Critically Sovereign: Indigenous Gender, Sexuality, and Feminist Studies

by Joanne Barker

Overview

Critically Sovereign traces the ways in which gender is inextricably a part of Indigenous politics and U.S. and Canadian imperialism and colonialism. The contributors show how gender, sexuality, and feminism work as co-productive forces of Native American and Indigenous sovereignty, self-determination, and epistemology. Several essays use a range of literary and legal texts to analyze the production of colonial space, the biopolitics of "Indianness," and the collisions and collusions between queer theory and colonialism within Indigenous studies. Others address the U.S. government's criminalization of traditional forms of Diné marriage and sexuality, the Iñupiat people's changing conceptions of masculinity as they embrace the processes of globalization, Hawai'i's same-sex marriage bill, and stories of Indigenous women falling in love with non-human beings such as animals, plants, and stars. Following the politics of gender, sexuality, and feminism across these diverse historical and cultural contexts, the contributors question and reframe the thinking about Indigenous knowledge, nationhood, citizenship, history, identity, belonging, and the possibilities for a decolonial future.

Contributors. Jodi A. Byrd, Joanne Barker, Jennifer Nez Denetdale, Mishuana Goeman, J. Kēhaulani Kauanui, Melissa K. Nelson, Jessica Bissett Perea, Mark Rifkin

Product Details

ISBN-13:	9780822363651
Publisher:	Duke University Press
Publication date:	04/28/2017
Edition description:	New Edition
Pages:	286
Sales rank:	1,061,958
Product dimensions:	6.00(w) x 9.00(h) x 0.60(d)

About the Author

Joanne Barker is Professor of American Indian Studies at San Francisco State University, the author of Native Acts: Law, Recognition, and Cultural Authenticity, also published by Duke University Press, and the editor of Sovereignty Matters: Locations of Contestation and Possibility in Indigenous Struggles for Self-Determination.

Read an Excerpt

Critically Sovereign

Indigenous Gender, Sexuality, and Feminist Studies

---

By Joanne Barker

Duke University Press

Copyright © 2017 Duke University Press
All rights reserved.
ISBN: 978-0-8223-6339-2

---

CHAPTER 1

INDIGENOUS HAWAIIAN SEXUALITY AND THE POLITICS OF NATIONALIST DECOLONIZATION

J. KEHAULANI KAUANUI

We put out a kahea [call] to our community to stand in support of ALL members of our 'ohana [extended, intergenerational family] and in support of S[enate] B[ill] 1 and marriage equality. ... We will not sit by idly and allow people to use Hawaiian culture and concepts to promote discrimination and replicate the very oppression that has been used against us for 200 years. Ua Mau ke Ea o ka 'Aina i ka Pono! The life of the land is perpetuated in justice! True Aloha does not discriminate. #truealoha — "True Aloha" Facebook page, https://www.facebook.com/truealoha/info

On October 31, 2013, the group True Aloha used social media to ask Kanaka Maoli (Native Hawaiians) to attend a rally at the State Capitol, under the banner "Aloha Does Not Discriminate," to support a proposal before the Hawai'i state legislature to legalize same-sex marriage. The announcement also called for Kanaka Maoli to wear their brightest kihei (a rectangular cloth that rests over one shoulder, like a cloak) "in order to have a Kanaka Rainbow" and to bring pu (conch shells that are blown like trumpets in ceremonies and at public events), along with "signs that express true meanings of 'ohana and aloha (love and more) and that support marriage equality for all."

