>

I'm familiar with this history, but I still don't see how it equates to non-indigenous gender theory appropriating indigenous gender theory. That would assume modern gender theory is built on or borrows from a culture (in this case - a wide variety of indigenous cultures) that "gender scholars" (which are barely even a thing anyways) have little understanding of or experience with. This isn't the case though, and modern non-indigenous "gender theory" is primarily a collection of ideas from trans people about their place in their societies and cultures. Some number of non-indigenous people trying to understand two-spirit identities without the specific cultural background is just not appropriation, and it isn't even part of a wider gender theory.
Sadly this is the situation with many native/indigenous communities across the Americas. >

Indigenous communities have been fighting for centuries but still get massive backlash and hostility.
You cant even talk about indigenous political stances because decolonization politics attacks the foundations of pretty much the entire political world.
Say Identity Politics in the Americas has roots in racial essentialism and erases indigenous culture to just "genetics", and that gender theory appropriates indigenous concepts like two spirited people without actually understanding the concept and you get in trouble with people who talk over feelings of Indigenous people.
Its hard to find political support when there is so much institutional hostility and these institutions literally do not think of the world the same way. An interview with an indigenous author had the interviewer ask if she was not "happy civilization lifted everyone out of poverty" instead of being pro-environment.
For many people, indigenous communities are still "in the way". >

Could you explain how "non-indigenous" gender theory appropriates indigenous gender theory? I've never met a 2S person who thought this way about it at all.