ABORIGINAL WOMEN AND
SELF-DETERMINATION:
THE
ABORIGINAL CHALLENGE:
{IN THE MOHAWK LANGUAGE THE WORD “WARRIOR” MEANS ONE WHO
BEARS THE BURDEN OF PEACE}
...
ABORIGINAL WOMEN {MARGINALIZATION
– REFERS TO THE STATUS OF A GROUP WHO DOES NOT HAVE FULL AND EQUAL ACCESS
TO THE SOCIAL ECONOMIC, CULTURAL, AND POLITICAL INSTITUTIONS OF SOCIETY }
=====> ECONOMICALLY ABORIGINAL WOMEN ARE WORSE OFF THAN
NON-ABORIGINALS AND ABORIGINAL MEN ======> SOCIALLY
THEY SUFFER FROM HARDSHIPS SUCH AS, ABUSIVE MALE FAMILY MEMBERS, SEXUAL
ASSAULTS AND RAPES, INADEQUATE HOUSING, SUBSTANDARD LIVING CONDITIONS, POOR
HEALTH {E.G., ABORIGINAL WOMEN AGED 55 TO 64 HAVE FAIR TO POOR HEALTH – MORE
THAN DOUBLE THE 19 PERENT NON-NATIVE FEMALE POPULATION} ======> POLITICALLY
THEY WERE STRIPPED OF INDIAN STATUS BECAUSE OF MARRIAGE TO A NON-ABORIGINAL
…
[[FILM: “KEEPERS OF THE FIRE”=====> OR, THE
STORY OF HOW RACIALIZED WOMEN HAVE TO STRUGGLE ON MULTIPLE FRONTS
=====> WOMEN WARRIORS OF THE VILLAGE PARISH OF OKA
{MOHAWK COMMUNITY OF “KANESAKAKE” 53 KM WEST OF MONTREAL}: THE “HIDAS” OF LYLE
ISLAND; THE WOMEN OF TOBIQUE; THE WOMEN OF ANDIAN
{KATHERINE BROOKS}.]]
...
IN 1956, MARY TWO-AXE
EARLY, A MOHAWK WOMAN FORM KAHNAWAKE, RAISED THE ISSUE OF DISCRIMINATION
TOWARD INDIAN WOMEN BEFORE THE {STANDING COMMITTEE ON INDIAN AFFAIRS AND
NORTHERN DEVELOPMENT} [SCIAND] ===> AS AN INDIAN WOMAN SHE HAD
“MARRIED OUT” {MARRIED AN “NON-INDIAN”} --- SHE LOST HER LEGAL STATUS AS AN
INDIAN UNDER THE INDIAN ACT, HER BAND MEMBERSHIP, AND HER RIGHT TO TRANSMIT
LEGAL STATUS AND BAND MEMBERSHIP TO HER CHILDREN.
FOURTEEN YEARS LATER, THE
ROYAL COMMISSION ON THE STATUS OF WOMEN RECOMMENDED THAT THE OFFENDING SECTION
OF THE INDIAN ACT (12[B]) BE REPEALLED. IN 1985, FOLLOWING A CONCERTED
STRUGGLE BY THE NATIVE COUNCIL OF CANADA, INDIAN RIGHTS FOR INDIAN WOMEN, AND
NAC {THE NATIONAL ACTION COMMITTEE ON THE STATUS OF WOMEN …CREATED IN 1972…}, AND
LEGAL CHALLENGES BY JEANNETTE CORBIERE LAVELL AND YVONNE BEDARD TO THE SUPREME
COURT OF CANADA (THEY LOST) AND SANDRA LOVELACE BEFORE THE INTERNATIONAL
COVENANT ON POLITICAL AND CIVIL RIGHTS (SHE WON), THIS SECTION WAS REMOVED
FROM THE INDIAN ACT.
THE SUCCESSOR LEGISLATION,
BILL C-31, SUSTAINED GENDER INEQUALITY, HOWEVER, BY ESTABLISHING THE SECOND-GENERATION
CUT-OFF RULE. NEARLY THIRTY YEARS LATER AFTER HER ORIGINAL
PUBLIC STATEMENT, TWO-AXE EARLY APPEARED AGAIN BEFORE SCIAND TO PROTEST THAT
THE GRANDCHILDREN OF A WOMAN “MARRIED OUT” --- UNLIKE THE GRANDCHILDREN
OF A MAN --- WOULD NOT BE ELIGIBLE FOR REINSTATEMENT OR BAND REGISTRATION.
THIS STRUGGLE REPRESNTS A LONG-TERM AND SUCCESSFUL JOINT ENDEAVOUR BY
MAINSTREAM FEMINISTS ORGANIZATIONS AND (PRIMARY) INDIAN WOMEN WHO HAD LOST
THEIR STATUS THROUGH MARRYING NON-STATUS MEN.