The previous month, on September 9, Governor Neil Abercrombie announced that he would hold a special session on October 28 to consider the proposed Hawaii Marriage Equality Act. Tensions in the islands over the matter were heated, and there was even threat of a citizens' filibuster to block it. In the midst of the statewide split over the issue, both proponents and opponents invoked Indigenous Hawaiian cultural models to their advantage, making for contested discourse regarding Kanaka Maoli tradition and sexuality. As part of that challenge, True Aloha was formed "to promote and support the authentic Hawaiian cultural value of aloha, which is an inclusive concept of love, compassion, and sympathy that does not discriminate against others." In addition to those who attended in response, people all across the island of O'ahu came together at the State Capitol in Honolulu to rally in support of the bill. They held signs that read "Kanakas for Equality" and "True Aloha Is Boundless = Marriage Equality for All" (which included the red-and-pink version of the Human Rights Campaign's equal sign logo). On the flip side, those opposed to the bill held the Hawai'i state flag (also the Hawaiian Kingdom flag) and chanted, "Let us vote! Let us vote!" while some held signs with the plea, "Save Our 'Ohana!" Despite the division across Hawai'i, the legislature passed the bill on November 12, 2013. In part to respond to the opposition, the law included a religious exemption, modeled after Connecticut state law, to protect religious groups and clergy who do not want to solemnize or participate in same-sex weddings.

Notably, it was the 1990 Hawai'i case on same-sex marriage that set off passage of the Defense of Marriage Act (DOMA) in 1996. In the lawsuit, originally known as Baehr v. Lewin (later, Baehr v. Miike), three same-sex couples argued that Hawai'i's prohibition of same-sex marriage violated the state constitution's equal rights amendment regarding gender. In 1993, the Hawaii State Supreme Court ruled in Baehr v. Lewin that refusing to grant marriage licenses to same-sex couples was discriminatory under the state's constitution. With regard to the couples involved in the Baehr case, the state was required to justify its position of opposing the marriages — to show that it had a "rational interest" in denying them this right. Also in 1993, the same year the court ruled in Baehr, the U.S. Congress passed a joint resolution apologizing to the Hawaiian people for the 1893 overthrow, which acknowledged that "the indigenous Hawaiian people never directly relinquished their claims to their inherent sovereignty as a people or over their national lands to the United States, either through their monarchy or through a plebiscite or referendum." This development pushed the Hawaiian sovereignty question in a big way and added fuel to rapidly growing nationalist mobilization — critical context for the groups organizing during that period that weighed in on the issue of sexual diversity.

As the Hawai'i case moved through the courts, the U.S. Congress passed DOMA in 1996 as dozens of states and a number of tribal nations passed statutes and constitutional amendments banning same-sex unions. By 1998, the passage of an amendment to the Hawaii state constitution allowed the state legislature to enact a ban on same-sex marriage, stating, "The legislature shall have the power to reserve marriage to opposite-sex couples." That led to the dismissal of the case in 1999. Once taken out of the Hawaiian context, public discourse of Kanaka Maoli tradition and sexuality waned in some ways, and the same-sex marriage debate seemed to drop out of the Indigenous nationalist context.

In this chapter, I discuss nation-based accounts of Indigenous sovereignty and interrogations of the legal power of the settler state and foreground Indigenous criticism of the overarching colonial and gendered/sexualized power relations facing Kanaka Maoli within the Hawaiian sovereignty movement. Through a historical recollection of activist mobilizations, dialogues, and political struggle I draw close attention to the interrelationships and difficult dialogues that characterize Indigenous activist praxis. I reflect on the Hawaiian sovereignty movement during the early to mid-1990s to document some of the practices of exclusion, mis-recognition, and misrepresentation in that period to provide context for reading the contemporary gestures of True Aloha. I offer a brief case study of a group of Kanaka Maoli bisexual, lesbian, gay, transgender, and mahu (BLGTM) individuals called Na Mamo o Hawai'i,which emerged in 1993 amid two, perhaps competing projects: the civil rights struggle for same-sex marriage in Hawai'i and the sovereign rights struggle for the restoration of a Hawaiian nation. Members of Na Mamo courageously pushed Kanaka Maoli at large to consider all forms of decolonization, and their open reclamation of Indigenous practices with regard to sexual politics enabled a space to consider a more complex view of how people think about traditional Hawaiian norms with regard to sexuality and intimate unions. Moreover, they worked to challenge haole (white or foreign) oppression in this area of political organizing and erasure by both dominant gay activists in Hawai'i and Hawaiian sovereignty leaders. Importantly, Na Mamo was able to change the nature of sovereignty discussions by challenging long-held beliefs about the prevalence of same-sex sexuality in Hawaiian history. However, as I show, even when activists acknowledged that Hawaiian gender and sexual diversity is part of recognized traditions — and not a colonial import — that concession did not necessarily guarantee that the conversation was welcome. Too often, leaders admitted same-sex sexual traditions in Hawaiian culture as an excuse for nationalist exclusion.

