The American Indian Movement of Santa Barbara (AIM S.B.) has criticized an episode of MTV’s show The Dudesons in America for a negative portrayal of Native American culture. According to a press release, AIM S.B. has written to MTV asking that it remove the episode from the Internet and the broadcast lineup. The organization has called for a boycott of MTV and the show’s sponsors, including Burger King and Pepsi, and has created a Web petition that has collected more than 1,000 signatures. In an interview, AIM head Michael Fairbanks said the group is contemplating legal action if the show is not removed.
AIM is an advocacy group for Native Americans. According to Fairbanks, the Santa Barbara group got started during controversy over the Carpinteria High School Warriors mascot. Since then, AIM S.B. has fought for better representation of Native Americans, especially in the media. When asked about the group’s current status, Fairbanks replied, “We have been very active in the Native American community, and we want be notified and support anything that people feel AIM can handle. That’s why we’re activated and why we’re currently in action against MTV.”
The Dudesons in America features a group of four young Finnish men who perform dangerous stunts in hope of assimilating into American culture. In the second episode of the season, “Cowboys and Findians,” Native American actor Saginaw Grant acts as the “King of All Indians” for whom the Finns perform dangerous stunts to win “the golden feather” and become honorary members of his tribe. These stunts include one Finn jumping onto a metal horse from a tall building in a fur loincloth, and another Finn allowing a line of totem poles to domino onto his penis. According to the show, the latter stunt is relevant to Native American culture because “all Indians have balls of steel.”
Fairbanks said that AIM activists “harbor no ill will” towards Saginaw, who called AIM immediately in response to the first complaint. Fairbanks said that AIM instead directs its anger toward “the producers of the show who would think this was funny at the expense of our culture.”
According to Fairbanks, MTV has come under fire for negative racial portrayals from other advocacy groups, such as the NAACP. According to an AIM press release, MTV representative Jeannie Kedas responded to AIM S.B., stating in an email, “I am sorry that members of the American Indian Movement were offended by that one particular episode,” but “in no way did [the show] or MTV intend to offend Native Americans.”


Print friendly
E-mail story
Tip Us Off
Comments
Share Article
Myspace





Previous Month



Comments
I think the stupidity of M.T.V. speaks for itself. Expecting M.T.V. to present dignified programming is like expecting Howard Stern not to behave foolishly.
billclausen (anonymous profile)
July 17, 2010 at 2:41 p.m. (Suggest removal)
as long as we all go to the casinos. Because thats Native
805RunningCrew (anonymous profile)
July 17, 2010 at 7:29 p.m. (Suggest removal)
What would Monty Python say?!? I must admit the totem pole dominoes scene reminds me exactly of that... and I didn't hear any whining over mashed Englishmen's wee-wees. If you're saying something this stupid reflects accurately on your culture... Well, I feel sorry for you.
Man up, chin up, and welcome to the white man's world!
maximum (anonymous profile)
July 19, 2010 at 12:39 a.m. (Suggest removal)
So when did our noble American Indians lose their sense of friggin' humor? C'mon, boys---lighten up.
The show: Stupid, yes. Utterly.
I've not watched it, nor will I, but why would anyone waste time on such drivel?
I mean c'mon---MTV? It hasn't been relevant since around 1988 or so after the music video channel aspect wore off and they plunged asslong into anything and everything NOT pertaining to music.
MTV stand for Mindless Television for the Vapid.
Everyone knows that.
And to my good friends of indigenous bloodlines: Enough already. Every depiction of Indian culture cannot be portrayed as noble and unsullied all the time. You're no more angelic than anyone else. Satire and humor gets to slam us all, so get over yourselves already.
And enough with the horrid whitewash term "Native American." You're Indians, misnamed certainly, but as poet and Spokane/Coeur d'Alene Indian Alexie Sherman says, it's a misapplied term that, in light of everything that has been taken in a thousand worthless treaties with the US government, they are NOT giving back.
I concur.
Anyone who was alive or born here when "America" the country came into being was/is a native American as are their modern day descendants. "Native American" refers to a nationality, NOT a race or bloodline.
"Native North American" might be a more accurate designation as it refers "continentally" to those who were here prior to the landbridge collapse. But American Indian works as a catch all for "The Nations" indigenous to North America as well as to those earlier inhabitants who were displaced prior to Indian culture and history. (Just as the term European and Asian serve to swoop up many cultures and all those modern ones displaced through history). So knock it off, already, all of you.
And American Indians, time to stop sweating and whining over the negligible and dismissible in these lamebrained fictional allusions to and depictions of your culture. Surely you have much more urgent and important issues to contend with and address like how to spend all that casino money. (See? Just kidding; laugh a damn little).
I will defer to the following Chinese proverb: "The beginning of wisdom is to call things by their true names."
