Talk:Passing (racial identity)

Does Grey Owl belong in section "Passing as Indigenous Americans"?

Grey Owl lived most of his life in Canada and was hardly in the U.S. at all. I believe that "American" is generally applied only to people of the U.S. Rightly or wrongly, Canadians, Mexicans, South Americans, etc. don't count as Americans without qualification. So the section, according to its title, is limited to Indigenous people of the U.S. and if a real example is wanted in such a prominent position in the image for the section a U.S. example should be sought.

The caption of the photo of Grey Owl reads "Belaney went to Canada and, among non-Natives, successfully passed as a First Nations person for many years." This statement is incorrect on many counts:

1) "First Nations" is a term used in Canada for part of the Canadian Indigenous population. It is not used in the U.S. for its Indigenous population, where the corresponding term of preference these days is "Native American". To say Grey Owl passed as First Nations implies a Canadian origin. But he actually claimed to have an Apache mother, so if he passed as anything he passed as "Native American". Or at least the use of that description would have to be supplemented with an explaination that he claimed he was a Native American who immigrated to Canada and hence became First Nations. (And also explain how he managed to claim all this back in a time before such terminology existed!) The article would do better to steer clear of such complications.

2) He claimed his father was Scottish and that he was a "half breed", so at most he could have passed as half something (however we characterize that something). He could hardly have pretended full Indigenousness with such bright blue eyes!

3) He convinced natives as well as non-natives that he was half Indian. For example, his longterm companion, Anahareo, an almost 100% Mohawk Algonquin (she actually had a Scottish grandmother), only became convinced he was not a half breed till after his death and exposure.

4) He couldn't have passed himself off as "First Nations", "Native American" or "Indigenous". To pass oneself off as something requires a concept of that something by the passer and the passees. These terms are of recent invention and carry a load of connotations that did not exist in Canada in the 1930s. Characterizing past people's beliefs and intentions in recently manufactured terms is an Anachronism, i.e. "an idea that exists out of its time in history, especially one that happened or existed later than the period being shown, discussed, etc." Much as we might regret it in these culturally sensitive times, the terms people used in Grey Owl's day (natives as well as non-natives) were "Indian", "half breed", "full-blooded Indian", etc. (For that matter, the legislation in Canada dealing with the Indigenous population is still called the "Indian Act", so we're not yet entirely out of the woods.)

So what to do? I propose the following changes:

1) Rename the section as "Passing as Indigenous North Americans" (assuming of course it isn't intended to cover similar issues south of the U.S. border).

2) Rewrite the caption for Grey Owl's portrait as something neutral:

"Portrait of Archibald Belaney, commonly known as Grey Owl. Photo by Yousuf Karsh, 1936. Born a full-blooded Englishman, Belaney spent most of his life in Canada and successfully passed as half Indian in the latter years of his life."

3) The paragraph on Grey Owl also needs some work, particularly the sentence "Belaney performed what he said were Ojibwe cultural practices and wilderness skills, and adopted an anachronistic and stereotypical lifestyle, as part of a persona which he was successful in marketing to non-Native audiences." The reference to Grey Owl's biography is misleading: no reasonable reading of that book could justify such a polemical statement! It's no wonder the citation lacks a page number. The previous sentence is no better: "When asked to explain his White appearance, he lied and claimed he was half Scottish and half Apache." The referenced BBC article contains no support for the first part of the statement ("When asked to explain his White appearance") and is also full of factual errors. It's clearly an opinion piece, and can only be used as a source with extreme caution. With all due respect for the undoubtedly good intentions of the contributor, these sentences express a personal opinion and lack substantiation.

Dsiedler (talk) 12:03, 11 November 2023 (UTC)

I noticed there is already a section on Canada, so one problem is solved by simply moving the material under that section. Dsiedler (talk) 15:37, 14 November 2023 (UTC)

In MASH 2/22 "George" a private admits to Hawkeye he got brusies when he got drunk and spoke about two of his secreta; That he is a negro passing as a white man Hawkeye says So your a megro? and that he is also homosexual no mention is made of the Private '"passing" as white; instead Hawkye and Trapper sabatoge Burns attempt to get the Private discharged as a section 8... at that time when the epsiode was orginally written that Weston admits he was "passing"; however at that time none of the 1970's generatio whould have understood what "passing" was; however at that time homosexuals were claiming their were discremenated against because of their sexual choices,,,,which was in the news alot. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 72.49.135.188 (talk) 14:42, 29 December 2023 (UTC)

Misleading

During the Reconstruction era, black people slowly gained some of the constitutional rights of which they were deprived during slavery. Although they would not secure "full" constitutional equality for another century until after passage of the Civil Rights Act of 1964 and Voting Rights Act of 1965, reconstruction promised African Americans legal equality for the first time. Abolishing slavery did not abolish racism. During Reconstruction whites tried to enforce white supremacy, in part through the rise of Ku Klux Klan chapters, rifle clubs and later paramilitary insurgent groups such as the Red Shirts.

"During Reconstruction whites tried to enforce white supremacy."

This is misleading information. Not all whites were involved with the oppression of black people. In fact only small groups were guilty of oppression. Remember Democrats promoted slavery and Democrats opposed ending slavery. This article clearly places blame and threat of harm on all white people. Be more specific with the history you present. 2601:245:4680:1836:7969:2C14:16B7:22B2 (talk) 23:15, 1 August 2024 (UTC)

Passing is not a global phenomenon

Passing is a phenomenon unique to American history, particularly the Transatlantic Slave Trade in the United States of America. Many examples provided in this article are instances of racial or ethnic misrepresentation. Blackfishing, Pretendians, racial misrepresentation, or ethnic representation and, their subsequent examples need their own pages. Sociology In Action (talk) 05:52, 22 September 2024 (UTC)

I agree with you on the Blackfishing and Pretendians topic. I don't think these are examples of passing at all, and I don't think they should be on this page - there's already a Pretendians page and a page for Racial misrepresentation where these examples fit much better. Whynotlolol (talk) 15:07, 12 November 2024 (UTC)

Concern that article overlaps

The section on Passing as Indigenous Americans seems to me to overlap with the article Racial misrepresentation, given that the majority of people included in this section are clearly misrepresenting their ethnicity, rather than passing as another for their own safety. I would argue that this is not a case of 'passing', but active fraud designed to achieve wealth or notoriety. 'Passing' as a concept necessitates that the person claiming to be of another race is doing so due to discrimination and oppression. This is made clear in the article's header.

The examples enumerated in the sections Passing as Indigenous American are already covered in the Pretendians page. I don't believe they should also be included here, as none of them are passing, and all are fradulent. I would argue that this section should be removed as it is antithetical to the concept of passing, as detailed above.

Would welcome thoughts on this. Whynotlolol (talk) 15:06, 12 November 2024 (UTC)