What follows here is a modest offering of the history of BLGTM recognition as it relates to Hawaiian sovereignty and an examination of some of the forms of cultural and political acknowledgment within the nationalist movement. I hope to provide insights as to the changing nature of debates about Hawaiian tradition during a very particular period of nationalist activism. After a brief historical background regarding Hawaiian history with regard to gender and sexuality and the transformation of Indigenous sovereignty, I provide an account of the early work of Na Mamo in engaging Hawaiian sovereignty groups and recount a personal experience at a nationalist forum where I was invited to work alongside members who made an intervention that had a deeply ambivalent reception. I then return to the politics of True Aloha as the project and the state logics of marriage. In conclusion, I argue that while there is Indigenous cultural revitalization of Hawaiian concepts that may be considered part of broader cultural decolonization, the state legislature's passage of the same-sex marriage bill is a form of settler colonial continuity. In light of the unlawful U.S.-backed overthrow of 1893 and the annexation of an independent state in 1898, those in the Hawaiian nationalist movement contest the legitimacy of the so-called fiftieth state. Besides this form of imperialism wrought by occupation, the Hawaiian sovereignty question is bound up with the ongoing processes of settler colonialism. In Hawai'i, same-sex marriage extends the colonial imposition of male-female marriage to the contemporary politics of assimilation and affirmation of U.S. occupation under the cover of inclusion in a multiracial liberal democracy in the "land of aloha."

Historical Background

Hawaiians had a range of models of gender and sexual diversity. For example, traditional ways to register interest in an enduring intimate relationship were called awaiulu (to bind securely, fasten, tie) or ho'ao (to stay until daylight). The intimate relationships between kane (man) and wahine (woman) are sometimes referred to in the literature as "marriage," but that term does not correspond to Kanaka relationships. Both men and women were autonomous in all conjugal relations. From the historical research of Lilikala Kame'eleihiwa and Noenoe K. Silva, respectively, it is clear that bisexuality was normative and that polygamy and polyandry also were not uncommon. In addition, there were distinct categories of same-sex sexual relationships, such as the aikane, a same-sex intimate friendship that might include sexual relations. There were also mahu, mentioned earlier, and the category of punalua to describe a situation in which two men were with the same woman or two women were with the same man. High-ranking Hawaiian women and men held governing positions as paramount chiefs and lesser chiefs before the formation of the monarchy in the early nineteenth century. As Jocelyn Linnekin documents, women of all genealogical ranks were considered strong, autonomous within the context of an interdependent polity, and active agents. Historically, Kanaka women were "symbolically associated with land, valued as producers of high cultural goods, held a separate domain of female ritual and social power ... and were points of access to rank, land, and political power." The reformation of these Indigenous norms and practices was central to the nineteenth-century Western civilizing process, in which the bourgeois family was the model to be emulated.

From 1795 to 1810, Kamehameha violently converted a Hawaiian society of multiple paramount island chiefs into a monarchy. The kingdom had strong Indigenous elements at the start, but by the 1840s it had become increasingly westernized. To gain access to the exclusive nineteenth-century Family of Nations, it was important for the kingdom to present itself as Christian. This was made possible by the American Board of Commissioners for Foreign Missions' initiation of conversion through the first mission to Hawai'i, which began in 1820. In this context, marriage itself was a colonial imposition, with coverture being a prime determinant of Hawaiian women's shift in status. Based on English common law and operative in the United States at the time, after marriage a woman's separate legal existence was negated and brought under her husband's.

