NAFPS Forum

Quote from: BlackWolf on November 02, 2009, 02:21:25 PM
Again, I think this term is misleading "PODIA" for the above mentioned reasons.  I prefer the term "people who claim Cherokee" ancestry in regards to those claiming to be Cherokee and can't prove it. Its more accurate and its a neutral word. 

Blackwolf, MamaPorcupine, I can't speak specificallly to the Cherokee, or Cherokee nation, given the specifics of tribal enrollment in those cases, but there really are real PODIA in fact, with DNA to prove it.

I am surprised that the CNO did not ask that applicants provide as much genealogical information as they could, and DNA test results. The 60% CNO number for a satellite community seems high, but that's their decision.

The thought of the political power of the Cherokee if even 1/3 of those who are claiming descent actually do have it and become involved keeps coming to my mind.

The other thought that keeps coming to me is that I am back east, and do not know the politics of Oklahoma, nor of the Cherokee in Oklahoma or back in the Qualla lands. But then that is their business. It will be interesting to follow Cherokee affairs and see what may be applicable to the Shawnee.

Quote from: E.P. Grondine on November 03, 2009, 01:26:25 AM
I am surprised that the CNO did not ask that applicants provide as much genealogical information as they could, and DNA test results. The 60% CNO number for a satellite community seems high, but that's their decision.

The thought of the political power of the Cherokee if even 1/3 of those who are claiming descent actually do have it and become involved keeps coming to my mind.

The other thought that keeps coming to me is that I am back east, and do not know the politics of Oklahoma, nor of the Cherokee in Oklahoma or back in the Qualla lands. But then that is their business. It will be interesting to follow Cherokee affairs and see what may be applicable to the Shawnee

I tend to think that over the course of the 6 months probation period that ones linage would be discussed in an informal way. But never the less the discussion should have names pop up that would be recognized. As for DNA I tend to think that they feel it is still in it's infancy so it may not carry the same weight that ones personality and linage would at this time. (just my thoughts, I may not have said that just right )

<The thought of the political power of the Cherokee if even 1/3 of those who are claiming descent actually do have it and become involved keeps coming to my mind.>

Please explain???

Paul123 said

QuoteThere was some talk about descendants of intruders claiming to be Cherokee. Well they were Cherokee. Their father may have been the intruder (trader) but their mother Was and the children and their descendants Are Cherokee. To paint them as anything else is disrespectful.

Paul, I wasn't talking about the descendants of white intruders and Cherokees.  I agree with you.  The descendents of these people would yes, be Cherokeee.  I was talkling about the descendents of white intruders who "did not" intermix with the Cherokees

Reading this all very interesting information.  My thoughts..  why are people so lost that if one great grandmom was Cherokee (or any other) and all the rest were white/european... I mean, what am I missing?  I guess I'm reading this and feeling confused.  Do these people have no family feeling connection to their more recent and more 'abundant' blood portions? 

I don't understand the 'drive' within someone to go seeking membership/acceptance from a tribe because one relative in a long chain of relatives was Cherokee or other tribe.  I think it's bogus.  I think, a white European baby born into a tribe and 'raised' within the culture is more 'ndn' than any of these folks with great grandma being ndn. 

Blood is well, ok.. so, it doesn't 'mean' that much to me... not as much as the 'family fold' even if you're not of the same blood, if it's where you've been raised, and taught, if it's your home, family and culture..  that speaks more to me than someone with great grandma being of the tribe. 

I mean, sure, a full blood is going to have family roots, history.. but someone with a drop of 'great' grandma's blood? 

Either these people want in because there's a monetary gain, OR they are truly lost folks who need something to make them feel special, never realizing their own more abundant family roots/history is just as special.  Lost people.  It's sad.  :(

Quote from: critter on November 03, 2009, 04:40:52 AM
Reading this all very interesting information.  My thoughts..  why are people so lost that if one great grandmom was Cherokee (or any other) and all the rest were white/european... I mean, what am I missing?  I guess I'm reading this and feeling confused.  Do these people have no family feeling connection to their more recent and more 'abundant' blood portions? 

I don't understand the 'drive' within someone to go seeking membership/acceptance from a tribe because one relative in a long chain of relatives was Cherokee or other tribe.  I think it's bogus.  I think, a white European baby born into a tribe and 'raised' within the culture is more 'ndn' than any of these folks with great grandma being ndn. 

