.png)
 |
| Miranda Mason ('19) |
Before European settlers arrived in the New
World, many indigenous people called it home.
While culture varied across tribes, there is evidence that there was a
more open attitude toward those who did not conform to a binary understanding
of gender than was found among Europeans.
Today, the people who were part of this third gender category are
referred to as “two-spirit”. The term is
also used by many modern LGBTQ+ (lesbian, gay, bisexual, transgender, queer,
etc.) American Indians to describe themselves.
It is a term that attempts to encapsulate the historical and cultural
background that is unique to them.
However, this term is relatively new.
The term was suggested by Albert McLeod at a 1990 conference of First
Nations people, many of whom were LGBTQ+.
The term is a translation of “niizh manidoowag” of the Anishinaabemowin
language, spoken by the Anishinaabe nation. It directly translates as “two spirits” and
was quickly adopted as the preferred pan-Indian term for the old lifestyles and
modern equivalents.
Why
was a term only agreed upon in the past few decades? There was another term, “berdache”, which was
originally used to describe the old lifestyle of non-binary members of tribes,
but it was imposed by Europeans. Though
most anthropologists used the term benignly, the origin became offensive to
modern two-spirits. The term was likely
adopted because the tribal language of the Crow included a term for certain
two-spirits which sounded similar to “berdache”. The word berdache was used by the French and
relates back to a Persian word which meant “kept boy”, with the connotation of
“whore”. This term was originally used
for a very specific way of life, but it was eventually generalized to mean
anyone that Europeans and white Americans perceived to be involved in sodomy,
homosexuality, hermaphroditism, transvestite behavior, etc. While some of these labels were accurate by
today’s definition, the understanding of such behaviors was not the same for
American Indians and colonists.
It
can be difficult to understand the two-spirit experience as it was before
European interference, because written documentation of it only began after
European influence had begun to shape the lives of American Indians. The writers of these documents were most
often European or Euro-American. There
is much evidence that bias, misunderstanding, and sensationalism may have
crafted subjective reports of the way of life in various tribes. Take for example, some of the most renowned
cases of two-spirit experiences.
The
Navajo nádleehé are well-known as men who took on the appearance and behaviors
of women. However, some scholars suggest
that the name was also used for women who took on men’s roles. Even then, others claim it was a variant of
such a word that referred to other vague circumstances. This ambiguity demonstrates how unfamiliarity
with a language could make documentation difficult to follow. Scholars, such as Sabine Lang and Wesley
Thomas have claimed that tribes had limitations upon the sexual behavior of
nádleehé people, so that a nádleehé was not permitted to engage in
relationships with women, while some sources claim that they could take wives. There are also disagreements about whether
some offspring in the Navajo tribe were assumed to be nádleehé from birth due
to “ambiguous genitalia”. All these minute details aside, it is sure
that there were two-spirit people in the Navajo tribe, but it is not clear how
they were regarded by their tribesmen before and after Europeans arrived.
Another
example is found in the 1937 article “Institutionalized Homosexuality of the
Mohave Indians” by George Devereaux, in which he described what he referred to
as “male transvestites” known as alyha
and “female transvestites” called hwame. The description he gave equated the life of alyha and hwame with homosexuality. He
emphasized that these people were ridiculed by their tribesmen, claiming that
others of the tribe might bully two-spirits into normal behavior, but his
sources may not have been reliable. His
primary informant, Nahwera, was considered by some to be a “senile and
toothless old singer”. Even if Nahwera
was reliable, Devereaux never saw or met an alyha
or hwame himself, which leads L.
H. Hasten to suggest he may have been poorly informed or else sensationalized
the truth.
Some
writings on two-spirits can be considered more trust-worthy because they come
from anthropologists with a well-informed background and an open mind. Take for instance, the work of Matilda Coxe
Stevenson, a researcher of the Zuni “Man-Woman”. This anthropologist provided first-hand
accounts of life as she observed the Zuni people. She wrote fondly of her friend We’wha. We’wha, born a man but attracted to feminine
roles, has become one of the most commonly known two-spirits. We’wha visited Washington, D.C. with
Stevenson for about six months in 1886.
