you're reading...
Pre-2008 Posts

UPDATE on Matricide at Pine Ridge: Anna Mae Pictou-Aquash’s Accused Murderer Extradited to Stand Trial; Russell Means Says Lakota Will Withdraw from U.S. Treaties


Anna Mae Pictou-Aquash

Update:  John Boy Patton Graham, the man witnesses at the trial of Fritz Arlo Looking Cloud say pulled the trigger held to the head of Anna Mae Pictou Aquash in 1976 on the Pine Ridge Reservation, has been extradited to stand trial for her murder.   Witnesses said Graham executed Anna Mae in the South Dakota Badlands while she begged for her life.  Patton has spent the last four years in Canada fighting extradition to stand trial for her murder.  The Canadian Supreme Court has declined to review Graham’s appeal, and he made his first appearance on first degree murder charges on December 6.  Trial is set for June 17.  Looking Cloud is serving a life sentence for first degree murder, and an appeals court has upheld his conviction.

From a press release issued by Indigenous Women for Justice in May of 2007:

Arlo Looking Cloud has now been tried and sentenced to life in prison for our mother’s murder. Twenty-three sworn witnesses, including former members of the American Indian Movement gave testimony, a video of Looking Cloud’s confession was shown naming Mr. John Graham a.k.a. John Boy Patton as the man who shot my mother. This was all reviewed by a jury before they voted to find Mr Looking Cloud guilty. Additional evidence and witnesses will no doubt be presented during a trial for Mr. Graham. We look forward to scrutinizing that evidence as well, in the pursuit of justice…

While we recognize that our mother’s case presents an opportunity of solidarity for those who feel they have been unjustly processed in the justice system, have been denied their treaty rights, or oppose uranium mining, there is no correlation to any other trial, cause or issue, past or present. A human being was murdered, there are witnesses, there is evidence, her murderers are known, and some of them are still free to walk around. They need to be held accountable for their actions.

There is no injustice in allowing Mr. Graham every opportunity to exercise his constitutional rights. It has now been almost four years since he was indicted on the charge of 1st Degree Murder. If extradited, Mr Graham has a right to defend himself, he has a right to tell his side of the story, in a court of law, in the United States. Justice can prevail, when evidence is allowed to be publicly vetted. It is time for Mr. Graham to allow the process to go forward.

Annie Mae Pictou Aquash was committed to, and driven by the call for justice for Indigenous people and those who could not help themselves. Our family and friends honor her spirit and name, and her right to obtain justice for those who so unjustly ended her life.

Note:   Also in December, a group of Lakota Sioux, headed by Russell Means, announced an intention to withdraw from treaties with the U.S. and to exist as a fully sovereign nation.  Note what the webmaster for Indigenous Women for Justice wrote below of Means quoted from my original blog post:

No major AIM leader attended Anna’s funeral. It is alleged that Russell Means, his brother and friends were attending a basketball game a few miles away. Their absence was a declaration of fear and an intimation of involvement in Her death.

While the FBI “may” have been involved/initiated the murder, it would have been an AIM high ranker that actually ordered the death of Anna.

John Boy and Arlo may have been the dirty work soldiers, but the high rankers are just as responsible and must, too, be dragged into the light.

Russ Means Holds Press Conference on Annie Mae’s murder (Dec. 3, 2007), Link   Link  News from Indian Country coverage and thanks to the blogger in comment 37 who tracked back to this post and alerted me to these events. 

Click on the “Continue Reading” link below for the original blog post.

AddThis Social Bookmark Button

“These white people think this country belongs to them — they don’t realize that they are only in charge right now because there’s more of them than there are of us.  The whole country changed with only a handful of raggedly-ass pilgrims that came over here in the 1500s. And it can take a handful of raggedy-ass Indians to do the same, and I intend to be one of those raggedy-ass Indians.” …Anna Mae Pictou

Having learned that Cecilia Fire Thunder had emerged as one of four candidates in the November election for president of the Oglala Sioux (the man who replaced her when she was impeached got 523 votes, she tied another man at 460 votes, and the fourth person, a man, received 416 votes), I visited Jacqueline Keeler at  Tiyospayenow wondering whether Jacqueline might have blogged about it.  Instead, I found this post about Anna Mae Pictou-Aquash.   This led me on a search for more and more information, until I came upon the website of Indigenous Women for Justice, an organization whose leaders include Pictou-Aquash’s daughters.   I learned, reading through the articles and links at Indigenous Women for Justice, about Pictou-Aquash’s life, loves, daughters, militance as an Indian woman,  about her central role as a militant in the American Indian Movement (AIM)  of the early ’70s, and of the way, after her rape and murder, AIM’s lights went out.  

In December of 1975, Pictou-Aquash, a young mother of two daughters, 10 and 11,  was kidnapped, brutally beaten, raped, and shot execution-style on a bluff on the outskirts of the Pine Ridge Indian Reservation in the Badlands of South Dakota.  Her body was found several days later by a rancher.   The coroner ruled she had died of exposure.  He could not identify her, so he cut off her hands and sent them off so that fingerprints could be obtained.  She was buried in a pauper’s grave.   Her fingerprints revealed she was Anna Mae Pictou-Aquash, originally from the  Mi’kmaq reservation in Nova Scotia.  She had joined the AIM resistance in Pine Ridge in its heyday several years prior.  Her family asked that her body be exhumed, because they did not believe she could have died of exposure or natural causes.  A second autopsy a few weeks after the first revealed that Anna Mae had been shot in the back of the head. 

AIM had been targeted by the U.S. government for aggressive, relentless, counter-intelligence activity during the ’70s COINTELPRO era.  The goal was to destroy AIM, or at the very least, to render it ineffective.  Infiltrators attempted to turn group members against each other, promoted suspicion and disinformation, and targeted visible leaders like Anna Mae in various ways.  Anna Mae was the victim of a “bad jacket” or “snitch jacket” operation; FBI operatives started rumors that she was a police informant and security risk to discredit her, to neutralize her effectiveness and influence,  to keep the attention off of those who were the actual infiltrators and snitches, and in hopes that she would be eliminated, either via being ousted or by more drastic means, by members of AIM.

After repeatedly being interrogated by the FBI and government investigators, she was then interrogated by AIM leaders who believed she was a “snitch”.   It is said of her that she was outspoken, that she did not back down, and particularly not for men, that she was a woman’s rights activist, always, and had been since she was very young. Ultimately,  at the order of an AIM leader, she was kidnapped, held in a room where she was brutally beaten, causing her to lose 10 teeth, and was then raped by at least one AIM leader and possibly more.  She was then taken to the Pine Ridge Reservation to be shot execution-style in the head. 

