​As many know, one of the main differences between Indigenous people and most if not all settler Canadians and our knowledge philosophies is that Indigenous people value the original dream of the Creator and Creator’s natural law. Another way to understand this difference is to value that Indigenous assumptions, beliefs, knowledge, teachings, and rituals are intentionally and consciously designed around natural models and features. This serves to keep us rooted within the naturalistic tradition. In short, the naturalistic tradition places natural law at its core where humans are placed within the context of all the other beings.
 
The naturalistic tradition is different from the humanistic tradition. The humanistic tradition places humans above the natural world and above all the other beings. This includes all of humanity’s creations such as governance and economic traditions. They are not designed to work with Creation; rather they are designed to control and monopolize Creation. While humans are smart beings and we are able to create amazing things with the gift of our mind, our egos and blind selfishness of the paramount importance of the natural world, and that humans too readily default to, is our own worst enemy. This is what is meant by the Anishinaabe philosophy and saying, ‘humans are pitiful’.
 
As we all know the humanistic tradition and inventions that emerge from it is devastating our collective land and waterscapes, so much so that our water is polluted with layers and layers of different kinds of pollution: debris such as plastic and other forms of garbage; chemicals such as organic compounds like dioxins, heavy metals, and pharmaceuticals; sewage and biological waste; and radioactive particles. Again, this is the result of human beings placing their needs over and above all the beings within the natural world.
 
The problem is that most people are suffering from ‘cognitive paradigm paralysis’, meaning they are unable to think conceptually about the paradigm they live within, and thus unable to think critically about the limitations of their paradigm ‒ the humanistic paradigm ‒ and value that there is a better more intelligent option waiting for them to shift into. The culprit is the pitifulness of human cognition.
 
A telling example of people’s inability to understand that they are stuck within the irrational humanistic tradition / paradigm is the fact that when a brick and mortar Church, Mosque, or Synagogue is damaged, people are disgusted and outraged and they call it a hate crime; yet when a natural Indigenous sacred place such as Akikodjiwon and Akikpautik located within the natural world of the land and waterscape of the Ottawa River is further desecrated these same people are unable to shift conceptually and value that this too is a hate crime. This inability continues to harm Indigenous people as well as all people and Creation.
 
Akikodjiwon and Akikpautik are the very land and waterscapes where Creator placed the First Sacred Pipe, the ultimate ritual and ceremony of reconciliation. The Spirit of the West Wind gifted his son Nanaboozo with the Sacred Pipe for fathers and sons, mothers and daughters, and citizens of all nations to assist in reconciliation. Sadly, Akikodjiwon and Akikpautik are slated for further desecration through the construction of Windmill’s condominium and retail complex. This is happening just upstream from Parliament Hill.

As many know I have been on a long learning journey piecing together what Canada has done, and continues to do, to Indigenous peoples. What I know for sure is the most effective way to destroy a people is to destroy their sacred beliefs, stories, and places. It is an abomination that the further desecration of this sacred place of reconciliation is happening during the time of the Liberal government’s reconciliation platform.
 
You are likely more familiar with my recent work challenging the sex discrimination in the Indian Act. Over the last few years I have also been working with allies from Free the Falls and Stop Windmill and Indigenous people and Elders regarding the need to respect Akikodjiwon and Akikpautik. We are at a loss about where to turn and so I turn to members of the Standing Senate Committee on Aboriginal People.
  
Additional resources:

• http://anishinabeknews.ca/2015/05/26/opinion-lambert-on-free-the-chaudiere-falls-and-save-the-islands/
• http://albertdumont.com/dreamkeepers-politicians-chaudiere-falls/
• http://muskratmagazine.com/celebrating-canadas-150th-featuring-the-desecration-of-an-indigenous-sacred-place/
• http://albertdumont.com/asinabka-impossible-to-buy/
• http://www.cbc.ca/news/canada/ottawa/windmill-to-unveil-domtar-land-plan-1.2460753

​Lynn Gehl, Ph.D. is an Algonquin Anishinaabe-kwe from the Ottawa River Valley. In 2017 she won an Ontario Court of Appeal case on sex discrimination in The Indian Act, and is an outspoken critic of the Algonquin land claims process. Recently she published Claiming Anishinaabe: Decolonizing the Human Spirit.  You can reach her through, and see more of her work, at www.lynngehl.com

​Many Layers of Structural Oppression
 
The knowledge of living as a structurally oppressed person is foremost held within the everyday lived experiences of the oppressed. The location of the knowledge of oppression resides within the bodies and hearts of the very people. As such, the wisdom needed to remedy structural oppression is located within the critical thinking minds of the oppressed themselves. Not all structurally oppressed people are able to move the knowledge from their bodies and hearts to the location of their minds. Remember that critical thinking is a gift and a skill.
 
Most people know we live in a society that oppresses women. Few people will deny this. But we need to keep in mind that heterosexual, able-bodied, white women only experience one layer of structural oppression, and therefore only know one layer of the knowledge. Further, they lack the intersectional knowledge located within the spaces of having more than one layer of structural oppression.
 
It can be said that the level of knowledge within the “Well of Wisdom”, needed to challenge oppressive structures that white women have, is not deep and murky. This sounds unkind but this is true. This is one reason why older white feminism was critiqued by women of colour. While white women were happy with the shifts made, women of colour were not ‘celebrating the continuation of the oppression’ as the shifts were mostly the assimilation of white women into patriarchal systems.
 
