Talk:Maasai people

Maa vs Maasai

I removed the following:

Contrary to popular belief, the language is Maasai and the people are Maa, not the other way round.

I'm not sure what is meant by this, but the people are certainly referred to as "Maasai". — Matt 17:43, 17 Oct 2004 (UTC)

We need a clean up, and a possible block.

According to my information the words Maasai means speakes of the language Maa207.99.90.253 15:29, 26 January 2006 (UTC)

I know Masaai is the people, but don't know anything about the language. Bluepaladin 02:40, 28 November 2006 (UTC)

Pulled out pending verification

The following paragraph was appended to the bottom of the article. I've pulled it out because it seems inherently confused and therefore can only cause confusion in the article.

According to Fr. Frans Mol, author "Maasai: Language & Culture Dictionary (Diocese of Meru, Kolbe Press Kenya) the spelling for the Maa (The language of the Maasai) word for warrior in the singular would be "ol - murrani" and in the plural would be "il - murran". The "ol" and "il" are Maa prefixes corresponding to the articles "a" or " the". Moron seems to be a phonetic spelling of the plural, and an unfortunate one. The common spelling is "moran" as it appears in writing in Kenya. Mol admits in his preface that the spelling of the language has not been officially determined.

I don't have the time to check this statements, but 'Maasai/Masai' is the most common term anyway. — mark ✎ 18:42, 16 May 2005 (UTC)

Yeah, it's pretty confusing. I think it was discussing the Maasai term for "warrior" (moran(i)) rather than a term for the Maasai themselves, but regardless, I don't really think the problems of transliteration for a single Maasai word is of sufficient importance to earn a paragraph in the article. — Matt Crypto 20:00, 16 May 2005 (UTC)

I concur. — mark ✎ 20:15, 16 May 2005 (UTC)

Maasai vs. Masai

Why is this article at "Maasai"? The spelling "Masai" is far more common, and the other usage of it - for a suburb of some Malaysian city we don't have an article on, is sufficiently more obscure that that should not be a problem. john k 16:19, 15 July 2005 (UTC)

A quick Google test gives about 1,500,000 million for "Masai", and 850,000 for "Maasai". I don't know if it really matters much, though? — Matt Crypto 18:15, 15 July 2005 (UTC)

A google search probably overstates the prevalance of "Maasai," I suspect. In terms of how much it matters, it's obviously not a matter of life and death, but that's true of most questions like this. At any rate, I tend to find it irritating when people try to replace a familiar older spelling with a new spelling which has no apparent advantage over it. What advantage of comprehension does the extra "a" give? It certainly gives most English-speakers no additional guide to pronunciation. And, given that the Masai were not a people with a written language, I can't see how this could possibly be a "more accurate transliteration" issue. So on what basis do we have it at this location, besides the fact that this is where Ethnologue puts it? john k 06:08, 16 July 2005 (UTC)

Sure, well I've also Googled and found the Encarta encyclopedia article. They say (and they sometimes get it wrong) that, "The word Maasai is the preferred spelling by the people" [1]. There's also a Ma?sai website that says, "Maasai is the correct spelling not Masai. Masai with one 'A' is incorect. In the future please spell Maasai with two AAs. We prefer Maasai, not Masai. The title Maasai derives from the word Maa. Maa-sai means my people" [2]. Now, normally I think we should go with whatever spelling is most prevalent, but the Google search gives some evidence that there is no clearly dominant spelling in usage, so I would suggest we go with the spelling that the people prefer and leave this page at Maasai — unless there's some compelling reason to do otherwise. — Matt Crypto 09:07, 16 July 2005 (UTC)

To Kenyans, the proper spelling is Masaai. I think google wouldn't help in this case. See, most of the on line content is generated by the west (Rich countries), who also tend to favour masai. Of course google is then going to generate more result for the later name. But insisting that is the proper spelling would be like telling someone called Jane, 'Hey, Your name is Mary and I don't want to hear about that Jane crap again, understand?

Well, the general rule on the English Wikipedia is to use the predominant form used when writing English. If there's no predominant form, it's probably best at "Maasai", in-line with the wishes of the people themselves (I presume you meant that the proper spelling is "Maasai", not "Masaai"?). — Matt Crypto 16:34, 26 January 2006 (UTC)

On the Official Maasai website, it says the correct spelling is "Maasai", and that the people don't like it spelled any other way, so I think the title "Maasai" for this article should be kept. Rhino131 00:18, 11 January 2007 (UTC)

Feeding on cow blood is not considered a ritual. They do it like the way most western do with crappy Bugger King. A day to day thing that have no meaning

Female "Circumcision"

Does anyone know the details of what sort of "circumcision" the Maasai practice on girls? There are an awful lot of different practices that are often described as "female circumcision." 68.226.239.73

I know the Maasaias remove the clitoris during circumcision. Pyramide 10:22, 27 August 2005 (UTC)

Don't click on circumsision....You WILL regret it!

I know how. The citoris is removed by tying the girls legs to seperate posts, and... jabbing it out with anything from a piece of glass to a knife... Today, some people are against it, but very few refuse, as far as I've heard. The reason is that if she doesn't feel pleasure, she'd have no need to cheat on a husband.