Her murderers, as it turned out, were leaders of the movement she gave her life for.   Many in the AIM knew who had killed her.  Ultimately, they all knew, if they didn’t know it at the time of her murder, that she was no snitch.  And yet those who knew continued, and some still continue, to blame her murder on the FBI or the government or COINTELPRO.  Yes, the U.S. government was to blame for infiltrating the AIM to destroy it.  No, it was not to blame for the fact that AIM leaders raped, brutalized and murdered a Native American woman. 

For 28 years no charges were brought against anyone in the murder of Anna Mae Pictou-Aquash.  Finally, in 2003, Arlo Looking Cloud was finally apprehended, charged with murder and jailed.  He had been present at Pictou-Aquash’s murder, but did not pull the trigger on the gun.  “John-Boy” Patton Graham pulled the trigger.  The U.S. filed charges against him in 2003.  A Canadian citizen, Graham has been fighting extradition since that time, has posted bail, and is under house arrest.  His next hearing is scheduled for October 30, 2006.  AIM leaders and former leaders have squared off over the charges, accusations, trials, all after these long 28 years of relative silence in which those who brutally raped and murdered a Native American woman leader walked free.

These are the words of Anna Mae’s daughter, Denise Pictou-Maloney, of Indigenous Women for Justice (links follow):

It is important to make the distinction between AIM, the true leaders who came out of AIM, and those so-called leaders who think AIM begins and ends with them. Shortly before she was murdered my mother wrote, “I’m Indian all the way and always will be. I’m not going to stop fighting until I die, and I hope I’m a good example of a human being and of my tribe.”

My mother was a strong woman, she was not an informant, and she would not back down. They could not control her, and so they silenced her…

There is no excuse for matricide, and that is what this is, even though Graham [Pictou-Aquash’s accused murderer, fighting extradition from Canada] wants people to believe that there was some sinister political motivation behind my mother’s death. This isn’t a battle between what’s left of AIM and the FBI, this is a struggle to bring justice for a First Nation’s mother who was kidnapped, brutalized, and murdered.

AIM is in the hearts of many Native people — it will be there when Banks, Bellecourt and company [believed to share responsibility for Anna Mae’s murder] have gone, just as it was there before they came — AIM is just a name, it’s not the movement, the movement is the inherent spirit of the people, a spirit my mother represented

There are good people and bad people in every movement, and those who were involved in killing my mother have learned that you can’t get away with murder and still carry the pipe, you can only pretend. People have told me that when the AIM Grand Governing Council holds its conferences today the room isn’t full and half of those who attend are wannabees and far-Left white activists, it’s easy to pretend to an audience like that. Credibility?

They’ve done it effectively; they convinced Peter Matthiessen, and to a degree Robert Redford, and they have used those documentaries, movies, and best-selling books to help cover-up what happened to my mother…

Violence against women, the life givers, is not traditional. Mental, physical, and sexual abuse against indigenous women is rampant throughout our communities. …Anna Mae Pictou-Aquash, suffered all of those brutal indignities in the last 36-hours of her life

For all of those who refuse to face the reality, just think of how it has been for us — this is our mother — she was a strong, beautiful, gifted Native woman, she is not just a topic of debate, a focus of speculation, or a pawn for political exploitation. Don’t hide from the truth, however painful, and don’t let our mother continue to be the victim of injustice to make a political point or to vent your frustration at the U.S. government. Remember Anna Mae? She was a First Nation woman, a Canadian citizen, the victim of kidnap, rape and murder — she was my mother…

Arlo Looking Cloud has said that Graham raped my mother at Thelma Rios’ apartment, and Graham is on tape admitting that Arlo was guarding the door to the room my mother was held in… I’d like to know if more than one person raped her there, and who they are, and who other than Thelma Rios’ beat her there…

Several AIM leaders liken themselves to Tasunka Witco-Crazy Horse and Tatanka Iyotanka-Sitting Bull. Yet, they have taken their visions and corrupted them. Crazy Horse and Sitting Bull didn’t use trust against the people to intimidate or control them. They didn’t place themselves above the people. They didn’t brag or demand respect or recognition. They fought to protect a way of life. They did it selflessly. They were true and loyal activists of the people. People like Anna Mae, Ingrid, and many others. Those who tasted sugar, coffee and felt Maza Ska-money in their hands betrayed them and the people. Both Crazy Horse and Sitting Bull were taken prisoner and killed. They were murdered for what they believed in. They were murdered so the Indians who deceived them would not lose what they had established at the Fort and on the reservations. Sounds familiar doesn’t it. ..

Graham [fighting extradition] told the AP, “This is not about women’s or men’s issues,” when patently it is. The abduction, rape, and execution of a woman is all about “women’s and men’s issues.” Rape is about power and dominance… Looking Cloud has said Graham raped Anna Mae. Graham admits Looking Cloud was there. At first-light on December 12, 1975, Graham had the ultimate power kick over a woman; he shot Anna Mae in the back of the head. Graham is an exponent of matricide, he pulled the trigger on an indigenous mother whose life and death symbolizes the struggle of indigenous women, and whose strength continues to inspire Native women. Anna Mae stood up to men in the AIM leadership who couldn’t handle it, and so they ordered her death. Sworn testimony now confirms that Arlo Looking Cloud, Theda Clark, and John Graham carried out the death sentence, and Graham has the audacity to talk about being “railroaded” and “sham” trials – what kind of trial did Anna Mae get John? You must at least remember what her appeals process was, when she was begging you and Arlo not to kill her as you pulled her out of Theda’s Ford Pinto on Highway 73.

As the man who provides webspace for Indigenous Women for Justice writes:

No major AIM leader attended Anna’s funeral. It is alleged that Russell Means, his brother and friends were attending a basketball game a few miles away. Their absence was a declaration of fear and an intimation of involvement in Her death.

While the FBI “may” have been involved/initiated the murder, it would have been an AIM high ranker that actually ordered the death of Anna.

John Boy and Arlo may have been the dirty work soldiers, but the high rankers are just as responsible and must, too, be dragged into the light.

…High rankers know, and have always known who murdered Anna. They also will pay.

…The First Nations have an obligation to Honor the hunt for Anna Mae’s killers. This must be done or there will be no Peace. Either for The Nations or for Anna.

Some say it does not matter who pulled the trigger. That it does not matter who raped Her. That what matters is determining those who prompted the pillage of Anna.

