A Native American Expert on No Doubt’s Controversial Video and Cultural Appropriation

Earlier this month, No Doubt found themselves in trouble for their latest music video, “Looking Hot,” which critics said depicts Native Americas in a racist light. Apart from the song itself being kind of lousy and November happening to be Native American Heritage Month, the video has its share of stereotypical smoke signaling, headdress wearing, spear throwing and tipi lounging. In some shots, Gwen Stefani, the captured Native American lead — obviously — is shown tied up and writhing while villain cowboy, drummer Adrian Young, points his six-shooter at her. In an open letter from the UCLA American Indian Studies Center, Director Angela R. Riley wrote that the video advances the perception that “American Indians are mere historical relics, frozen in time as stereotypically savage, primitive, uniquely-spiritualized and — in the case of Native women — hyper-sexualized objects to be tamed.”

The band has since pulled the video as best one can in the digital age, and issued an apology on their website, stating: “As a multi-racial band our foundation is built upon both diversity and consideration for other cultures. Our intention with our new video was never to offend, hurt or trivialize Native American people, their culture or their history. Although we consulted with Native American friends and Native American studies experts at the University of California, we realize now that we have offended people.”

With mounting accusations of Native American cultural appropriation happening these days — Lana Del Rey, Khloe KardashianKe$ha, and Urban Outfitters, among others, have all dabbled and been scolded — the No Doubt video seems to have brought the discussion to a tipping point. But, in comparison to some of the other stuff out there, is the video worth getting upset about, or is it just some silly fun that happens to rely on the cliched Cowboys and Indians genre? To help make sense of what constitutes cultural appropriation as opposed to a cultural hybrid, an homage as opposed to an act of exploitation, we spoke with Professor N. Bruce Duthu, Chair of the Native American Studies Program at Dartmouth College and a member of the United Houma Nation of Louisiana.

What were your initial thoughts after seeing the music video for the first time?

The main concern I had was with the objectification and sexualization of a person depicted as a Native American woman. The whole tying her up and so forth, together with the provocative lyrics, is a timeworn trope. It made me think of a video game launched in the early ’80s by Atari called Custer’s Revenge. The object of the game is to navigate your character, which is General Custer, through a barrage of arrows as he makes his way toward a Native woman tied to a stake. The goal is for him to have forceable sex with the woman. I present this to my class in the context of a long, sad history of the sexualization of Native women, who face the highest rates of sexual violence of any discrete group of women in the entire US. I’ve written on this subject and had a piece published in The New York Times. So seeing Gwen Stefani tied up as a Native woman with lyrics that say, “Go ahead and look at me/Do you think I’m looking hot?” was just pretty revolting.

What other aspects of the video did you find disturbing?

Well, the video continues the tradition of popular media treating Native culture as if it’s part of the public domain, as if one can simply go into this reservoir of stereotypical images and draw from it without any kind of limitation or concern. When lands have been lost and cultures have been decimated, one of the last things left to be appropriated from Native cultures is their very dignity. And this is what videos like this do — they exhume and exploit and pull away whatever shreds of dignity may be left. It reflects our historical amnesia.

I know some people think this is overreacting and Native people are just whining again. But for those who find this a waste of time and don’t understand Native cultures as living, breathing, thinking societies that are worthy of people’s respect, it’s pretty hard to have a serious conversation about concerns such as the return of Native land. So if the attitude still exists that Native cultures don’t mean anything, don’t count, don’t deserve respect, it’ll translate into destructive action.

And I do give credit to No Doubt for their response. You don’t make a video like that on the cheap, so for them to yank it was a big deal. I applaud them for responding very promptly and thoughtfully, and basically saying: “Look, we did it, we made a mistake and we’re yanking it.” So kudos to them.

As cultures across the globe continue to mix, how would you even begin to differentiate between cultural appropriation and cultural hybrids? How would you define exploitation as opposed to cultural blending?

I think that depends on one’s purpose. Are you trying to sell records or T-shirts? If it’s being done to push products, which is often the case, then the bar should be higher in terms of paying attention to the context, message and history behind these kinds of depictions. I would imagine we’re going to see similar disputes when The Lone Ranger movie comes out, with Johnny Depp playing the role of Tonto.