During that time, Stevenson, though close to We’wha, was unaware of her
two-spirit nature. After developing a
closer relationship, Stevenson would be let in on the secret, and then go on to
write a report in 1904 which clarified many misconceptions that had been held
by outsiders of the cultural tradition up to that point.
It
was important that Stevenson became better acquainted with the tribe before
publishing, as she had personally held many misconceptions until We’wha
informed her otherwise. For example,
Stevenson had mistaken the Zuni two-spirits as biological hermaphrodites. However, even Stevenson’s work has been
subject to controversy. Stevenson
claimed that ko’thlama, men who have
adopted female appearances, could marry men.
Arnold Pilling argues that there is no firm evidence of this. One fairly uncontroversial bit of evidence
about the Zuni two-spirits is that lhamana,
the most general term for two-spirited individuals, originates in the Zuni
creation myth as a mediator between the sexes.
This is a definition that has taken hold in the modern two-spirit
movement, though the societal roles implied are no longer clearly defined.
There
are some tribal heritages that we have never had a firm understanding of, but
anthropologists have done the best they can to investigate these. One tribe which has caused controversy is the
Cherokee. Gregory Smithers of Virginia
Commonwealth University has analyzed the methodological challenges associated
with historical studies of two-spirits, presenting the Cherokee of early
America as a case study. He identifies a
singular quote from the journal of a white traveler who encountered a group of
Cherokee people in 1825, learning that “There were formerly among [the
Cherokee] formerly, men who assumed the dress and performed all the duties of
women and who lived their whole life in this manner.” This account is a rare piece of evidence of
two-spirit people among the Cherokee.
There is a shortage of such primary sources, and this shortage had
discouraged most scholars of the eighteenth and nineteenth centuries from studying
two-spirit peoples.
When
more research was made into the matter in the twentieth century, Smithers
argues that some scholars to jump to conclusions, colored by their own
desires. He points out that many
scholars would come across small details such as the aforementioned quote and
take the license to argue that sexual freedom was normal among the tribes. This perception was often reached by gender
theorists and LGBT scholars who may have wished to “buttress indigenous
revitalization movements” and make a political statement of history. However, as the course of the twentieth
century went on, a small, but detailed collection of written documents became
central to a well-founded assertion that two-spirits did live among the five
southeastern tribes, including the Cherokees.
However, even then, the social standing of such people was unclear. Historians could agree on one thing,
though. After delving into all available
sources, they could come to the consensus that Europeans and Euro-Americans of
the eighteenth and nineteenth centuries associated the term “berdache” and the
people to which it ref
erred with “transgressive gender behavior and
nonreproductive sexual activity”. This sense contributed to the bitterness that
many American Indians felt toward the term and affected the self-perception of
some indigenous people.
erred with “transgressive gender behavior and
nonreproductive sexual activity”. This sense contributed to the bitterness that
many American Indians felt toward the term and affected the self-perception of
some indigenous people.
Scholars
have gone on to quibble over the two-spirit identities, or lack thereof, of
various tribes and individuals. Nancy
Ward, a Cherokee woman and leader in her tribe, partly involved in the Treaty
of Hopewell, has been subject to one such debate. Because eighteenth century Cherokee notions
of tohi (requiring health, balance,
and peace with others), osi (requiring
a balance of needs of town and environment), and similar concepts created
military, diplomatic, and ritual positions that allowed men and women to fill
similar roles, some scholars have seen the role of ghigha (beloved woman) as being one of a two-spirited nature. Ward, a ghigha,
served an important role in a society with malleable social roles, but there is
no evidence that her role was similar to the two-spirit identities in other
communities. Despite a lack of evidence,
some gender theorists and LGBT scholars have jumped at the chance to include
her in the ranks of two-spirits.
Despite
a lack of evidence to affirm the possibility of Ward and other people as
two-spirit, it is still necessary to consider the speculative possibility. After all, there is interference between the
reality of the time period and the records of the said time. Though there are few coherent observations of
two-spirit mannerisms in the Woodland South, that may be due to the fact that
the observations were flawed. Smithers
explains that, “When the authors of these sources had their curiosity piqued by
perceived anomalies in sexual or gendered behavior, they most surely lacked the
cultural awareness, theoretical frameworks, and appropriate language to
comprehend and adequately describe what they saw.” Thus, we find ourselves in the trap of
history: it is written by men who may fail to capture what only their eyes can
see in a way so that we see it too.