I say that it does matter who pulled the trigger. That it does matter who raped Her. That it does matter that all involved, top to bottom, are dragged into the Light.

It does matter that a debt be paid.

Go here to find out how to support the fight to get Anna Mae’s killer extradited.

Go here, to a website defending her accused murderer’s extradition, to write to the addresses listed there supporting his extradition.

Go here to read what Indigenous Women for Justice have to say and to send them letters of support.

It’s not good enough to blame COINTELPRO, the U.S. Government, or the FBI, generically, for a woman’s brutal beating, rape and murder.  They definitely deserve the blame for the many crimes they committed in Pine Ridge.  But the men who beat, raped and murdered Anna Mae Pictou-Aquash deserve to be held accountable for those crimes of terrorism against a woman leader, against Native American women, against all women.


Link to Interview with Denise Pictou-Maloney (Anna Mae’s daughter) (includes links to court testimony and other sworn testimony) 

Link to article refuting a book about Anna Mae written by a non-indigenous woman and supportive of some accused of responsibility for her death)




42 thoughts on “UPDATE on Matricide at Pine Ridge: Anna Mae Pictou-Aquash’s Accused Murderer Extradited to Stand Trial; Russell Means Says Lakota Will Withdraw from U.S. Treaties

  1. Very interesting. And they say ‘disappearances’ are not traditional in this country.

    Posted by profacero | October 19, 2006, 11:31 pm
  2. Of all the hells in this system, men of color violating, dominating, and oppressing women of color is probably the hardest cross to bear. For all we do as mothers, wives, sisters, daughters, in our families and in the community, and then have so-called brothas treat us like this—it’s hard to imagine what is worse about being a woman of color in this world.

    Male dominance is the only carrot that a man of color gets in this system. The power of life and death over women and children, the rule of woman by man. Maleness is as exclusive as white skin privilege, and once a man has it, he will fight any woman that “threatens” to take it away, even go as far as killing her. That’s how deadly patriarchy is. It’s so deadly it will make you forget the ways of the ancestors, as so many African American, First Nations, and Asian Pacific men have done. Misogynistic violence is the dirty open secret in our communities.

    When I hear or see a Black man beating “his” woman, I have two undesirable choices: stay silent or call the police. I don’t want to call the cops on anybody, especially a Black man. But if you’rerbrutalizing my sister, what the hell choice do you leave me? You know?

    These so-called brothers who killed Mother Anna Mae Pictou-Aquash need to be held accountable, by any means necessary.

    Posted by Y. Carrington | October 20, 2006, 2:51 am
  3. What a disgusting story of betrayal. Especially from men who were supposed to be her allies.

    I feel sadness for Anna Mae, such a brave and beautiful soul, and to suffer her final moments so.

    Posted by stormcloud | October 20, 2006, 11:54 am
  4. Y Carrington, your comments are very incisve.

    I heard somewhere and forgot the source, about the term “white dividend” or maybe “race dividend” meaning, you may be a miserable worker who works all your life and never gets over, but at least you’re white. That is, racism is a way to keep the class system functioning. You make me think of extending that to a “male dividend” so, you may be a miserable worker, and not be white, but at least you’re male.

    Well if you’re not white and not male, well you can’t really fight back anyway.

    I also agree with you that if it werent for the very sharp difference in class and wealth, in addition racism we wouldn’t be seeing such extreme violent misogyny.

    I imagine it is very hard to come out with this stuff because white women have a hard time admitting they have privilege. Especially not those who work against oppression, because they can’t imagine themselves as the enemy. But privilege is nice, like any drug.

    Posted by saltyC | October 20, 2006, 2:25 pm
  5. Don’t idolize native culture. Their history is of a very misogynistic and racist culture. Native men traded women as goods, abandoned wives they didn’t like, had multiple wives, took slaves from other native tribes… The men who killed Anna Mae were not outstanding in any way.

    Posted by Pony | October 20, 2006, 3:55 pm
  6. Yes I believe you. I have Tupi-Guarani ancestry and my baby is part Cherokee.
    I don’t know how that has any bearing, I just thought I’d say that.

    Posted by saltyC | October 20, 2006, 4:14 pm
  7. No kidding, Y. Carrington, re not wanting to get help from white law enforcement officials and courts and yet also not wanting to be abused and battered. It’s interesting, in one of the links on the Indigenous Women for Justice site, Anna Mae’s daughter says she thinks these men should be charged and tried by white men, given that it took 20-some odd years for all of these male leaders to even acknowledge what had happened to her mother. They knew– why didn’t they do something about what they knew? Leonard Peltier knew. He’s sitting in prison with two life sentences. Why would it have cost him anything to tell what he knew? Well, it would have, because he was one of Anna Mae’s interrogators according to court transcripts and at one point he stuck a loaded pistol in her mouth, and all of that stuff, all the complicity would have had to come out. One of the tribal leaders, Banks, I think, who was there when she was being interrogated, had been her boyfriend for a while, too. Peltier has disavowed any connection with Graham, the guy who is said to have actually pulled the trigger, but it took him until 2005 or so to do so.

    What the U.S. government did there should not be underestimated so far as the effect it had. That was genocide there at Pine Ridge. If you go to some of the links on the IWJ site, you’ll see the list of the MANY, many, MANY Native Americans killed, murdered on the reservation between 1972 and 1976. Many of them were murdered by “GOONS,” Native police commissioned by a really corrupt tribal leader who had sold out to white men. But infiltration via COINTELPRO operations in those days was a serious thing. All of the dissident groups were being infiltrated, including feminist/Women’s Liberation groups, the Black Panthers, SDS, SNCC, all of them. Infiltrators were good at what they did–they would inveighle their way in, try to get close to visible leaders, get their trust. They’d pit people against each other, cause people to distrust each other in all sorts of ingenious ways. I have no doubt that AIM was in turmoil during these years; they were under seige, they were being offed every single day, they were being infiltrated, interrogated. I’m sure some really did believe that Anna Mae was a snitch. I’m sure others didn’t know but liked the idea because they didn’t like her; she was strong, sharp, defiant, would not back down, a leader, and on top of all that, she was beautiful, all of which made her a woman it is easy for many people to hate or at least dislike, resent, so that if they hear something negative about her, they’ll believe it. I’m just saying, we cannot downplay the effect on members of the AIM of U.S. government infiltration and attack.