It’s not like I see myself — or any native scholar or activist or tribe — as a gatekeeper for the nation’s taste. It’s not that you have to get permission to use anything that involves something Native. It’s about assuming responsibility and not being surprised if people react by saying, “You screwed up.” It’s not about censorship; it’s about being clear on the motivations that are inspiring the appropriation.

Do you find that other cultures in the US receive the same kind of treatment as Native Americans?

To be honest, I really don’t see a parallel with another culture that is so widely held. All you have to do is look at the plethora of mascots and symbols that are used for sporting teams, whether high school, college or professional. For example, we would never have the San Diego Blacks.

Again, this idea that Natives are part of the public domain has longstanding roots. During early contacts between European societies and Native Americans, in many contexts the Natives were seen as part of the flora and fauna — not as societies. If you’re seeing people this way, you aren’t seeing them as rights-bearing people, and you don’t see the land as their land. You see it as empty land.

Historically speaking, when did people start considering it unethical to appropriate Native American culture?

I think Native peoples found a voice during the ’60s. They were armed and inspired by the civil rights activism found in the African American community and women’s rights movement. It was an important moment.

Also, I think for many Native peoples, the advent of social media has meant that groups and individuals around the globe can now participate in this push back. Within minutes, people from all over can join the conversation, which provides a quick reading on the popular reaction to certain events and activities.

As with No Doubt, will social media help other artists and public figures gauge what’s exploitative and what’s not?

The downside is that people aren’t always writing the most thoughtful things on Facebook or Twitter. It can be a quick flash in the pan “I hate you” or “I love you” that doesn’t provide a lot of depth or context. It’s very different than a book where someone has probably lived with the project for years. When temperatures are very high, you don’t always get the best kind of exchanges.

Also, you don’t want to make decisions about whatever you’ve put out there based on the fact that at one moment people are upset about it. Sometimes it’s going to be the issue du jour, and by next week people will have moved onto the next issue. The core problems, such as sexual violence against Native American women, are still going to remain when the furor over Gwen Stefani and the band dies out. Gwen is going to have a nice career and make millions of dollars, but meanwhile those of us who care and work in Indian country are still going to be looking at ways to help turn things around. In the historical backdrop, this is going to be seen as yet another distraction to the real ongoing problems.

We recently celebrated Halloween. What are your thoughts on Native American costumes? Should they be condemned?

One big difference between dressing up as a Native American as opposed to a pirate or astronaut or cowboy is that the latter are occupations, not societies. You don’t try out for a job as an Indian. It’s your culture; it’s your way of life.

If my kid said, “Dad, I’m going to go out trick-or-treating as a Jew,” I would wonder what he was going to look like and how he was going to dress. Likewise, if he said, “I’m going to go out as a black person,” would that mean blackface and an afro? When you put the issue into this context, it sharpens the nature of the appropriation and hopefully invites a conversation about whether that’s a good thing or not.

Filed Under:

Post comment as twitter logo facebook logo
Sort: Newest | Oldest
NikkiJXO 5 pts

Lame song..... I can sing it better lol (Full Navajo woman 24/7 baby) ;))))))

That's why Islam don't allow us to spread vulgar imagination because it hurts us a lot... Also it is the waste of money our basic goal should be give food to poor people.. then strengthen the living standards of all Human Being which may be Muslim or non muslim.

maybe some of you people should actually go to south Dakota, Arizona, north Dakota and go to the reservations there sure aren't any privaye schools there. and its funny how some of you say ive only seen one "real indian" wtf is a real indian? I am a Proud Oglala Lakota from Pine Ridge Reservation.

To those who have tried so hard to explain further what Professor Duthu was saying, thanks for your efforts. And the article was excellent. I generally believe that labelling someone a racist in conversation is sure to shut down conversation, so Jan, I won't label you a racist--you're just an ignorant, near illiterate shit head. Holy Mother--the Irish Echo??? Did you even know that this wasn't a real newspaper? You gave me a good laugh. I guess you get your "news" on the state of the world from the National Enquirer.

