate in a religious ceremony, or advance in the practice of a religion, but in itself, age is not a religious teaching.

Now back to long hair as a protected right. It is under freedom of speech/expression, not religion. It falls under gender discrimination. Boys have a different standard than girls. The state can show no compelling interest to mandate boys wear their hair differently as demonstrated by the fact girls are not bound by the same requirement in the same environment, regardless of religious preference.

These are important distinctions because when you teach your child that hair length is a sign age, you displace it from the religion. When you teach your adolescent hair length is a sign of personal strength, you displace it from religion, and then later in life you decide to teach members hair length is a religious symbolism, it become personal whimsy rather than religious doctrine.

 

I see you are a moron. It is protected under the religion. I PROVIDED the proof. But YOU want it to not be, so you try to say it's not. I PROVIDED many links and such so you can try to understand that our "religion" is different than other regulated religions with rules. You have refused to look at it with an open mind. All you do is find the smallest of small mute point to TRY to prove your idea. Sorry, based on just your idea, it is not going to change the thing.

When the football players are able to prove and get protected with the united states government that it's their religion, then I will agree with you.

Pointless to argue with someone who doesn't look with open eyes and doesn't like to learn new concepts, ideas, or get a deeper understanding of things. Are you sure you aren't my exhusband?


And as for the little boy, that was the only way he could explain himself. It is the connection he has had with his spirituality within himself and to mother earth for that length of time. IF you have read some of the links I provided, watched some of the video i provided, you would have realized this. 5 year old may understand the concept but probably hard to tell a stranger in detail what it means. Before you present an arguement, educate yourself, when presented with information and facts, actually read them and try to understand them. Otherwise, you really can't argue in a meaninful way.

As of now, I am done with you. No point in arguing with someone who just likes to argue and will grasp at anything to do just that.

 

This is a discrimination of sex, not of ethnicity. He was not cut for being a native with long hair. Instead, he was cut for being a boy with long hair.

The long hair wouldn't have been okay if the boy was white or native. However, it mattered because he was not a girl.

 

The OP also featured other articles showing that this is a problem that native american men or boys face. That was the point.

But, I agree, whatever race the person is, they shouldn't be forced to cut their hair because someone else feels it is better to conform to their way of thinking or beliefs. No one should be forced to be an ideal person based on what others think.

 

and you are a drama queen. I have a hunch that the term "borderline personality" is familiar to you, possibly bi-polar also. But thats just a guess.

You provided unsubstantiated speculations on the term religion. There are things that link Native Am religion together, sky earth directional symbolisms (of course there are more) but the long hair issue is fluid. It varies from tribe/nation/band to tribe/nation/band just like various christian sects have variations.

And there are plenty of christian religions which have adherents who believe every aspect of their life is a practice of their religion, so for you to claim that nat.am religion is somehow 'different' is simply false, or the no true scotsman fallacy.

Ah, but it is a deeply held individual belief. Who are you to claim its different? I think it is silly, but they dont. Visit a church during a noon kickoff Vikings vs Packers football game.

And as far as your legal proof again, it leaves much to be desired. For example your excessive copy paste of the beginning of the text ignores the substantial rulings against Am Indian assertations, many of which I personally disagree with (sweats, pipes, medicine bags). However here is an example related to the topic, from one of your links:

"In Hamilton, a native inmate alleged that prison officials had violated his free exercise right by requiring him to cut his hair and by denying him access to a sweat lodge. (99) In its analysis, first the court considered all the penalogical interests and then concluded that the prison officials's actions were rationally related to legitimate penalogical interests of safety and security (applying the former Turner-O'Lone standard). Next the court went on to apply RFRA (just in case?) to the claims and came out exactly the same way, holding "the prison officials in the present case demonstrated that the prison regulation and policy at issue are the least restrictive means of maintaining the prison's compelling interest in institutional safety and security." (100)

However, I dont particularily like using prisoner lawsuit examples.

See, I did read the link about the boy. Quote from article:
"Rhodes asked [the parents] what religion upheld that Adriel could not cut his hair. The family explained there wasn't a church or doctrine they followed, but they believe that Adriel's hair is sacred."