    At the same time, there are things about this that are just striking. There was a guy who was outed as an actual snitch, a real one. His last name was Durham, can’t recall his first name, but he was a slimy, weasel-y snake. Anna Mae wrote about the first time she saw him dressed in traditional Native clothes and dying his hair black. He wasn’t Native in any way shape or form and she never trusted him. Later it was revealed that he was an operative, and how did AIM leader handle that? When they found out, they just kicked him out. Nothing happened to him, he just got the boot, got the door. Compare that to what happened to Anna Mae, and in particular the rapes. This is how women are put in our place, by being raped by men.

    The other things that stood out to me, or some, are the way some have gone on to be movie makers and so on with the support of guys like Robert Redford, the way AIM meetings now are just full of wanna bes and white leftists, and the non-indigenous woman who wrote the book about Anna Mae and is supporting Graham, the guy who shot her! Believes all of his crap, despite what Anna Mae’s daughters have written, despite the trial and conviction of Arlo Looking Glass and the tons, just tons of testimony of eye witnesses to what happened. There she sits making bucks from her book about Anna Mae! As the daughters said, if she was in any way legit or right, she’d send all the proceeds of that book to Indigenous Women for Justice.

    There’s a movie out, just released, about Anna Mae Pictou-Aquash’s life and story. It’s the top link on the Indigenous Women for Justice site. I’m going to get hold of that movie, definitely. Those links are well worth reading and particularly the link to the interview with Denise Pictou-Maloney, the daughter. It’s a powerful story and she’s a powerful woman, her mother’s daughter.


    Posted by womensspace | October 20, 2006, 4:20 pm
  8. Oh wait, that’s an important part of the story and I didn’t make it clear what was going on.

    One reason the FBI/government operatives put a snitch jacket on Anna Mae was that from the get-go she knew that Durham guy was a real snitch. She didn’t trust him from the moment she laid eyes on him. So they set about to discredit Anna Mae hoping people would start to not trust her and hence not trust her suspicions and hunches about the real operatives.


    Posted by womensspace | October 20, 2006, 4:26 pm
  9. Don’t idolize native culture. Their history is of a very misogynistic and racist culture.

    Pony…with all due respect, this simply isn’t true. Before white folks came here, there were thousands of indigenous nations in the Americas, each with their own political and cultural systems. There is no single “Native culture.” Actually, many North American nations would have what we’d consider today to be egalitarian practices regarding gender. For instance, the Iroquois Confederation (a collection of several nations in upstate New York) was led by women, and it was the women who decided what jobs and leaderships positions men would serve in, or if they could serve at all. If a man was not up to his job, the women could (and did) remove him.

    What we should be clear about is that indigenous Americans did not have the system of gender as we know it today. There were “men” and “women” (and variations known in our time as “two-spirit”), but the meaning of these concepts was qualitatively different from European concepts of gender (female inferiority, homophobia, male sex right, etc). As far as racism goes, that definitely is a product of the “New World.” Native culture is only as racist as any other culture in a genocidal settler state like the US.

    Furthermore, your words skirt very close to demonizing Native Americans. I know you’re not white, but all of us in the White West internalize white supremacy, and the notion that men of color are more misogynistic and violent than white men is white supremacist to the core. This racist notion has fueled lynching, Jim Crow, and every war the US has fought since World War II (the demonization of the Japanese during that war is enough to make you sick).

    Posted by Y. Carrington | October 20, 2006, 4:56 pm
  10. Thanks, Heart, for the article and the links.

    Posted by Char | October 20, 2006, 5:01 pm
  11. “One reason the FBI/government operatives put a snitch jacket on Anna Mae was that from the get-go she knew that Durham guy was a real snitch.”

    That is the usual strategy in such circumstances. I had it happen to me in an anti-porn (private) group recently. Apparently I was “aggressive, violent and fascist” because I called for security measures to tighten on the group, due to certain situations that had occured pointing to a leak of information (some minor sabotage).

    Whilst it is a great thing to invite many supporters to help with a cause, it is a dangerous thing when operatives infiltrate. At best, they disrupt the group, at worst, life and death consequences.

    Posted by stormcloud | October 20, 2006, 5:36 pm
  12. Y. Carrington: and the notion that men of color are more misogynistic and violent than white men is white supremacist to the core. This racist notion has fueled lynching, Jim Crow, and every war the US has fought since World War II (the demonization of the Japanese during that war is enough to make you sick).

    This has me thinking about something I read about privilege– that privilege has to do with having the power to make what you want or need to happen in the world, happen. In other words, those who have privilege have learned to expect that if they want or need something, the systems and structures are and will be in place for them to get what they want or need. Those who are marginalized and disenfranchised do not have that same expectation. The way this works out is, the marginalized and disenfranchised have to *fight* for just about everything. They have to fight to survive, fight for justice, fight for recognition, fight for opportunity. They have to be loud, they have to speak up, they have to be aggressive, sometimes they resort to violence, *as individuals*.

    White men, and those who enjoy relative degrees of privilege, don’t have to do all that. They just call the police, and expect that most of the time, white male policemen will show up and do their bidding. They just sue and expect that a white male judge will see things their way. They just tell their side and expect that a white supremacist culture will agree that they’re right. They complain and just expect that they will be heard and taken seriously.

    This is one reason (among many, many others) that it can look as though men of color are more violent or more misogynist. They don’t live inside of the kind of entitlement which relies on others, including powerful others, to do their bidding. You only need a few thugs to privilege the whole gang; white men have enough thugs that they all dont’ have to be thugs.

    As to misogyny, I mean today the news is that the Russian president Putin made a JOKE about the Israeli president having raped and sexually assaulted 10 women. He said something like, “We’re all jealous.” And all the men in the room, leaders, laughed! Talk about white male misogyny in high places. These guys are every bit as misogynist and violent as any other men anywhere.


    Posted by womensspace | October 20, 2006, 5:54 pm
  13. I’m not white, no. I’m Metis. I think Iroquois culture is not as democratic as you paint it.

    I’m not saying native cultures are worse, just they are no different than any misognyistic culture, ours for example. Iroquois women were traded like beads too. There’s one in my ancestry. She was a teenager, married off to a white trader of 60 to cement trade relations. You want to see the wedding photo; he’s gloating over a cigar in his teeth and winking at the camera, she’s looing like a rabbit in the headlights.

    I think academia, in it’s presentation of native culture, is as misguided as it is in ‘gender’ studies. Native women trade misogyny from one culture for misogyny from another.