This is a very well put article on the subject of Cultural Appropriation. There is a huge difference between paying homage to a culture and cultural appropriation. It's really sad to think that some people are unable to discern what the difference is. http://jezebel.com/5959698/a-much+needed-primer-on-cultural-appropriation?utm_campaign=socialflow_jezebel_facebook&utm_source=jezebel_facebook&utm_medium=socialflow

"So here’s the problem. The argument that you can ‘try on’ a cultural identity for a day and then discard it speaks to the ability of being able to return to your special place of privilege. You can take off your headdress and sleep at night, knowing that you don’t have to wake up the next morning to confront a history of colonialism and genocide that has left your community living in an impoverished reservation and having to deal with segregation, racism, and gross cultural misrepresentation in the form of films, sports mascots, and holidays. As the ‘We’re a Culture, not a Costume’ Campaign put it, “You wear the costume for one night, we wear the stigma for life.” http://listengirlfriends.wordpress.com/2012/11/05/post-halloween-musings-fashion-and-cultural-identity/

All I know is that if my people were either decimated or enslaved by some other civilization, I'd probably be pretty pissed off if their children thought it was cute to derogate my ravaged cultural institutions by wearing knock-off polyester costumes for one night as a joke. Kind of like smearing shit on a salted wound.

Jan-The Irish Echo is a tabloid. Citing them is like citing the National Enquirer. They never would have printed a retraction because as they don't fall under US libel or slander laws, so there was absolutely no incentive to do so. It was a rumor, nothing more (in the late 1990's---why it was back in the news last year is beyond me). Look under: 'BHA Shamrock Urban Legend.' Regardless, it is not relevant, since the shamrock is not a religious or ceremonial symbol, nothing was appropriated by another group and I don't think anyone's buying the idea of white oppression. So if you want to think there's Irish oppression going on in South Boston, go right ahead. The way that Native ceremonial dress is being portrayed by these ads is more similar to if someone was doing an ad featuring bikini girls at Oktoberfest drinking out of chalices wearing ecclesiastical robes and tossing a baby Jesus for sport. In blackface. And--Yes they do care. And Frank, this isn't just the susceptible woman in me talking. This is the person who teaches in a school that is 35% Native and has a great many Native friends, relatives, co-workers and former classmates. Long hair and not. I do realize that not everyone lives in the vicinity of populations of Native Americans---but just the fact that people are saying there aren't any is evidence of the marginalization. The racial charge of all of this goes beyond whether or not someone practices the traditions. And just imagine what it would be like to have to explain one of those ads to your kid. Miguel-to clarify--I understand that video to be propaganda rather than a business venture, but I could be wrong. Is your question that because Mohammed is pictured therefore it is offensive? I haven't seen it, so I don't know. The guy who made it was just sentenced to jail, I believe. I guess what I should have said is that if you are mocking another culture/race/religion to make money, it's wrong. (Well, it's wrong either way, but worse if it's in your business plan.) I am not at all saying that one group should be privileged over another, but if it feels bad, it probably is. And: Your Uncle--exactly right, the blowback was probably anticipated, perhaps even calculated, but that doesn't change the underlying fact of misuse.

If a culture doesn't want to be depicted a certain way, why argue about it? If the Irish don't mind being mascots that's them. There are cultural differences that should be understood but aren't respected. Why impose your will over another culture and aggressively assert yourself in a position of what people should do or feel? Nobody has that right. It's sounds like Jan is coming from the position of cultural superiority and lack of cultural sensitivity. But it doesn't sound like she cares much about cultural sensitivity as she seems only be concerned with debasing Native people with irrelevant info that has nothing to do with the topic but more to do with control and authority in this country.

So, No Doubt have a new song out. I didn't know that until now. Nothing like a little controversy to sell a few downloads.

If you're not Native American you have absolutely, positively nothing to say on this matter because you don't understand and never will, so don't make fools of yourselves.

JonathanMalaer 5 pts

You're joking right!? What about the various other cultural societies that receive mistreatment? What about the Japanese that were relocated because we are too arrogant as a species to understand the concept of trust... what about the countless African Americans that were beaten and dragged through streets? Native Americans are just part of a whole that is experience the same prejudices and stereotypes. 

On behalf of my ancestors, my people and all our American Indian Nations, please stop your use of mocking or stereotyping our cultural regalia and sacred cultural items. It saddens me to see this type of disrespect floating around FB setting forth negative images that distort our true cultural values. History is already plagued and distorted enough about our culture, traditions and people. "LETS EDUCATE not HUMILIATE" - Aho Mitakuye Oyasin, L.Q.