Blood is well, ok.. so, it doesn't 'mean' that much to me... not as much as the 'family fold' even if you're not of the same blood, if it's where you've been raised, and taught, if it's your home, family and culture..  that speaks more to me than someone with great grandma being of the tribe. 

I mean, sure, a full blood is going to have family roots, history.. but someone with a drop of 'great' grandma's blood? 

Either these people want in because there's a monetary gain, OR they are truly lost folks who need something to make them feel special, never realizing their own more abundant family roots/history is just as special.  Lost people.  It's sad.  :(

Well I have to disagree with you here. I think???
It's hard to tell where you are coming from here, in one paragraph you say that blood doesn't mean that much and then in the next you poke fun because they are someone with a drop of 'great' grandma's blood?
 
There are thousands of people with that yearning.  I for one am one of those.  I have money (not a lot, but enough), family, friends, social involvement, Faith and education.  I'm not lost or sad,,, nor are the thousands of others (well may be a few). You can easily poke fun at them because you don't understand them by belittling them with statements about a low BQ of their granny. That's your choice.  I guess that's human nature. If you don't understand it that's cool, I don't either, If on the other hand it's just because they weren't raised in the culture,,, well trust me it wasn't their choice, and I see nothing wrong with wanting to learn about it now.

I will remind you that the CNO has card carrying members with low BQ's. the lowest is I think 1/4047th, They have Counsel members with 1/256th. I'd love to explain to ya that they have a granny with a low BQ  too, so what does that have to do with being NDN? or are we back to the card thingy? You may not even be aware of what you just did. What you did was to accept a very low BQ from a citizen by saying that blood doesn't mean that much and then put down someone else that doesn't have a card because of a low BQ. I won't tell you how to think but, if it were me, I'd put them down because of who they are, not who their granny was. but that's just me,,,

There is a person in the CNO doing their dissertation for their PhD  on this very subject. I asked if that person was considering the spiritual side of things to explain it. All I got for an answer was a small smile and a wink. I dunno,, could be something here that no one else is putting into the picture. Perhaps only an Indian Doctor would know, and they won't say.   

Well said, Paul! I have to add, Great grandmothers are not so distant. I knew two of mine as a child.

I'm sorry you thought I was poking fun at anyone.  And I'm sorry you thought I was putting someone down.  Wasn't. 

I don't believe there is anything more 'special' about ndn blood/dna than any other blood/dna and that the yearning would be there regardless, a yearning for whatever 'spiritual' or whatever it is that is felt.  If a whole white person has a yearning, should we pity them because they have no ndn blood therefore, can't get their foot in the door? Many people have the same yearning you talk of, but are not of ndn descent. 

And I still don't believe that blood/dna from one relative is more important than the blood/dna from another relative. 

I guess I am not able to completely express my self, so I will leave it.  Just know I am not putting anyone down or poking fun at them, but that psychological reasons, I believe, are at play here, more so than having 1/4047 of ndn blood. 

EP Groundine

QuoteI can't speak specificallly to the Cherokee, or Cherokee nation, given the specifics of tribal enrollment in those cases, but there really are real PODIA in fact, with DNA to prove it.

I didn't say there isn't any such thing as PODIAs. That's obviously not true...

I also didn't say I thought mtDNA should be used to draw conclusions about any individuals ancestry , as it only shows the matrilineal line. What it is useful for is showing the big picture and general heritage of a group.

What I did say , which is based on the evidence I have seen , is that for every real person of distant ancestry there is about 9 others making unfounded claims. I have also seen this in people i have met , when you begin asking questions about their family, but mtDNA evidence is more easy to present here.

I agree that a great grandmother can be a large influence. A great grandparent can also be no influence at all. It all depends on the family and community a person grew up in.

I know a number of people who are 1/4 or 1/8 , who didn't grow up in a Native community and didn't have much contact with their grandparent and while they all have stories about their family and an interest in all their history , they don't feel any sense of not belonging in the culture they live in , or a "longing" to reconnect. And I have asked. Some of these folks I know very well.

The difference is probably that the tribes these peoples ancestors came from
have very restrictive enrollment policies , and there is no perception that people with a similar line of descent have the ability to enroll, while unfairly, they do not.

It seems the CNO's enrollment criteria which allows extremely distant descendents to be enrolled, is frequently used as a justification and inspiration by wannabes. 

