68:. For an Indigenous woman to maintain status, she had to marry an Indigenous man. If a non-Indigenous woman married an Indigenous man, she would be designated with Indian status. If an Indigenous woman married a non-Indigenous man, she lost her Indian status, and so did her children. Another example of gender discrimination seen in the Indian Act can be seen with the “double mother” clause. If the child's grandmother on their dad's side, and if their mother only received status from marrying an Indian, they would lose their status at the age of 21. The loss of status led to an imbalance between those with power and those without, which divided itself along gender lines. Indigenous women subject to these gender discriminatory rules set out by the Indian Act had to relocate from the reserve, lost all their rights, and lost their
222:
created, called the 'second generation cut-off,' which was supposed to be non-discriminatory based on gender. In this cut-off, if two consecutive generations of status
Indians, no matter what gender, married a non-status Indian, the third generation, or the grandchild, would not have status. This still included gender discrimination as the children of a woman who regained status after Bill C-31 would have 6(2) status, meaning that they would not be able to pass on their status to their children. For men, their children would have 6(1) status, meaning that their grandchildren would also have either 6(1) status, or 6(2) status, as the men never lost their status before 1985, and their wives gained status even if they were not Indigenous.
210:. This bill included an amendment to section 12(I)(b) of the Indian Act to eliminate gender discrimination. With this new legislation, women who lost their status, and their children, were allowed to re-obtain it, and from then on, women would not lose their status if they married a non-Indigenous man. Non-Indigenous women would also no longer gain status if they married an Indian man. Also, although the government was still in control of the legal status of Indians, Bill C-31 allowed band-membership to be controlled by the First Nations bands. Additionally, Bill C-31 outlined the different types of status, which are 6(1), in which both parents of the person are status Indians, and 6(2), in which only one parent has status.
178:
them, and that the reserve lands would be taken away as a result of the group's advocacy. The group faced opposition from its very inception, and only survived due to the determination of its founders. A major source of opposition came from women who had married into band membership. According to the
Steinhauer, at the time, these women felt threatened by the advocacy of the women who had married out of their band membership. Many well known Cree women were against them in the early days, including Agnes Bull and Helen Gladue.
195:
proposed bill had the intention of amending the Indian Act but made no reference to marital or gender discrimination. Due to the strong condemning of this bill to the committees reviewing it, IRIW gained support from those, especially women, in
Parliament. Their protesting gained significant attention nationally and also from government members, such as Gordon Fairweather, the Human Rights Commissioner, who publicly voiced their support that the Indian Act needed to be amended.
27:, Kathleen Steinhauer and Nellie Carlson. IRIW used the voices of many Indigenous women who had lost their status across Canada to protest and stand up to the government. Due to their activism, Bill C-31, an amendment to the Indian Act, was implemented in 1985. Bill C-31 protected the status of Indian women and brought the Indian Act in line with the increasing gender equality of the time.
113:
Irish-American electrical engineer in New York, she lost her Indian Status. Earley held a fellow Mohawk woman named
Florence in her arms as she died, and believed her cause of death to have been the stress of losing her status and being ordered to sell her house and leave the reserve. Additionally, after her marriage to Gordon Margetts in 1960,
60:, Indigenous women who married non-Indigenous men did not lose their status. Instead, they kept their status but were labelled as “red ticket holders.” Having this distinction meant that these women were still legal Indians, but they lost all right associated with being Indian, such as having the power to advocate for their rights on the
186:
handled well. In the early days, the group didn't have much money for lobbying, conferences, or significant organizing. What the group did have came mainly from family allowance cheques from the government. Long-distance phone calls fell to Nellie
Carlson, who received money from her husband to do so.
194:
A large achievement of Indian Rights for Indian Women was that this was a national activist group that fought for rights for nearly 20 years. Important protests took place in the late 1970s and early 1980s. In 1977, Bill C-25 was passed in the House of
Commons and sent to the Senate for review. This
149:
Earley and
Margetts took on the roles of co-presidents immediately. The Alberta end of the organization, consisting primarily of Carlson, Margetts and Steinhauer, began to work with leading male Indigenous activists to foreground the issue of gender discrimination. Marie Small Face Marule, mentioned
96:
had brought an action against the
Canadian government for discrimination under the Indian Act, after she had lost her status for marrying a non-Indigenous man. Around this time, Indian women in Canada took advantage of the trend of activism and started to collectivize in the fight for their rights.
145:
A meeting of the Voice of
Alberta Indian Women group was held in Saskatoon in March 1968. In attendance were all of the founders except for Nellie Carlson, who had pneumonia: Steinhauer, Earley, Lavell, Marule, Margetts, and Monica Turner, who went on to become the group's first Eastern president.
