Last week APTN News reported that not only does the Cons’ new missing persons initiative entirely bypass Sisters In Spirit, the very group which initiated research into the nearly 600 missing and murdered FN women and girls in the first place, but SIS can no longer use the SIS name or continue their research when applying for grants.

Status of Women Minister Rona Ambrose invoked support from the Sisters’ parent organization, Native Women’s Association of Canada, to blow off criticism in the House:

“Most important, we are working with and have the support of NWAC”

and

“In fact, we have been working with NWAC for the last couple of years in order to implement these concrete actions.”

APTN News: NWAC kept out of the loop on missing women’s announcement

Native Women’s Association of Canada president Jeannette Corbiere Lavell said she was only informed by the government the day before Status of Women Minister Rona Ambrose stood in the Vancouver police department to say her government was following through on their $10 million commitment.

Lavell said the Conservative government did not consult with NWAC staff or those involved with the organization’s groundbreaking Sisters in Spirit project in the lead-up to the announcement.

“NWAC was originally led to believe that it would be invited to join in a discussion with the Department of Justice . . . about the allocation of the $10 million,” said Corbiere Lavell. “This did not occur.”

Lavell further notes that the new initiative “reinvents” the work already done by SIS [at a new RCMP centre that will use up half the money], folds their research on murdered FN women into a general pot of violence against all Canadians, and excludes provinces east of Manitoba from access to funding.

She also confirmed Status of Women’s embargo on the SIS name and continued research.

So why did Lavell stand with Ambrose on that podium in Vancouver last week and imply NWAC’s endorsement?

Because, explains Lavell, they need the money and Aboriginal women have been waiting for it. They have to comply with the new SIS-squashing rules so they can access funds to continue related work.

Nice. Someone better call Ambrose on her bullshit in the House next week.

As Cathie from Canada put it: “Trying to make it disappear just like all those women have disappeared.”

And as for Canada’s conditional endorsement of the United Nations Declaration on the Rights of Indigenous Peoples this week: See Pam Palmater at Non-Status Indians.

Today, for the first time in my life, I was concerned for my safety based on my gender.

Working in a northwest Calgary neighbourhood, I was informed by a resident that a “perv” had reached inside a woman’s bedroom window (in a house just down the street) and fondled her breasts in the middle of the night. She indicated to me the address of the man she suspected as being the “perv.” Just minutes before I had been on his doorstep.

I wasn’t afraid, though — just a little uncomfortable. I thanked the woman for the heads up, and told her, “I’m not worried. I’ll be fine.”

“You have to be!” She said. So I asked why. “Because,” she answered, “you’re a woman.”

I’ve always rejected the notion that I should live my life on edge and constantly on guard simply because I am a woman. I resent the term “weaker sex,” though I do acknowledge that yes, most women are smaller in size and stature, and therefore not as strong, as most men. So does that mean it’s time for me to admit that I am less safe in this world because I am a woman?

I’ve always known my risks — girls learn from an early age to be extra careful. We are made aware of all the potentially dangerous situations: Walking to your car alone, drinking too much while out with friends, leaving a drink unattended, using public transportation alone at night, to name a few. Not to mention methods of prevention: Use the buddy system, always tell someone where you’re going and call them when you arrive, stick to busy streets and well lit areas, don’t wear your hair in a ponytail because it’s easy for an attacker to grab, and so on. We are told throughout our lives how not to get attacked. How not to get raped.

And then the onus is on us. But why should we live in fear?

Women need to be informed and aware, not afraid. Knowledge is power. Of course, we should also be aware of dangerous situations and take preventative measures. I walk alone at night on a semi-regular basis and I’m seldom afraid. I’m always paying attention and I’m always making smart choices. I walk on the sidewalk where there’s adequate lighting, not only because it’s safe but because the sidewalk is safer than the street and the lights help me see where I’m going. But that’s just common sense, not fear.

We also need to talk to the boys.

Tell them when they’re young. Tell them throughout their lives, as vigorously as the women have been warned, not to attack or rape. Tell the boys: if you see a woman walking alone at night, leave her alone. Insist that men do not abuse their position as the “stronger sex.” Instill in them the same concern for every scenario . . . if a woman’s bedroom window is unlocked, keep your hands out of it! A good friend of mine once said, “We wouldn’t have to protect our drinks if men would stop slipping drugs in them.”

Not that I was so composed as I walked my route. (I deliver mail.) After five or six warnings in half an hour, I started panic. I felt unsafe. There I was in broad daylight, a strong, confident woman capable of self-defense, shaken. Waiting for something bad to happen. And then I was angry, because I should not be afraid.

Telling me I’m more vulnerable makes me so.

My advice? I think all women should take self-defense courses. We owe it to ourselves; if someone else isn’t going to respect our bodies and our safety, we need to be equipped to do so ourselves. As early as elementary school girls should learn how to compensate for their smaller size, and how to protect themselves and ward off threats. And we should make a life-long commitment to taking courses and encouraging other women to take courses. When schools educate females by placing “No Means No” stickers and posters in the girls’ bathrooms, they should also appear in the boys’ bathrooms. Boys should be active participants in women’s safety.

