So you want a national inquiry? Perhaps you signed a petition? Maybe you tweeted something relating to #MMIWG (missing and murdered Indigenous women and girls) recently and are now all worked about the government not doing anything? Surprise! Welcome to Canada.

But what are you exactly asking for when you say that you want a national inquiry for missing and murdered Indigenous women and girls?

Some people say this is a call to action. Actually, no, it isn’t a call to action. But thank you National Chief for that gesture of civility—you don’t have to apologize. We (well some of us) already realize the constrained structures that you are working within and how those structures limit what you can actually do or say, publicly or privately. Oh that darn locus of power, eh?

Some people say it is what we need RIGHT now. No, we don’t.

Let’s have a quick little discussion about what a national inquiry actually entails (and maybe we will throw in some already conducted inquiries, how they didn’t help, and what they couldn’t actually say given their tightly imbricated colonial mandates).

Many people have asked me why I am saying no to a national inquiry. Simply put, it maintains the status quo and besides the obvious, we already know all the reasons why this is occurring, and what about all of the other reports/research previously done? Plus, inquiries only allow certain voices to be heard and certain bodies to be seen. Not everyone is considered equal in the process.

The national inquiry is set up formally and its jurisdiction is established by legislation (we already know how legislation plays out in favour of Indigenous peeps—NOT); its set duration established in terms of reference (ToR). This means that the inquiry “can be short, medium or long” (oh the excitement!). The inquiry can be headed by one or more Commissioners (with legal and supporting staff hired). It is often open to public including documents, process, hearings, and final report may be posted on the internet (kind of like this 150+ page document here). Some organizations like to say that the inquiry’s relationship to the government is independent but this is contradictory in itself because it is established by the government–because it really isn’t independent. The costs can be high (for all the bullshit reasons that we need an inquiry in the first place). The structure is dependent on the ToR, the process is dependent on the ToR, and the activities include “generally intended to advise or investigate” and “may call subject matter experts, witnesses, etc.” This is where only certain voices and bodies matter to the inquiry. Just think about who is going to be called to be a witness and who isn’t? What differential power relations are at play here? Where will the hearings be held? How will the witnesses be able to get there? As for the big kicker, future actions? These are at the discretion of the governments that established the inquiry (which won’t be done by Harper I will tell you that much and that includes if the government who established the inquiry remains in power after the inquiry is over). Additionally, participation is only granted by Commissioner at hearings and maybe, just maybe written submissions may be accepted (probably in English, which ultimately views Indigenous languages as inferior—you know the usual). Oh, but don’t forget, all of this is non-binding (translation: the government can do what it has done before in other inquiries, ignore it).¹

But wait, didn’t I say there was previous inquiries done? Yeah, like during the inquiry into the missing and murdered Indigenous women in Vancouver’s Downtown Eastside—the same women that the police didn’t care about and turned a blind eye when they were reported missing by their families/friends. What was the outcome of that report? Well, Oppal basically wrote that serial killer Robert Pickton targeted Indigenous women given their status in present-day Canadian society, less than human.² What was the outcome of that inquiry? Exactly. Nothing. Do we really need another inquiry to tell us why Indigenous women and girls are being targeted by serial killers/murderers because they are considered less than human and how the rest of Canada doesn’t care? No. We can have inquiry, after inquiry and they can all say the same thing: Canadian society doesn’t care about Indigenous peoples, specifically Indigenous women and girls. They can also give us all the same recommendations but you know what? Those recommendations are non-binding. Let’s get all up in arms about a process that is created by a colonial government and that doesn’t hold a colonial government accountable for its actions in remaining complicit in the violence against Indigenous women.

Other inquiries that were conducted on Indigenous peoples, including an Indigenous child that died in state care and an Indigenous man that died while waiting for urgent medical attention INSIDE a hospital: Brian Sinclair³ and Phoenix Sinclair⁴. The outcome of those inquiries didn’t mention anything about the racism or colonialism that is interlaced within ALL of these cases. So yes, let’s have a national inquiry that will ignore the racism and colonialism that cause so many Indigenous women and girls to go missing or murdered! And for what, another inquiry to have the government apologize again? How many apologies is that now from political leaders and other government officials?