Also, the lips are sowed together, leaving only a tiny hole for secretion and periods. This is to prevent wetlocks. At marriage, the husband rips it open. I truly feel sorry for these women. Bluepaladin 02:44, 28 November 2006 (UTC)

I feel sorry for their boys, too. I doubt having a piece of glass taken to one's penis feels good.

What Bluepaladin describes is female infibulation, but no evidence is offered that infibulation is a Maasai practice. Malangali 12:44, 28 November 2006 (UTC)

Yeah, what's with this article's bias? Only female circumcision is refered to as "mutilation," while male circumcision is praised as a "rite of passage." So it's a "right of passage" for boys, but it's "mutilation" for girls? Absolute poppycock. Mutilation is mutilation. Don't try to defend it based on "sex" or "severity." And do not edit what I have to say. I hereby sign my comment and own it on this "discussion." Kogejoe 01:08, 18 June 2007 (UTC)

The article goes into great detail outlining the severity of "female mutilation," while it just grazes over "circumcision" when it refers to males. So they spread a girl's legs and jab her clitoris out with a glass shard? So what do they do to males? I'm sure it entails much more than just a quick jab. I'm sure the foreskin of an adolecent male is much greater in size than that of the clitoral hood, and/or the clitoris combined. As stated in an earlier comment, mutilation is varies in severity in both males and females. For females, in the simplest form it involves the pricking of the clitoral hood and/or the clitoris itself. More advanced circumcision involves the cutting out of the clitoral hood, and sometimes the minor labia. Even further than that is the actual removal of the clitoris, and even further than that is infibulation, in which the wounds of the labium are held shut to heal together to leave just a hole for the passage of menstruation. In some cultures, this serves to insure a bloody first night, which is held in high importance. For men, the most minor form of circumcision involves just the removal of the tip of the foreskin, in earlier biblical times done with a sharpened stone. Actual foreskin removal varies from culture to culture and through time. Jews, for example did not remove all of the foreskin until Rabbis of the 6th century saw it necessary to remove any trace of it to prevent foreskin restoration performed by renegade Jews. The procedure performed on infants, preferably with sharpened nails is refered to as "peri-ah," and this ensures that there is absolutely no fold of skin left on the shaft of the penis. People go to great pains to minimize male circumcision, while comparing it to the worst possible case of female mutilation which is infibulation. If you were to compare just circumcision, or the removal of the foreskin of either sex, it would be quite objectively obvious that foreskin removal is much more severe in males than it is in females. It is a disservice to humanity to condemn the genital mutilation of one sex, while marginally minimizing the genital mutilation of another. Both sexes are human and are therefore deprived of their rights to their own bodies when forcefully mutilated for traditional, or "prophylactic" reasons. Even in female circumcision, the same rationale used to endorse male circumcision is used; it's "cleaner," conformity (to look like all of us)," and disease prevention. (see: http://www.ias-2005.org/planner/Abstracts.aspx?AID=3138 ) Yes, I'm quite biased myself, but so is this article, and thus far, so is any information regarding the subject. There can't be a "fair and balanced" discussion about it because the facts are against the practice of forceful genital mutilation of either sex. For good reading of the history of the medicalization of male circumcision in America, and in most of the English-speaking industrialized world, read the book "Marked in Your Flesh" by Leonard Glick. Yes I am against the practice of male genital mutilation, as I am against the practice of female genital mutilation, whatever the reasons "prophylactic" or "cultural" as they may be. Sue me for standing up for human rights. Kogejoe 01:30, 18 June 2007 (UTC)

Maasai

Aren't the Maasai known to be very large people? There is no information having to do with their stature.

No, they are not ! Omoo 23:42, 24 January 2006 (UTC)

See below, under height

Ngai

I was oce told that Ngai was the only Maasai god but have been unable to verify the statement. 207.99.90.253 15:32, 26 January 2006 (UTC)

This essay agrees with what you were told: "To the Maasai there is only one God (Ngai)." — Matt Crypto 15:35, 26 January 2006 (UTC)

Height?

I read somewhere that the average Masai male is something around 6ft tall as an average. I know they are very much famed for their height but nothing of this is mentioned in the article.

I lived in Nairobi for two years, in the 1980s. I was led to believe that the Masaii were a slightly different racial stock than the predominant Bantu in the region, possibly originating in northern africa (Egypt?) and migrating southward. The Masaii I saw tended to average about 6 feet, were thin (not much body fat), and had closely spaced nostrils. The Bantu living in Nairobi proper tended to be shorter, stockier, and have widely spaced nostrils.

It would be best to cite a published source before adding this to the article. — Matt Crypto 07:03, 1 May 2006 (UTC)

From personal experience in the Arusha region in Tanzania, I can safely say that the Maasai I spoke to attributed their height to a combination of genetics and their diet, which is heavy in calcium and dairy products. The Maasai are taller than agrarian peoples in the region because milk is consumed on a less freuqent basis, resulting in a stunted growth among many. -Wy

Colonial terminology?