Another possibility, that secrecy kept such things from writers’ sight,
has shown some promise. The Cherokee
were not always forthcoming with information on their sacred practices, and if
two-spirits served a role in them, as in other tribes, they may have been kept
hidden from the disruptions of colonists.
Yet
another example of attempted scholarly writing, which may offer either great
insights or a misguided interpretation of a situation, is that of Jacques Le
Moyne de Morgues in Florida in the 1560s.
This writing, much earlier than many of the previously addressed
records, should have greater promise of depicting American Indians before
European influence could further influence them, but also may suffer from
European dismay. Le Moyne discussed the
commonality of “hermaphrodites” that could be assumed to be something similar
to the two-spirits that were apparent in other regions of North America. He said they were “considered odious by the
Indians themselves,” suggesting a servile status. His documents suggest that they were strong
like men, took on women’s work, and performed the ritual and spiritual roles of
priests. His observations suggest that
they would be deemed more respectfully than his statement implies. This is precisely why we must be critical and
yet open-minded in the historical analysis of two-spirit existence and societal
roles.
For
tribes like the Cherokee, which lack much surefire written evidence of two-spirits,
oral tradition and story-telling have become exciting ways to gain insight into
the past. Much of the modern culture of
two-spirits has been based around the whispers of old American Indians who were
not completely changed by the religion of Christian missionaries, the
assimilation of boarding schools, or the loss of their homes and livelihoods. The modern two-spirit does not hold the same
position as the old but is often touched by the old stories of people who
shared something with them. In spite of
contradictory historical records, a modern movement, tied to traditions that
are centuries old, has developed. In the
1960s the American Indian Movement and Gay Liberation Movement set the stage
for a renewal of ideas that had once been excepted by some tribes in North
America. Though many LGBTQ+ people found
no home in the American Indian Movement and many American Indians were met with
racism from the Gay Liberation Movement, the existence of both groups set the
stage for two-spirits to shine. As previously stated, the movement of
two-spirits began to really coalesce in the 1990s.
The
meaning of two-spirit differs when looking at a historical or modern
context. Many tribes once saw these
individuals as special, bridging the gap between women and men, as though they
had two spirits inside of them—one masculine, the other feminine. The two-spirit’s role varied by the person’s
tribe and skills. In many cases, two-spirit
children would be taken on to learn the art of healing and/or leadership. These individuals were often considered
superior craftsmen and cooks as well.
They may have completely adopted the lifestyle of the gender opposite of
their physical form or adopted a unique balance of masculine and feminine
roles. A male-bodied two-spirit may act
as the wife to a male-bodied man along with female wives or may choose to live
promiscuously with various members of the tribe. A female-bodied two-spirit may serve as the
masculine one in a marriage to a woman.
In some tribes, the male-bodied two-spirits would go along with war
parties as shamans or cooks because female bodies were not permitted. However, in other tribes a female-bodied
two-spirit might lead the party. The
expectations and terminology for this phenomenon varied from tribe to tribe,
but the Pan-Indian term two-spirit is used to describe all of these.
In
comparison, modern two-spirits do not have the same tribal culture to take part
in. A two-spirit role in their society
may no longer exist. American mainstream
society has tried to stray from traditional gender roles in many ways, thus
making it difficult for anyone to claim that the work they do is of a
particular gender. If the community role
was a defining trait of two-spirits, then how do modern two-spirits use the term? The issue is currently up for debate. A few people would share the term with anyone
who is gender-queer, others only with queer American Indians, and yet others
with only those queer American Indians who perform a specific role in their
communities. The largest consensus seems
to hold that a gender-queer American Indian who attempts to serve their
American Indian community is legitimate in identifying as two-spirit. Even then, some gender-queer American Indians
do not identify by this term. The debates
continue, amongst scholars, social media, and reservation communities. Of course, some have argued that the
generalized title of “two-spirit” is no better than the generalized term
“berdache”. Both terms seek to simply
place individuals into a category that is easier for outsiders to
understand. The only difference, from
this perspective, is that “two-spirit” was chosen by a group of American
Indians, rather than Europeans.