How about instead, we support the community-based organizations that are working directly with the families and friends of the missing and murdered Indigenous women and girls? You can start by donating to Families of Sisters in Spirit.

1.http://www.nwac.ca/files/2013.10.09_Why%20Support%20a%20National%20Inquiry_FINAL02.pdf

2.http://www.missingwomeninquiry.ca/wally-oppal/ OR http://www.ag.gov.bc.ca/public_inquiries/docs/Forsaken-ES.pdf

3.http://www.cbc.ca/news/canada/manitoba/brian-sinclair-s-condition-didn-t-seem-urgent-inquest-told-1.2485343

4.http://www.cbc.ca/news/canada/manitoba/manitoba-sorry-for-failing-to-protect-phoenix-sinclair-1.2518147

This post is written after spending two years in an executive position on a commission (at the national level) for a political party in Canada. I am set to attend (probably) my final convention (because these things are fuckin expensive) within the next few days. Nevertheless, I will be happy to see my friends. Over these last few years, I learned a lot and definitely can appreciate why some people are never involved with politics. Would I say that someone should never get involved? No. I think you have to experience it for yourself in order to truly understand if this is the route you want to take. I’ve decided that this isn’t the route for me. This is based on my own personal experiences especially with particular non-Indigenous commission. This also isn’t a post that is generalizable to all people, especially Indigenous persons, in politics and the work they do. Again, this is based on my own personal experiences. I wish I could say that I was writing a different post about my experiences, but I can’t–it is what it is, and here it is…. Why politics isn’t for me (from an Indigenous woman’s perspective). 

1)    Because it’s fuckin politics and the political system is the most fucked up system out there (especially for those who come disadvantage backgrounds, like being Indigenous AND being women)

2)    Because white people don’t really care unless there is something in it for them (including their platform, their cause, or their own hidden intentions—whatever that may be)

3)    Because if white people care, it means that they only considered you at the end of the entire process. (Oh, but what about the Natives!)

4)    Because when white people (especially white women) asked you for their opinion, it means that if you don’t agree/critique their efforts, they will find someone else who will support and praise their efforts (Hooray! White women have come to save us!)

5)    Because if white women care it only means that they considered you at the end of the entire process (Oh crap! We can’t forget about the Natives!   …. Again.)

6)    Because when it comes to women in politics, it is more tolerable if you are married (or in any relationship really, preferably one that maintains cisnormativity)

7)    Because it is also better if you sustain and maintain this cisnormativity

8)    Because for Indigenous women who don’t align with middle-class values (or who are not even apart of the middle-class), it means they will never fit it in (especially for a party that is striving to protect the “values” of the middle class)

9)    Because it is also better if you sustain and maintain these middle-class values (sit quiet, do right/white, and don’t attract too much attention—don’t act “too Indian”)

10) Because for Indigenous women who can’t afford (this includes, not being able to afford a ticket, not being able to afford travel, not being able to afford accommodations) to attend the political events (policy forums, general events, etc), it means you remain invisible to the entire political process

11) Because for Indigenous women who remain invisible to the entire process, this means you are erased from the political process altogether

12) Because for Indigenous women who are invisible/erased from the entire political process, this means issues as it relates to Indigenous women/girls, they will always be heard last

13) Because for Indigenous women/girls it means being integrated at the very end of the political process (the add-Indigenous-women/girls-and-stir approach–actually it is more like, add-Indigenous-people-and-stir approach, with Indigenous women/girls added at the very end.)