129:
Prior Indian women's rights groups coalesced and resulted in the formation of Indian Rights for Indian Women in 1967. In the late 1960s, Kathleen
Steinhauer wrote to several other women who she thought might be opposed to Section 12(I)(b) of the Indian Act. She contacted Jeannette Corbière Lavell,
185:
Another significant challenge the group faced was funding. Since IRIW was a collective made up of non-status Indigenous women, the government did not fund them like other Indian organizations. Much of their funding was regularly in jeopardy as a result of concerns that the finances were not being
181:
Nellie Carlson cites opposition from the women's own families and close friends. Her own grandparents, and band councillors on her reserve, punished her for speaking out. The women often faced aggressive opposition, especially from Indigenous men, who referred to them as "squaw libbers". Kathleen
177:
Indian Rights for Indian Women often faced opposition. As Kathleen Steinhauer stated, "A lot of our difficulties were within our own communities, from our own people." Some felt as though changing the section on gender and marriage in the Indian Act would make the treaties invalid or even destroy
198:
Along with protesting, IRIW drafted a policy paper during a large conference in Alberta 1978. This paper discussed ways to define an Indian using a quarter blood-quantum, as this would be gender-neutral. It also proposed giving back status to the women who became enfranchised as well as all the
221:
Although Indian Rights for Indian Women fought for rights for Indigenous women, and the group played a big role in the implementation of Bill C-31, another outcome is that gender discrimination in the Indian Act did not stop despite the group's efforts. With this legislation, a new concept was
202:
An almost-success can be seen with Bill C-47, which was introduced by the Liberals and was intended as a non-discriminatory amendment to the Indian Act. This was the first attempt at a change to the Indian Act that would have taken gender discrimination into account. This is a success as the
134:
Then one day Marie rang up and said: "Call your women together. I'm coming to Edmonton." So I called Nellie and Nellie phoned Jenny Margetts and Myrtle Calahasen. We met here, and sat around this table. Gordon Margetts, Jenny's husband, was here. Some guys came here to listen. Marie was very
112:
Formerly Nellie Makokis, Nellie Carlson married Elmer Carlson in 1947. The government revised the Indian Act in 1951, ruling that women who married non-Indian men, and their children, were no longer status Indians, and could not live on reserve. Similarly, when Mary Two-Axe Earley married an
23:. The group's primary goal was to eradicate Section 12, paragraph 1(b) of the Indian Act, which removed the Indian status of Indigenous women who married non-Indigenous men, and prohibited them from passing status onto their children. Among others, the group was founded by
225:
Also, with bands being able to control their own membership, IRIW feared that although there was less legal gender discrimination, that women would be discriminated against within their own bands, as the bands would be able to decide who has band membership and rights.
168:
The group faced pressure from national women's groups, including the Native Women's Association of Canada, to expand their focus to other important issues, such as foster care. However, the group remained steadfastly focused on Section 12(I)(b) of the Indian Act.
100:
Before the solidification of the group known as Indian Rights for Indian Women, there were regional political activist groups that preceded it. One of these was a group called Equal Rights for Indian Women, which was formed in 1967 by Mohawk activist
203:
protesting and hard work of IRIW led to the acknowledgement of the discrimination Indigenous women faced, and a concrete step taken by the government in attempting to fix it. However, once the bill reached senate, it was voted against.
44:
societies. In others, men were the leaders, and men and women had different roles in society but they were considered equals. With the Indian Act, women lost numerous rights. For example, they lost their equality, as the Indian Act is
56:. When assigning status, the Government of Canada disregarded Indigenous systems that were already in place for determining identity and instead used a patrilineal system. This means status was passed down through men. Before total
249:
Two-Axe Earley, M. (1994). Indian Rights for Indian Women. In H. Dagenais & D. Piche (Eds.) Women, feminism and development / Femmes, FĂ©minisme et DĂ©veloppement (pp. 429-433). Montreal: McGill-Queen's University
218:
One of the main outcomes of IRIW's activism and advocacy, which is the creation of Bill C-31, led to more than 100 000 women and their children to either get their status back or be given status.
162:
The primary goal of Indian Rights for Indian Women was always to end Section 12 (I)(b) of the Indian Act, the section that mandated the loss of Indian status for women who married non-Indian men.
80:
Women's rights movements started to become more relevant and popular in the 1960s and 1970s. Increased activism in Canada was partly in response to government actions, such as the
207:
622:
135:
supportive. She got us started. "This is what you must do," she said. She wrote it all down for us, the legal resolutions, all of it. And we were off.
109:, calling themselves the Ad Hoc Committee on Indian Women's Rights in the early days. Another contributing group was Voice of Alberta Indian Women.
