Issues Surrounding Indigenous Gender Roles: The Emic and Etic Inclusion

(Tina)Theresa Hannah-Munns
First Mini-reflection paper
ING 258 - Lorena Sekwan Fontaine
September 20th, 2005

Issues Surrounding Indigenous Gender Roles: The Emic and Etic Inclusion

Complex and interconnected issues and debates are presented throughout the six articles assigned as readings that lead to this reflection, with both insider (emic) and outsider (etic) perspectives that focus our attention at a reconceptualized portrayal of the impact of these issues that occur centred around the eurocultural framework of ‘gender roles’ within Indigenous societies dealing with colonization. Though gender roles is the central theme, these articles do not redelegate roles to packaged categories of either feminine or masculine conceptualization; instead, these articles confront the lack of Indigenous women’s input into the documentation and representation of traditional roles in textual sources, as well as within the social structures of historical settings.

With the emphasis on the lack of Indigenous women’s input, descriptions of the issues are highlighted, with the interpretation of Indigenous women gender roles more prominent than the male roles, which are only addressed if central to the discussion of the women’s interpreted roles and their issues. As such, the power (or lack of) assigned to the pre-contact or pre-colonized Indigenous woman is discussed with the understanding that these complex issues arise from the context of colonial processes that have far reaching impact on the identity of Indigenous women and on Indigenous societies in their entirety. No concluding answers are intended; rather, the processes of sex discrimination, race discrimination, gender biases, and the subordination of Indigenous populations throughout colonial history is referenced, resulting in my etic conclusion that colonial history has attempted to distort and dismantle Indigenous knowledge systems and structures by first dismantling the power and prestige that women may have held in their own communities.

Some of these articles are known to be written by outsiders to the Indigenous cultures (etic analysis), with their focus of study being self-attendant to how their own eurocultural frameworks have impacted the study of Indigenous gender roles as eurocultural objects; Laura Peers is a recognized eurocultural historian who critiques her own culture’s practice of recording history through eurocentric research, interpretion, and documentation methods. While Peers’ feminist analysis notes the male-orientated activities that support gender biases in the secondary literature about Saulteaux subsistence, Brodribb’s etic analysis is more subtle; a very close inspection of her use of pronouns is the only reference to her eurocultural membership. An example of this is on page 96, within her discussion of the eurocultural usage of dichotomic frameworks that impose “onto egalitarian societies the role structures of our own culture” (italics mine). She brings forward contemporary Indigenous women voices into the feminist discourse about Indigenous women roles while adding to the critique of patriarchal and colonial impact on the documentation of these roles.

Along with Peers and Brodribb, Kathleen Jamieson’s eurocultural frame of reference gives a detailed etic historical glimpse of the political impact of the Indian Act on Indigenous women and the resulting effect of the sexual discrimination around the policies contained within it and surrounding it. Her etic analysis is derived from her political expertise and her feminist theoretical disposition and lends authority to the debate without stepping over the line and talking for Indigenous people. Unfortunately, she does not add any Indigenous women voices into her presentation, with no Indigenous references contained within her bibliography.

The etic voices are important in providing a bridge for communication into the privileged (thus inequitable) setting of the mainstream’s eurocentric discourse about Indigenous peoples as ‘objects’ to be studied, with the etic critique turned onto their own emic interpretative processes. Rather than the continued exploitation of Indigenous knowledge as an ‘object’ to be packaged and marketed by eurocultural views, scholars interested in Indigenous topics have started to understand their own systematic contributions to the perpetuation of colonial practices. Instead of the continued objectification of other human beings and their cultural products, many eurocultural scholars are starting to allocate their voice alongside the Indigenous voices so that the continued discrimination and stereotypes can be put to rest, or better yet, transformed into an analysis in order to become self-aware of the eurocultural processes that subjectively color many of our interpretations of the world.

While etic analysis provides the perspective of distance that can be of aid, these analyses must be balanced by a larger supply of emic voices. Up to this point in history (and even includes our contemporary time since Indigenous studies seems to occur within two seemingly isolated camps), the prevalent interpretation about Indigenous societies has been the male outsider voices of eurocultural missionaries, fur traders and agents. Emic voices must be emphasized in order to correct the misunderstandings, misconstruances, and misconceptions that have occurred already. Replacing eurocultural male interpretation with eurocultural female representations is not the answer; Indigenous voices are needed, specifically women voices to balance the more prominently quoted male Indigenous presence in print.

Emma LaRocque is one such voice who not only tackles the lack of indigenous women representation in the history of Canada, but also confronts the current dilemma encountered by contemporary indigenous women scholars who deal with the dominating and subjugatory relationships of both gender inequality and race inequality that occurs in academia. Highlighting race and sex as bifocal tools used to oppress Indigenous women, LaRocque speaks from within her everyday etic experience while theoretically constructing arguments and formulating critiques against academic discriminatory practices. Through the inclusion of her personal voice, a call to action is expounded, rather than Indigenous women waiting to be acted on; this call is dynamic, much like her description of the diversity of knowledge and ways of knowing.