14) Because addressing the rights of Indigenous women/girls never includes the rights of Indigenous men/boys or Indigenous trans/two-spirited individuals

15) Because policy and politics is blind when it comes to history/context

16) Because for Indigenous women/girls, policy resolutions attempting to address lack of access to reproductive justice/health doesn’t mean addressing the lack of access to basic (universal) health (Don’t believe the hype that Canada has a universal/accessible health care system)

17) Because for Indigenous women/girls, policy resolutions attempting to address violence against Indigenous women/girls always means that they must be in a relationship WITH children and currently living in a home in order to access basic services/rights (Remember? We. Must. Maintain. Cisnormativity. And also, brownie points for heteronormativity).

And last but not least…

18) Because when it comes to politics, the rights of Indigenous women are always deemed separate and not attached to other rights, like rights to land/access to land (Because there is NO! connection between rights to land/access to land and the violence committed against Indigenous peoples, especially Indigenous women/girls. Nope. No. Connection. AT. ALL.)

Note: I use the term “white people” because this is where the chunk of my experiences (based on these points above) in politics with others lie. I understand and appreciate discrimination can also come from non-white people. However, I have yet to experience that… just sayin’!

I wanted to write this post for a long time. Okay, I lied…only since a couple of weeks ago did I think about writing something like this, and with good reason.

Since December 20, 2013, which marks the date the Supreme Court Decision released its decision regarding Bedford v. Canada, the discussion regarding sex work has intensified from both supporters and opposing parties (without surprise). Around the end of last month (and beginning of this month), there was a leaked document from Amnesty International, which has supported the call for the decriminalization of the industry. Following this leak of Amnesty’s report, the opposition from anti-sex work organizations has escalated. This isn’t the first international organization to support the decriminalization of the trade either. Within Canada, it has intensified to the point that organizations and supporters of the criminalization of sex work have even started a national postcard campaign. Those who do not support the decriminalization of the trade (antis for short) are beginning to call prostitution (sex work) as a form of violence against women, including Indigenous women and girls (which is ultimately attempting to include Missing and Murdered Indigenous Women and Girls or MMWIG)–not that this is anything new.

Throughout the antis’ opposing the decriminalization of the trade, it becomes even clearer that the antis have not even taken time to read Amnesty’s leaked document. You can read that in detail here. This isn’t much of a surprise either since the antis tend not to read any of the current research that supports the decriminalization of the trade. The antis tend to only read and repeat the research that has been discredited by numerous institutions including the Ontario Court of Justice (you know, Farley et al).

When it comes to the leaked document by Amnesty International, you don’t even have to read the entire report to see that the antis didn’t pay much attention to what was actually said in the report. In fact, it becomes quite clear what the antis are supporting when it comes to protesting against sex work, and that is they are supporting the further marginalization of sex workers, specifically those sex workers who are marginalized in other ways (race, class, ability, gender, etc).

Amnesty International (AI) is quite clear that it supports the decriminalization of the trade between consenting adults. While I understand and appreciate that people of various demographies, including age, engage in sex work, I do not support the criminalization of the trade for anybody. When a behaviour or activity is criminalized, people tend to believe that it will increase the safety and security of individuals who engage in these activities. However, this is the furthest from the truth. Specifically, the criminalization of the trade allows the state to monitor and control certain types of activities. Yet it is the activities of those most marginalized, including activities that youth engage in, that are most often criminalized (even if it is not directly related to the trade) and when they are criminalized, this increases their risk for more stigmatization, discrimination and further limits their access to certain services and opportunities. The idea that a youth’s criminal record is expunged at the age of 18 is a myth. The argument that Canada needs to adopt a model like the Nordic Model to prevent harms is another myth.

Let’s have a real discussion about what constitutes violence against women, specifically Indigenous women and girls.

The reality is that the majority of the harm that Indigenous women and girls experience is directly related to the state, including policing agencies and the justice system, and these types of violence include the criminalization of the trade (including the buying and selling of sexual services). While some individuals admit to entering prostitution with constrained choices, these choices should not be negated. Arguing that one does not have a choice negates their very existence, their humanity, and their self, their being. By not viewing individuals as beings who are capable of making choices negates their existence, and only certain bodies are placed into these categories, explicitly Indigenous women and girls.