I agree that this can depend a lot on individual circumstances, and even a small amount of ancestry can have a voice to some people, but what Critter is saying about the importance of this depending on a combination of what is in the head and what is in the blood, is, IMO , entirely correct 

And I didn't hear anything in what Critter said that sounded like putting anyone down or poking fun at anyone - though maybe the common sense in their words made Paul feel foolish ... Accusing Critter of poking fun and putting people down  just seems to me to be the often used tactic, of trying to play the victim , when in fact, most of these people aren't victims of anything. IMO , the real victims is the Native people who are expected to take care of the unrealistic demands of a group where probably 9 out of 10 of the people are discontented non-natives who are confused about their family background .......   

CNO only allows enrollment of people that are directly decended from folks on the Dawes rolls. Blood quantum is irrelevant. You can be a distant decendant and be able to prove it with other documentation and be SOL. I am not complaining, I fully support the soveriegnty of the CNO to decide who can and cannot be citizens. Just pointing this out.

Well, my either or statement was probably wrong to say.  I'm sure there's people who are just interested in their family ancestry.

I have Russian/Lithuanian on one side, and German on the other.  I find myself more drawn to the Russian/Lith side, however, that is a psychological thing.  The German side is there and just as relevant to who I am dna/blood wise.  I've never met either of my grandfathers.  I did meet both of my grandmothers.  My Lith grandmother sat with my father one day and described where she came from, how they lived in a hut with the ground as the floor, and chickens and pigs were brought in at night so they wouldn't be stolen/eaten by wild animals or other peoples.  As a child, that story was more interesting to me.  Naturally, I grew up with a more 'interested' draw to that side of the family history.  Someone could say it's my 'blood' and I should go and hunt down these folks and join them and be one of them.  It's not.  It's my childhood fancy of living in a hut with animals.  The German side could have just as interesting stories, but they were not told to me.

All I'm trying to say in my posts above is that I don't believe having a bit of blood from one ancestor or another is the 'driving' factor.  Most people living in America know something of ndn's.  Have heard, read, told interesting stories that create a childhood fancy.. a romanticism perhaps.  Then, finding out you have the blood..  well, it drives people.  It even drives people who do not have any ndn blood.  

Now, I'm not talking about people who really did have grandparents or great grandparents who were ndn and as children, then as adults feel kinship and wish to open and learn that side of their family history and be part of it.  But I do see as I see myself, one side playing more importance than the other simply due to the psychological effect.  So, I was trying to say why don't.. or if.. these people also go after the other 'blood' in their ancestry?  And if not... why not?  It's not any less than the ndn blood imo.  No one group/set of peoples is more or less than another.  All come from somewhere down the line, a tribe of some kind, culture, belief.

The fascination and obsessions some people place on one group or another is psychological in nature, and can be detrimental, or can be a blessing.  Just depends really.  

I see tons of people wanting ndn spirituality.  I perceive that way back when, the Europeans came and tried to decimate the ndn populations by converting them by trying to beat their culture/spirituality out of them.. and now a days, well, it's unlawful to do such, so instead, they try to decimate them by diluting their culture and spiritual ways.  I don't believe they do so consciously and intently.  But every time I see a new age sweat lodge or books on the topic or any other new age pseudo ndn BS, I can't help but think that the 'enemy' is still at it, still trying to decimate the Native culture and spirituality of this (and other) lands.  

So, I think that having a flood of peoples coming into native culture based on a drop or two of ndn blood is a serious situation.  And needs to be looked at very closely.  I commend the tribes that have a limitation to such descendants.  It helps to keep their culture and spirituality 'safe'.

I think if you are a descendant, no matter how distant, there is a right way to approach it, and simply signing up and claiming it as your own is not a 'right' and 'respectful' way.  And I think if a person were truly concerned, they would know this, and help to prevent the dilution of such cultures and spirituality.  And perhaps even forgo the signing up, as a respectful way of keeping such culture/tribe intact.


Edited:  I forgot to say Thanks Moma P.  :)

I am really glad that this conversation is happening. I think it is an important one.

I know we are talking in generalities here, but I'm going to get specific here and write my story of Cherokee ancestry and let y'all pick it apart for me.

I was born in Durant, Oklahoma in 1953.  My mother was born and raised in Bennington, Oklahoma. Her grandmother (her father's mother - yup, my great grandma) said she was Cherokee. She lived right next to my mother and helped raise her. My mother also helped to take care of her as she got older. I knew her as a child. She died in 1969. She was the source of my mother's information.

As long as I can remember, I have known about my Cherokee ancestry. The story that I was told growing up was as follows:

My great-grandmother's mother died when she was 4, leaving three little Cherokee girls without a mother. Her father remarried a white woman who did not like Indian ways and raised these little girls as white. My great-grandmother resented that she had no pictures of her real mother and apparently was not too fond of her stepmother.