…
{{{{{ASIDE: HOW DO
YOU THINK NATIVE MEN REACTED? DO THEY GET THE SAME MESSAGE AS COLONIAL MEN AND
WHAT ARE THE CONSEQUENCES IF ANY???}}}}
…
EX:
JUST AS THE INDIAN ACT DIVIDED AND CATEGORIZED PEOPLE, SO HAS THE RESISTANCE
BY THOSE SEEKING TO SUSTAIN THE EXCLUSION OF WOMEN WHO MARRIED OUT. THE
ASSEMBLY OF FIRST NATIONS (PRIMER AUTHORITY) ARGUED THAT “AS
INDIAN PEOPLE, WE CANNOT AFFORD TO DEAL WITH INDIVIDUAL RIGHTS OVERRIDING
COLLECTIVE RIGHTS” [QUOTED IN CANNON 1995: 98]
====> FIRST NATIONS LEADERSHIP USES THE ARGUMENT,
FOR EXAMPLE, TO BLOCK ATTEMPTS BY ABORIGINAL WOMEN TO USE THE CHARTER OF RIGHTS
(AND THUS THE CANADIAN STATE) TO SETTLE WHAT THE AFN PERCEIVES AS
INTERNAL DISPUTES
{MANY} ABORIGINAL WOMEN AND MEN HAVE ARGUED THAT THE INDIAN
ACT WAS ALSO A RACIST AND IMPERIALIST PIECE OF LEGISLATION
THAT WAS IMPOSED UPON THE INDIGENOUS PEOPLE IN WAYS THAT DISTORTED THEIR
INTERNAL RELATIONS, STRUCTURED THEIR SUBORDINATION TO NON-ABORIGINAL PEOPLES,
AND THREATENED THEIR EXTINCTION
IN RECENT YEARS ABORIGINAL WOMEN'S MAJOR CALL HAS BEEN FOR
SELF-DETERMINATION FOR THEIR PEOPLES AND AN END TO THE TRAGIC RESULTS OF
COLONIZATION, IMPERIALISM, AND WHAT MANY CONSIDER THE IMPORTATION OF WESTERN
PRACTICES OF MALE DOMINATION
{IMPORTANT NOTE:
THEY ARGUE [LIKE MANY ANTI-RACISTS --- THAT “NOBODY CAN BE NEUTRAL”]
THAT PEOPLE WHO DO NOT SUPPORT THERE DEMANDS ARE COMPLICIT IN THE OPPRESSIVE
RELATIONSHIPS AND STRUCTURES THAT HAVE BRUTALIZED ANA DESTROYED THEIR PEOPLE}
SEE SOCIETY LIKE OTHER
RACIALIZED COMMUNITIES ===> AS A CONTEXT OF DEPRIVATION AND
STATE-INITIATED VIOLENCE OF THEIR LIVES ===> AS WITH OTHER RACIALZIED
COMMUNITIES MALE FRUSTRATION (REPRESSIVE DESUBLIMATION) WAS OFTEN VENTED ON
WOMEN AND CHILDREN AND THEMSELVES.
IT IS SUGGESTED THAT INSOFAR AS THERE IS A SHARED CRITQUE OF PARTRIARCH
RELATIONS, SOME MEETING GROUND FOR ABORIGINAL {AND OTHER RACIALIZED} AND WHITE
FEMINISTS EXISTS ===>
QUESTION:
BUT DON'T RACIALIZED WOMEN EXPERIENCE THEIR WORLD THROUGH THEIR
CULTURE/RACE “BEFORE? GENDER? =è
CAN FEMINISM OFFER THESE WOMEN A “FULL SOLUTION” TO THEIR EXPERIENCE OF INEQUALITY?
…
QUESTION: IF FEMINIST CRITIQUES OF PATRIARCHAL CAPITALISM, IMPERIALISM,
AND THE STATE DO NOT TAKE AS A GOAL ===> EX: WHO MAKES AND ENFORCES THE
CRIMINAL LAWS, WHICH SENDS DISPROPORTIONATE NUMBERS OF RACIALIZED PEOPLE TO
PRISON --- OR --- WHO CONTROLS LAND AND DEVELOPMENT AND IN WHOSE INTERESTS? ---
OR --- IN WHOSE INTEREST HAS THE ENVIRONMENT BEEN RENDERED CLOSE TO
UNINHABITABLE FOR PLANTS, ANIMALS, AND HUMAN BEINGS --- OR --- IF IT DOESN'T
HAVE AS A LONG-TERM GOAL, THE ERADICATION OF THE LEGAL OPPRESSION OF ABORIGINAL
WOMEN {RE: BAND STATUS} AND/OR RACIALIZED SERVITUDE OF WOMEN {RE: IN THE
IMMIGRATION SYSTEM}---- ECT., --- WHAT CAN FEMINISM OFFER WOMEN OF COLOUR?