
Murders and disappearances of Indigenous women called a 'Canadian genocide' - DoreenMichele
https://www.cbc.ca/news/indigenous/genocide-murdered-missing-indigenous-women-inquiry-report-1.5157580
======
undersuit
I'd like to bring attention to the size of this issue. It's not Indigenous
women in Canada, it's all of America.

[https://billingsgazette.com/news/state-and-
regional/mmiw/](https://billingsgazette.com/news/state-and-regional/mmiw/)

[https://www.daily-times.com/story/news/local/navajo-
nation/2...](https://www.daily-times.com/story/news/local/navajo-
nation/2019/04/02/new-mexico-law-missing-murdered-indigenous-women-task-
force/3345261002/)

[https://www.telesurenglish.net/news/Almost-500-Guatemalan-
Wo...](https://www.telesurenglish.net/news/Almost-500-Guatemalan-Women-Still-
Missing-Despite-New-Law-20170417-0027.html)

[https://www.sovereign-bodies.org/mmiw-database](https://www.sovereign-
bodies.org/mmiw-database)

------
DoreenMichele
The actual report:

[https://www.mmiwg-ffada.ca/final-report/](https://www.mmiwg-ffada.ca/final-
report/)

------
jbob2000
I’m not understanding why it’s a genocide. It’s not one entity performing
these killings and it’s not organized; lots of indigenous women are just in
shitty situations, that doesn’t make it a genocide. We’re talking about ~100
deaths a year here, that’s the equivalent of gang violence in some run down
American cities and we don’t call that a genocide.

~~~
DoreenMichele
Just an FYI in response to your statement that you don't understand.

[https://twitter.com/apihtawikosisan/status/11352398862172733...](https://twitter.com/apihtawikosisan/status/1135239886217273347?s=19)

~~~
ramblerman
A tweet from some random is not typically how we define concepts.

Especially when the words are internationally agreed upon already.

~~~
DoreenMichele
She's a First Nations Canadian author subject matter expert.

[https://apihtawikosisan.com/](https://apihtawikosisan.com/)

------
duxup
Genocide is supposed to mean something a bit different than the terrible
things that this article describes.

I really object to its usage here, the situation is terrible but genocide is
something else.

------
a0-prw
Who does the raping and killing ? Is there any reliable data on that ? If it
is predominantly people of European descent I will buy "genocide", otherwise,
it's "just" another indigenous culture falling apart from being exposed to
European culture. Oh, sorry ... we can't look at the "race" of the
perpetrators, because that would be racial profiling.

------
vivekd
I could have topd them how to prevent more murdered or missing aborigional
woman and it would have cost a lot less than $ 92 million

1\. Take some of that 92 million to run a bus service along the highway of
tears and similar areas where lots of female hitch hikers go missing- or even
just not arrest private entities who dont have state permission from running
their bis service.

2\. Create acess points and resources for indigenous women who want to find
work on cities.

3\. Actually give native people their tribal land instead of doing this thing
where government cotrols sale and use of the land and natives have "fake
ownership" where they get to live there. Either that or just be honest and
admit youre not giving them the land and compensate with money.

4\. Make native governments actual governments that people might actually care
enough to vote for rather than puppet governments that have to have every
decision approved by the corrupt Indian Affairs branch of government.

[https://www.vice.com/en_ca/article/ava4kk/canadas-first-
nati...](https://www.vice.com/en_ca/article/ava4kk/canadas-first-nations-
reserves-have-a-faulty-system-of-government)

You got that government of Canada? You want to stop the murser of Canadian
indigenous women all you have to do is stop facilitaing their deaths and
creating circumstances where their deaths are inevitable. You dont have to
spend 92 million on beurocratic reports that go nowhere.

What do we get for our 92 million $ report. We get crap like make native
languages official languages like French. What does that mean - school kids
learn every single native language on school like we do French? Every
government agency has to have someone who speaks every one of the various
native languages? The 92 million dollar report is fulled with quaint,
unrealistic solutions that don't solve the problem. How is that going to stop
these women from dying.

What native communities need to do is stop playing ball declare war and start
stockpiling munitions. They need to fight back violently against the opressive
tyrannical structure that has led to so many deaths in their communities. Only
then do we have any hope of change. Because until they start shooting our
government is going to keep this ridiculous structure that keeps natives
imprisoned

~~~
sonnyblarney
"What native communities need to do is stop playing ball declare war and start
stockpiling munitions. "

The aboriginal women dying, are doing so at the hands of aboriginal men
unfortunately.

While historical social structures are obviously relevant, the $100M political
show actually tried to move away form what the government already knows (i.e.
intra familial violence) so as to somehow point the blame at external causes,
which is shameful.