The representation of the nation as part of "civilized manhood" was crucial, especially for a Polynesian brown people considered irrational, savage (yet childlike), and oversexed. The acceptance of the kingdom by world powers necessitated an independent nation that displayed a masculine face, which served as a sign of modernity. This major reorganization of social arrangements by Kanaka elites — male and female — to create new norms was a political strategy to fight Western racism, yet it necessitated a capitulation to that racism in the transformation of the Indigenous polity.

Favored Descendants?

From the start of Na Mamo's existence, members drew from a range of Hawaiian symbols while working to secure a rightful place within various competing nationalist groups. They insisted on the recognition that their claims to these same-sex civil rights had a place within the same-sex legacies already identified within traditional Hawaiian cultural practices. The nature of the terms in which Na Mamo activists traced same-sex relations mark them as an integral part of "Indigenous tradition."

Within Na Mamo's political discourse, genealogy was a central theme. For example, in an article on the group published in 1996 in the Village Voice, a co-founder, Ku'umeaaloha Gomes, explained that King Kamehameha had had an aikane (male lover) named Kuakini, whom she identified as a high chief who later governed Hawai'i Island. In relation to this history, she told how the group got its name: before going into battle, King Kamehameha called his warriors "na mamo," meaning "favored descendants." Gomes's invocation of royal naming practices worked to insinuate members of the group within a particular Hawaiian lineage. It also exemplifies a central feature of Hawaiian genealogical practices, in which people trace ascent, selectively choosing their way upward. In other words, Na Mamo insisted that Hawaiian same-sex legacies can be drawn on to bolster contemporary identities in terms of who Hawaiians are in the present, not just who they were in "ancient times." Within a Hawaiian ontological frame, genealogical precedence holds powerful sway in how the present is regarded, explained, and authorized. As another co-founder, Noenoe Silva, stated in an interview, "Homosexuality wasn't a despised trait in ancient Hawai'i. It is part of our culture that the Christians have made our k[u]puna feel ashamed about. But within our own families it's tacitly accepted — people aren't shunned from the family. Now maybe it's time for that side of our Hawaiian culture to come out of the closet and to say 'yes, we're part of the family.'" Those affiliated with Na Mamo made a point to claim a Native lineage for their work and in doing so attempted to secure a place in Hawaiian nationalist culture.

When asked about Hawaiian reception regarding differences when it comes to sexuality, many Kanaka Maoli leaders acknowledged that Hawaiians are mostly an accepting people. But their reception was limited: some leaders suggested that group members were being divisive by raising the "gay question" and thus threatening political unity. In asking what claims BLGTM Hawaiians had at the time within the multiple and competing sovereignty groups and citizenship models, Na Mamo challenged Hawaiian sovereignty leaders to demonstrate their recognition. Gomes posed the challenge, "If we are creating these new nations, this new Hawaiian nation, and do not include homosexuals equally, then aren't we recreating the status quo?" This was one of several direct calls to leaders asking them to delineate their groups' position statements with regard to bisexual, lesbian, gay, transgender, and mahu inclusion.

Soon after, Hawaiian sovereignty leaders responded to the call, with assistance from Susan Miller, in interviews published in a special issue of the gay magazine Island Lifestyle. The first leader Miller interviewed was Kekuni Blaisdell, a longtime independence activist and the then-head of Ka Pakaukau, a coalition of organizations and individuals pursuing self-determination and independence. He answered questions about sexual politics in a way that acknowledged diverse Hawaiian legacies of varying forms of intimate expression. "It's not enough for sovereign organizations to say they don't discriminate," he argued. "In the plans for a new nation, sovereignty leaders must go beyond unwritten understandings with some type of formal policy to address how to recognize sexuality difference as an accepted part of the tradition of Kanaka Maoli." Blaisdell clearly reminded us that "tolerance" is not enough; implicit acceptance is insufficient within the context of Hawaiian self-governance. In other words, he urged people to consider formal inclusion and to acknowledge the spectrum of sexual practices and identities as normative.

