Exploring Ambiguity: Aboriginal Identity Negotiation in Southwestern Sydney

Abstract

There has been little discussion on urban Indigenous identity in post-settler societies. However, in the scarce works which exist on this issue there are some remarkably common traits. For most Indigenous people, identity has primarily involved kinship ties associated with their perceived place of origin. In the city, Indigenous people encounter other Indigenous people who cannot be identified through kinship ties; in this situation, organizations dealing with Indigenous issues provide ways of connecting nonrelated Indigenous people, in line with a notion of ‘pan-Indigeneity’. This pan-Indigeneity is not only based on their experience in the city, but also is influenced by the ‘antique’ image of Indigenous people created through contact with European settlers as well as the common cultural mores and traits which Indigenous people share. With these different kinds of identities, urban Indigenous identity has been described as ‘fluid’ or ‘ambiguous’. The relationship between these identities has not been much examined. This paper explores the ambiguous and dynamic nature of Aboriginal identity in southwestern Sydney. Even though they are not related, Aboriginal people can usually recognize each other as ‘Aboriginal’ through certain cultural mores and traits. However, there are some who, although claiming to be Aboriginal, who do not share these cultural mores and traits. Their presence gives rise to tension and conflict revolving around the concept of Aboriginality. Through an ethnographical examination of the process of accommodating nonrelated Aboriginal people, this paper reveals how different kinds of identities are related to each other in urban situations.

Being Indigenous in a Non-Indigenous Environment: Identity Politics of the Dogai Ainu and New Indigenous Policies of Japan

“…The discussions span policies and governance (DeVerteuil and Wilson, 2010;Moore et al, 2011;Peters, 2005;2011a), homelessness (Peters, 2012), housing issues (Gagné, 2013;Walker, 2008;Walker and Barcham, 2010), health (Van Herk et al, 2012), settlement patterns (Forrest et al, 2009;Starchenko and Peters, 2008), the lack of community and invisibility (Lawrence, 2004), women and the loss of legally recognized Indigenous rights (Lawrence, 2004;Peters, 2004), and racism (Paradies and Cunningham, 2009). A key issue has been identity and the definition of ethnicity: that is, who constitutes an Indigenous person, and who makes that decision (Lawrence, 2004;Lobo, 2001a;Sissons, 2005;Watson, 2010;Wilson and Peters, 2005;Yamanouchi, 2010). These questions are of primary importance to Indigenous peoples who have attempted to maintain the right to self-define and have challenged definitions imposed by non-Indigenous peoples.…”

“…Because outsiders do not always see the dynamics of urban Indigenous populations, Indigenous identities cannot be defined by anyone but urban Indigenous people themselves. Recent studies of ethnic minorities, including Indigenous peoples, have also confirmed that self-identification is key to surveys on ethnic minorities, and a lack of self-identification in surveys may affect the reliability of data and the credibility of surveys of stigmatized populations (Krizsán, 2012;Lobo, 2001a;Ringelheim, 2011;Watson, 2014a;Yamanouchi, 2010). To make survey data more credible, ethnic minorities are even encouraged to 'come out' (Ringelheim, 2011).…”

“…The case of the Dogai Ainu, however, might suggest that some arguments made in the literature on Indigenous/ethnic studies need to be carefully examined. These arguments include: that self-identification is key to surveys on Indigenous peoples to recruit participants; that credible data are important for governments to implement ethnic policies; and that ethnic minorities should be encouraged to 'come out' to make survey data more credible (eg, Krizsán, 2012;Lawrence, 2004;Lobo, 2001b;Ringelheim, 2011;Sissons, 2005;Watson, 2014a;Yamanouchi, 2010). In the case of the Dogai Ainu, however, the survey organizers encountered significant difficulties in obtaining consent to participate in the survey (WGDA, 2011, page 34).…”

The geographies of cultural geography III

“…Responses to these representations and their connected material exclusions, have fuelled a need in published research, for challenging the politics of delimiting places for 'races', and other human identities (see Yamanouchi, 2010), including heteronormative accounts of sexual identity and their sites of belonging (Gorman-Murray, 2011;Waitt and Gorman-Murray, 2011;Singham, 2011).…”

Poverty, Work and Social Networks: The Role of Social Capital for Aboriginal People in Urban Australian Locales

“…More recently, a strong interest in the study of Aboriginal identity in major urban centres such as Sydney is emerging (e.g. Everett, 2010;Yamanoguchi, 2010). The research I draw on here involves 60 semi-structured interviews with Aboriginal people residing in Western Sydney, New South Wales and in Shepparton, Victoria.…”