One
American Indian woman who has served as a spokesperson for two-spirits in the
United States is Beverly Little Thunder.
Her Standing Rock reservation community had rejected her when she “came
out” in the 1980s. She went on to fight
for the rights of LGBTQ+ American Indians, taking part in a conference that
promoted the use of the term two-spirit in the United States shortly after it
was adopted in Canada. She hoped a
pan-Indian word chosen by indigenous people might serve to unite a diverse
community across the country, giving people like her a voice. She had been fighting for recognition and
respect in her community for over three decades when she and a group of her
fellow two-spirits were finally welcomed home at Standing Rock as part of a
protest against the Dakota Access Pipeline. Indeed, activism on behalf of broader
interests has brought more support to two-spirits.
Two-spirit
activism has played a large role in the legalization of gsame-sex marriage on
some reservations. Before Obergefell v.
Hodges, some American Indian reservations were ahead of the curve. In the American Indian Law Review, Trista
Wilson discussed two-spirit traditions among tribes of North America and argued
that legalizing gay marriage would be a return to traditional values. Her argument aimed to undermine that of
elders who said they did not want to diverge from “traditional values”. By this, many meant a value system that had
only been adopted under European influence.
Wilson pointed out that true American Indian traditions tended to be
inclusive of individuals even when they did not fit neatly into modern
conceptions of gender norms. Taking into
consideration evidence much like that previously observed in this paper, Wilson
argued strongly that the 155 American Indian tribes that are known to have been
accepting of two-spiritedness in their past should be similarly accepting in
the present. She continued to explain
that even in tribes with little to no information about two-spirits (such as
the Cherokee), a “lack of direct evidence alone does not disprove that
two-spirit culture existed within those tribes,” and those tribes may also
violate tribal traditions by not embracing a more open attitude.
Two-spirit
advocates for same-sex marriage used their tribe’s historical culture to
validate what many of their elders had come to disrespect. In 2008, the Coquille Tribe of Oregon was the
first to extend marriage rights to same-sex couples. This was possible due to tribal sovereignty. The Suquamish tribe followed suit. The Cherokee, one of the tribes with an
unsure heritage of two-spirits, passed a law in 2004 prohibiting same-sex
marriage, but it was finally overturned in 2016 after a decade of people
arguing that their original culture was one of acceptance, not alienation. The Navajo, with a well-proven history of
Nádleehés, however, have yet to legalize gay marriage in their territory. When the Navajo Tribal Council unanimously
voted in favor of the Dine Marriage Act (preventing same-sex marriage), Navajo
Nation President Joe Shirley, Jr. attempted to veto it to no avail, arguing
that the Act, “Veiled a discriminatory aspect in the guise of family values,
which goes against the Navajo teaching of non-discrimination and doing no
psychological or physical harm.” Unfortunately, Shirley’s opinion was
unheeded.
The
divisive attitudes seen in the Navajo tribe and others toward two-spirits has
been correlated with the influence of Christian ideology and political leanings
of the states in which the reservations lie.
Typically, if a state favors same-sex marriage, the tribal communities
within made moves to legalize it early, while if the opposite is true, the
tribal communities have been more likely to continue rejecting it, even after
the Supreme Court made a nationwide decision for the states. The history of two-spirits in a tribe does not
seem to make as great an impact upon tribal decisions as the opinions of
mainstream society outside of the reservations.
It
is because European ideologies changed American Indian ways of life that
something as simple as the term “two-spirit” can be meaningful. Many indigenous people, especially those that
identify as two-spirit, wish to reclaim a long-lost part of their culture, and
make something new that is truly their own.
Modern two-spirit culture clings to remnants of the past and uses them
to bolster the future. Though it can be
difficult to sort through the muck of history to find incontrovertible facts,
one thing is sure: two-spirits were important to some American Indian
communities once, and they are important to a pan-Indian community now.
Miranda Mason, of Corinth, Ky., is a senior McConnell Scholar at the University of Louisville, where she is an individualized major in medicine and society.