    Posted by Pony | October 20, 2006, 5:59 pm
  14. God, I’m just sick to my stomach about this. I read Mary Crow Dog’s account of the AIM movement (Lakota Woman) some time ago, at which time Annie Mae’s death was believed to be an FBI murder . It sickens me to discover what actually unfolded.

    I did some work about twenty years ago with AIM , raised money for Leonard Peltier and met many of the “original” activists. Sexism is strongly documented in the movement, of course, by various accounts, so it’s not like I was unaware of it. But with the recent events surrounding Cecilia Thunder-Fire and now this, I’m just really disgusted and dissapointed.

    Posted by Txfeminist | October 20, 2006, 6:05 pm
  15. Hi Heart,

    I find myself accused of all sorts of nefarious things. I noticed that some bloggers who were blogging anonymously were doing things that compromised their own anonymity, so I e-mailed them privately to warn them. I thought they would want to know. Never outed anyone. Never threatened to out anyone. Never would. I don’t have any “secret databases,” just common sense. Some people just like being angry, and hurting others.

    I read this and it gave me a sense of perspective. Thank you for your courage in writing this, Heart.

    Posted by Ann Bartow | October 20, 2006, 6:45 pm
  16. Heart, thanks for this great post and links. I watched a documentary about Anna Mae a while ago; I think it’s probably the same film you mentioned. This probably says more about me and what I wanted to believe (or maybe my bad memory) than it does about the film or the filmmaker, but I’m sure I came away with the idea that her murder was an FBI job, too. I’ll be spending some time reading through all the links you provided.

    Huh, I wasn’t sure, but it must I must have seen the film on Sundance:

    Posted by Melissa | October 20, 2006, 8:39 pm
  17. For those who wish to write the Canadian gov regarding Graham, please note the name and information on the Anna Mae website is incorrect.

    Use this:

    I have advised Anna Mae’s daughters.

    Posted by Pony | October 20, 2006, 10:50 pm
  18. Y. Carrington I was rushing out when I responded to you and see I sounded abrupt. Not abrupt, but short of time.

    Yes there are many native cultures, and they cannot be confused. But the Iroquois are almost always granted higher humanity among native people by whites, from historians to today, because they were an agricutltural people primarily. Not savage, you see. Even today, it’s common for mixed blood people to prefer to say their native ancestry is Iroquois. God help them, never Cree, the dispossessed Indians who lay in their own puke in gutters all across western Canadian cities and towns, and whose women make up the bulk of prostituted women in those cities.

    Although women in all native cultures played important roles in varying ways, it was still the male roles, whatever they were, that was respected more highly. It is western society which holds what was granted to Iroquois and some other native women ie) ‘owning’ land as proof they held high status.

    When white men came, it was the native woman’s fathers and brothers who handed her over to the white men to increase his status, and when their mothers did it, it was done in the same way African women infibulate their daughters.

    Everyone wants to eat.

    Posted by Pony | October 20, 2006, 10:59 pm
  19. It is my understanding – correct me if I am wrong – that the status of women in many native cultures went down from what it had been after the white men arrived because white men refused to deal with women as leaders and representatives of their nations. Is that correct?

    Posted by Branjor | October 21, 2006, 12:20 am
  20. I don’t believe women were leaders in native culture any more than women are leaders in white culture. They had influence, there were individual women noted for that, they may have done heroic things. Just like today, they were still part of the class of women whose role was subordiate. There is no utopia in native culture. I view this idea whole noble Indian idea as racist. Now nearly exterminated in a genocide that has gone on for four centuries, but you can visit them in museums.

    Posted by Pony | October 21, 2006, 6:20 pm
  21. Well Pony, I am not doubting you here. I know some tribes were patriarchal and some matriarchial, but I would really like to know if there is some evidence of what you say. Native American writers do seem to call upon myths that do say female agency was recognized in a much more coherent way than in white society within certain tribes to be sure. Are you saying that native women were just figure heads the way white women have been in white society? In other words the projected ideal?
    When I read Paula Allen Gunn and Louise Erdrich, just to name two, I do not get the impression women are things to be used, It is a totally different way of looking at relationships. I mean totally different than women as property in the way white christians viewed women. So your comment has really confused me.

    Posted by rhondda | October 21, 2006, 8:48 pm
  22. I think there are several things at work here. I think native people today are divorced from their culture. They don’t know it, but are trying to recover it, and sometimes I think have an unrealistic idea of what is ‘was’, by contrast to the culture that has broken it. I also think if you are looking at academic views of native culture, there is a split there just like there is with prostitution. One faction say prostitution is work, and just needs unions. The other says…well you know what radical feminists say.

    I’m sorry I don’t have citations for you.

    I don’t romanticize native culture. Not the present day’s culture or that of the past. For example, there was serious racism, enslavement, and cannibalism,

    Posted by Pony | October 22, 2006, 12:32 am
  23. I’ve been thinking about this all day.

    I think that I err on the side of idealizing Native American cultures, for a million and one reasons. My dad, just out of law school when I was a tiny girl, a toddler, clerked for Federal Judge George Boldt. I grew up hearing about Judge Boldt and occasionally seeing him when he came to my house to have dinner with my dad. My dad was a liberal Democrat when I was young, a fighter for the rights of all people. I grew up with a deep understanding of the way Native Americans were marginalized. I didn’t need to hear about it, read about it, I could see it in the poverty of people on the reservations in the Pacific Northwest where I lived. I saw it firsthand on our family trips to Montana to visit relatives, where the racism against Native Americans was nothing short of horrifying, gut-wrenching. I learned about it as the girlfriend, in high school, of an Indian boyfriend, smart, a great football player, but with a horrible drinking problem. I watched Bob Satiacum of the Puyallup Tribe near where I grew up fighting for Native American fishing rights, fighting, fighting, absolutely murderously hated by white men. Ultimately I was thrilled when Judge Boldt, the awe-inspiring judge of my childhood, issued his historic ruling reaffirming the fishing rights of Washington’s Indian tribes. Later I would figure out that that same decision denied some Washington tribes rights to the land given to them via treaties. And later I would watch as Bob Satiacum fled to Canada and sought asylum after having been charged here in Washington, a few miles from where I grew up, with sexually molesting several small girls in his family. He said he was drunk, didn’t remember, what he did was misunderstood. I wanted to believe him. I tried to.

    A feminist I appreciate very much said once of women that we are not morally superior to men, we are just uncorrupted by power. I think that may be true of Native Americans as well. They are not colonizers as white men are. They have not had power as white men have had it. And so in some ways they are uncorrupted, compared with white men.