Miller next interviewed A'o Pohaku Kailala, the head of the Nation of Ku, another sovereignty organization. Pohaku stated, "Pre-Christianity, being gay was not a problem." When asked about her position on the inclusion of gays within the nation, Kaiala said, "I guess the time has come, since gay marriages and gays are becoming more open about their human rights. They have every right to fight for that. Hawaiians need to start looking at this and give support to other groups who are fighting for basic human rights. The Hawaiian movement is about basic human rights." Pohaku also openly acknowledged that one of her sons is gay and explicitly said, "Basic human rights for gays is also a cultural issue ... and it is not our position to make this a moral issue. ... That's why there needs to be more education." Further, she stated, "For the Nation of Ku, we would have no reservation including anyone. We would love to take affirmative action. And I would love to work with gays or whoever [sic] chooses to work for the benefit of the nation." Pohaku's use of the term "affirmative action" is important and highlights her proactive stance, especially since she also refers to human rights, which are more encompassing than civil rights. Interestingly, she notes that this is a "cultural issue," not a moral one, which seems to be her approach to affirming same-sex sexuality as a Hawaiian cultural norm.

(Continues...)

---

Excerpted from Critically Sovereign by Joanne Barker. Copyright © 2017 Duke University Press. Excerpted by permission of Duke University Press.
All rights reserved. No part of this excerpt may be reproduced or reprinted without permission in writing from the publisher.
Excerpts are provided by Dial-A-Book Inc. solely for the personal use of visitors to this web site.

---

Table of Contents

Introduction Critically Sovereign Joanne Barker 1

1 Indigenous Hawaiian Sexuality and the Politics of Nationalist Decolonization J. Kehaulani Kauanui 45

2 Return to "The Uprising at Beautiful Mountain in 1913" Marriage and Sexuality in the Making of the Modern Navajo Nation Jennifer Nez Denetdale 69

3 Ongoing Storms and Struggles Gendered Violence and Resource Exploitation Mishuana R. Goeman 99

4 Audiovisualizing Inupiaq Men and Masculinities On the Ice Jessica Bissett Perea 127

5 Around 1978 Family, Culture, and Race in the Federal Production of Indianness Mark Rifkin 169

6 Loving Unbecoming The Queer Politics of the Transitive Native Joni A. Byrd 207

7 Getting Dirty: The Eco-Eroticism of Women in Indigenous Oral Literatures Melissa K. Nelson 229

Contributor Biographies 261

Index 263

What People are Saying About This

Spaces between Us: Queer Settler Colonialism and Indigenous Decolonization - Scott L. Morgensen

"This volume argues compellingly that Indigenous peoplehood, landed inhabitance, and interrogations of the power of settler states should focalize theories of gender and sexuality, and that gender and sexual politics must be understood as being key to the very question of indigeneity within Indigenous studies. Critically Sovereign will have a lasting impact within numerous fields for years to come."

Dancing on Our Turtle's Back: Stories of Nishnaabeg Re-Creation, Resurgence, and a New Emergence - Leanne Betasamosake Simpson

"Critically Sovereign is pure Indigenous brilliance from start to finish, making intelligent, incisive, and elegant interventions in fields often wrought by division and controversy. These outstanding essays embody the highest levels of excellence and ground conversations around gender, sexuality, and feminist studies in the proper frame—Indigenous self-determination. This is a book I've been waiting for."

Editorial Reviews

"Critically Sovereign is not only a necessary reading for those studying Indigenous politics, it should also be considered a required reading for scholars and activists who study race and ethnicity, gender and sexuality, and colonialism."