Please consider...

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Talk:Tribe#Usage_of_the_term_varies.2C_sometimes_unfairly.3F — The preceding unsigned comment was added by 137.158.128.106 (talk • contribs) 19:39, 26 May 2006 UTC.

Maasai flag

A Maasai flag might look more like the logo here that the current FOTW pic. -- Himasaram 22:14, 17 August 2006 (UTC)

Maasai are a bit more complicated than this article leads you to believe.

Maasai Farmers

1. They are traditionally pastoralists, but I visited Maasai farmers just last month. The current Tanzanian Prime Minister is a Maasi. But I'm sure that he isn't a pastoralist either.
2. Female Circumcision is illegal in both Kenya and Tanzania. It may still be practiced in isolated traditionalist groups, but mostly has been abandoned by the Maasai.
3. The Maasai are integrated into the larger economy. They sell livestock for cash to buy foodstuffs and cloth. You'll see them walking to town or riding bicycles.
4. They are of normal height and of slight build.
5. Bantu is a tribal language group, not a racial group. The Maasi are not Bantu. They're history and origins are obscure.

--DJay 15:11, 25 August 2006 (UTC)

I'm largely ignorant about the above, but this article currently has very few references. If you can correct the article citing reliable sources, that would be ideal. One thought is that we should distinguish between traditional Maasai culture, and the lives of a typical modern Maasai. — Matt Crypto 16:45, 25 August 2006 (UTC)

The Masai have always been predominantly resistive to any type of change. They are extremely more complicated than this article begins to describe. There is absolutely nothing about "oporor," the core value of their culture. They are believed to be Hamitic in origin but I couldn't begin to source that. It needs much more before it can be anything but start class. btw, if you visited the Masai recently, then you should know that the Masai are not "farmers"--their word for farmer ("olmeg") is an opprobrium to them! --131.238.92.62 11:39, 28 March 2007 (UTC)

A google search for "oporor maasai" yields very few hits. Oporor is not listed in the darkwing.uoregon.edu Maa dictionary. If oporor is "the core value of their culture", it appears to be a very well kept secret. Steve Pastor 16:47, 6 July 2007 (UTC)

What about the jumping dance?

Aren't the Maasai warriors famous for their extraordinary jumping dance ceremonies? — The preceding unsigned comment was added by 124.62.212.69 (talk) 11:02, 19 December 2006 (UTC).

Recently added content

Recently, a paragraph on 'the commercial aspect' was added:

Unlike many other tribes, the Maasai are very warm and welcoming to travellers and visitors. For a fee of approximately $15 per person, you will get a guided tour of the Boma, which will nearly always be given by the camp leader. The camp leader will almost certainly speak very good English. There will be traditional dancing to start with, and after the tour of the buildings and school etc, you will be invited to buy some of the products they make themselves, including bracelets, jewellery, shields, clubs, pendants etc.

If you do purchase, you must bargain; it is expected and would be met with surprise if you offer the asking price. A good rule of thumb when bargaining, not necessarily with Maasai but with anyone in the country is to offer half of what they are asking, and work towards a happy medium. Again you must not feel bad about bargaining; it is simply part of their culture, and most importantly, they expect you to bargain, and adjust their prices accordingly, so that there is a margin that can be haggled away.

This is more in place at WikiTravel. And the 'unlike many other tribes' is quite a platitude. — mark ✎ 12:02, 30 December 2006 (UTC)

religion?

the infobox says their religion is "Christianity", but the text states "The laibon or spiritual leader acts as the liason between the Maasai and their one god, "Enkai" ". Additionally the page Masai mythology is written in the present tense, suggesting the native religion is still practiced. So are the Maasai still Pagan/Animist, or are they Christian? Maybe a mixture? --Krsont 14:15, 5 February 2007 (UTC)

after some digging in the history, I've discovered it originally read "Animist", then "Monotheist", then was changed to "Christianity". Presumably whoever changed it to "Monotheist" wanted to make clear that the Maasai worship a one God rather than the polytheism that is implied by "animist", and then another editor mistakenly thought this referred to Christianity. I'm going to change it to "monotheist animist" as this seems to be the most correct. --Krsont 14:24, 5 February 2007 (UTC)

Don't presume--the Masai have converted to Christianity in communities, not as individuals. One of the leading experts on the Masai was Father Vincent Donovan (see Christianity Rediscovered) who is the 1970s and 1980s converted many whole communities based on Masai culture and values, not on remaking them in a western image or "Western church." They also weren't animists--God to them was distant, remote, and not a part of this earth, but a sky dweller who looked with favor only on the Masai--enabling them to keep their culture.--131.238.92.62 11:46, 28 March 2007 (UTC)

Boma

As best as I can determine, boma is a swahili word meaning variously: stable (for cattle), fort, fortress, mound, pile of earth, pile of stones, government administrative office, castle, framework (of a house) [[3]] Much of what is covered in this section is covered under the culture section. I have edited appropriately. Steve Pastor 21:36, 3 July 2007 (UTC)

Romans?

What's this tidbit about the Maasai being descended from Roman soldiers? That sounds like complete garbage.