My great grandmother complained to my mother that she did not get on the rolls because her husband delayed taking her to town and by the time she got there the applications were closed.

This was what we were told as children growing up in the '50s. No stories of hiding it or dropping off the trail. No stories of the trail at all. No princesses.

Several years ago I started doing genealogy work in earnest and I found that my great-grandmother had older siblings that my branch of the family had not been aware of. In addition 7 of my grandfather's first cousins had been students at Carlisle Indian School. Surprisingly, they are listed as Delaware. I have found several distant cousins of my generation who have also been doing genealogy research and they also report never hearing anyone in the family mention Delaware and always being told that the Indians in our family were Cherokee. I do not have an explanation for this but push come to shove, I'll believe a consistent oral history in multiple branches of the family over something a white bureaucrat wrote. I'm guessing my mixed blood ancestors were also mixed tribe.

I have also recently found a Confederate Service Record with my great great grandfather's name, for the First Cherokee Mounted Volunteers, which was part of Stand Waite's Confederate troops. We are looking for more information to confirm that it is him, but the dates and location are correct, and I believe it to be him.

In addition, my mother had DNA done on her cousin who is the last direct female descendant of my great-grandmother and on her (my mother's) brother. Both have indigenous DNA.

Does this make me Indian? NO! NO! A thousand times NO!  I will say again and emphatically, I accept and support the sovereignty of the three federally recognized Cherokee tribes and their total right to establish who can and cannot be a Cherokee citizen. Period.

Does it make me a descendant?  I think so.

I will say this; all those folks Momma P. and BlackWolf have been talking about make it difficult for real descendants. We are guilty until proven innocent.

I will also say, I have never felt white. I have never felt as if I fit into mainstream American white society, for many reasons, not just being of mixed heritage. And I am clearly not Indian either. And I'm really ok with that. Creator has a purpose for folks who are outside the circle too. We challenge assumptions which is always a good thing. Gets people thinking.

Also, I do not practice American Indian spirituality or claim to be "walking the red road" or any of that other stuff. Don't have an "Indian name".  Well, my given name means "spruce" in Cherokee, (so now all you Cherokee speakers know my real name) and it is a family name passed down from a great Aunt, but I really don't think that's significant.

I am just really heartbroken and angry about what happened to my ancestors and what continues to happen to Indian people today and want somehow to make a difference.

I want folks like me to have a way to express this and be a positive force in the world, instead of being sucked in by the phony tribes and frauds.

Ok, <cringe > have at it!

Everyone should see this.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=gp7Z4eiEuaw

Hi Taraverti

I don't want to pick you apart - and I'll stick up for you if anyone else does!

I don't think descendents like yourself are creating the problems, though sometimes perhaps descendents who don't know any better can support people who are . I have never had the impression you don't know better , and although I am sort arguing on the other side of this, I have no problem understanding that for many reasons people can feel impacted, influenced by, or connected with this part of their heritage.

I say I have seen Native people be kind and welcoming to PODIAs, but that doesn't mean there is no way to alienate people. There is places only some people can go, songs only some people can sing, clothes that shouldn't be worn on some occasions , questions that shouldn't be asked, and boundaries that just shouldn't be crossed, or you will find yourself very clearly not being welcome.

What rubs me the wrong way is when people say they just want to belong, and then they do things they know full well will make the people they claim they want to belong to, feel mistrustful . And this is very clearly what people are setting up for themselves when they argue on behalf of descendents having a right to claim to be a tribe / band Nation ect .

And then everyone's supposed to feel sorry for these people ...  ::)

It seems to me, that instead of complaining about not being welcomed , people would do better to ask themselves what they or their cousins did to wear out their welcome, and look for ways to remedy this. 

Quote from: critter on November 03, 2009, 02:28:41 PM
I'm sorry you thought I was poking fun at anyone.  And I'm sorry you thought I was putting someone down.  Wasn't. 


I guess I am not able to completely express my self, so I will leave it.  Just know I am not putting anyone down or poking fun at them, but that psychological reasons, I believe, are at play here, more so than having 1/4047 of ndn blood. 

critter,
I too have trouble expressing my self,

I did say that It's hard to tell where you are coming from on this. Please read inquisitiveness in my statement not harshness. I don't think that either of us would have miss-read each other if we were talking to each other in person. it is hard to express such things in text form.

I do think that we agree on more than we disagree.