But we have discussed this. There is no Am Indian religious doctrine on hair length.

And your avoidance of my point that

Is a true statement.

But in reading the texas article again, this pops up:
"Arocha's father and mother didn't embrace their Native American heritage. By Arocha's calculations, his family descends from a southwestern Apache tribe that split for Mexico in the 1880s, in fear of being herded onto a reservation. His ancestors are mixed Spanish-Apache, and a DNA profile has confirmed this."

I suppose DNA was used because he isnt a tribal member. I wonder if his blood percent is too low to become a tribal member. Or even is he a US citizen? The apache DNA alone sure doesnt prove that. Do the apache now have legalized gambling?

 

What?
Now you're qualified to make a diagnosis? Over an internet forum?

Brilliant.

This really... is all that's needed.

 

There has been a great deal of quality information provided for you in this thread, which you seem to have failed to absorb fully, or alternatively, sought to reinterpret in light of your evidently entrenched (and often erroneous) notions of what's what. You also seem to have a great deal of trouble with concepts such as "variations from the norm" or "themes within themes" and so forth, seeming instead to feel that things must be a certain way, and always and only a certain way, in order for them to be anything at all.

There's also a somewhat bitter air and antagonistic air to your posts, with an escalating back note of hostility.

Perhaps the easiest thing, would to accept that it really doesn't matter what you think.

Legislation and (primarily) Native American peoples have got it all figured out. And that's all that counts.

 

I have a hunch that the term "borderline personality" is familiar to you, possibly bi-polar also. But thats just a guess.

The above indicates OTHERS have made the diagnosis. Hence the terms "possibly" and "guess".

If your ability to read/comprehend the text is any indication of your ability to relay oral instruction, I would suggest those curious about the traditions of Native Americans seek verification of your interpretations.

You want to discuss the topic?

Participating in First Nations traditional dancing is a competition or a show much like the touring of broadways Rockets or line dancing competitions. An example:

http://www.firstnationsuniversity.ca/default.aspx?page=301

Agenda near bottom. Note the Dance Exhibitions Champion, Teen and Youth Divisions and Dance Competitions. Also notice the Beauty pagent?

See, they have competitions. There is a reason why charges were not filed on the religious infringement issue. This kid wasnt participating in a religious ceremony.

Quote from article linked in OP:
"“For First Nations this is a painful and harsh reminder of what our children suffered in the residential schools, where braids were cut as part of the overall denigration of our people and culture,” said Ontario Regional Chief Angus Toulouse. “"

See, culture not religion. I dont know how much higher of an authority than the elder Toulouse words to figure out the issue isnt about religion/spirituality when the Regional chief himself avoids those words and chooses the term culture.

 

But isnt that what you are doing?

 

Actually discrimination is treating someone differently so if a few kids get to keep their hair long and the others dont then they are discriminating against the others.

 

My ability to read is not based on your attempt to appeal to the way you veiled your insult in order to make yourself look innocent.

Very few people around here are so stupid as to believe a word of what you just tried to pass off.

 

They aren't ashamed of their heritage, they are embarrassed by the Native Americans they know. Ever seen anyone blind drunk?
At the end of the month when the gvmt check runs out, you would be amazed at how many blind drunk Indians turn up at the hospital because they drank hair spray, rubbing alcohol, or Aqua Velva (they smell good though!!)

Its the apathy that's embarrassing. All talk, no action

 

And how exactly am I doing this?

 

From what i have read you want a teachers aide to be perfect based on what someone else is thinking.

 

Perfect? No, to do their job, which does not include cutting someone elses hair.

Truth is, if you take on the job of working with children, you take on a high responsibilty. If you don't like your job or can't do it properly, then you don't belong around children. A job like that is a big responsibility. It's not just pushing paper around, you are dealing with shaping a child's mind, teaching them. It isn't the easiest job in the world. I give major credit to our teachers and aides, I don't think they get paid enough for what they do.

But yeah, when I see someone abusing that power or authority they have, that's just screwed up and it irrates me. But to be perfect? Not a living soul is perferct, so I wouldn't expect that. But to be responsible and resposible for a mistake? Not a real high expectation.