105:
in Quebec. Likewise, Nellie Carlson and Kathleen Steinhauer founded a group in Alberta for the particular purpose of combating the discriminatory
569:
165:
Subsidiary goals of the group included obtaining the rightful Indian Band assets that the government stripped from them through the Indian Act.
302:
Lawrence, B. (2003). Gender, race, and the regulation of Native identity in Canada and the United States: An overview. Hypatia, 18(2), 3-31.
121:. The effects of the Indian Act on these women would act as motivation for their founding of the Indian Rights for Indian Women group.
706:
130:
Jean Cuthand and Mary Small Face Marule to gauge their support. She describes a meeting resulting from these messages as follows:
81:
19:(IRIW) was a grassroots activist collective in Canada, formed in 1967, that advocated against the gender discrimination in the
89:
286:
Disinherited Generations: Our Struggle to Reclaim Treaty Rights for First Nations Women and their Descendants.
92:
began to gain ground in the 60s. There was a notable court case proceeding in Canada at this time as well, as
61:
264:
Grammond, S. (2009). Discrimination in the rules of Indian status and the McIvor case. Queen's Law Journal,
546:
65:
399:
206:
Despite this first loss with Bill C-47, in 1985, a major achievement was made as the government passed
151:
93:
57:
650:
182:
Steinhauer cited opposition to the goals of Indian Rights for Indian Women from her own parents.
118:
49:. They lost many of their traditional rights and roles and they lost the right to own property.
597:
507:
676:
154:
when Steinhauer wrote to her, and became an integral member of the group in the early days.
52:
Part of the way the Government of Canada legislated Indigenous populations was by assigning
312:
40:
Although political and governance systems varied across different First Nations, many are
8:
102:
24:
85:
53:
114:
41:
700:
547:"The search for consensus: A legislative history of Bill C-31, 1969-19851"
64:. The concept of status being taken away was first seen in 1869, with the
69:
46:
106:
20:
150:
in the quote from Steinhauer above, was the executive director of the
284:
Carlson, N., Steinhauer, K., Goyette, L., & Campbell, M. (2013).
35:
75:
651:"Remaining inequities related to registration and membership"
493:
491:
489:
479:
477:
458:
456:
366:
364:
362:
352:
350:
348:
338:
336:
334:
313:"Jeannette Corbiere Lavell, Lifetime Achievement (2020)"
140:
Kathleen Steinhauer, describing an early meeting, pg. 60
486:
474:
453:
359:
345:
331:
288:
Edmonton, AB: The University of Alberta Press. 55-56.
630:
Assembly of First Nations Legal Affairs and Justice
577:
Assembly of First Nations Legal Affairs and Justice
551:
Aboriginal Policy Research Consortium International
698:
36:History of Legislation on Indian Women's Status
76:Background of Indian Rights for Indian Women
397:
544:
82:Royal Commission on the Status of Women
699:
508:"Nellie Carson School: School Profile"
564:
562:
560:
540:
538:
536:
534:
532:
530:
528:
117:lost her treaty rights and status to
674:
298:
296:
294:
280:
278:
276:
274:
260:
258:
256:
245:
243:
241:
239:
398:Robinson, Amanda (March 23, 2017).
13:
557:
525:
14:
718:
623:"Second Generation Cut-Off Rules"
570:"What is Bill C-31 and Bill C-3?"
291:
271:
253:
236:
707:Canadian human rights activists
668:
643:
615:
590:
500:
465:
444:
435:
426:
417:
391:
382:
189:
373:
305:
17:Indian Rights for Indian Women
1:
675:Conn, Heather (May 6, 2020).
229:
172:
7:
213:
152:National Indian Brotherhood
124:
90:Women's Liberation Movement
66:Gradual Enfranchisement Act
10:
723:
423:Carlson, N. et at., 71-72.
30:
681:The Canadian Encyclopedia
602:The Canadian Encyclopedia
404:The Canadian Encyclopedia
199:Indian rights they lost.
545:Hartley, Gerard (2007).
157:
94:Jeanette Corbière Lavell
512:Edmonton Public Schools
497:Carlson, N. et al., 66.
483:Carlson, N. et al., 67.
471:Carlson, N. et al., 70.
462:Carlson, N. et al., 68.
450:Carlson, N. et al., 58.
441:Carlson, N. et al., 63.
432:Carlson, N. et al., 60.
388:Carlson, N. et al., 32.
379:Carlson, N. et al., 28.
370:Carlson, N. et al., 61.
356:Carlson, N. et al., 57.
342:Carlson, N. et al., 56.