Draxor (anonymous profile)
July 19, 2010 at 9:46 a.m. (Suggest removal)
Part 2
Now, a chapter of AIM wants to capture the spotlight by jumping on a bandwagon where they’re literally shaming themselves, while shouting, stereotyping and the big “R”?
Where were they when Pine Ridge was happening; where are they while the real-racists try to destroy an American Indian and his proposition of World-Wide friendship for The American Indian?
An excerpt from a letter of Michael Fairbanks’, Director of A.I.M. American Indian Movement of Santa Barbara to: AJ Sarcione and the MTV staff
“This episode of the The Dudesons In America, not only encourages people to have misconceptions about First Nation people, but also perpetuates very offensive stereotypes regarding Native American spirituality, ceremonies, culture and customs.”
Mr. Fairbanks, what do you think the Indian Princess, Indian Prince led internet groups do every day? You should know, because many of your Santa Barbara AIM members are also members of the groups, perhaps you are too...
For starters, the groups are cultivating and perpetuating the myth that, “Being ‘Indian’ is not in the blood, but in the Spirit,” besides other aggressively racist “misconceptions” concerning our spirituality, ceremonies, culture and customs.
Mr. Fairbanks, this is a personal invitation to you, Marcos Akiaten, Mr. Rod Rondeaux, Mr. Jay Tavare and Mr. Aldred Montoya, to join us on an actual and truly American Indian group, The Red Nation Society, so that you can see and experience an actual American Indian’s concept of Friendship and acceptance of all: therednationsociety.ning.com
Mr. AJ Sarcione, you are also invited to join us on TRNS. Bring The Dudesons along and show The World what I already know, that you are not enemies of The American Indian: therednationsociety.ning.com
I will post updates as to who is and who is not serious about either being supportive, or non-supportive of America’s First People.
New concern: Is Santa Barbara AIM stating that it’s not traditional AIM, but merely Media AIM?
Sincerely,
Calvin Tatsey
calvintatsey (anonymous profile)
July 20, 2010 at 11:30 p.m. (Suggest removal)
Part 1
Question: Exactly what part of the skit is, “stereotype-perpetuating” [from a related article by Michael Fairbanks]?
I’m puzzled. Does Santa Barbara AIM assume that American Indians are similar to characters within the skit? That assumption, in itself, stereotypes American Indians right along-side of Santa Barbara AIM as not having common sense, but Santa Barbara AIM does not represent or identify me, nor does it represent or identify hundreds of thousands of other honorable, intelligent and educated, American Indians.
Could Santa Barbara AIM be seeking publicity and making us look bad in their quest?
I think so, because when emergency help was badly needed upon The Pine Ridge Indian Reservation in December of 2009, where was Santa Barbara AIM, where easy publicity was not immediately-available?
I may be wrong and Santa Barbara AIM could have been up-in-arms about Pine Ridge’s situation, but I just don’t remember seeing, or hearing of their presence during that desperate time.
All well and good and I do not have a major gripe or bone to pick with Santa Barbara Aim; however, I do have a personal issue and major concern, where they and what they’re supposedly representing matters:
I have an internet group, therednationsociety.ning.com and it’s been online since November 14th, 2008.
Since day one, I’ve been personally-attacked by group owning, “Indian Princesses,” “Indian Princes,” Hiawatha’s times whatever granddaughters and grandsons, etc…who were earnestly-attempting to subvert The Red Nation Society and for no reason, other than because it and I, finally-offered a measuring stick whereby they were seen to be whom and what they are, non-American Indians leading, benefitting and profiting from the American Indian persona, our spirituality, ceremonies, culture and our customs – playing house, essentially.
I’d repeatedly-notified, requested and invited several chapters of AIM to join and support TRNS, through the New Frontier of insidious-racist-attacks appropriated upon an actual American Indian and his endeavor to make friends throughout The World for The American Indian, but AIM sadly ignored my plight and invitations.
By AIM’s simply becoming a member of The Red Nation Society would have lent support, but AIM would not and in fact, some of their members joined the Indian Princess, Indian Prince led and owned groups, with one self-alleged member of Santa Barbara AIM, “Bear Warrior,” a self-described Puerto Rican’s actually fighting to destroy TRNS and I, tooth-and-nail; shame on you Santa Barbara AIM, for having such a member...
calvintatsey (anonymous profile)
July 20, 2010 at 11:31 p.m. (Suggest removal)
1. "Native americans" is not a name necessarily loved by the aboriginals of this continent, mainly because they pre-date "america". It is in use as a more politically correct name than "indians" because of the difficulty of finding a generic name for a group of people that have been here for untold thousands of years with communities ranging from complex civilizations to roving bands carefully utilizing their resources and everything in between. Therefore, the "I'm a native american too!" argument, besides being so old and worn out that I'm surprised anyone uses it anymore, still continues to miss the point.
