Author: kwetoday

Caught in human traffic Lies!

anti-human trafficking, Canada, Laura Agustin, LFpress, London ON, sex work View all 3 comments

Here is a story that I read last week entitled “Caught in human traffic”. Coincidentally, I also happened to read it the day before I was presenting my paper on human trafficking of Indigenous women/girls which argues that these new anti-human trafficking legislation(s) and/or policies are in effect an attempt to control Indigenous women’s bodies/sexuality, and in a much broader significance, Indigenous sovereignty. I am not alone in this argument as Laura Agustin describes this social phenomena in similar terms. Smith on Agustin writes,

She said that the words “human trafficking” started entering the lexicon in a serious way around 2003 and 2004. Now, she maintained that the language is shifting to emphasize slavery. She bluntly described this movement as a colonial initiative. (Smith, 2011)

I was not impressed with the above LFpress story and the significant claim being made by the alleged victim in this story. After speaking to multiple mutual friends who both know the victim in this story and the dancer who committed suicide (who is mentioned in this story), I decided to write this blog post. The article reads,

Most importantly she throws a lifeline to the women being trafficked on the circuit she once worked. But sometimes the rope misses. “The hardest part is losing them,” she said, referencing a girl who hung herself three months ago. “Her stage name was Alex, but I want to say her real name out loud – it’s Michelle – because she was a real person,” said Stacey. 

The suggestion that this victim knew Alex/Michelle well enough to know her reasons for suicide is a falsification of Alex/Michelle’s story to sensationalize the alleged victim’s own story to solidify the argument that human trafficking in London ON (or in Ontario in general). Most importantly, it is also a complete disregard for the families/friends of Alex/Michelle. I even commented on the article and another reader suggested that I was in denial that her suicide was connected to human trafficking. I can tell you right now that the suggestion that Alex/Michelle committed suicide because of human trafficking is a blatant lie. I can also tell you that the victim in the story did not know Alex/Michelle. In fact, she was not allowed in the club or anywhere near the club where Alex/Michelle worked (from a mutual friend who knows the victim and Alex/Michelle). So to suggest she tried to “save her” is another blatant lie. Also, the article has Alex/Michelle’s death date wrong because she died last August 2012 not three months ago. To put it plainly: another blatant lie, and she just doesn’t know what she is talking about when it comes to someone I lived with, was my neighbor, had a relationship with, knew her parents, was there for the birth of her child, and a magnitude of other life events.

This idea that anti-human traffickers make up statistics or stories or use the lives/deaths of people no longer around anymore always seem so distant to me. However, after reading this article, I knew that I had to do something; hence, I am writing this blog post.

I am not here to suggest that people who are exploited or victimized should not have their stories acknowledged; however, if claims are going to be made about certain populations then these claims need to be legitimate and not further exploited for financial gain which is what is happening here with this idea that human trafficking occurs in London ON. I wrote about the research that suggests that “1:5 in sex workers” are trafficked (you can read more HERE). There are huge amounts of government grants and research grants that are being poured into program planning and program implementation locally, nationally, and internationally. In fact, Agustin mentions that one does not even have to mention “trafficking” to receive funding. I guess that is why the research report that I cited in my previous blog post “Human Trafficking in London?!?!’ mentions “Aboriginal women” only briefly (I mean, there are loads of money pouring into organizations and institutions that seek to investigate the lives of this “vulnerable population.”). While describing the picture of two white-abled bodied men drawing attention to “vulnerable women,” Agustin writes,

They don’t mention trafficking too loudly, but that is now the keyword to access much funding for ‘women’s issues’. It wouldn’t matter that these two guys are unlikely to have met any trafficked victims or know what to do if they did.

Another issue that needs to be addressed with the anti-human traffickers’ crusade is the organizations involved. As state in the article, the alleged victim received help from the Salvation Army and is a member of the London Anti-Human Trafficking coalition (LAHTC). I had a class last year and it was entitled “Sociology of Deviance.” In this class I learned that the LAHTC argues that the strippers/exotic dancers who are being trafficked travel in groups along the Windsor Corridor which is also described in the LFPress article. The reason strippers/exotic dancers travel in groups to various clubs in Ontario is because it is safer! It can even be argued that it is suggested that non-sex work women should not travel alone or employ safe travel practices when traveling alone like changing rooms if a stranger over hears the hotel agent announcing the room in the lobby while presenting a room key to the female guest. So then why is there a difference in traveling advice/tips for sex workers? Must they absolutely travel alone in order not to be considered a trafficking vicim? Must they put the consideration of anti-human traffickers and their ideals of sex workers above their own income/employment by sticking to one club, absolutely?

Not only does the LAHTC propose outlandish ideas that suggest a sex worker is being trafficked, the training manuals that have been created also create problems for all those involved in this anti-human trafficking crusade. This short 6 minute video is a fine example of the problems associated with training for the rehabilitation of human trafficking victims:

Although not obvious, the training manual suggests that prostitution can be found at health clinics (???), and that God intended for sexual relations to only happen between man/woman (hello transphobia/homophobia), and the there needs to be a “restoration” of sexuality to this natural intention, and finally, what to expect from human trafficking victims: masturbation (!?!?!?), confused sexuality (!?!!??!), and STIs (!?!??!). So not only does it cause stigmatization among the victims, it assumes that the only way for a victim to be truly saved he/she must conform to societal gender/sex norms. It also suggests that all those in the sex industry have STIs. I always wondered where this idea came from and why the reader in the above LFpress article suggested that prostitution be legalized (not decriminalized which is what is really being asked of the courts with the Bedford et al. case before the SCC), and that all “prostitutes” should undergo mandatory STI testing–I guess this is where the idea originates from that all those involved even those who are considered human trafficking victims will have STIs which is also indicated in this US based website. Hello stigmatization!!!

In addition to the above paragraph, what is really alarming about this video is the role-playing suggestions for facilitators of groups and as the voice-over announces, “it is a perfect example of sexual exploitation” because the facilitator must call on a volunteer (actually a woman), then blindfold one and then gag the other, and having the gagged-other to call out for help. A big WHAT-THE-EFF! This training manual is the training manual of the same Christian/Faith based organization mentioned in the LFpress: the Salvation Army.

So hey people of London, while you read about these stories and these suggestions that human trafficking exists in Southern Ontario, please be critical of where you are reading the information, who is presenting the information because it is clear that the organizations involved will exploit the lives/deaths of others for their own agenda and own gain.

Human Trafficking and Indigenous Women in the 21st Century

Uncategorized One comment

My speaking notes for my paper presentation today for Flaunting It 9. This was an amazing experience and it was great to hear all the other presenters share their knowledge. 