Women seem esp. susceptible to this idea that Indians were these great spiritual people "in touch with the earth." It's laughable when you look at how brutal they were, and how they'd leave old women out in the forest to starve to death once they were no longer useful to the tribe, how each village had it's own torture pit, etc.. A very good book on this is "Scalp Dance." If you have an ipad...actually, even if you dob't, if you have a computer and an amazon account, you can buy "scalp dance" from amazon and read it on your computer right now. Even before the White man got there. the Indian idea of "fun" was to bring back a captive from another tribe and can keep him alive as long as possible while inflicting as much pain as possible. These dumbkins talk about the Indians's "deep respect for nature." If the Indian had metal tools and anything other than a stoneage culture, there wouldn't have been a tree or a Buffalo left in the whole contient when Whitey got there

As much of a dislike as I have for victoria secret and all their publicity stunt bullshit, they allow themselves to be bullied this way? http://finance.yahoo.com/blogs/the-exchange/victoria-secret-apologizes-fashion-show-gaffe-194400804.html

I've known ONE real Indian in my life-- he went to an expensive private school with my ex]s kids on scholarship. My ex and I got fairly close to him, bc he could get us really good, high quality peyote! Lol. And it was legal! He vouched for us as being members of his tribe.

Sandra troll elsewhere. I think the water here is too deep for you.

I Like how NO ONE IS EVEN COMMENTING ON THE POINTS IN THE ARTICLE. JUST A BUNCH OF TROLLS.

"REAL indians could care less about this nonsense." And you know this from experience? Stop making generalizations.

Should youtube should remove the video "the Innocence of Muslims" or any other video on Yt that purports to show an image of Mohammed, since Linda Michel-Cassidy, in her own words: A good number of these images are tied to ceremonial rites and for that reason alone, should be respected and off limits. Period.

Poor, poor Jan. Marginalized everyday of her life... NOT

Yeah. It's funny. In my whole 31 years of which I've spent....probably 29 in this nation, I've only met one real indian who looked the part, had the long hair, kept up with all the rituals and stuff, etc.. He name was Willie. Willie would have laughed at a liberal asshole like this. He couldn't give a shit if Us football or baseball teams wanted to call themselves redskins or Indians or whatever. REAL indians could care less about this nonsense.

It is a lame song, with not very catchy lyrics and the costumes looked like they were borrowed from the upcoming "Lone Ranger" !!! but the most offensive was the crappy riding skills of the "Indian princess"...all in all schlocky stuff but if it gets the conversation going then it has at least that much merit....

An instance of this is reported in the Irish Echo, the largest-circulation Irish-American newspaper. As more and more Blacks in Boston's public housing moved into areas where Irish already were living, the Blacks noticed the prevalence of shamrocks being displayed by Irish residents on their doors, in their windows, on playground equipment, and so on. The shamrock is the most common symbol of Irish ethnicity, of Irish pride. Well, the Blacks don't like it, and they have complained about it to the Boston Housing Authority, the BHA. I'll read you the first three paragraphs of a story in the February 14 issue of the Irish Echo: In a controversial measure designed to placate offended minority residents, officials of the Boston Housing Authority are asking residents to remove shamrock displays from doors and windows in housing developments across the city, the Irish Echo has learned. Confirming rumors that have been circulating around South Boston in recent weeks, Lydia Agro, BHA's communications director, told the Echo that housing managers are advising residents that shamrocks and other 'bias indicators" are offensive to some minority residents and should not be publicly displayed. "There are a number of symbols that have been identified by some of our residents as making them uncomfortable and unwelcome," Agro said. 'In response to those concerns, we're including shamrocks along with swastikas, Confederate flags, and other symbols which give offense. The quote came straight from Lydia Argo, Boston Housing Authority's communications director. the "Irish Echo" never printed a retraction. they were never sued for slander. So, what do you think? So, do you think "The Irish Echo" made the whole thing up, complete with the quote? Another good lesson -- never trust the media as far you can throw them. We have to accept the reality that we live in a world where we have a media that lies to us when they think they can get away with it. Had my friend not known that issue and remembered the source, you'd have walked away thinking bullshit and the whole thing had been a rumor! Really disgusting. I'm not trying to sound...didactic or like I'm lecturing you, but based on that quote "straight from the horse's mouth" as it were, do you see how that whole previous article you found was damage control bullshit? And the media went along with it, and printed it, knowing it was a lie? They keep such info in their computers, they knew what she had said. I hope that frightens you as much as it does me and reminds you that you can't even trust one source; you have to look for multiple sources and look for contradictions. Pretty sick world we live in, isn;t it

