Tribes can exclude members on gendered marriage lines

Evidence

An example of co-creation comes from the changing standards used in determining Native tribal membership and identity. Native American identity has been determined differently during the history of settler colonialism in the Americas. Self-identification on the census, externallyimposed standards like blood quantum that renders anyone with mixed white and the requisite amount of Native ancestry a Native, and internal tribal recognition or non-recognition, are all means by which the question has been settled. And some tribes refuse to recognize African and Native descended peoples as Native, resulting in the denial of tribal membership. In Santa Clara Pueblo v. Martinez, the tribe decided to exclude the Ms. Martinez’s daughter from inclusion in the tribe because she married a Navajo man. Male members of the tribe were not similarly excluded. Ms. Martinez and her daughter sued but lost. — Cyra Akila Choudhury, Racecraft and Identity in the Emergence…, 84 (#corroborates, via linked claim)

The federal civilization plan was spare on specifics but transformative in practice. American officials intended to drive what the historians Theda Perdue and Michael Green have termed “comprehensive cultural change,” converting a communal lifestyle rooted in sustainable farming and hunting into an individualistic lifestyle punctuated by private property and male authority. The policy demanded that Native men give up the bow for the plow, and that Native women cease farming corn and turn their attention to the domestic work of spinning thread, weaving cloth, and other “properly” feminine activities. Native people were advised to adopt Christianity and begin producing “civilized crops” like cotton. And Native tribes, which held lands in common, were expected to embrace, as Henry Knox put it, “a love for exclusive property.” To aid in this reinvention of Indigenous society, the United States would provide tools, fund the establishment of Christian missions and schools, and commission blacksmiths. If Native people did not prove that they could rise above savagery and assimilate, Hawkins and others believed, they would be crowded out or killed. — Nikole Hannah-Jones et al., The 1619 Project, 482 (#expands, via linked claim)

Categorization

• XREF: connects to: Identity is constituted through exclusion of what it is not; Federal Indian policy deliberately dismantled communal landholding and gender roles — Nikole Hannah-Jones et al., The 1619 Project: A New American Origin…, 482; Ingroups need not be defined in opposition to outgroups — John F. Dovidio, Peter Glick, Laurie A. Rudman, On the Nature of Prejudice: Fifty Years…, 427 (+2 more)

Broader Connections

• Native tribal membership rules co-construct race with gender and settler logics #corroborates (0.82) — Cyra Akila Choudhury, Racecraft and Identity in the Emergence…, 84
• Identity is constituted through exclusion of what it is not #expands (0.78)
• Federal Indian policy deliberately dismantled communal landholding and gender roles #expands (0.75) — Nikole Hannah-Jones et al., The 1619 Project, 482
• Ingroups need not be defined in opposition to outgroups #qualifies (0.72) — John F. Dovidio, Peter Glick, Laurie A. Rudman, On the Nature of Prejudice, 427