For my presentation, I will discuss how current human trafficking legislation and institutional definitions of domestic human trafficking specifically targets Indigenous women/girls. In addition to this, this paper presentation will discuss how colonial and oppressive legislation has negative implications regarding Indigenous women/girls agency and bodily autonomy, and in a much broader significance, Indigenous sovereignty. The two main papers that help situate human trafficking from the 20th century through to the 21st century are: The Traffic in Women essay by Emma Goldman and Canada and Migrant Sex-Work: Challenging the ‘Foreign’ in Foreign Policy by Leslie Ann Jeffrey. While Goldman’s Traffic in Women and Jeffrey’s Canada & Migrant Sex-Work address the same topic from different viewpoints, their main arguments are comparable which is a need to focus on human rights and workers’ rights. Their contrast is in their approach. Jeffrey adopts a post-colonial approach and Goldman adopts a victimist approach. The victimist approach is defined by Jeffrey as “part of a binary discourse of victim/perpetrator that makes it impossible to talk about migrant sex-workers as rights-bearing individuals who deserve to have those rights respected” (39). Subsequently, in her post-colonial framework, Jeffrey draws attention to sex workers’ right to work safely and autonomously.  Jeffrey argues, “trafficking, understood as exploitation within sex-work, occurs because of ignoring sex-workers’ rights to decriminalized and safe working conditions” (34). Thus, there is a fundamental need for sex workers’ who enter the trade autonomously to have their voices heard as opposed to the constant re-telling of the stories of victims of trafficking. 

Within a Canadian context, on November 25, 2005, Bill C-49, An Act to amend the Criminal Code (Trafficking in Persons), received its Royal Assent. This Bill introduced changes to the Criminal Code of Canada by including section 279 to address a concern over trafficking in women. Since the Bill received its Royal Assent, there has been a reported increase in concern of trafficking in Indigenous women. A report by The Standing Committee on the Status of Women writes, “[Indigenous] girls and women are at greater risk of becoming victims of trafficking within and outside Canada” (9). Then in November of that same year, a report was published by the First Nations Caring Society calling for more analysis, research, and documentation of trafficking in Indigenous women and girls (Sethi 68). In March 2010, the Royal Canadian Mounted Police (RCMP) released a complex report entitled Human Trafficking in Canada. While current research on this growing topic concerns itself with examining the causes of trafficking in Indigenous women and girls, there is little research that investigates the connections between exploration on Indigenous lands and the exploitation of Indigenous bodies, specifically Indigenous women’s bodies. Although Canada’s current anti-prostitution and anti-human trafficking legislation appear to work for the safety and security of individuals, these policies work to further advance the colonial agenda of the Canadian government by exploiting Indigenous lands and Indigenous bodies. 

Canada’s colonial agenda began with the creation of the North West Mounted Police (NWMP). Often ignored is the role the NWMP played in the criminalization of Indigenous peoples through the effects of carrying out Canada’s colonial agenda, which included the forced assimilation and civilization of Indigenous populations. In “Racialized Policing” Elizabeth Comack writes, “the project of colonizing the Indigenous population began in the seventeenth century [and] the colonial project involved a number of strategies” (69). One strategy included the enactment of the Indian Act in 1876. According to Comack, the NWMP role was to protect settlers’ missions to dominate and control Indigenous land by controlling Indigenous bodies through “implementing the government’s policies towards [Indigenous] people” Like the Indian Act. The Indian Act is a legislation that has undergone many changes since its enactment in 1876. Some changes were for the benefit of Canada’s Indigenous populations. However, the most underreported change that directly affected Indigenous women and girls are the prostitution sections that permitted the policing of Indigenous bodies and sexuality. Before the enactment of the Criminal Code of Canada (CCC) where Canada’s current anti-prostitution laws can be found, the anti-prostitution laws were first enacted in the Indian Act “by adding a series of provisions relating to prostitution” (Boyer 78). These sections relating to prostitution within the Indian Act underwent significant changes, which added more force and more provisions than their preceding sections. For instance, initial sections only affected Indigenous women. However, later modified sections affected both Indigenous men and women, and allowed for policing of Indigenous bodies and sexuality in their own homes (Boyer 78). Finally in 1892, the CCC was enacted and all sections relating to prostitution were removed from the Indian Act and then added to the CCC (Boyer 78). There is almost no recognition of this history of prostitution laws in Canada in current research that attempts to address the growing concern over human trafficking in Indigenous women and girls. As a consequence, the continued policing of Indigenous women’s bodies and sexuality as being inherently tied to the colonization of Canada are often ignored. 

At the heart of this colonization is Othering where the Other is seen as the problem. In Decolonizing Methodologies,Linda T. Smith writes, “the ‘indigenous problem’ is a recurrent theme in all imperial and colonial attempts to deal with Indigenous peoples [and] concern about ‘the indigenous problem’ began as an explicitly militaristic or policing concern” (91). The Indigenous problem for Canada was initiated through its creation of policies and the problem was controlled by Canada’s policing agencies. Within Canada, human trafficking is policed under two distinct pieces of legislation. Domestically is it policed under the CCC which is similar to anti-prostitution laws. Domestic human trafficking in Indigenous women and girls is defined as being familial-based or gang related. It is often described as an exploitative relationship between two individuals where one controls, coerces, or forces another to do labour, which is most often sexual labour, through intimidation and violence, and the RCMP definition emphasizes that a human trafficking victim does not have to be moved to be trafficked. Some argue an emerging key trend relating to trafficking in Indigenous women and girls is the increased trafficking “due to flourishing oil rights and mining businesses in Alberta” (60). As mentioned earlier, research on this topic concerns itself with examining the causes of trafficking. As such there is little research that investigates the extent of resource extraction as way to exploit Indigenous lands and the creation of the problem of human trafficking as a way to police Indigenous women’s bodies and sexuality. 

Linda T. Smith examines limitations of research through the discourse of the Indigenous problem. Smith states: 

“A continuing legacy of what has come to be taken for granted as a natural link between the term ‘indigenous’ (or its substitutes) and ‘problem’ is that many researchers, even those with the best of intentions, frame their research in ways that assume that the locus of a particular research problems lies with the indigenous individual or community rather than with other social or structural issues.” 

This growing concern over trafficking of Indigenous women and girls is initiated and maintained through Canadian policies, like Bill C-49, and through the continued policing of Indigenous bodies. When trafficking is seen as a problem within families and communities, they ignore, as stated earlier, the continued policing of Indigenous women’s bodies and sexuality as being inherently tied to Canada’s colonial agenda. Consequently, institutions and researchers do not directly address the effects of Canada’s colonial agenda on Indigenous women and girls. With respect to domestic human trafficking, the RCMP adopts a victimist approach by defining a domestic human trafficking victim as someone who does not know they are victim. The RCMP removes agency from trafficking victims by defining who is a victim and who is deserving of being “saved.” This conceptualization of the victim in domestic human trafficking discourses indicates a disregard for the continued exploitation of Indigenous women’s bodies by designating who is a worthy victim which is demonstrative of the colonial agenda. This colonial agenda indicates a further exploitation of Indigenous lands and controlling of Indigenous women’s bodies. Susan Hawthorne, in “Land, Bodies, and Knowledge” makes this connection between women’s bodies and the land. Hawthorne writes, “both the land and women’s bodies have suffered colonialist intrusions, and both colonialist and imperial agendas have capitalized on exploiting women’s bodies and the land” (314). One might argue that there are legitimate human trafficking victims that are deserving of support and the services to help rehabilitate them. Yet, if human trafficking victims and their relationship to the human trafficking perpetrators are defined as exploitative, including having a fear for their life or experiences of violence, it can be counter-argued that the creation of these laws is excessive since there are other sections of the CCC that deal with violence, sexual exploitation, kidnapping, and other items that may classify a human trafficking victim’s experience. One might argue by not addressing domestic human trafficking that it will not bring justice to the families/friends of the 600+ missing and murdered Indigenous women. Yet, the RCMP emphasizes that a domestic human trafficking victim does not have to include the movement of the victim. In Trafficking of Aboriginal Women and Girls in Canada, Anette Sikka, also argues that conflating human trafficking with the number of missing and murdered Indigenous women “does an injustice to both issues.” This discussion of human trafficking and Indigenous women and girls begs the question: why are settlers so concerned with trafficking in Indigenous women and girls? 