Vikings did it better! They sailed into Europe, conquered and assimilated. Europe sailed into the Americas and then the rest of the world did too. America, "the melting pot of the world". Every race has melted here. Too bad we can't meld together now as just "Americans". Too many trying to climb out of the pot to call the kettle black.

It is clear that Jan is trying to incite an argument based on irrelevant points to make him or herself feel better about being a racist. Don't feed the troll.

I don't believe the shamrock story saying that never happened. That's damage control after the controversy erupted. I'll go backand find you the original articles and quotes from residents.

(ps. nothing against Dartmouth--)

The banning of shamrocks by the BHA was erroneously reported by an Irish newspaper, which for a while had some teeth, but was eventually traced to a mere rumor. The BHA NEVER asked anyone to remove shamrocks from their windows. I was living there at the time and working for a governmental agency and come from a very Irish family on my mom's side, so I have no personal interest in denying that story. Also the Fighting Irish was a name chosen by a Catholic, largely Irish school. Totally different than a white college naming it's team after another race. What if Dartmouth had called itself "Bunch of Angry Black Guys"---not such a great idea now, huh? As to the over-sexualized use of native imagery, I don't see how anyone can see this as anything other than absolutely inappropriate and offensive. And talking about Native people as historical figures; guess what! Although the Europeans did their best, there still are Native Americans, lots and lots of them who I can imagine are even more appalled than I am. A good number of these images are tied to ceremonial rites and for that reason alone, should be respected and off limits. Period.

Jan, I think your point is well taken, but to be fair, Indians won't be.

"People like that, you just have t systematically deconstruct their argument (bc it’s built on sand) and make them look foolish." But you haven't done this. You haven't deconstructed any arguments that this university professor has brought forward.

Have you noticed it's considered perfectly Ok to have a college football team called "the fighting Irish" and you never hear Irish bitching that it reinforces the stereotype of them as violent. You people make me laugh. In fact, a few years back, the boston housing authorities went around and asked all these old Irish women to remove shamrocks from their windows and doors, bc some minorities saw it as "a racist, supremacist symbol" and "weren't comfortable with its display." Talk about the height of insanity? People like that, you just have t systematically deconstruct their argument (bc it's built on sand) and make them look foolish.

Jan - You have failed to provide a counter point for Professor Duthu's responses in this piece. Instead - you derail, make accusations, and bring up irrelevant research that still doesn't provide an explanation as to why racism and appropriation are okay?

Kat, Read "across the atlantic" and then get back to me. http://smithsonianscience.org/2012/01/new-book-across-atlantic-ice-the-origin-of-americas-clovis-culture/ ""Across the Atlantic Ice boldly challenges this old narrative and presents overwhelming evidence for a pre-Clovis occupation of the American continents, and finds virtually no direct evidence that the progenitors of Clovis came from Siberia. Evidence put forth in this new book overwhelmingly indicates southwestern Europe, specifically the Ice Age Solutrean Culture of France and Spain, as the source of the people that developed into the Clovis."

Jan - So cultural appropriation is okay because Landbridge?

What about the solutrean hypothesis and the new book by the head of the Smithsonian that asserts Europeans reached this land via an ice bridge over 6,000 years before the asiatics crossed the Bering strait. This is a bit melodramatic in places, but definitely worth watching. And it doesn't even get into all the evidence. The injuns are trying to sue to prevent bodies from being examined, bc mummies on the west coast have been turning up with red hair. In addition to tools made of rock only found in france turning up in the East Coast. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=maziRFPYU14

"Also, since it’s fair for “Native Americans” to defend any insults against their heritage, why can’t france drive out the muslims from THEIR historical homeland, which the muslims tried to conquer?" False equivalence. Stop derailing.