    I think I have a sense of what Pony feels. For some years I was what I would call neo-Amish. I wore a head veiling and my daughters did too. I was a pacifist, a citizen of a heavenly country, very other-worldly. Amish and Conservative Mennonite people were my closest friends. I came to know the Plain People well. In the wake of the murders of the Amish schoolgirls, media has been all about idealizing the Amish and how forgiving they are and we should all learn from them and so on.

    Well, I know better. I know better because, for one example, I was the one to attempt to comfort one of my closest Mennonite friends when her 3-year-old daughter was raped by a 14 year old Amish boy while ALL the parents were in the house. The Amish don’t go to civil authorities for justice. So the elders required the boy to “repent.”  So he did.  The little girl lives forever with having been raped, and who knows how many other little girls he raped. Amish parents, Conservative Mennonite, Hutterite parents,  can be absolutely physically brutal with their children. Amish women and girls are totally and completely subordinated to Amish men.  So yeah, the Amish may be all about being forgiving of the heathen hordes, in the wake of these horrific murders. But they have their own significant issues, including as to all of this magnificent forgiveness they say they have to offer.  As to forgiving me or women like me? Any woman who, say, divorces, even for battering and abuse?  There is no forgiveness for this.  They will never forgive me for this. I am forever shunned by them.  I’ll never forget reading a tract sent to me:  “We can offer no hope of heaven to anyone who has divorced and remarried.”

    So, no. Don’t fricking idealize the Amish to me. I know better.  I know them.  I think something like this might be what Pony feels.

    We all want, want, want for some men, some people, some cultures, to have figured things out, to have made better decisions, done things better, than our own people did. So, we idealize people we do not know. We should not.

    My thoughts for now.


    Posted by womensspace | October 22, 2006, 4:34 am
  24. Yes Heart. Your thoughts so beautifully expressed; what I was trying to say.

    There is a beautiful movie you might want to see, not about ‘Indians’ but aboriginal northern people, a hunting culture. Or maybe you’ve already seen Atanarjuat: The Fast Runner. It is made by Inuit, with Inuit village people as the actors, about a very old Inuit legend. It won an Cannes award.

    Posted by Pony | October 22, 2006, 6:48 am
  25. Thanks, Pony and Heart, that clarifies it somewhat for me and helps clear up the confusion I have experienced with all the contradictory depictions of native Americans.

    I am not surprised by the Amish, though. As someone involved in animal rescue, I have been aware for some time that the Amish run some of the worst puppy mills in the country.

    Posted by Branjor | October 22, 2006, 12:40 pm
  26. Heart, let me make this clear: I never idealized anybody, at any point in this thread. I’m speaking as a woman of color, who has experienced oppression from white people and men of color. I am not speaking about what I don’t know. I know than Native men and all men of color can be misogynist and violent, they are men after all. But we know that white supremacy demonizes men of color as misogynists, as if it is a special problem of colored men only. Not only is this meme not true, it’s disingenous to the core. Whose system of gender are we in the Americas living under anyway? Whose history do we learn? Whose culture do we internalize? What language are we speaking on this thread? We know the answer here.

    Do Native Americans struggle with patriarchy? Hell yes. We’re talking about a Native woman who was raped and murdered by Native men, after all. But are Native societies in the Americas inherently misogynistic and racist? Are African Americans inherently misogynistic and racist? Are Asian Americans? Hispano-Latina folk? Arab/Middle Eastern folk? No!

    Men of color are not inherent misogynists. They are not inherently violent. The idea that they are has led to brutal oppression and bloodshed—lynching, imprisonment, colonialism, war. It is not idealization to say this. It’s a fact, a fact that I experience every day of my life. I do know of what I speak, Heart.

    Posted by Y. Carrington | October 22, 2006, 1:43 pm
  27. Hey, Y. Carrington, I totally agree with what you’ve said there, no question, you are right. In my own posts, I was thinking about the tendency white liberal and progressive people have sometimes in the direction of idealizing marginalized people groups they don’t know much about, including my own tendency that way, to the point that they, we, do not see misogyny or minimize it (which is the point I thought pony was making).   I completely agree with you that white supremacist culture demonizes men of color in every conceivable way to justify its ongoing racist and colonialist brutalities. I am sorry to have been less than clear there– I know you know what you’re talking about and did not intend to lump you in with those who don’t.   I think we have to find ways to say exactly what you’ve said, and I and others have said– that men of color are demonized under white supremacy– while still saying, as we have also all said, that men of color still mistreat women.  The former doesn’t change the latter, and the latter certainly does not justify the former.

    I meant to respond to you, too, Melissa– I think the film you saw might be one Anna Mae’s daughter was referring to where she said:

    “They’ve done it effectively; they convinced Peter Matthiessen, and to a degree Robert Redford, and they have used those documentaries, movies, and best-selling books to help cover-up what happened to my mother…”

    The movie I’m thinking of is a Canadian film written and directed by women– there’s a link to it on the Indigenous Women for Justice site.


    Posted by Heart | October 22, 2006, 2:14 pm
  28. YCarrington I respectfully disagree with you about native men. You cannot overlay onto them what you think about men of colour. For the purposes of blogs culture I have id’ed myself as ‘coloured’ but it’s just not a term or understanding used in Canada at all re native people. Although there are native people in the States too, they differ TOTALLY from native people in Canada. It’s so complex I cannot begin to explain it especially in this medium. I won’t even try so please understand I’m not dismissing you.

    But I can just say, do not apply to native men what you say about men of colour.

    Posted by Pony | October 22, 2006, 3:03 pm
  29. Heart, I thought so to, that it must be a different film than the one I saw, when I first clicked through to the site, because it’s titled “Bringing Annie Mae Home.”

    But when I clicked the link on that page, it took me here:

    and that (“The Spirit of Annie Mae”) is definitely the film I saw. Like I said, it was quite a while ago, at least 2 or 3 years, and whatever my impression was at the time was most likely influenced by my own misguided idealization of native culture. Once I heard COINTELPRO and FBI, I’m sure my mind shut out the possibility that AIM members murdered her. Going back now and reading all the interviews, etc. I realize I didn’t pay attention to what Anna Mae’s daughters and friends were ACTUALLY saying in the film.

    Posted by Melissa | October 22, 2006, 6:43 pm
  30. Branjor – Yes, it is true that Native American groups (like all groups that I know of, worldwide and throughout time) are male-dominated societies in their own specific ways.

    That said, you are absolutely right that white colonists brought patriarchy on the boat with them.