In I am Woman, Lee Maracle highlights the aims of the colonial agenda from an Indigenous woman’s perspective. Lee Maracle writes, “the aims of the colonizer are to break up communities and families, and to destroy the sense of nationhood and the spirit of co-operation among the colonized” (91). Maracle reminds us of Canada’s colonial agenda in relation to the increasing concern over trafficking in Indigenous women and girls. The colonial agenda persists through the conceptualization of domestic trafficking victims, as being non-agents, and domestic trafficking perpetrators, as being closely related to Indigenous women and girls. The anti-prostitution and anti-human trafficking legislation continues to police Indigenous women’s bodies and sexuality, and allows for the increasing exploitation of Indigenous lands by ignoring the injustices that Indigenous people experience due to Canada’s colonial agenda. As a nation, Canada and Canadians need to be reminded of this colonial agenda and the ways in which this persists through the NWMP’s living legacy, the RCMP, and the exploitation of Indigenous lands and Indigenous bodies through our current anti-prostitution and anti-human trafficking legislation that continue to police Indigenous women bodies and sexuality.

Human Trafficking in London ON?!?!

london ontario, sex work Leave a comment

Just recently I had the opportunity to speak at an event on Kings Campus. This event was organized by one of my peers and we were having a discussion on Idle No More (www.idlenomore.ca), and after the event we had an opportunity for attendees to ask us questions or converse with us.

At one point I was congratulated on my opportunity to present at Flaunting It 9 (an undergraduate conference on main campus). My paper was chosen for this conference and I am speaking on “Human Trafficking and Indigenous Women in the 21st Century.” At the moment I announced this, I was immediately asked about what I thought of the recent article in the Metro newspaper on human trafficking in London which cites that one in five (1:5) sex workers are trafficked  (read article HERE). I read this article before this young man had asked me about my thoughts on this and I knew well in advance how to answer this.

In addition to this, when people ask me what my thoughts are on human trafficking the first thing I ask them is “where do you think this problem comes from?” Almost everyone has no reply or no response, and I get it, they are probably not used of receiving that type of reply. They are probably confused with the term human trafficking too.

The current research that is being done in London ON on this subject is quite questionable. I am not saying that is shouldn’t be done or that those who experience victimization or exploitation should not have their experiences examined or investigated to further enhance the services available to them. What I am saying is that the research that is currently out there should not be blanketed on all those who are doing sex work.

That statistic that I quoted earlier is the one major issue I have with the discussions around human trafficking in London ON. This statistic was taken from the recent research done at My Sister’s Place (MSP) which is a social service agency that provides social supports, referrals and other services to women struggling with a range of issues including mental health, addiction, poverty, homelessness, and violence (Orchard et al 2012). The methodology states that “over half of the 100 women who come to the agency daily have taken part in the sex trade” and this statement is problematic in itself because how do the researchers conclude that over 50% of the women who enter MSP on a daily basis are have taken part in the sex trade? One possibly cannot determine this upon simply looking at an individual and one cannot determine if another has partaken in the sex work by a simple conversation–unless of course they asked every single women at MSP “are you in the sex trade?” upon entering. This was not the case as the data they collected only involved 33 semi-structure life histories and they only spoke with 23 women and of those 23 women, four categories of sex work emerged. Of those four categories, it was discovered that 4 of the 19 women who did sex work were forced whereby forced is defined as kidnapped, pimped, or coerced by a criminal organization. I find the sections dealing with human trafficking in the Criminal Code of Canada quite excessive. If the women were kidnapped/pimped/coerced, then there are already sections in the CCC to deal with those offenses.

In addition to this, the research indicated that there was an overrepresentation of Aboriginal women (25% interviewed but make up for 1.5% of London’s population. They do not account for this overrepresentation with being connected to the effects of colonialism (not once is this mentioned) and they ignore the fact that London is surrounded by some of Canada’s largest First Nations.

Much of the media’s focus on human trafficking in London has been focused on this research that was released last October 2012. However, to say that 1/5 women in sex work are being trafficked is not generalizable to sex workers in London ON. The research gathered their participants from an already vulnerable population and due to this fact, it is quite a reality that you are bound to find someone who has been exploited or victimized. As I stated earlier, I am not saying that this work shouldn’t be done. I am just saying that we have to be careful how we apply research to a specific population in a specific region. To say that 1/5 sex workers are trafficked in London is questionable.

Not only is this statistic questionable, but so is the suggestion that trafficking does happen in London. In the metro article, the police officer is quoted as saying that no charges for human trafficking have been laid and that these charges mostly end up as charges relating to assault and extortion.

Perhaps future research should include an accurate representation of sex workers in London and not just the most vulnerable and most visible. If the research being done on sex work is going to affect sex work, then the voice of all sex workers need to be included. Also, as a young Indigenous woman, I am tired of researchers that discuss Aboriginal women but the discussion remains lost or buried in the population being investigated. This was the case in this report since Aboriginal women and their experiences were only discussed briefly in the methodology section.

I thought I would write a brief blog post on this topic since it is coming up a lot in my life at the moment and since I will be presenting my paper on the topic this coming Friday. If you have any questions/concerns, please do not hesitate to leave a comment or contact me via twitter or Facebook.

Have a great day all!

Xo

Resources:

Mmmmm coffee makes me feel good but so does…

Uncategorized Leave a comment

Hello beautiful and amazing readers!

I am writing this blog post today to say that I am really happy with this new initiative I started on my blog and that is the “buy me a coffee” button! Since starting this, I have received some funds (a huge thank you/chi-miigwetch to one reader). I must say that since I’ve received the funds I have been wondering what to do with some of them (not that I receive a lot but still wondering nonetheless). As a community member, I believe that it is also good to give back to communities that I am located in whether it be locally, regionally, or nationally.

Because what’s better than buying someone a coffee? Supporting fundraising efforts!

So I just wanted to say that in addition to this “buy me a coffee” fund, it will also be a fund where I donate a portion of the monies I receive to organizations or causes that have sought out funds either to groups or individuals in an online setting. I am limiting it to those individuals and organization who raise funds online (and preferably) via paypal since I have already that jazzy stuff set up. If you submit some funds to my “buy me a coffee” efforts, and you would like me to donate to a particular organization/individual that has paypal set up, just let me know via email nls@kwetoday.com.