While LaRocque balances her insider voice through scholarly methods of writing and sourcing, Marshall uses the emic process of storytelling to show how Indigenous knowledge systems can give us representations of more fluid traditional roles rather than utilizing the more eurocultural framework of ‘gender’ categories. The teachings of humility are given through a third person, the husband of the woman who is both courageous and humble. Here is an example of a woman who fulfills the limited definition of “woman’s role” while also accomplishing a more heroic feat than any man can as he tries to fulfill his own gender role. This narrative about humility taught me to be humble in my own interpretation of dichotomous data, or in setting up dichotomous frameworks since there will always be the narratives that incorporate and/or transcend the simplistic structure of theory.

While the previous articles seemed to have interconnected themes or similarities within their discussions, Fernandez’s article is unique in its representation of both emic and etic voice. Being male and writing about gender equality, with the primary topic being Indigenous women’s roles, his perspective is that of an outsider. Though he is of mixed Ojibway-Celtic ancestry, his perspective is that of an insider, especially since both lineages where oppressed in similar fashion (for example, both endured residential school systems and class oppression, though both did not have the added weight of race oppression). Yet his genuine interest in the subject of race inequality allows for him to stay true to his own voice without speaking for women or for groups of Indigenous people. His article contains analysis on how colonialism and gender inequality impact Indigenous male gender roles and contains recommendations for his fellow Indigenous males to correct inequality from within their own communities through their own individual actions.

Overall, these articles empower students to understand the diversity of Indigenous gender roles in discourse, endowing a taste of the subject’s complexity, and helps the reader to reconceptualize different frames of reference that may better suit the performance of duties that enabled Indigenous societies to flourish, both before contact and after. Resiliency and resourcefulness is components of their groups’ survival; though all Indigenous institutions have been impacted, there are strands of lineages that remain intact within the many different Indigenous groups that make up Indigenous societies as a trope. Language can still be utilized to design new categories from within living indigenous knowledge systems; maybe it is time to break out of the didactic categories of fe/male gender roles and seek the tropes from within the Indigenous language structures.

One personal example of this is the lack of gender differentiation within the nēhiyāwak (Cree) language. Instead of ‘s/he’, categories are classified by ‘in/animate.’ The roles that are attributed to gender are all animate roles that sustain life. Within the traditional nēhiyāwak values, all abilities and skills are gifted to human beings to empower life and must not be disrespected. My daughter is two-spirited, and I have relatives that are contrary, or backwards. These people sometimes are gifted with skills (or visions to be acted upon) that defy the limiting frames of gender. My daughter for example, sometimes helps male lodgemakers around the sweat, as doorkeeper or firekeeper, which tends to be viewed statically as a man’s task. Many old men and women have told me that if she would have been a good hunter in the old days, her skill would have been utilized. She may not have been included in the group hunting activities, but she would have been allowed to forage and hunt as fits her skills. As an Irish mother, these teachings validate that bringing my daughter to her father’s culture is the best gift I could have given her since her two-spirited nature is not always supported within the heterocentric eurocultural society.

Many questions arose in reading these six articles, but for me, the most important question was how the roles are discussed in the perspective and context of the writers. Questions such as how roles have changed over time and the images that represent these roles, the various stereotypes and their impact on identity formation, are all issues that must be allocated attention in further mini-reflections. There is simply too many issues to be discussed in six small pages. Hopefully, the insider and outsider perspective categories have allowed for a more diverse yet comprehensive view of the issues that surround gender roles, and possibly move towards a recategorization of indigenous roles, and possibly the gender roles delegated within the mainstream structure, that moves away from the limited context of gender into a more Indigenous framework of conceptualization.



References

Peers, Laura. (?). “Subsistence, Secondary Literature, and Gender Bias: The Saulteaux,”.

Brodribb, Somer. (1984). “The Traditional Roles of Native Women in Canada and the Impact of Colonization,” The Canadian Journal of Native Studies, IV, 1: 85-103.

LaRocque, Emma. (?). “The colonization of a Native Woman Scholar,” .

Jamieson, Kathleen. (?). “Sex Discrimination and the Indian Act,” Arduous Journey: Canadian Indians and Decolonization, edited by J. R. Ponting. McClelland &Stewart.

Fernandez, Carl. (?). “Coming Full Circle: A Young Man’s Perspective on Building Gender Equality in Aboriginal Communities,” Strong Women Stories: Native Vision and Community Survival, edited by Kim Anderson & Bonita Lawrence. Sumach.

Marshall III, Joseph M. (?). “Humility, Unsiiciyapi,” The Lakota Way: Stories and Lessons for Living. Viking.