Dear HCN,
I have been amused for
the past 30 years each time someone takes umbrage at the use of the
word squaw while making the assertion that it is a vulgar term
invented by white man to demean Native American women. We did
encourage and abet the destruction of the early inhabitants by
means inexorable, foul and deadly. We, like so many of those who
swept out of Africa lo these many millennia, did sweep outward and
eventually westward to supplant any we could conquer. We engorged
or destroyed cultures and generally won the argument that whatever
we have is ours because we stole it fair and square. One thing we
did not do was invent or adapt the word squaw as a term for Native
American women.
The fact that the argument was
started in the early ’70s in an assertion by an Indian Rights
activist who was overstating his point of cultural iconclasm has
been ignored almost from the get go. Also, the fact that the word
squaw does not nor did it ever indicate anything other than a
general description of a female and that the word’s etymology is
Eastern Native American has never held sway with those who are
quick to be offended. Anti-intellectual, emotional and just plain
prissy idiots are, for the rest of time, I suppose, going to try to
perpetuate this fallacy, this canard, this wonderful and
imaginative justification of proof that the European conquerors did
no good and nothing but harm.
I hope you at
HCN are proud of the obnoxious presentation of
rank stupidity in your latest edition (HCN, 4/23/01: Heard around
the West) by Betsy Marston. I do have to say that I am still trying
to decide whether my 8-year-old will be allowed to read this
edition as his bedtime story. Parenthetically, my son and I
together have been reading this paper for two years now and he does
understand more than some and, fortunately, less than others what
is written. I think Marston can do better. I think she could, if
she would get off her high horse, go through the whole of the
literature and discover that this particular argument is mindless,
misdirected, misanthropic and wrong and woefully supported by
unthinking ejaculations of commiserative pettings. What is normally
a great chance to find thoughtful and honest writings and
expositions has been misused by Ms. Marston and I am disappointed
in you for allowing it to happen.
Tom
M. Theobald
Peoria, Arizona
This article appeared in the print edition of the magazine with the headline ‘Squaw’ and mindless parroting of bad science.
Republish our articles for free, online or in print, under a Creative Commons license.