Please keep in mind that you do not have to have to have a paypal account to donate.

Thank you/chi-miigwetch for continuing to read and support this blog!

Kwe Today, 
Naomi Sayers

Makers Documentary

barbara smith, Documentary, International women's day, Makers Documentary, sheryl sandberg Leave a comment

Here is an interesting documentary that I recently came across apparently just in time for International Women’s Day (sorry I have other things on my mind and that particular day slipped my memory recently). The documentary is entitled “Makers”:

The tag-line for the trailer peaked my interest which read “Women got fed up with bad sex and being secretaries.” I watched the trailer hoped to be at least the bit intrigued to at least want to watch the documentary itself. Alas, this trailer failed. It is particularly interesting because

  1. the tag-line introducing the trailer
  2. the women introduced in much of the first half of the video are all white*

*(Oh but except Barbara Smith… she appears to be the one women of color before the trailer appears to enter the 21st century).

I find this tag-line particularly confusing since it was mostly white women in the first half and then one black woman, who is also a lesbian, and not to say that black women or lesbians weren’t/aren’t sexual beings. However, with the messages being sent by the other women (“you had to get married and have children”) suggest that, at the time, were limited to heterosexual marriages due to the fact that the images of relationships/marriages portrayed in this trailer were mostly white/heterosexual relationships/marriages. So, I guess only white women were fed up with bad sex and since racialized/Indigenous women still don’t have equal opportunities in employment, again, it was pre-dominantly white women who are fed up with being secretaries.

Yes I am bit skeptical about this documentary even if it does appear prima facie to include women from other backgrounds. I mean, there is the inclusion of Facebook COO’s Sheryl Sandberg. Yes, the “unofficial figurehead of women in business.” (globe and mail, 2013). However, she does not represent just any women in business; rather, only women in business who disclose their plans for future families to their employers or perhaps who intend to apply to companies, who she casually suggested, should be asking about female employees’ future baby-making plans. We all know how important it is to know when that baby making business happens!

So hey, thank god white women got tired of bad sex and being secretaries because we would have never made it this far today where another white woman in the C-suite is telling companies that they should directly ask women about their family/baby-making plans! Yay for progress!

Mack’s Packs

Uncategorized Leave a comment

Hello readers! Today I am publishing a guest blog written and published by Mackenzie Sayers, M.Ed, teacher, motivator, and fellow inspiration-creator! She is employed by a First Nation school board and she loves her job as well as her students who she helps achieve their own goals and grow into their own little magnificent selves. Today, I asked her to write about her scholarship program which provides students with basic supplies to become successful students (supplies that sometimes we forget that are just as important to one’s academic/educational success). You can find out more about why she started this scholarship program and where you can find out more (link provided at the bottom of the post). Enjoy! 

Mack’s Packs started as an idea based on the simple fact that I am an educator and I see many students come to school with little to none of the necessary tools required to help them succeed in a classroom.  These tools can be as simple as pencils, pens, binders, and much more that one can stuff in a backpack.  With this in mind, and the sheer fact that budgets for classrooms have been dwindling I got the idea for Mack’s Packs.  I ran something similar to Mack’s Packs when I was a head dancer at a traditional powwow years ago.  To show my appreciation, I stuffed backpacks full of school supplies and had all the youth dancers come out and dance.  Then I asked community elders to take notice to the dancers and choose one they felt were proud of who they were in the powwow circle.  All the kids that received backpacks were beaming and I couldn’t help but wish that I could have provided more to the many youth that came out to dance.
Last year was my first year for doing Mack’s Packs and although I tried as I might to get the word out, I did not get a lot of entrants and in total had nine applicants.  Out of those nine I chose to give out five backpacks as they were all from the same category.    This year I am hoping for more and utilizing social media to get the word out to our youth that they can win a backpack full of school supplies for the upcoming school year.  I also received donations for the backpacks and was able to get them full of much needed school supplies as shown in the picture below. 

To participate in the contest, I had students write essays and answer “Why is cultural identity an important element on our educational journey?”  I chose this question because it one I answered throughout my own endeavors as a student.  It all began when I started to learn about my culture at the age of 12.  And then in grade seven it really hit me how important it is to know who you are when I had to take a teacher to human rights.  I had witnessed a fight between a Native and non-Native student and heard the teacher who broke up the fight mutter under her breathe “Stupid Indian”.  And I thought, she could be talking about him, me, or any other First Nation student so I told my mom, who, I told to tell the principal.  Well word got back to her that it was me and while in class, she pulled me out of the classroom and proceeded to yell at me for what seemed like a lifetime.  It was humiliating because I’m a crier and no one wants to not only have their classroom but also the senior grade class hear you crying as your being belittled.  All I remember from her rants was her telling me “Are you gonna go cry to her now?” when after running away, I was stopped by a concerned teacher and she had her arms around me leading me away to the counselor.  It didn’t end there because I decided to take her to human rights and although it did not go to court, she was instructed to apologize, was moved to a different school, and the board implemented cultural sensitivity workshops for educators.  I felt the worst for her to do was apologize because she broke down and cried. 

That was the beginning when I realized how important it was to be proud of who you are.  I still believe this and demonstrated it through the completion of my Masters in Education with my thesis being an action research based project that focused on implementing a culturally relevant classroom into a First Nations classroom.  My thesis can be found in the University of Western Ontario libraries.  I believe that First Nation students need to be proud of who they are in order to be successful in life.  I’m not stating they need to be practicing traditional ways (if that is not their beliefs), but to be proud of who they are and their history.  We have a beautiful culture that should be celebrated and a relationship to Mother Earth that should be held near and dear to our hearts.  There are many stereotypes of First Nation people and with each new generation I hope that they are broken.
With all of this in mind, Mack’s Packs focuses on First Nations students and the pride that we must have as a nation.  It provides them with some of the tools that can assist them to enter into a classroom confidently and feel ready for a new year.  This year the competition will be somewhat different with it being open to a smaller age bracket but with more categories to enter.  I hope through social media, colleagues, family and friends that word gets out that Mack’s Packs wants to give deserving students back packs to prepare them for their educational journey. 

Mack’s Packs information can be found at http://sayers6.blogspot.ca/.  All donations are utilized for backpack purchases and the costs associated with having such an opportunity for First Nations students and can be sent thru email money transfer to mackspacks5@gmail.com. 
I believe in providing our children with the necessary tools to enter a classroom and feel prepared.  Our society is one where education can open many doors and this is just one way to support our students in their scholastic endeavors. 
Respectfully,
Mackenzie Sayers

The Awesomeness of Elizabeth Comack

colonialism, colonization, Elizabeth Commack, Racialized Policing, Reproducing Order Leave a comment
The issue is not simply about how the police behave, however problematic that may be. Rather, the issue is much broader. It has to do with how racism is embedded in everyday experiences and institutional practices and implicated in our society’s prevailing patterns of marginalisation.
 
One starting point, then, is to heed the call of the TRC: to become well informed about the nature of the relationship between Aboriginal and non-Aboriginal peoples – and the ways it has been shaped by colonialism and racism.