    Colonialism (and its modern-day equivalent, globalism) harmed/harms women just as other forms of conflict (disease, poverty, war, racism) do: the new outside threat harms women *who are still being harmed from within* their society as a status-quo (invisible) oppression.

    So colonialism is/was extra-bad for women because the white men’s culturally-specific ways of victimizing women were used against Native women in addition to the ways women were being harmed within their communities.

    It’s like one group always “knowing” women “can’t” wear green, and a new group showing up to say they can’t wear blue, either. Sure, sexism seems new to people who have only known the ability to wear blue, not green. And to the new group, the culture may be seen as “less sexist” because when they showed up all the women were freely wearing blue, and that’s their litmus test. Or maybe they’re seen as MORE sexist since “their” women wear green all the time and are therefore “free.”

    The fact remains that regardless of how either group SEES what has happened, since the colonists came, women can’t wear blue OR green, because basic male dominance has now been spiked with the supremacist outlook of the white westerner.

    So things are worse.

    Posted by funnie | October 23, 2006, 10:06 pm
  31. pony i take it you most be white let correct there were women leaders in native culture.

    im sick of white people making excuses for taking our land calling us savages
    and primative. when you people were far more savage then us taking over
    country’s raping there women and and enslaving them you europeans not only took blacks as slaves you took east asians aka the real indians and native americans.and why because you people were too fat and lazy to work yourself.

    even today native people are treated badly especially by the police have you white bastards ever been stopped by the cops for walking.
    i have on many occasions for simply going to the store late at night.
    and another thing when a white kid dies from gang violence everone makes a big deal about it but native kids die from it all the time and no one cares. did you see any white person speak out when a young native matthew dumas was shot and killed by police.
    yes matthew was being persued by the cops but the only weapon he had with him was a srewdriver and was surrounded a ton of cops and they could have taken him down without shooting him.

    Posted by apissedoffojibway | November 27, 2006, 1:53 am
  32. Say, apissedoffojibway– I get it that you’re pissed off, you are right to be, I am pissed off, too, most of us who read and post here are pissed off. There is much for all of us to be pissed off about, including everything you list there. For the record, pony is of Native ancestry–she is Canadian and Métis. We are a diverse group of women here, of many ethnicities and ancestries.

    I hate police brutality like no other, I hate the way young men and women of color are harrassed, beaten, jailed and murdered for being young men and women of color (and, for that matter, old men and women of color.)I have spent a lot of time and energy over the past 15 years, especially, fighting for my own adult kids who have experienced police brutality because of their race, fighting for their friends of color, fighting for my own women friends and relatives of color.

    I don’t, again, fault you for your anger. I am intimately acquainted with anger. I hope you will take a minute, though, to consider who you are engaging here. We are radical feminist women here, of all races and ethnicities, some of us old, some young, lesbians, disabled, poor, survivors of rape, incest, and battering at the hands of men, including men of color. Most of our women ancestors lived as indentured servants and slaves to men including in this country, the so called “land of the free.” It wasn’t the land of the free for us. We were brought here against our will, taken from our womenfolk in our homelands, we could not vote, be educated, be gainfully employed, we could not own property, land or bank accounts, could not sign contracts, could not serve on juries or run for office, we could not divorce, but if we left husbands, we left with the clothes on our backs, if that, and without rights to children or property. We could be legally beaten and raped by our “husbands” until 50 years ago or less than that in some states– we had no recourse. Most of us *have* been beaten and raped — by husbands, by fathers, relatives, strangers. We didn’t create this horrifying world we all must now live in and with, anymore than you did. We were chattel, property, owned by men, treated like animals, and that includes those of us who are white.

    So be careful where you point that thing. If you want to point it somewhere, I suggest you go over to Alas,a blog and point it at all the conservative white men and liberal white men, so-called, there, some of whom fancy themselves to be oh-so-progressive, but who benefit, benefit, benefit from a system which relentlessly targets and violates people like you, and people like those of us here. I suggest you take it over to Daily Kos or to Hugo’s blog or to any of the many sites run by white men who preen and posture as though they have some sort of clue, but who will sell us out, “us” meaning the women here, and you, too, the first chance they get, the first benjamin someone offers to some of them.

    I’d also ask that you not use “fat” as an insult when you’re talking to feminist women. We are all about size acceptance here, most of us, we appreciate women of all sizes and shapes, fat is a-okay with us, even beautiful to us, and we do not appreciate the fascist beauty standards of *any* men, of *any* race or ethnicity. I do understand your rage. Don’t get me wrong. I am with you in it. I am just saying, we don’t participate in, or agree with, or want any part of all the horrifying things you have listed there,and most importantly, we don’t benefit from any of it. We suffer from it. Just as you do.


    Posted by womensspace | November 27, 2006, 3:29 am
  33. You know, here’s something. When I was 22, I was brutally beaten with a metal rod by my then husband, a black man, black nationalist, actually, a political radical, as I was. I got sick of his abuse and left him. He stalked me, found me, beat the shit out of me in an attempt to kill me. He fractured my skull in many places,and my eye sockets. I was covered head to toe with bruises. The whites of my eyes were blood red for a long, long time.
    He was arrested shortly after he tried to kill me. He ran off when a young woman, German accent, ran up with a stick saying, “What are you doing? What are you doing to her?” I never met her, but she called me when I was in the hospital and told me she would testify for me if I needed her to in court.
    I was a young, beautiful, blonde white woman, the daughter of a prominent attorney. Do you know how much attention this near-murder got in the newspaper the year this happened, 1974? About a column inch in the very back of the “Local” section of the local newspaper. Why? Because it was my *husband* who attempted to take my life, who beat the hell out of me with a metal pipe, despite restraining orders, despite all I did to hide from him. This just wasn’t really news. When the cops picked him up, he told them, “That’s my old lady,man.” Figuring they’d understand. I’m sure they did, too. When women of whatever color are beaten and die at the hands of men, of whatever color, it’s usually no big deal, just as you describe with Native boys at the hands of white cops — if the man is her boyfriend, her husband, her pimp, her father, hell, most of the time, even if it’s some stranger. It’s no biggie at all. It’s just some woman, getting the shit kicked out of her. She probably deserved it, stupid slut.

    Posted by womensspace | November 27, 2006, 3:46 am
  34. I’m a pissed off half-breed. And you I think are a troll.

    Posted by Pony | November 27, 2006, 6:41 am
  35. Thanks for the article and the links on Annie Mae. I also first read about her from Mary Crow Dog’s book, “Lakota Woman”. When they did the grand juries, there were some articles posted on it then.

