1 Introduction to "Indigenous Women: The State of Our Nations" Bonita Lawrence and Kim Anderson "Indigenous Women: The State of Our underpin whose perspectives are prioritized are Nations" originated with our desire, as co-editors, to obvious; what is less clear are the ways in which the continue a working relationship that began with the gender divisions forced on us by the colonizer may anthology Strong Women Stories: Native Vision and have resulted in different definitions, among men Community Survival (2003). In Strong Women and women, of "sovereignty" and "nationhood." Stories, the contributors addressed the range of issues that Aboriginal women take on as they work WHERE ARE YOUR WOMEN? to ensure the survival of our communities. A number of them examined the complex legal The absence of Aboriginal women in categories through which Canada classifies politics is rooted in our history, as coined in the Nativeness, and explored how being labelled as a "Where are your women?" question posed by "C-31 Indian," or as "non-status" or "Metis," Cherokee Chief Attakullakulla upon meeting a affected their ability to feel a sense of belonging colonial United States (US) delegation. As Marilou within their own and other Native communities. Awiakta reports, Chief Attakullakulla's party Other women addressed issues of child-rearing, included women "as famous in war, as powerful in schooling, sexuality, community leadership, women the council," while the US party included only men and "traditionalism," aging, violence against women (1993, 9). In terms of governance, where were (are) and children and healing. Notably absent in these their women - and what has happened to our accounts, however, were articles that explicitly Indigenous female political authority, vision, voice explored the politics of sovereignty. This absence and direction? both intrigued and troubled us, and prompted us to We know that colonial governments ask the contributors to this journal to write about historically refused to negotiate with Indigenous Aboriginal women and nationhood. women, accepting only male representatives when As a starting point, we knew that discussing terms of relationship. They then actively "community issues" and "sovereignty issues" have disempowered women by attacking the clan often been separated within our communities. systems and other forms of female representation, "Sovereignty issues," as articulated by the formal and by making it illegal for Indian women in leadership (largely male) have addressed land Canada to take part in the band councils that claims and constitutional battles, in the courts and replaced traditional Indigenous governments. The within government circles. "Community issues," as legacy of the Indian Act, in the form of all-male articulated by the informal leadership (largely representation, has shaped the nation to nation female), have encompassed a range of struggles, discourse since then. This has set the stage for a including addressing violence against women and political representation that is not shaped by children, alcoholism and other addictions, the health women's ways of knowing the world. needs of children and elders, and education that is Native women have been far from silent culture-based and community controlled. Too often, about community needs and priorities, but our the agendas of the formal leadership are prioritized, voices are only beginning to be heard politically at while the informal leadership's concerns receive the national and international levels. More secondary attention. The gender divisions that Aboriginal women are entering formal leadership Atlantis, Volume 29.2, Spring/Summer 2005 2 Lawrence & Anderson positions nationally and are increasingly addressing broke down, their struggle gradually evolved into international forums on Indigenous issues, yet the the larger issue of loss of Indian status. This reality of ongoing colonization ties our hands. Our ultimately led Sandra Lovelace to the United families and communities require constant attention Nations (UN), where she argued that Section because we continue to move from crisis to crisis. 12(1)(b) of the Indian Act, through which Indian As primary caregivers, these responsibilities weigh women lost their status, was in violation of Article heavily on us. 27 of the International Covenant on Civil and There have been other reasons for us not Political Rights, which protects the rights of taking active roles in formal political structures. minority groups to enjoy their culture, practise their Some Aboriginal women have sought a broader traditions, and use their language in community vision than the band council system forced on our with others from their group. In 1981, the UN ruled communities and so tightly controlled by Canada. against Canada, and found that Lovelace had been These women may have maintained traditional denied her cultural rights under Article 27, thereby leadership as clan mothers, or have worked in other forcing Canada to change the Indian Act in 1985 ways to re-awaken or strengthen the traditional (Lawrence 2004). systems of government in their nations. However, What has been less well documented than other Aboriginal women, particularly those who the above interventions, however, are the ways in have struggled against being formally expelled from which gendered struggles against colonialism have their nations because of gender discrimination in the all too frequently been reduced to "women's issues" Indian Act, have borne the brunt of actually having by the formal male leadership, and then presented formal political structures work against them. as a wholesale threat to sovereignty. The now It is becoming increasingly well-known notorious incident when the National Indian that a critical act of political resistance on the part Brotherhood (predecessor of the Assembly of First of Native women has been against the Indian Act Nations), when faced with the Lavell and Bedard clause that expelled Indian women who had married case, actually lined up, with Canada, to be non-Indians from their communities, while allowing intervenors against Lavell and Bedard (Jamieson Indian men to bestow Indian status on their white 1978), is only one example. There are others. When wives. Indian women struggled long and hard the Lavell and Bedard decision clearly foreclosed against this legislation which disenfranchised them any possibility of legal redress within Canada, Mary from the life of their nations while in many places Two-Axe Early and sixty other women from enabling white women to replace them. The Kahnewake attempted to take Canada's gender organization "Indian Rights for Indian Women," discrimination into the international arena by initiated by the late Mary Two-Axe Early, was attending the International Women's Year probably one of the earliest examples of Native conference in Mexico City in 1975. They returned women's resistance to this gendered form of to find that their band council had served them colonialism. However, in the early 1970s, when eviction notices (Jamieson 1979). Meanwhile, the aspects of overt racial inequality within the Indian struggle of the Tobique women for housing and Act were overturned in the Drybones case, two against loss of status, which they waged at one Native women, Jeannette Corbiere Lavell and Irene point by occupying their band office, resulted not Bedard, attempted to have the overt gender only in threats of arrest by the leadership but also inquality within the Act overturned by challenging continuous physical violence against them and their the loss of their Indian status in the courts. families. This happened to such an extent that the Ultimately, however, the Supreme Court judgment American Indian Movement actually offered to in Lavell and Bedard maintained the gender come into the community to protect them (Silman discrimination which had been so central to Native 1987). women's colonial disempowerment. Subsequently, Against this background, it is perhaps not when the women of Tobique First Nation in New surprising that the Native Women's Association of Brunswick began to challenge the manner in which Canada did not feel sufficiently "represented" by housing on reserve was assigned only to men, the Assembly of First Nations, and therefore leaving their families homeless when marriages struggled, fruitlessly, to get a seat for status Indian Atlantis, Volume 29.2 3 women at the table during the 1982 talks around through many Native communities in Canada, repatriating the constitution. It is also not surprising fragmenting decolonization efforts in a number of that the Métis National Council of Women has been ways and marginalizing women's voices within forced into the courts in their attempts to bring communities. Because gender discrimination has about national representation of Métis women's been a central means through which the voices. These struggles all highlight the extent to colonization of Native communities has taken place, which the formal male political leadership has, in particularly in Canada, addressing the general, refused to address colonialism when marginalization and devaluation of women's voices women, rather than men, are targeted, and why a becomes central to decolonization. section of Native women activists have lost faith in Viewed this way, the political choices these organizations to represent them. facing our communities are not, as they are Indeed, it is only since 1985, when frequently articulated, between "sovereignty" changes in the Indian Act