 
— Elizabeth Commack, in “Reproducing Order” (May/June 2012)

#IdleNoMore and the changes to the Indian Act explained

#idleknowmore, activism, Idle Know More, idle no more, idlenomore, Indigenous activism One comment

I have debated a great deal about writing this blog post but after attending an event on my university’s campus, I was inspired to write about this topic and share the information I have gathered over the last little while.
I am not writing the Idle No More movement in general. Rather, I am writing about a specific topic and that is the assumption that the paternalistic, unilateral omnibus bill that received its third reading on December 12, 2012 does not mean economic prosperity or property ownership to help with economic prosperity for First Nations and its on-reserve members. When this movement began, I was a little overwhelmed with joy in how fast it was growing. It must be noted that this isn’t the first time Indigenous activism has ameliorated itself within North America. It would be a safe assumption to say that Indigenous activism and Indigenous political activism has been around since confederation of Canada.
To begin this post, I was motivated to write something after one of my amazing friends on campus asked me if I had a resource that was easy to read on the bill that received so much attention since beginning of Idle No More (INM). So I have provided some of those resources to her and also for my readers listed below.
There is an easy to read article HERE and a resource on the INM site HERE. I would recommend reading over those two articles before continuing onto reading the rest of this post because there is a wealth of information in either two resources. I would also recommend checking out this resource HERE and also reading this INM for dummies article HERE.
The article that she forwarded to me was a little bit disturbing because it was entirely wrong with respect to the references it made to the Indian Act. While this post she forwarded to me was well-written and somewhat thoroughly researched, it did not provide an accurate representation of what the real issues are with Harper’s latest assimilative efforts and misinterprets much of the resources the blogger, Mr. Bergen, makes reference too (Thank you to Mr. Bergen who provided the resources and links to them so that I didn’t have to do too much digging around). Mr. Bergen states the following,
”The explanatory notes say that the changes are as a result of concerns with the current land designation regime voiced by the National Aboriginal Economic Development Board, the Standing Senate Committee on Aboriginal Peoples, and the Auditor General.  The original land designation process was at the request of a First Nation back in 1988, so they would not have to initiate a land surrender.  I therefore find the claim of no consultation to be a little false in this case.” – Dan Bergen
The way the Indian Act works is quite intricate and sometimes it is hard to understand when you read it at first glance. The Indian Act also has several regulations attached to it, which Mr. Bergen fails to take into consideration. This initial consultation that Mr. Bergen reference was done back in 1988 and was done with the Kamloops First Nation in an effort to change the way economic development is done with the First Nation. The problem with this bill is that it assumes that all First Nations have the same needs and the same wants. That is not true. That is colonial in nature. I thought it was interesting that this post pointed out the fact that the initial consultation was done in 1988 over 20 years ago. I am sure that the needs and wants of the First Nation and its member probably changed, just like the rest of society has changed over the past 20 years. This is where First Nations are sort of left in a double bind: we cannot grow and change with the rest of society and we are expected to remain in the same position we were in 20, 50, 100, 200 years ago. Yet, when we assert our rights to sovereignty, we are ostracized for allegedly interfering with our own and the rest of the country’s economic growth.
When my friend sent me her message, I told her simply that the argument made in Bergen’s post are wrong. I told her plainly that what these changes to the Indian Act would mean for the Canadian government:
“They [the Canadian government] need to get permission but they don’t have to have everyone’s permission from the community because even the last and final decision will be made by the Minister and sometimes can be made by the Minister without the community’s input”
Mr. Bergen, who I previously referenced, even provided the awesomely inadequate summary made by the Canadian government itself. That summary can be found HERE.
In this summary, the government gives it reasoning how these changes were brought about and why these changes are being made. It references the 1988 consultation with Kamloops First Nation. It also mentions how long land designations take which is approximately 2-4 years in length. The reason it takes this long is due to the fact that First Nations take the adequate steps to ensure that all community members can vote on the land designation process, including those First Nation members who live off reserve and who have status with the First Nation. This process is explained in detail within the Indian Referendum Regulation which can be read in full detail HERE.
Another major problem with these changes is the unilateral enactment of these legislative changes. The Harper government unilaterally enacted these changes because of the agreement of only some First Nations, as cited in their summary. These changes also force First Nations to agree to a simply majority voting threshold. So instead of having a referendum wherein the majority of the electorate (meaning all those band members who are registered with the band and either living on or off reserve and are over the age of 18 years) would vote for change in land designation, the band only requires a simply majority meaning only 51% or as was described at the INM event on campus, only 51% of those attending the referendum voting process. There are also no changes in the way the Minister can act either for or against a First Nation’s request for a referendum, which means the Minister can request a referendum even if the First Nations members do not want one. The obvious major problem with this change is that it silences the voices of young people who have a truly vested interest in the way the lands that belong to their community can be used. It excludes them from the referendum process and it also potentially excludes off-reserve band members. Again, this places First Nations in a double bind: we cannot move off the reserve to obtain gainful employment or attend university/college. Rather, we must stay on reserve land and continue to, as the media has been putting it, live off the backs of the federal government and allegedly not pay our taxes (a hugely ignorant and uneducated racist stereotype).
Another assumption about these changes is that it would allow First Nations people to finally own land and gain their own economic independence. The National Post even thought it would be a good idea to have the input of a northern First Nation on-reserve doctor, who no longer practices medicine on northern First Nations, to be published. The doctor’s letter to the post can be read in full HERE minus the Appendices the doctor references in his letter. Like with many other people who do not understand the legislative changes, the doctor assumes that owning land is simple and that allowing First Nations members to own land will help with economic prosperity. It is quite entertaining to read these arguments because most of the arguments fail to take into consideration that First Nations members already own the land although as a collective. Yet, as demonstrated above, the referendum process silences the voices of young people and also potentially exclude the adequate process of informing off-reserve band members and allowing them enough time to vote in the referendum process. There are First Nations who have been developing their own land registry systems such as Six Nations here in Ontario. Much of the land issues that occur today can be partially blamed on the fact that much of the land registry software does not recognize Aboriginal title or Aboriginal land claims. Having experience with the widely used Teranet/Teraview which is a land registry/titles program used by law offices and lawyers, I know for a fact and with hands-on experience that Aboriginal title/land claims do not require a lawyer’s signature. What is done within this registry system is that the title or claims are usually placed as a side note and sometimes these notes are overlooked. Along with this, because anyone can edit these notes referencing Aboriginal titles/claims within this software without a lawyer’s signature, these claims/titles sometimes are ignored for that reason: a supposed illegitimacy. Yet, these claims/titles are not illegitimate. They are very real. This is how issues arise such as the one at Caledonia where developers assert that they have the right to develop the land because they claim they did not “know” (in other words, they ignored the note) that there was an Aboriginal land claim on the land they wished to develop. Again, this is colonial in nature.
Along with these above issues, the major issue is that the legislation is paternalistic in nature and continues to act unilaterally against the rights of Indigenous peoples and their sovereignty. As mentioned before, the final and ultimate decision, and sometimes only decision that has to be made, lies in the Minister’s hands. It can be argued that the Minister does not always act in the best interests of First Nations and its members which is evident when current Minister ordered Attawapiskat to be placed under third-party management and the Federal court later ruled that Harper’s government acted unreasonably with this decision.
In the end, for all those who are confused about INM, I suggest that you read and educate yourself on the issues at hand. These issues are not just related to Indigenous peoples and their rights. These issues affect all Canadians and even call attention to the government’s own disregard to our constitution and law. These issues also draw attention to the Indigenous activism and Indigenous political activism that happened before INM and will continue to happen so long as our rights as all Canadians continued to be ignored. INM is not just for Indigenous people; INM is concerned with the rights of all people, Indigenous and non-Indigenous, within Canada.

