Making Space for Indigenous Feminism, 3rd Edition

In the first few weeks after I submitted my dissertation, I went through a weird phase where I could not think about it. I had a secret fear that it was embarrassingly bad to the degree that it was basically gibberish. So I literally could not look at it. I did some rehearsals, but I did them from memory. Eventually I did look at it, and aside from one random half sentence that appears to be a copy and paste error, it thankfully is not non-sensical. Anyhow, now I am in a new weird phase where I can't work on it (because it's been submitted) but I have all of this weird energy. But I can't start something new, because I haven't defended yet. So I'll just keep blogging stuff that I read. 

Making Space for Indigenous Feminism, 3rd Edition is a beautiful book. I have the second edition, and if people are wondering, this edition is all new content. 

The introduction is written by Joyce Green, who edited the previous editions, and Gina Starblanket, who edited this edition. They reflected on the symposium that led to the first edition, and how an elder who attended the conference helped them overcome the misconception that feminism was not traditional, and so if they were feminist, then they were not really Indigenous. They also reflected on the symposium in Victoria which was held in order to workshop papers which would eventually become this book. I like it when books are the product of an event. It adds a layer of cohesion to the work. The introduction is an excellent overview of what makes Indigenous feminism distinct. I don't think I read every chapter, but out of the chapters that I did read, a few chapters stood out to me. 

Following the introduction, the first chapter is by Joyce Green. She uses her intergenerational autobiography to illustrate the complexities of Indigenous identity. It is very generous of her to share so much of herself. There is a lot of discussion of theory and politics in the book, and having it anchored in Joyce's life experiences helps one understand what is at stake. 

Gina Starblanket's chapter on Red Ticket Women. Red Ticket Women were a legal category of Indigenous women who married out and lost their Indian status under the Indian Act, but remained treaty. These women did a lot of advocacy in and out of their community in order to try to regain recognition. Part of their advocacy included trying to convince their own communities that when women and their children lost status, it didn't just impact individuals, it hurt the community as a whole. 

Kelly Aguirre wrote a chapter on Indigenous Feminist and Queer Two-Spirit Storywork. The title of the work is really cheeky (Decolonization is also metaphorical), and the article is in part a response to Tuck and Yang's article Decolonization is not a metaphor. The biggest insight that I gained from reading Aguirre's article is that some resurgence narratives could be interpretated as ableist and anti-intellectual. I read the chapter, and it made me think, and I am still thinking about it, because this is not something that I had noticed before. 

There's also a chapter in which Gina Starblanket, Leanne Simpson, and Robyn Manyard converse. I recommend reading that chapter if you're on the fence about whether or not to read Rehearsals for Living, because if you like this chapter, you'll like Rehearsals for Living. 

Overall, I highly recommend this book. 

Olúfẹ́mi Táíwò and contested definitions of decolonisation

iTunes and Amazon keep recommending that I read Against Decolonisation: Taking African Agency Seriously. I finally caved and listened to it. Here's the publisher's description: 

Decolonisation has lost its way. Originally a struggle to escape the West’s direct political and economic control, it has become a catch-all idea, often for performing ‘morality’ or ‘authenticity’; it suffocates African thought and denies African agency.

Olúfẹ́mi Táíwò fiercely rejects the indiscriminate application of ‘decolonisation’ to everything from literature, language and philosophy to sociology, psychology and medicine. He argues that the decolonisation industry, obsessed with cataloguing wrongs, is seriously harming scholarship on and in Africa. He finds ‘decolonisation’ of culture intellectually unsound and wholly unrealistic, conflating modernity with coloniality, and groundlessly advocating an open-ended undoing of global society’s foundations. Worst of all, today’s movement attacks its own cause: ‘decolonisers’ themselves are disregarding, infantilising and imposing values on contemporary African thinkers.

This powerful, much-needed intervention questions whether today’s ‘decolonisation’ truly serves African empowerment. Táíwò’s is a bold challenge to respect African intellectuals as innovative adaptors, appropriators and synthesisers of ideas they have always seen as universally relevant.

I think that I would not have been so open to reading it if I hadn't already been annoyed with the way that some people are using the word decolonisation. For example, when I hear calls to decolonise the police, I can't help but to feel that the word is often being used wrong. The history of policing as a mechanism to violate Indigenous peoples' rights is well documented. See for example The Report of the Aboriginal Justice Commission of Manitoba. In my mind, true decolonisation demands abolition. I'm not against decolonisation. But I am troubled by the way some people characterize decolonisation. And so I did listen to the book. 

The premise of the book is that decolonisation has lost its way. I actually think that a different framing would be that there is currently a power struggle going on with respect to what the words means. People are using it for all sorts of things, and rather than being against decolonisation, I think that the focus could be on more carefully defining decolonisation and becoming more vocal about its misuse.

I think the book sets up a false dichotomy between decolonisation and Indigenous agency. Indigenous agency is the heart of decolonisation. The book was valid, however, in pointing out that if people in positions of authority have a fixed and predetermined set of criteria regarding what decolonisation "looks like", and then they unilaterally impose it upon Indigenous people, then  they are actually recolonising. 

Overall, I felt like the book was intentionally provocative. I would recommend reading this book if you have the capacity to be fuelled by controversy. I also recommend reading this book in order to be aware of what critics of decolonisation are saying. I do not recommend reading this book if you are working on decolonising projects and are already feeling unsupported, as this book would be discouraging to read if you were already in a position of feeling unsupported.