This type of logic also completely ignores the history of violence against Indigenous women and girls and the type of violence that contributes to the missing and murdered Indigenous women and girls (MMIWG). Although one might argue that saying that Indigenous women and girls are capable of making choices and that this logic follows that Indigenous women and girls deserve what they got (the same type of logic used within dominant discourses/institutions, including policing agencies), this is not the argument I am trying to highlight. What I am pointing out is that Indigenous women and girls agency (or more appropriately, lack of agency) is only useful when it comes to colonial gains, including those gains such as maintaining the prison industrial complex, non-profit industrial complex, and state control over Indigenous sexuality/sexual behaviours. Additionally, when the state of Indigenous women and girls are discussed, these narratives rarely ever include the history of colonialism and the colonial state as being a contributor and supporter of violence against Indigenous women and girls.

The argument that prostitution is violence against women also ignores the diversity within the trade, including those Indigenous peoples who identify as male, trans, or two-spirited. This argument also (obviously) conflates violence against women with prostitution. Because it sees all prostitutions as forms of violence against women and as such, usually advocates for the criminalization of the buyers. However, what this does is that it distracts from actual real violence against women. Violence against women is a unique situation that exists outside of prostitution and saying that all prostitution is violence against women assumes that all violence against women is prostitution. But we all know that (without this being highlighted) that all violence against women is not prostitution. Furthermore, there are already laws in place to deal with real violence against women, like the sections in the Criminal Code of Canada that deal directly with homicide, assault, sexual assault, harassment, etc. Saying that all prostitution is violence against women also negates that some women choose to enter prostitution and it assumes that the violence that they experience is entirely their own fault: they deserved what they got. More bluntly, those women should have known better because prostitution is violence against women, and who, in their right mind, would put themselves in a direct line to violence? A perfect example of anti-choice.

Logically, saying that prostitution is violence against women and saying that we must criminalize the buyers of the trade doesn’t make any sense. It says that one can advertise their services but they can’t AND shouldn’t get paid for their services. Again, an example of anti-choice. Keeping any aspect of the trade criminalized, including the buyers, negates one’s choices, which (as I stated earlier) negates one’s existence and very being. It also distracts from the real violence that both sex workers and non-sex workers may experience, including assault or sexual assault. When MMIWG are included in this discussion, it also ignores the fact that the some of those MMIWG were sex workers. It speaks to the tone that those who were sex workers deserved what they got. Also, when MMIWG are included in this discussion, it ignores that the criminalization of the trade (including the buyers and sellers—while it wasn’t illegal to exchange sexual services for money, it was illegal to do it certain spaces) contributed to their disappearances and murders. This is further complicated by the fact that policing agencies and our colonial governments continue to exhibit a complete lack of concern for MMIWG. Adding MORE laws that criminalize their behaviours isn’t a solution to this social issue. These arguments also pay no attention to the history of Indigenous women and girls in Canada—where the government was a contributor and a supporter to the violence that Indigenous women and girls experienced (and continue to experience). We must ask ourselves, how is the further criminalization of the trade (either buyers or sellers) going to address the violence of those within the trade?

In closing, I will call attention to the fact that when we ignore the history of violence against Indigenous women and girls, it is direct violence against Indigenous women and girls. So again, I say, let’s have a real discussion about what constitutes violence against women (especially Indigenous women and girls), and let’s discuss how certain experiences are erased from this discussion and how certain histories (and present experiences) are continuously dismissed as not being legitimate.

Note: please take your time to view this Amnesty International link (and read the leaked report in detail) and voice your concerns over the continued criminalization of the trade by emailing  swc@amnesty.org if you are a not a member of Amnesty International (if you are a member, as per the site, “please engage with the consultation process directly with an office located in your country). 

Well actually, it’s that time again… two years later.

The LPC Biennial Convention!