Sorry Ms. Christie Blatchford but you are not writing about Aboriginal culture…

Uncategorized Leave a comment


Over the last little bit, with the rise of the Idle No More movement, I have had plenty of things to think about, to feel, and to even ponder about what I should write about. I was itching to write because what helps me in times like these is writing. Just as stated in this blog written by Eric, The Normalization of Murder: 
“I was enraged. I still am. Since the shooting I have been struggling with my emotions. Normally, I try not to write publicly when rage hits – it so often leads to words I regret. But, days later, I am still raging and need an outlet. Writing is so often that for me. And, as Audra Lorde reminds us, anger often needs to be voiced and has a particular power and transformational energy. As Tuck and Yang remind me, sometimes we need to be more impatient with each other to ensure decolonization happens.”
Very nicely said.
Yet this blog won’t be about murder or the violence that was committed against the children and adults who lost their lives this past week in the states. This blog won’t even be about the Idle No More movement. This blog won’t even be about the intense emotions that I feel when I think about how our PM is ignoring Chief Spence’s hunger strike. 
It will be about my displeasure for the continuation of the stereotypical image either in mainstream media, every day discussions, or even classroom lectures on the culture of Aboriginal people. 
I can tell you as an Indigenous woman that culture has never been discussed properly or given a platform to be properly discussed in the classroom, in the media, or in every day discussions. As a criminology student, my peers are forced to discuss (sometimes awkwardly) the plight of Aboriginal people and not even with adequate education or backgrounders either before they attend class or attend university. As an individual walking down the street, I hear the racist slurs hurled toward me with futility. I have grown accustomed to the racism, the ignorance, and the stereotyping I experience on a daily basis as an Indigenous woman; they are just habits of every day people in my every day life. 
However, I would like to stress the point of my experiences. With these habitual experiences, I am not vilified for simply being a woman but also an Indigenous woman. I am not criticized for being who I am as a person. Rather, I am condemned for the group of people I belong too. It is not an assault on one person but the millions of people who have been here before me and who will come after me: it is an assault on generations of people. 
This assault happened again today after I was finished reading Christie Blatchford’s nightmare of an article after the recent release of Oppal’s Missing Women’s Commission Inquiry. Ms. Blatchford decided to take it upon herself to comment on this report, which I highly doubt she read in its entirety since she complained about the 1,448 page report. In fact, it seems that she only read the first few pages because she casually mentions that these women *might* actually be human. 
Ms. Blatchford writes, “[Oppal’s] worthy intentions are evident in the report’s title (Forsaken) and the sophomoric collage of words (“joyful, brave, loved, compassionate, mother, caring,” etc., etc.) that adorn the cover and are meant to recognize the murdered women as the complete and complicated human beings they were.“
I bolded parts of the above quote because this is her ignorance of the fact that these women went missing and/or eventually murdered because of the fact that policing agencies did not recognize them as “worthy victims.” And what does Ms. Blatchford mean about complicated? Last time I checked, all of our lives could be complicated at any point in time and with varying degrees. Yet, these women lived lives that were ignored and swept under the rug like dirt meant to be ignored by the policing agencies themselves. It is about time that we, as a society, demand the respect and humane treatment for women and girls especially those caught in the patriarchal, imperialistic system we like to call our criminal justice system (In another post, I refer this system as a system of injustice; rather than a system of justice because it is clear indication with this report that our justice system is not a *gasp* justice system).  
When it comes to the policing agencies themselves, the reality is that these women’s lives were dismissed because the police did think “they were transients prone to just disappearing.” It was not assumed, not in the first instance but in the multiple instances after the first instance. That is the way it was. There is no grey area. Even though Mr. Oppal stressed this may have been unintentional, it was not. He even stated that it was the systemic bias in the institutions themselves. I know that Christi Blatchford favours Canadian institutions and would rather have Aboriginal people charged or in jail as opposed to receiving justice themselves, because I wrote about it here. Yet when a report such as this stresses it was systemic bias that translates to deeply embedded practices and policies which ultimate means these practices and policies have to change! Not yesterday but today!
Ms. Blatchford goes on to say that these institutional changes will cost Canadians too much money. She writes, “sweeping institutional change that would, if implemented, cost the moon,” However, she fails to address that sustaining prisons/penitentiaries actually cost more per individual than making such changes as highlighted in the report itself. In fact, these costs continue to rise each year. So why not offer positive change to the systems that continue to target and cause more harm than good to Indigenous peoples themselves? It is after all the policing agencies themselves that are offered a great amount of discretion of who they will investigate as evident in this report and in Ms. Blatchford’s article. Note: I am not saying that these women should have been inside the justice system, although many of them would have been if the policing agencies so casually ignored their families/friends call for help. Rather I am highlighting the fact that the policing agencies used their discretion to ignore the missing and murdered women. 
The really interesting part about her article is that she totally undermines the importance of Aboriginal elders that Oppal’s report recommended to those who read it. This is a clear indication that Ms. Blatchford is in fact not an expert on Aboriginal culture and does not have a clue what she is talking about when she writes about the “the crisis that is the broken state of Aboriginal culture.”
In fact, the report eloquently states the following on page 23 of Volume 3, 
“Ongoing challenges include ensuring there are enough resources in Aboriginal communities to deliver….culture-based programs that recognize the importance of cultural awareness and Elder wisdom.” 
So the truth is that the Aboriginal culture that Ms. Blatchford talks about in her article is not the culture of Aboriginal people. Her article is an assault on a group of people who have been fighting for their cultural rights over the past decades which have been taken away from them due to residential schools in the past and the institutional violence that continues today. Her article is not what Aboriginal culture involves. As an Aboriginal woman who practiced her culture growing up and is striving to re-learn it from those around me, I can tell you, that her picture of what Aboriginal culture entails is not Aboriginal culture. This article and much like her other articles written on Aboriginal people are ill-informed and for the most part, ignorant and racist. 
I cannot stress this enough: this article that I am referring to in this post is demonstrative of this ignorance and racism. 