--Brionca Taylor "Gender & Society"

"Critically Sovereign offers a strong addition to scholarship or graduate-level coursework engaged with global feminisms. . . . Critically Sovereign provides a timely entry point into the seismic stakes and shifts within Native American and Indigenous studies."--Kirisitina Sailiata "Feminist Review" (3/1/2019 12:00:00 AM)

"A powerful and urgently needed anthology. . . . Critically Sovereign is an essential text for anyone engaged in feminist and queer theory or projects of decolonization."--Stephanie Lumsden "American Indian Culture and Research Journal" (4/1/2017 12:00:00 AM)

"For those of us seeking to grow our equity work in educational settings, reading essays like those in this collection allow us to privilege-check our own approaches. The denseness of the material aside, each piece acts as a motivator for equity work and as a reminder that this work cannot be done in a vacuum, and can never be complete without an understanding of intersectionality."--Tracey Germa "Education Forum" (12/1/2017 12:00:00 AM)

"This collection rejects the elimination of the Indigenous through the erasure of gender and sexuality. For the queer, femme, and two-spirit people at the center of Indigenous movements for autonomy and freedom, this is a deeply important project. Critically Sovereign is an opening salvo in what I hope is a burgeoning intellectual and intersectional field."
--Anne Spice "Women's Studies Quarterly" (11/1/2018 12:00:00 AM)

"Through a collective of brilliant voices, the essays in this book grapple with the significance of gender, sexuality, and politics with searing wisdom. Critically Sovereign gives readers a reason to hope for a decolonized tomorrow."--Dianca Potts "Signature" (1/19/2018 12:00:00 AM)

From the Publisher

"This collection rejects the elimination of the Indigenous through the erasure of gender and sexuality. For the queer, femme, and two-spirit people at the center of Indigenous movements for autonomy and freedom, this is a deeply important project. Critically Sovereign is an opening salvo in what I hope is a burgeoning intellectual and intersectional field."
 

Women's Studies Quarterly - Anne Spice

"Through a collective of brilliant voices, the essays in this book grapple with the significance of gender, sexuality, and politics with searing wisdom. Critically Sovereign gives readers a reason to hope for a decolonized tomorrow."

Signature - Dianca Potts

"Critically Sovereign offers a strong addition to scholarship or graduate-level coursework engaged with global feminisms. . . . Critically Sovereign provides a timely entry point into the seismic stakes and shifts within Native American and Indigenous studies."

Feminist Review - Kirisitina Sailiata

Critically Sovereign is not only a necessary reading for those studying Indigenous politics, it should also be considered a required reading for scholars and activists who study race and ethnicity, gender and sexuality, and colonialism.”

Gender & Society - Brionca Taylor

"For those of us seeking to grow our equity work in educational settings, reading essays like those in this collection allow us to privilege-check our own approaches. The denseness of the material aside, each piece acts as a motivator for equity work and as a reminder that this work cannot be done in a vacuum, and can never be complete without an understanding of intersectionality."

Education Forum - Tracey Germa

"A powerful and urgently needed anthology. . . . Critically Sovereign is an essential text for anyone engaged in feminist and queer theory or projects of decolonization."

American Indian Culture and Research Journal - Stephanie Lumsden

"This volume argues compellingly that Indigenous peoplehood, landed inhabitance, and interrogations of the power of settler states should focalize theories of gender and sexuality, and that gender and sexual politics must be understood as being key to the very question of indigeneity within Indigenous studies. Critically Sovereign will have a lasting impact within numerous fields for years to come."

Spaces between Us: Queer Settler Colonialism and Indigenous Decolonization - Scott L. Morgensen

"Critically Sovereign is pure Indigenous brilliance from start to finish, making intelligent, incisive, and elegant interventions in fields often wrought by division and controversy. These outstanding essays embody the highest levels of excellence and ground conversations around gender, sexuality, and feminist studies in the proper frame—Indigenous self-determination. This is a book I've been waiting for."

Dancing on Our Turtle's Back: Stories of Nishnaabeg Re-Creation, Resurgence, and a New Emergence - Leanne Betasamosake Simpson