Remember my blog post a couple of years ago? No. That’s okay. Two years is a long time ago. I mean, I don’t even remember what I ate for breakfast (small lie–I eat mostly cereals and fruits for breakfast so there really isn’t anyway for me to forget). For your reference and to help jog your memories, I wrote two blog posts (here and here). I wrote these posts to raise funds for this special journey which lasted *drum roll* two years!!!!

Over the past two years, I have encountered many challenges, learned many lessons and also gained some valuable knowledge/experience on how the Canadian political process(es) work. It was definitely a learning curve for me because this was the first time I had ever been involved in in politics and the people I was surrounded by had definitely a lot more knowledge and experience than I did. Fortunately enough, some of the people I met along of the way were willing to help me get over that learning curve. I mean, the only thing I knew about Canadian politics was what I learned back in high school and maybe some of my law clerk courses during college (I think… or that might have been during first year university… that’s kind of a long time ago though).

In the two posts linked above, I wrote about my desire to fulfill the VP-women’s representative position for the Aboriginal Peoples’ Commission for the Liberal Party of Canada. However, to make it all happen, I also had to raise some funds in order to be considered as a candidate (which I was acclaimed too). This post is sort of the same.

Being apart of this commission was a role in which I volunteered for. Some of the things I accomplished in my role include the following:

• Drafting a resolution on MMIWG
• Advocating for Indigenous women/girls and issues that affect them (including reproductive health, violence against women, MMIWG)
• Writing blog posts for the apc-cpa.liberal.ca website (post 1, post 2, and post 3)
• Ensuring that potential party leaders were questioned about their stance on issues that affect Indigenous women/girls, including how they would support organizations that are currently advocating for Indigenous women/girls.
• Providing support/advice to other young Indigenous women who were interested
• Representing the commission at the Assembly of First Nations AGA in Toronto of June 2012, and interviewing Indigenous women from various Indigenous organizations, including Indspire, Families of Sisters in Spirits, and Indigenous Women in Community Leadership program at the Coady Institute on the east coast
• Attending policy forums where/when possible
• Also, I am a member of the board of the London North Center FLA and provide feedback on events/topics/etc pertaining to Indigenous issues

Some of the costs that I would need assistance with include accommodation costs and food/incidentals. Luckily, the travel has been graciously purchased for (Thank you/Chi-Miigwetch APC!). A more detailed list includes the following:

• 164/night x 4 nights (divided amongst 3) = $218 (minus taxes) for accommodations
• 50/day x 4 days = $200 for food/incidentals
• TOTAL = $418

As a part of this final stage in this journey, I am attending the convention to be able to support my peers and other Indigenous people running for their positions that are interested in filling. I am also attending this convention to share my experiences and voice any concerns to help make the next team’s tasks coming in, a little more easier. Being both an Indigenous person and a woman, I can appreciate the struggles that individuals from either group have to endure. At times, there were many instances that I wanted to quit, but I didn’t because I felt that I would be cheating myself and those who supported me–such as those who donated the last time. When this journey is over, this will probably be the last time I participate this deep in politics (as in sit on a commission). As much as I love politics, I feel that my journey is going to continue on a different path. This path, although not always easy, was definitely one worth taking.

I am hoping that I can raise some funds to assist with some of these costs, similar to last time. If it wasn’t for your help, whether you shared the blog post, RT’d the blog post, donated what you could or provided me with some moral support, I probably wouldn’t have made it this far. If you would like to donate via email-money transfer, please contact me directly, or post a comment below with your email and I will reply directly to your email (all comments need approval so any comments with emails won’t be published). Also, you can donate via paypal (the button at the top of the page on the right).

Help me complete this last leg of my journey! Your donations (any amount from $2.00 to $20.00) will be greatly appreciated!

Chi-Miigwetch/Mahsi-cho/Niá:wen/Thank you* 

*Those are the only ways I know how to say “Thank you” in Indigenous language(s)… if you know more, comment below!