119:Saddle Lake Cree Nation
88:. Internationally, the
143:
400:"Mary Two-Axe Earley"
132:
115:Jenny Shirts Margetts
655:Government of Canada
103:Mary Two-Axe Earley
25:Mary Two-Axe Earley
714:
691:
690:
688:
687:
672:
666:
665:
663:
662:
647:
641:
640:
638:
637:
627:
619:
613:
612:
610:
609:
594:
588:
587:
585:
584:
574:
566:
555:
554:
542:
523:
522:
520:
518:
504:
498:
495:
484:
481:
472:
469:
463:
460:
451:
448:
442:
439:
433:
430:
424:
421:
415:
414:
412:
410:
395:
389:
386:
380:
377:
371:
368:
357:
354:
343:
340:
329:
328:
326:
324:
309:
303:
300:
289:
282:
269:
262:
251:
247:
141:
86:1969 White Paper
722:
721:
717:
716:
715:
713:
712:
711:
697:
696:
695:
694:
685:
683:
673:
669:
660:
658:
649:
648:
644:
635:
633:
625:
621:
620:
616:
607:
605:
596:
595:
591:
582:
580:
572:
568:
567:
558:
543:
526:
516:
514:
506:
505:
501:
496:
487:
482:
475:
470:
466:
461:
454:
449:
445:
440:
436:
431:
427:
422:
418:
408:
406:
396:
392:
387:
383:
378:
374:
369:
360:
355:
346:
341:
332:
322:
320:
311:
310:
306:
301:
292:
283:
272:
263:
254:
248:
237:
232:
216:
192:
175:
160:
142:
139:
127:
78:
70:band membership
58:enfranchisement
38:
33:
12:
11:
5:
720:
710:
709:
693:
692:
667:
642:
614:
604:. May 12, 2020
589:
556:
524:
499:
485:
473:
464:
452:
443:
434:
425:
416:
390:
381:
372:
358:
344:
330:
304:
290:
270:
252:
234:
233:
231:
228:
215:
212:
191:
188:
174:
171:
159:
156:
137:
126:
123:
77:
74:
37:
34:
32:
29:
9:
6:
4:
3:
2:
719:
708:
705:
704:
702:
682:
678:
677:"McIvor Case"
671:
656:
652:
646:
631:
624:
618:
603:
599:
593:
578:
571:
565:
563:
561:
552:
548:
541:
539:
537:
535:
533:
531:
529:
513:
509:
503:
494:
492:
490:
480:
478:
468:
459:
457:
447:
438:
429:
420:
405:
401:
394:
385:
376:
367:
365:
363:
353:
351:
349:
339:
337:
335:
318:
314:
308:
299:
297:
295:
287:
281:
279:
277:
275:
267:
261:
259:
257:
246:
244:
242:
240:
235:
227:
223:
219:
211:
209:
204:
200:
196:
187:
183:
179:
170:
166:
163:
155:
153:
147:
136:
131:
122:
120:
116:
110:
108:
104:
98:
95:
91:
87:
83:
73:
71:
67:
63:
59:
55:
54:Indian status
50:
48:
47:paternalistic
43:
28:
26:
22:
18:
684:. Retrieved
680:
670:
659:. Retrieved
657:. 2018-11-28
654:
645:
634:. Retrieved
632:. 2020-01-06
629:
617:
606:. Retrieved
601:
592:
581:. Retrieved
579:. 2020-01-16
576:
550:
515:. Retrieved
511:
502:
467:
446:
437:
428:
419:
407:. Retrieved
403:
393:
384:
375:
321:. Retrieved
316:
307:
285:
265:
224:
220:
217:
205:
201:
197:
193:
190:Achievements
184:
180:
176:
167:
164:
161:
148:
144:
133:
128:
111:
99:
79:
51:
39:
16:
15:
598:"Bill C-31"
553:(98): 5–34.
517:October 28,
409:October 28,
323:October 28,
42:matrilineal
686:2020-10-28
661:2020-10-28
636:2020-10-28
608:2020-10-29
583:2020-10-28
230:References
173:Challenges
107:Indian Act
84:, and the
21:Indian Act
268:(1), 421.
208:Bill C-31
701:Category
317:Indspire
214:Outcomes
138:—
125:Founding
62:reserve
31:History
319:. 2020
250:Press.
626:(PDF)
573:(PDF)
158:Goals
519:2020
411:2020
325:2020
703::
679:.
653:.
628:.
600:.
575:.
559:^
549:.
527:^
510:.
488:^
476:^
455:^
402:.
361:^
347:^
333:^
315:.
293:^
273:^
266:35
255:^
238:^
72:.
689:.
664:.
639:.
611:.
586:.
521:.
413:.
327:.
Text is available under the Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike License. Additional terms may apply.