12 October 2010

cultural sensitivity

One of the delights of cultural pluralism is considering the wicked problems thrown up by disagreements about ethnoreligious values and sensitivities. (Another delight, of course, is watching a media circus.)

Under the heading 'Museum warns pregnant women off Maori exhibit' the ABC reports that -
New Zealand's national museum has warned pregnant or menstruating women to stay away from some of its exhibits or risk an encounter with angry Maori spirits.

The Te Papa Museum in Wellington confirmed it had invited regional museum staff on a behind-the-scenes tour of its collections on the condition that women who were pregnant or menstruating did not attend.

The museum's Maori adviser, Michelle Hippolite, said the condition was because some of the Maori artefacts had been used in wars and were believed to contain sprits that could harm pregnant or menstruating women visiting the exhibit.

"They may have an encounter that may be a form of communication," she told Radio NZ.

"Those of us that are accompanying the group might not see this, hear it or understand what may be happening."
That belief, which might be respected, is of course not necessarily true. Sincerity is not automatically equivalent to truth.

The ABC goes on to report that -
Te Papa spokeswoman Jane Keig said the policy was not an outright ban, rather it was strong advice designed to protect pregnant and menstruating woman from exhibits which Maori, New Zealand's indigenous people, believed could hurt them.

"Pregnant women are sacred and the policy is in place to protect women from these objects," she said.
A statement by Te Papa indicates that -
Ms Michelle Hippolite, Te Papa’s Kaihautū, today clarified the Museum’s guidelines for entry to its taonga Māori (Māori treasures) collection store - an area not accessible by the general public - in response to media reports today. One of these cultural considerations is that hapu (pregnant) or menstruating women (mate wahine) should consider entering the taonga Māori collection stores at another time.

‘Te Papa, as the kaitiaki (caretaker) of taonga Māori and a bicultural museum, embraces Māori tikanga and kawa when caring for those collections’, Ms Hippolite said.

‘While we inform visitors to the collection stores of cultural considerations, no visitor would be stopped from continuing the tour if they wished to.’

Te Papa worked with iwi and museum practitioners to develop protocols as to how the collections should be best cared for, including any cultural considerations that should be taken into account. Some taonga in the collection were used for special ceremonies or purposes and are sacred. Some have been used in warfare and funerary purpose and it is believed these objects retain the tapu associated with those activities. While Te Papa has been able to identify many of these taonga, there are many still for which the purpose and history is yet to be determined.
The statement continues that -
Ms Hippolite noted these kinds of cultural considerations for indigenous collections are becoming more common in collecting institutions internationally as museums begin to engage on a deeper level with their communities. Te Papa has advised visitors to the taonga Māori collection store of these guidelines since opening in 1998.

‘Our objective is to increase access to the collections and to continue to educate visitors regarding taonga and tikanga Māori associated with these collections,’ said Ms Hippolite.
One reader of this blog has commented that the brouhaha is reminiscent of problematical claims by some Australian Indigenous figures, including a prominent Melbourne academic, regarding the didgeridu (ie a wind instrument).

Particular figures, responding to the Dangerous Book for Girls - perhaps more aptly named Dangerous Book For Publishers - claimed that if a female played the instrument she would be rendered sterile or suffer another dire fate. Several anthropologists and other Indigenous figures disagreed.

As with pseudoscience assertions regarding reincarnation, precognition and other mumbojumbo questioned in past entries on this blog (eg here and here), there is no scientific basis for believing that blowing air into a wooden tube will result in infertility among women whose belief system is different to that of some Indigenous communities.