@Jan Uh...from my understanding Columbus started the colonization of the Americas that led to a huge amount of genocide. They can do what they want with the name, but when something is racist and oppressive, they should probably stop being racist and oppressive. At the very least they should own the history that lets them currently benefit from colonization. This also seems like a derail from the original point, which is to not be racist and appropriate people's cultures.

Native people do have history. Living, breathing, kicking natives today have little in common with the Indians of the nineteenth century; except nature worship being basic to both. Each tribe considered themselves unique and "the people". Others were to subjugated, enslaved or killed, red, white, black, yellow it didn't matter. They lived and loved to make war not peace. Wild creatures don't have boundaries or plots of land; "who can own the earth?", but go into their territory and look out. Most Indians conquered their land from other Indians. Indians of 1800's wouldn't recognize the Indians of today except maybe at a Pow Wow. American Indians didn't want a fair fight they just wanted to win. I think that is how most Earthlings feel.

Also, since it's fair for "Native Americans" to defend any insults against their heritage, why can't france drive out the muslims from THEIR historical homeland, which the muslims tried to conquer?

Kat, should Washington, District of Columbia should be renamed too bc it honors Columbus, a man the Indians now claim committed such a horrible genocide?

Honestly, you can't tell the difference between someone identifying a culture as their own and someone else appropriating it? Really? And to address your final comment here. "Equal" does not in any way mean "same". It's pretty simple that acknowledging and respecting differences is the path to equality. You can respect someone's culture and identity without appropriating it. But don't let that stop you from your brave journey to uphold the status quo.

Kat, are you referring to the sensational award winning advertising campaign created by United Colors of Benetton in the 80's, depicting people from all over the world? People like Angela R. Riley (she's a indian-loving advocate who seems to shoot more botox than keith richards shoots dope)wanted to know who was who just like these "birthers"...people were complaining even back then. They kept calling Benetton wanting to know if the "indian" was an Itlain or was the indian a multi- racial dark skinned Mexican or was the indian a Pipl indian. Did the Bentton billboards make your sweaters pill up?

I posted a picture of Rigoberta Menchú, the Nobel Peace Prize winner from Guatamala (She now has bleached out blond hair) I posted this astonishing photo because when I saw the documentary from the 80'which made her famous I was impressed with the people's colorful attire and the dignified way in which they held and carried themselves. They made such an impression on me. Such dignity! Seeing Rigoberta with bleached out blond hair is too much. I asked "Where does it end?", this is the answer the post received- You asked "where does it end?" It doesn't end. This is the end game of cultural marxism. "Equalize" everyone in every way possible.

Jan, there are plenty of websites and books that can answer your questions. Why don't you think about the parallels raised by Professor Duthu about using stereotypes of other minorities in place of Native Americans. Do you find those things appropriate? As for the Redskins, the Washington City Paper has stopped using the team name in articles because it's offensive. Don't think it's a fight with only one side.

I'm posting about this on Facebook. this comment really nails it- "Last year, the "cherokee nation" voted to kick out the blacks who were their slaves in the late 1800s. They're meant to be an "independent nation," but the FEDS stepped in REAL QUICK (even though they had no right to under the agreement) and told them they couldn't kick out the blacks! The blacks claiming the "indian benefits" bc they were slaves of the cherokees are so numerous, they were able to vote one of their own as "chief" of the tribe. you have to see the pic of the black dressed in Indian garb, and taking the whole things very seriously. It's hilarious. Yet, if I dressed up in blackface, I'd be "racis." amazing how that works, no?" http://newsone.com/1526735/cherokee-nation-will-restore-rights-for-black-cherokees/

Also what about Ralph Lauren, his collections are gorgeous and full of indian inspirations.

Was the musical artist in the village people who dressed as the Indian "culturally insensitive."?

I've been wearing my hair in a wrap around braid. I purchased some moccasins and a great handbag from Peru in San Miguel De Allende, Mexico to complete the look. Now I'm afraid.

Investigating this more they also had a commercial before Halloween "we're a culture, not a costume." They tried to go after the Washington Redskins over their name, but the jewish man who owns that team told them to go get lost, bc it's one of the ten most valuable franchises in the world.