Not all men are rapists, attackers, or peeping toms and I don’t think we should treat them as though they are. But we should educate them equally so that boys grow up with an understanding of what is and isn’t acceptable behaviour, and what their role is in women’s safety.

As women we should stop allowing fear to dominate us. We don’t have to be afraid to be safe.

On Valentines Day, 2,000 to 4,000 people marched through Vancouver’s Downtown Eastside in the annual Women’s March for Missing and Murdered Women. A memorial march — not a protest — it is organized and led by women of the DTES to remember the hundreds of aboriginal women who have gone missing or been murdered in the past two decades. With no other competing agendas represented, it is the very essence of a respectful and focused peaceful grassroots march, and only by chance coincided with the other daily Olympic protests here.

CBC’s coverage of it on “The National” notwithstanding, doubtless this is the first time many people outside of Vancouver have even heard of it.

The previous day, a few hundred people took to the streets to protest an interwoven range of complaints highlighted by the Olympics — stolen aboriginal land, environmental destruction, tarsands, corporate greed, Gordon “Red Mittens” Campbell, Harper, poverty, homelessness, etc. A couple of idiots threw a Province box through a window of Olympics sponsor Hudson’s Bay Co., while others threw paint, overturned trashcans and traffic pylons, spat on police — who showed admirable restraint throughout — and insulted onlookers. Thirteen were arrested and four charged.

The media here and around the world immediately ate it up of course, and thousands hit the “agree” button in the comments section of the CBC story, endorsing those who thought the protestors should be strung up.

Many progressive bloggers were swift to distance themselves from the vandals. They pointed out that such violence only serves to alienate potential supporters. The notoriety that comes with being a self-aggrandizing asshole will only hurt the given cause, they said.

And yet something about all this outrage directed at a few brats has been bothering me ever since. We’re talking rudeness and minor property damage here, right? They spat and broke stuff. When I walked past the broken window a few hours later, it had already been replaced.

Compare this with when Robert Dziekanski, in sheer frustration at his own helplessness, broke up furniture at YVR — it did not stop us from identifying with his plight. When the very few and vastly over-reported stories of property damage in Haiti came to light, we did not condemn the frustrated perpetrators for their actions. Indeed, we thought it remarkable in the face of being denied the basic necessities of life, displayed but refused them, that such incidents were so few and far between. So why the double standard for the Olympics vandals?

It takes hope and solidarity and strength of purpose to witness, non-violently, year after year, as do the Sisters in Spirit marchers. Twenty years now, the core of them have been waiting for action on their missing sisters. They march while waiting for the rest of us to catch up and claim their cause — which includes continuing murders and disappearances — as our own.

I think the angry hooligans from the Olympics protest just don’t think they have the luxury of that kind of time to protest peacefully while waiting patiently for the rest of us to catch up to their sense of urgency about the world. I worry that our rush to condemn them means that we imagine we do enjoy that luxury.

On Monday, October 4, 2004 — that is over three years ago — Amnesty International shone a light on our nation’s worst disgrace: Aboriginal women aged 25-44 are five times more likely than other Canadian women of the same age to die of violence, according to their report. More than 500 Aboriginal women have gone missing or been murdered over the last 30 years.

That is 50 women every year. Apparently Aboriginal women are disposable. That is not what Canadians say but that is certainly the way Canadians behave. And it is mostly certainly the way Canadian police behave. Their usual method of dealing with Aboriginal women at risk, particularly prostitutes, is to ignore their safety concerns completely. Apparently working as a prostitute is a heinous enough crime to set you outside the protection of the law. And apparently raping, beating, and killing Aboriginal women who are prostitutes is also okay because we rarely find and prosecute the assholes who do these things.

So it has been three years. What has been done? In 2004, the Native Women’s Association of Canada (NWAC) launched the Sisters in Spirit campaign to raise awareness of the high rates of “racialized and sexualized violence” against Aboriginal women. I went to the Sisters in Spirit website and found a few announcements and absolutely nothing else. Absence of information on the web does not mean that nothing has been done but, when we look at the recommendations coming out of the Amnesty International report and compare them to what both Liberal and Conservative governments have actually done, it is clear that nobody is taking responsibility.

How does an issue this important get left under the carpet? Does the push for Aboriginal self-government mean that the various governments of Canada can relinquish responsibility while Aboriginal governments stumble? Is responsibility for the security of Aboriginal women in nobody’s back yard?

If not, we know whose back yard many will end up in.

Perhaps these fellas feel that the campaign against violence against women has impacted policy around access. But Canadian law is pretty clear: unless a parent has demonstrated that they are unfit, they have an equal right to their children. If that is not the case, at least pick a credible place to present the issue to Canadians.

Meanwhile, one in three women on the globe has been brutalized. What the hell! It would be a different story if more women had control of policy and the agencies that enforce it. Give women at risk their own security force, their own surveillance cameras. But even here in Canada, only 20.8 per cent of seats in parliament are held by women (if we use the term loosely). Maybe that’s because most of us are stuck at home during the day and working nights because we cannot find safe day care for our kids for — what is it? — 100 bucks a month? Is there no concept of how public policy actually plays out in the lives of women? Duh.

Conferences are very good. Seizing the reins of real power is better. Let’s hope this conference ends with some plans to get more whuppass women elected (if we can find any who aren’t exhausted).