Maybe Im being sensitive but everyone is speaking of the Navajo in past tense. This is still very much a contemporary conversation, theyre still here and they still do,

/u/davediggity wrote up a response that might help you here:https://www.reddit.com/r/AskHistorians/comments/a5zzg8/we_see_today_a_massive_increase_in_people_who/

The answer is no. I am full blooded Navajo, and a lot of the old stories, morals and rules have been passed down to me by my parents, grandparents, and great grandparents. In Navajo religion, there is a male and a female of everything (ie: rain, clouds, mists, sky, earth, animals, mountains, plants, insects, birds, trees, waters, people, etc). These male/female couples face each other in the harmonious order of the world; neither male nor female is greater than the other, but both need each other to exist. Life is created (and therefore exists) between the male and female. A baby can only be made between a man and a woman. The Gods or Holy People wrote this fundamental rule into the stars. The male is represented by the Big Dipper, and the female is represented by Cassiopeia. Directly between the Big Dipper and Cassiopeia is the North Star also known as the Fire of Life. The Big Dipper and Cassiopeia rotate around the North Star the same way a husband and wife are supposed to make a living around their Fire of Life inside their home.

The classification of religious ceremonies reflects this duality: Hoozhooji (Blessing Way) reflects the female, and Nayee'eek'ehji (In Accords to Fear Surrounding Way also known as Monster Way) reflects the male. Blessing Way ceremonies are about nurturing and growth, positive things in life (ie: First Laugh Ceremony, Wedding Ceremony, Conception Ceremony, etc). These are often things done inside the house. Monster Way ceremonies are about protection (ie: War Dance, Hunting Way, Evil Chasing Rites, Scalp Dance, Ghost Way, Lightning Way, Bear Way, etc). These are things done typically outside of the house.

In the past, deviating from this duality was a sacrilege. Men were taught to be protectors, hunters, farmers, shepherds and laborers, to do work outside of the house. Women were taught to be weavers, mothers, cooks, basket makers, etc -- work inside the house. Prior to Pueblo influence, Navajos raised their children similarly until the age of 12. Both male and female children learned the basics of both male and female duties. A girl might learn to shoot a bow, ride horses, and hunt rabbits, and a boy might learn to butcher livestock, start a fire, and cook. They learned the basics of survival. After boys and girls had their respective Puberty Ceremonies at age 12, they learned activities specific to their gender roles. The purpose of Puberty Ceremonies is to learn about life, the role of men and women, duties associated with those roles, and procreation. In the past, women were allowed to accompany their husbands to war, but the couple had to adhere to strict rules of conduct such as no teasing, laughter or sexual contact. Hunting Way was one activity where women could not participate. The reason for this is lengthy, complicated to explain, and beyond the scope of this write up.

If a hermaphrodite or intersex child was born, that was considered a shameful thing. The reason for this is because in the origin story, the hermaphrodite or Nadleeh was considered the originator of sexual perversion and wickedness. The Nadleeh was responsible for destroying the previous world. Navajo families from the past used to leave hermaphrodite babies to die in arroyos. The Navajo word for arroyo is Chashk'eh or Chahak'eh, which means In Accords to Crying -- a reference to the cries of the abandoned child. When twins were born, because both babies could not be cared for at the same time, the weaker of the twins was similarly abandoned in arroyos. Since the 1940's, Navajo people have started saying that hermaphrodites and twins are holy.

Hello. I'm a librarian rather than a historian proper, so please see the references. I think there's a lot of cross-pollination of ideas happening here.

​

1. In the Diné / Navajo context, nádleeh or nádleehí is a real term that was used historically. But it doesn't map very well into into the current Western gender-spectrum idea. Carolyn Epple wrote a neat article (based on her dissertation?) about this like 20 years ago in American Ethnologist 25(2) called "Coming to Terms with Navajo Nadleehi." It looks at the use of the term, and has a fantastic set of end notes and references to dig into, but the central conclusion is that the mapping doesn't work because the Western spectrum-oriented conversation about sex and gender requires endpoints (absolutes) that don't map over correctly. Like the English word "tomboy," "nádleeh" is related to gender, but it's not like a point on a line.
2. Since the 70s, Native American activists like (Paiute) Randy Burns have worked to fold traditional "two-spirit" ideas into the contemporary LGBT discussion in the Native American Community. This was furthered by Will Roscoe's books late 90s Living the Spirit and Changing Ones which was embraced by cultural theorists but uh... not super popular among historians AFAIK. I'll let an actual historian chime in on that one.
3. Mixed into this soup is the word "berdache." It was applied to Native Americans by French travelers in the 18th century, and translates to "boy prostitute" (Encyclopedia of North American Indians v2, p161). But as time went on, all sorts of what we'd call non-binary behavior from all sorts of tribes got shoehorned into this term, further mudding the waters. For a set of examples from Wisconsin, see N.O. Lurie's article "Winnebago Berdache" in American Anthropologist v55, p708 (1955).

​

HTH!

​

Someone uploaded Epple's American Ethnologist article here:

https://www.yumpu.com/en/document/read/11716491/coming-to-terms-with-navajo-nadleehi-a-critique-chabot-college

You can read Will Roscoe's Changing Ones (1998) here:

https://epdf.pub/queue/changing-ones-third-and-fourth-genders-in-native-north-america.html

You can read Lurie's 1955 Winnebago article here:

https://anthrosource.onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/pdf/10.1525/aa.1953.55.5.02a00090

You can read about Randy Burns here:

http://andrejkoymasky.com/liv/fam/biob6/burns04.html