The first peoples also plan to be here long after "america" is dust, too.
2. Don't like casinos?
Fine--stay out of them.
Lots of negative things about casinos, but natives were not loved when they were still on welfare and didn't have per caps to support themselves.
Using your rights as a sovereign political entity to set up a business for your people seemed the way to go for many tribes.
Seems that the charity and community organizations now lined up to take native money don't have such qualms.
Neither do the folks lined up to get jobs.
And who could blame natives for keeping every dime they were entitled to and not giving all this support to the communities that abused them for so long?
Luckily, it seems natives, while no group is perfect, ARE somewhat better folks than the invaders , no matter what some folks think.
Seems if you are native, you're damned if you are poor and damned if you get rich.
Maybe that's why its better to define yourself and not give a rat's nether region about the opinion of white folks in that regard. You'd go nuts figuring out what the "dominant culture" wants you to be from century to century---"savage"?(1700's) "noble savage"?(1800's) "business-like" (1930's) "traditional and mystical"? (1960's, 70's etc.)
3. Not getting stuff back?
I wouldn't count on that.
Treaties still have force of law and there is more than land at stake protected within them.
But, if you get rich enough, you can get land, too!
In regard to the issue at hand:
*MTV's Dudesons---they had the right to make it.
* AIM had the right to protest it and call for a boycott.
* People had the right to honor the boycott or not.
* MTV had the right to say "we don't care about the boycott"
or "this isn't worth it---we're pulling the episode".
They chose to pull---and if it's so stupid and irrelevant--why does anyone here care if it was pulled?
Nothing is complicated here--and if the Finnish idiots had had the stupidity to take on African-Americans or Latinos that way with "ancient tribal rights-- so we can be an honorary Mexican or black" they would have gotten the same treatment from that population.
And white folks whining about the fact that someone non-white (gasp!)had the guts to flex their intellectual and political muscle.
KanuMomma (anonymous profile)
July 25, 2010 at 8:22 a.m. (Suggest removal)
Calvin, no group speaks for all members of their ethnicity.
What group speaks for all whites?
or all African-Americans?
AIM SB is making a stand on what they perceive as racism in the media.
I'm sure they don't expect everyone to agree with them.
So---you think "educated, intelligent " Indians would think this episode not stereotypical?
Educational perhaps?
I seriously doubt that.
Here you have white people dressed up in what I can only assume is some sort of attempt at "Plains" regalia while goofing off on California native land using Northwest totem poles to bash themselves in the scrotum, catch fish with their teeth, and "break out of jail for stealing from their own casino".
I wish MTV had had the guts to film this on some Plains Rez in front of the locals.
Heck, I wish MTV had the guts to do this to any other brown-skinned ethnic group.
Just do it in the barrio or ghetto where they could get some" instant " and "valuable" "feedback".
I don't even have a TV, but I would definitely make every effort to catch that episode.
KanuMomma (anonymous profile)
July 25, 2010 at 8:49 a.m. (Suggest removal)
More casino's !!!!!!!!!!! So you can pass on your traditions
805RunningCrew (anonymous profile)
July 27, 2010 at 2:51 p.m. (Suggest removal)
Guess what, Running Crew?
the casinos (and only a percentage of the tribes have them and only a percentage of those are profitable)--do help pass on traditions by funding language and culture classes that were not affordable before (takes money to hire teachers--even if you are asking your tribal members to give up their day jobs to do it--- linguists, and other support staff). If your language is in good shape , it is easier. If you want to drag it back from the dead (because it was beaten out of most of your tribal peoples at boarding schools run by whites who felt you had no right to your own language and culture--and who also beat and raped you---) then it will be more expensive.
If you have gone to a casino lately, thanks for your contribution.
KanuMomma (anonymous profile)
July 31, 2010 at 3:41 p.m. (Suggest removal)
I grew up in the SYV. I grew up with the Kahn boys and spent many a nights on the Res. And No, why would I ever go to a Indian Casino? Talk about white trash hangout. Oh and lets talk about "traditions" how are the Armenta men doing theses days?
805RunningCrew (anonymous profile)
August 4, 2010 at 1:56 p.m. (Suggest removal)
KanuMomma: Is the Santa Ynez casino involved in the educational programs you mention? Also, how do the Jews manage to pass on the Hebrew language and their culture without casinos?
billclausen (anonymous profile)
August 5, 2010 at 4:51 a.m. (Suggest removal)
"Don't like casinos?
Fine--stay out of them."
As long as the meth addicts and other criminal elements the casinos attract don't impose their lifestyles onto the communities around them, and people don't drink at these casinos and get behind the wheel,I have no problem with casinos.
billclausen (anonymous profile)
August 5, 2010 at 4:57 a.m. (Suggest removal)