When referencing the specific profiles of Aboriginal women in Oppal’s report, Blatchford writes, “these profiles paint a ghastly portrait of a culture that is pathologically ill.” No, Ms. Blatchford, these profiles paint a picture of institutional failure and institutional violence committed against a group of women not for being an individual. Rather, the violence committed against these missing women for belonging to a specific group: Aboriginal women. 
Perhaps Ms. Blatchford was correct when she wrote, “Commenting on the tragic state of Aboriginal culture wasn’t Mr. Oppal’s mandate. Neither is it the job of the child-welfare inquiries. And let’s be frank: There is little appetite, either in institutional Canada or among Canadians, for the full conversation.” Mr. Oppal did not comment on Aboriginal culture because the lived realities of suicide, alcoholism, and violence (just to name a few) is not our culture.  And conceivably, that little appetite in institutional Canada or among Canada, is due to the systemic racism and systemic bias in mainstream media, the classroom, and our everyday lives as Indigenous peoples, especially, the racist/ignorant assaults committed by Ms. Blatchford herself against Aboriginal people. 

The big awful picture that Ms. Blatchford refers to in her article is this continued racism that institutional Canada and Canadians so habitually turn a blind eye to, or overtly ignore. 

And Ms. Blatchford herself is a culprit to this horrendous party. 

References:

Traffic in Women from the 20th Century to the 21st Century

Uncategorized Leave a comment

Traffic in Women from the 20th Century to the 21st Century

Traffic in Women by Emma Goldman is an impressive statement, for a woman of her era, with respect to prostitution and the effects of legislation in managing this social issue. Goldman writes, “There is not a single modern writer on the subject who does not refer to the utter futility of legislative methods in coping with the issue” (19). Today, there are many established organizations that fight against such legislations that continue to harm sex workers’ right to work safely and autonomously. For example, there is the Sex-Workers Outreach Project (SWOP), who supports sex workers with a focus on ending violence and stigmatization, with various chapters throughout the United States. Goldman’s work, as impressive as it is, can be paralleled with Leslie Ann Jeffrey’s Canada and Migrant Sex-Work: Challenging the ‘Foreign’ in Foreign Policy (Canada and Migrant Sex-Work). For instance, in detailing Canada’s response to migrant sex-work, Jeffrey highlights, “new immigration legislation was widely criticized for its focus on security measures over concerns about human rights” (37). While Goldman’s Traffic in Women and Jeffrey’s Canada and Migrant Sex-Work address the same topic from different viewpoints, their main premise to focus on legislation and workers’ rights is comparable. In contrast, Goldman’s essay adopts a radical feminist perspective stressing the importance of eradicating prostitution all together, as opposed to Jeffrey’s decriminalization of prostitution and inclusion of sex workers’ rights, like human rights, into Canadian society. This paper will discuss this argument through a simultaneous analysis of Goldman’s Traffic in Women and Jeffrey’s Canada and Migrant Sex-Work, and will conclude with my own reflections on sex work and how to move forward in a positive direction within a present day context.

In Traffic in Women and Canada and Migrant Sex-Work, even though discussing the same topic, the way Goldman and Jeffrey respectively define prostitution vary significantly. On one hand, Goldman defines prostitution as “a widespread evil that our industrial system leaves most women no alternative except prostitution” (10). However, she does not limit her definition of prostitution to the milieu of the industrial system. Goldman also credits the faults of society for failure to protect young women who engage in sex outside the institution of marriage. Goldman states, “It is altogether the fault of society especially it is the criminal fault of our moralists, who condemn a girl because her first sex experience has taken place without the sanction of the Church” (15). Goldman’s approach to prostitution is a perspective that is expected at the time of publication in the early 1900s since women who were beginning to assert their own rights within society at this time. On the other hand, Jeffrey advocates an entirely different perspective when it comes to defining prostitution. Jeffrey calls attention to the fact that “debates over the issue of prostitution are rarely about prostitutes” (33) and “policy decisions on prostitution, therefore, most commonly reflect concerns to construct and discipline particular identities” (33). With this statement, Jeffrey avoids defining prostitution altogether to eschew socially typing the already marginalized groups by espousing a post-colonial approach. Jeffrey writes, “Instead, I frame the issues [of prostitution] within post-colonial approaches to understanding the construction and maintenance of gendered, racial, and national borders” (33). By framing the issue of prostitution around the construction of gendered, racial, and national borders, Jeffrey is considerate of the fact that sex-workers who are often marginalized are those who are racialized women from non-Western, or underdeveloped countries seeking refuge in the West. As such, the population groups involved in the sex trade that Goldman and Jeffrey draw attention to can be contrasted. Goldman addresses the issue of the sudden emergence of white slave traffic within the States. Meanwhile, Jeffrey focuses on migrant sex workers from the global South. Goldman writes, “Our reformers have suddenly made a great discovery – the white slave traffic” (10). In contrast, while describing the landscape of migrant sex work in Canada, Jeffrey discusses the Westernized image of sex workers in the south. Jeffrey states the following: Some feminists are willing to accept that women from the global North may be choosing to enter prostitution [but] there has been widespread resistance to the idea that women from the South may also be choosing to enter into the sex-trade as the best paid option available to them. (34)

Jeffrey’s approach to sex work introduces the idea that some women are actually deciding to enter the sex trade on their own. This is where Goldman and Jeffrey also differ in addressing the issue of prostitution. While Goldman focuses on the causes of prostitution from a radical feminist perspective, Jeffrey tends to focus on sex workers’ right to work safely and with agency.

From the radical feminist perspective, Goldman tends to focus on the patriarchal structures and institutions as the causes of prostitution thereby removing agency from sex-workers. Goldman asks, “What is really the cause of the trade in women?” (10). For Goldman, the answer is simply exploitation (10). However, it is not the exploitation of women and their bodies but women and their underpaid labour. Goldman writes, “Exploitation, of course; the merciless Moloch of capitalism that fattens on underpaid labour, thus driving thousands of women and girls into prostitution” (10). By adopting this radical feminist perspective and placing blame on patriarchal structures and institutions, Goldman removes agency from sex-workers and focuses on the victimist approach. The victimist approach is defined by Jeffrey as “part of a binary discourse of victim/perpetrator that makes it impossible to talk about migrant sex-workers as rights-bearing individuals who deserve to have those rights respected” (39). Subsequently, in her post-colonial framework, Jeffrey draws attention to sex workers’ right to work safely and autonomously. Jeffrey argues, “trafficking, understood as exploitation within sex-work, occurs because of ignoring sex-workers’ rights to decriminalized and safe working conditions” (34). Thus, there is a fundamental need for sex workers’ who enter the trade autonomously to have their voices heard as opposed to their invisibility to the issue of traffic in women.

