ONe point that I want to add to this discussion is that while the 1st nations people find the depiction of women in an unclothed and subservient manner offensive - native womens groups still have a long way to go in order to get equal representations within their own society. (of course I have no inside knowledge of this but this was in the news couple of years ago, when aboriginal womens groups raised this issue to the primarily male leadership. (many of the chiefs are hereditary). The second point is that to a certain extent 1st nations rights are a fairly big topic in BC right now as there is an upcoming provincial election and an extensive native land claim agreement (the Nisgaa treaty) which has been under negotiation off and on for a 100 years. Someone said in an earlier thread that he didnt care much about local history and that interaction between Europeans and the natives was pretty much the same all over North America, which is not quite true. The lands of the natives on the west coast (of Canada) as well as the Inuit & Dene in the Northern Territories were among the last to be settled and consequently the land claim settlements for these groups are better than any settlements on the east coast of North America. (in some cases there was no treaty). It is likely that the Provincial Liberals will win the next election and they want the Nisgaa treaty put to a province wide referendum (which most likely will mean its rejection). This also reminds me of what some see as a sort of cultural censorship story - the UBC museum of anthropology used to have a historian explain the story behind totem poles and carvings. This was similar to a family coat of arms but under the native tradition no one other than a member of the family can tell that story, for someone else to describe the totem pole would be would violate their beliefs. So they protested and whenever the museum staff explained the carvings and totems they would be in their face and say "you cant tell that story its against our religion" so now the museum staff just explain that they cant relate the meaning behind the art. My own feeling is that while Id like to respect their tradition, I am interested in that history and if the family members die out so does the history if no one else can talk about it. Ultimately I find the destruction of art for political or religious reasons abhorrent rather like the 1000 year old Buddhas destroyed by the Taliban, or for that matter religious art destroyed in the reformation. Should we ban Tom Sawyer or stop performing SHowboat because they were written in a different time.