We should have invested the $100M in practical programs to help communities
move on.

From Gov. Canada's own web site concerning victimization surveys [1] have a
gander:

"Research reveals that Aboriginal women experience dramatically higher rates
of violent victimization than non-Aboriginal women do (Proulx and Perrault
2000; Hylton 2002; Brzozowski et al. 2006). Violence within the domestic
context is the most pervasive form of victimization experienced by Aboriginal
women. Nearly one-quarter (24%) of Aboriginal women in Canada reported having
been assaulted by a current or former spouse, compared to 7% of non-Aboriginal
women (Brzozowski et al. 2006). Results from other studies suggest that this
figure may be as high as 90% in some Aboriginal communities (Ontario Native
Women’s Association 2007).

The literature shows that Aboriginal women consistently report a rate of
partner violence much higher than their non-Aboriginal counterparts, even
after controlling for relevant social variables. For instance, while living
common law is associated with a 13 percent greater risk of victimization for
non-Aboriginal women, the associated risk for Aboriginal women is 217 percent
higher (Brownridge 2008).

Sexual assault against women is particularly prevalent in Northern Canada
where there is a much higher proportion of Aboriginal people in each of the
territories than in the provinces. In 2002, the rate of sexual assault in
Nunavut was 96.1 for every 10,000 people compared to the overall rate in
Canada of 7.8 in every 10,000 people (Levan 2001). Aboriginal women have also
been found to be greatly over-represented as sex trade workers compared to
non-Aboriginal women (Oxman-Martinez et al. 2005; Royal Canadian Mounted
Police 2006). In one study of the Vancouver sex trade, 52 of 101 women
interviewed were Aboriginal (Farley et al. 2005). The overwhelming majority of
these women reported both a history of childhood sexual abuse by multiple
perpetrators and a history of rape and other assaults while working as
prostitutes."

[1] [https://www.justice.gc.ca/eng/rp-pr/cj-
jp/victim/rd3-rr3/p3....](https://www.justice.gc.ca/eng/rp-pr/cj-
jp/victim/rd3-rr3/p3.html)

~~~
vivekd
I think you are absolutely right - but the continuation of these structures
and conditions that make violence against women ripe, easy and prevalent are
due to structures that the government set in place. If natives actually owned
the land - they would be able to sell and mortgage it - and use the money to
move off reserve or start a business or whatever.

If tribal counsels weren't just puppet governments, people might actually
trust them and they might have competence to fix the situation.

Right now Natives are almost under government stewardship - that condition
doesn't seem like it will change any time soon and their situation seems to
degarde the longer it continues - which will lead to more deaths and
victimizations.

I think to connect our points simply, we could say

1\. Yes many of these women are victimized at the hands of men from their
communities

2\. Many of their communities are impoverished and under 3rd world conditions

3\. Abuse and victimization are more likely under such conditions

4\. Women are less able to escape victimization under such conditions

5\. The government created these conditions and propagates these conditions

~~~
sonnyblarney
No, I disagree on so many levels.

A) the land ownership issue is existential and could blow up the entire
country. Every treaty is also different.

B) This is not a money problem. If aboriginal communities were given the land
to sell, it would be sold to outside interests and the money would be gone in
a generation.

C) The 'system' that they are pointing at are the residential schools - they
were ended a long time ago.

D) Many reserves have a high degree of self governance. Self governance
requires responsibility. The last government forced transparency among local
aboriginal communities and it showed widespread corruption. That said - many
communities were managed very well i.e. 'as diverse as the country itself'.

E) The government does not create or propagate anything: 35 million Canadians
live very well in Canada, there's no reason most Aboriginals could not live
off reserve and do the same things that the rest of Canadians do. Obviously,
not an option for some, but for most - absolutely.

We need pragmatic studies, pragmatic programs, oversight, accountability - but
in the end, there is no way that anyone else can lift the aboriginal
communities out of whatever conditions. They have to do it themselves. Today
we could hand them money, education, jobs - and it still wouldn't work, so
there are underlying issues to work on.

~~~
vivekd
Im going to respond in a limited way because I think this is leading to a big
fruitless debate. But notions like limiting native ability to sell the land
b/c quote "it would be gone in a generation" is paternalism and I would
characterize it as racist perternalism because it assumes natives are not
rational actors who can decide their fates. It assumes they need government to
keep them from squandering their land. And its this kind of paternalism that
has characterized the governments policy towards natives and has led to the
current sad state of affairs.

Second its one or the other -either you are paternalistic and take
responsibilty for the state of many Natives or you give them autonomy and they
take responsibility for themselves. Wanting control because you think they
cant responsibily manage their land and resourses but still blaming them for
their shortcomings like tribal corruption is an inconsistent position you are
taking.