Surprisingly, while Goldman and Jeffrey differ in their approach to the issue of prostitution through its definition, population groups, and its causes, both authors correspond with their stance on legislation or legislative methods in combating prostitution or traffic in women. As highlighted in the introduction, Goldman and Jeffrey agree that the answer to changing the horrendous work conditions of sex workers lies in changing legislation. Yet, even in their agreement, one can find differences. For instance, Goldman prefers to have prostitution eradicated all together. In Traffic in Women, Goldman states, “As to a thorough eradication of prostitution, nothing can accomplish that save a complete transvaluation of all accepted values – especially the moral ones – coupled with the abolition of industrial slavery” (19). Meanwhile, Jeffrey stresses the importance of decriminalization of prostitution to focus on the civil, political, and employment rights of sex workers. Jeffrey argues “changing Canadian behaviour – most importantly through the decriminalization of sex work in Canada and the institution of policies that create good working conditions for all sex workers – is a large part of the solution” (33). One might argue that the decriminalization of sex work might lead to more violence and stigmatization against sex workers. Yet, even Goldman agrees that sex workers are more likely to experience violence and exploitation at the hands of those designed to protect society. In describing the collection of extra bribes and fines from the madam of a bawdy house in the 1900s, Goldman draws attention to this seedy revenue collected by police officers as “the blood money of its victims, whom it will not even protect” (16). This focus on victims for Goldman suggests another divergence from Jeffrey in their approach to women in the sex trade.

In Traffic in Women, through the radical feminist perspective and the victimist approach, Goldman focuses on the exploitation of women and girls as opposed to the rights of victims and sex workers. In Goldman’s discussion of child prostitution, she suggests that child labour in general is the first step to prostitution because young girls either have “no home or comfort” or are “in close proximity of the other sex” (15). Again this argument removes agency from women and girls. However, given the time period Goldman was writing in, she is possibly working within the economic systems of oppression to fight for child welfare rights and perhaps better wages for women. The way Goldman and Jeffrey differ here is that Jeffrey empathetically advocates for both the rights of sex workers and victims to prostitution.

In Canada and Migrant Sex-Work, Jeffrey introduces the idea that Canada is playing the role of a “white knight” in combating the issues of traffic in women. This approach, as outlined by Jeffrey, does more harm than it does helping the issue. Jeffrey argues that “the initial impulse behind traffic in women discourse appears to be one of protecting the rights of exploited women” (34). This impulse to protect exploited women and girls is similar to the discourse in Goldman’s Traffic in Women. Jeffrey then highlights that the “white knight” approach assumed by Canada “puts sex-workers at greater risk by strengthening the powers of police to raid sex-work establishments thus pushing the industry further underground and into less and less safe areas” (34). Today, some dispute that without legislation, like the Criminal Code of Canada or anti-human trafficking legislation, it will cause more harm to already exploited women and girls. Jeffrey counters this argument that enacting harmful legislation continues to “strengthen the hand of officials without empowering the women themselves by strengthening the powers of police” (34). So where do this idea that women and girls are being trafficked?

It is hard to isolate exactly when women in traffic starts to become an issue in either time periods. It is evident that through Emma Goldman’s Traffic in Women the issue existed over a century ago but with a focus on white women and a concern for the social conditions of women and girls at the height of the 20th century. Goldman writes, “We must rise above our foolish notions of ‘better than thou,’ and learn to recognize in the prostitute a product of social conditions” (19). For Goldman, these social conditions include, as stated earlier, the possibility of child welfare rights or better wages for women. Today the focus on traffic in women is on women in third world countries causing the issue of traffic in women to be confused with other injustices such as smuggling or other criminal matters like transnational organized crime. Jeffrey writes the following:

While ministers have tended to articulate the issue as violence against women, or an assault on human rights, and government bureaucrats talk about a modern form of slavery, most of the actual policies and programs have been shaped as a response to organized crime with very little in place to support or protect putative victims. (37)
By outlining that there is very little in place to support or protect actual victims of trafficking, Jeffrey indicates that governments should be focusing efforts on other issues, like violence against women or human rights issues. It can be theorized that the issue of traffic in women transform as social conditions for women and girls change.

At the time Goldman’s Traffic in Women was published, Nazism began to become a globalized issue and shortly after, the First World War broke out. As such, with anti-Semitism at the centre of Nazism, there was a focus on the Jewish prostitute migrating to America as indicated by Goldman. Fortunately, Goldman debunks the myth of the Jewish prostitute by outlining that “no one but the most superficial will claim that Jewish girls migrate to strange lands, unless they have some tie or reaction that brings them there” (17). Similarly, Jeffrey’s Canada and Migrant Sex-Work emphasizes the fact the rise in concern for traffic in women in the 21st century began shortly after the 9/11 attacks in the United States. Jeffrey writes: In the post-9/11 era, the current US government is actively seeking closer cooperation with Canada in order to more firmly secure the borders. At the same time it has enacted anti-trafficking policies that permit the American government to upbraid and even punish those countries that fail to live up to its own version of correct anti-trafficking procedures, which includes ensuring that countries in no way encourage prostitution through measures such as decriminalization or legalization. (38)

This indicates, within a present day context, that there is a conflation between traffic in women and women who enter the sex trade autonomously which contributes to the criminalization of women for their choice of work. Even if women do enter sex work because that is the best possible way to make a living, there should not be an amalgamation of these two separate issues. By combining sex work and forced prostitution under one umbrella, there is the invisibility of the injustices that do occur at the hands of authorities or other parties involved to either women who enter the sex trade autonomously or forcibly.

While Goldman and Jeffrey address the issue of traffic in women from different perspectives and in different time periods, they both agree that obstacles to the issue begin with legislation. For Goldman, she prefers to have prostitution eliminated all together. For many, including governments, this is the ideal outcome. Unfortunately, given that prostitution has been around for many centuries and does not look like it will be going anywhere anytime soon, the focus should shift from eradication of prostitution to supporting women and girls who enter the sex trade. One might argue that support is there for women and girls who are rescued from the sex trade. However, this argument ignores the fact that this support for women and girls come with the risk of being criminalized if they do not conform to the victimist ideals. Jeffrey stresses that the “rhetoric of protection of victims can be used to justify harsh security and criminal measures” (37) which contribute to the impression that women are viewed as a risk rather than right-bearing individuals. Consequently, Jeffrey suggests a move towards decriminalization, and for Canada, sex workers’ rights inclusion into Canadian society. With decriminalization, one might argue that this leaves the door open for increased exploitation especially for young girls. However, reasons that young girls who enter the sex trade are incomparable to the reasons for women who enter the trade.

If we continue to focus on the fact that women who enter the sex trade are forced, similar to Goldman, because they need the money, we ignore the real issues at hand. Such issues include rape, assault, or extortion, all of which can be handled under the Criminal Code of Canada without criminalizing prostitution. (Jeffrey 36). This then begs the following questions: Why does society not question minimum wage jobs that women and girls work because “they need the money”? What makes one job more acceptable or deserving of more rights and protection than the other? The continued criminalization of sex workers maintains the ideals that women are incapable of choosing to enter the sex trade instead of drawing attention to harmful legislation. Government policies and legislation should be closely examined as to how and why it continues to harm women and girls. As Jeffrey eloquently states, “Canada needs to look within and address the problems faced by sex-workers and migrant workers, particularly women” (43) and “only then will Canada set a global example on maintaining women’s and migrants’ human rights” (43). The discourse of traffic in women needs to include all voices to avoid causing invisibility of violence against women and girls at the hands of government officials and authorities. More importantly, the discourse of traffic in women needs to focus on dismantling the patriarchal, imperialistic, and paternalistic legislative approaches to prostitution in order to include women and girls as rights-bearing individuals as opposed to individuals who need to be controlled and dominated.