    Posted by Radfem | November 28, 2006, 10:23 pm
  36. Don’t think native cultures are better re women. Not neceessarily. They are patriarchies, even in those nations that have matriarchal property.

    On women:

    Ah, women. . . (laughing). And women find it strange for me to speak about women like this. Many of our women have completely broken protocol, taboo, custom, tradition. They will, like I said to you before I am uncomfortable speaking [before the chiefs], because that’s the way we were trained. I was at my father’s home when he used to call all the chiefs. . . what I call real chiefs in earlier times. . . I was just little girl when I used to help serve them. But I used to like to take my time because I wanted to listen to what they had to say. Because women weren’t, not all women were allowed to attend these meetings. Only certain women. And they had to either have a potlatch position or they were very high ranking chiefs’ wives. And even the women never spoke in those meetings unless they were asked to by the chiefs. And then, if a chief is speaking, a woman never interferes.

    If I’m talking with you and if a [chief] all of a sudden had something to say he will say something even before I am finished speaking and I have to stop speaking when he does this, because that’s the way of our tradition or custom. . . that he must be heard.

    And many people, many women again, they have meetings before potlatch and only a handful of people are supposed to attend this potlatch. And only knowledgeable women are allowed to attend these potlatches.

    Now you have very aggressive women barging in and saying, ‘This is my right. I have a right to be here,’ and completely monopolize the meeting, shutting out the voices of the chiefs, and they do that in the big house, and they start to. . . the decision is no longer made by the chiefs, it’s made by the women.

    In the early days I used to hear the old chiefs say, ‘How dare so-and-so get up and speak at the potlatch last night. Doesn’t she know that she is not allowed to speak?’ And that’s in the big house during a potlatch. And I heard this. . . and today they completely monopolize everything. They make the decisions. They decide how things are going to happen. . . I know what has to happen at the big house, but never once do I sit down when my brother is going to have a potlatch [and say] this is what is going to happen, this is what we’re going to do and you guys have to do it because I say so. Never have I done that. I will say, ‘What are we going to do? What dances are we going to show?’ . . .even though I may have more knowledge than my brother, he must have a voice. . . and then we all decide as a family what will be shown and what will be said and what will be given and how we’re doing to do it. But in many cases [today] the women have complete control, and control everything. And the old chiefs call that a shameful act and I’ve heard it over and over as I was growing up.

    On respect:

    I even had one feminist ask me did I not feel bad that the men controlled our traditions and culture. And I said, No, because there is a time that they will help support me. There is a time they will honor me. When it’s their time, not your time. . . and you receive respect from men. But an aggressive, belligerent woman will never get that respect. Oh, they might get their way, but they will never get that respect from the chiefs because of that attitude. And as I said to that feminist, I love men. I loved my father and I love my husband. And it’s from that training I was taught that you work with one another. You are your male partner’s helpmate. And when you have that kind of respect for each other then the other partner doesn’t become a footstool. So that was part of my training.

    Posted by Pony | November 30, 2006, 4:59 pm
  37. Many cultures, groups, and belief systems can be very beautiful and espouse high ideals, EXCEPT when it comes to its treatment of women. Most religions, for example, advocate wonderful things like help for the poor, peace, etc, while seeing no disconnect with the treatment of women as second-class citizens. Liberals advocate for freedom for all kinds of groups, except for women.

    Posted by Miranda | January 1, 2008, 11:23 pm
  38. If you’re such a feminist, why are you falsely portraying Anna Mae as a helpless victim of her own organization? She was a national leader of AIM, a warrior who carried arms and was skilled in Karate.

    Why are you covering up for the FBI and BIA who tried to cover-up her identity and cause of death when they found her body? Why are you covering up for BIA cop Paul Herman who was there when Anna Mae’s body was found and who also served a relatively short prison sentence for torturing and killing a teenage girl on Pine Ridge?

    Why are you covering up for FBI agent David Price who threatened Anna Mae with death because she wouldn’t collaborate with them, and who got Louis Moves Camp off of potential rape charges so that he could falsely testify against Dennis Banks and Russell Means, and who, with his partner, threatened Myrtle Poor Bear with photos of Anna Mae’s body and told her it’d be worse with her if she didn’t sign false affidavits against Leonard Peltier?

    If you’re such a feminist, why don’t you read well-known Native feminist writer and activist Lee Maracle’s support letter for John Graham in which she says Graham didn’t kill Anna Mae?

    Posted by Commenter | January 2, 2008, 6:55 pm
  39. Because I am a feminist, I have believed what Indigenous Women for Justice have posted to their website. Because I am a feminist, I have believed what the daughters of Anna Mae Pictou Aquash have written and included about their mother’s murder on that site.

    I suggest you (and anyone else) read my entire, original blog post together with everything included in the links. This will answer every one of your questions and any other questions you or anyone else might have.

    Why are you trying to cover up for those witness after witness, under oath, reported raped and murdered Anna Mae Pictou Aquash?

    Yours is the ONLY comment of its kind which I will approve to this blog.

    To approve comments like yours is to approve attacks on Anna Mae’s daughters and womenfolk and on Anna Mae Pictou Aquash’s memory, and I’m not going to allow that here.

    One more time:

    Indigenous Women for Justice

    Read it. All of it.


    Posted by womensspace | January 2, 2008, 7:03 pm
  40. Thanks for the update.

    Posted by Radfem | January 2, 2008, 10:13 pm
  41. This is the sort of case that makes me reject entirely the notion that any man can be on my side. To be on the side of women would mean they would have to reject male entitlement and the passivity that maintains and frankly I don’t see too many guys stepping up to that plate. As Miranda says, there’s lots of cultures where they talk about brotherhood and peace and blah blah blah and oh, yeah….then there’s women who never get included in ‘man kind.’ Fuck ’em all. I don’t care what excuses any man makes at any time. Women aren’t symptoms of man’s inhumanity to man. I’m sick of men using women as game pieces in some game between men.

    Posted by ginmar | January 3, 2008, 12:32 am


  1. Pingback: Tribal Shame: Murder At Pine Ridge Reservation « Moments In Time - January 1, 2008

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in: Logo

You are commenting using your account. Log Out /  Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )


Connecting to %s

Blog Stats

  • 2,599,016 hits

Enter your email address to follow this blog and receive notifications of new posts by email.


The Farm at Huge Creek, Michigan Womyn's Music Festival, The Feminist Hullaballoo