Intersectional Feminism
 
While white women do have some of the knowledge of structural oppression and the wisdom of how to address it, it stands to reason that women of colour will have more. What is more, women of colour will also have the intersectional effects of being both a woman and a woman of colour; where the experience of intersectional effects mean they also know the inter-acting results of experiencing two levels of structural oppression. What this means is the level of knowledge in the “Well of Wisdom” that women of colour hold to challenge oppressive societal structures is deeper and more murky than the level white women have.
 
While women of colour know more than double the knowledge of structural oppression over white women, it stands to reason that women of colour with a disability embody even more of the knowledge and wisdom: more than three times the knowledge in that again they also hold the intersectional effects contained.
 
We can keep adding to this. For example, a woman of colour with a disability and who is gender non-specific will even have more of the knowledge and wisdom needed to address structural oppression.
 
In sum, the knowledge of structural oppression is located within the lived experiences of the oppressed where the multiply oppressed have more of the knowledge and wisdom needed to challenge it. My goal here is not to set up a knowledge competition but rather to illustrate why it is that people under more levels of oppression are able to identify the limitations of the less oppressed, that being white women. It is because they hold more of the knowledge.

Cognitive Dissonance is Unpleasant
 
All too often when white women take on a social justice issue, where they lack a deeper understanding of the knowledge of structural oppression, they are then faced with situations of cognitive dissonance when a person who is more oppressed speaks up letting them know they are not addressing issues in a way that the more oppressed need them to be addressed. Experiencing cognitive dissonance is emotional and the feelings that emerge are negative: embarrassment, shame, anger, hate, toxicity, lateral violence, arrogance, and ignorance. The good thing is the best learning is emotional; not nice though.
 
What happens all too often when white women are informed or told about their ignorance they become reactionary so much so that they can and will rely on and hurl nasty adjectives to describe the person who was brave enough to speak up. Interestingly, I have come to know that the nasty adjectives actually best describe the less oppressed person’s emotional state brought on by their cognitive dissonance rather than the more oppressed brave person. The emotions are a result of them being challenged in ways they are ignorant about; or result from them being called out about their unspoken political agenda that further oppresses such as them supporting the current Minister of Status of Women Maryam Monsef who is not addressing sex discrimination in the Indian Act, the land claims process, and the destruction of sacred Indigenous land and waterscapes.
 
On White Privilege; We Need White Women, But …
 
While it is indeed a wonderful thing that white people are now learning about, reading about, thinking about, and talking about white privilege, white people do not have the everyday lived experience of being at the back end of white privilege where as such they do not hold the monopoly of knowledge on white privilege. It is crucial to keep in mind they do not and cannot ever hold the depth of knowledge and wisdom that people of colour hold on this topic. In short, because it is not their everyday lived misery they do not know it wholistically, deeply, or completely.
 
Some people may be inclined to think, if white women do not hold enough of the knowledge of structural oppression, and if people who are more oppressed are not happy with the actions of white women, then they need to take a lead role in the process of challenging structural oppression and forget about white women. This line of thought is reactionary and not the thinking of a genuine social justice seeker, not at all. Asking white women to reflect on who has more of the knowledge is valid; it does not mean the more oppressed don’t need them in the struggle. Of course we do. What we need is for them to take a back seat or follow and serve the more oppressed.
 
What is more, the less oppressed people who argue there is the need for the more oppressed to be nicer when they encounter settler ignorance really need to think critically about intersectional feminism, and stop burdening more oppressed people with settler emotions.
 
I have produced a large volume of short reading materials that enhance the knowledge shared in this blog:
 
Intersectional Oppression:
https://journeymagazineptbo.com/2016/09/14/2830/
Follow the Turtle:
https://www.lynngehl.com/follow-the-turtle.html
Critical thinking and the Charity Model:
https://www.lynngehl.com/black-face-blogging
Kawartha Truth and Reconciliation Support Group on Maryam Monsef:
http://www.huffingtonpost.ca/lynn-gehl/canada-is-carrying-out-cultural-genocide-with-a-smile_a_23204482/
http://www.windspeaker.com/news/opinion/opinion-minister-monsef-disappoints-on-bill-s-3-and-continues-the-discrimination/
White Woman’s Gaze:
https://www.lynngehl.com/black-face-blogging/that-white-womans-gaze
On Nice People:
https://www.lynngehl.com/black-face-blogging/nice-people-scare-me
On Reconciliation:
http://muskratmagazine.com/celebrating-canadas-150th-featuring-the-desecration-of-an-indigenous-sacred-place/

Critically thinking people in Peterborough have been working long and hard on issues of social justice from the perspective of multiple intersectional oppressions, meaning colour, gender, disabilities; yet it appears that not much progress is being made. Of course this has to do in large part with oppressive power, but it also has to do with a lack of critical thinking about the limitations of the Charity Model of social justice. While compassion is valued and needed, the Charity Model is for the most part a back-end focus to social justice issues and thus not capable of addressing the deeper structural issues oppressed people face. In short, back end compassion alone is not enough; front end solutions are needed.
 
Further, oppressed people want and need more than being patronized with small tokens of charity at the back-end. They also want more than being someone’s “feel good moment” where they are offered charity so a privileged person can feel that they did a good thing at Christmas time. Yes, this actually continues to happen.
 
It is often said that social justice awareness, understanding, knowledge, wisdom, and actions must emerge from the location of intersectionally oppressed people. This is mostly true as they embody, live, and have much of the knowledge of oppression. But it is also said there is the need to embrace genuine critical thinkers to guide processes of social justice efforts to a real and more meaningful place. Unfortunately critical thinking is also not well understood where as a result sometimes a “token critical thinker” is relied on when addressing social justice issues.
 
Critically thinking (with some criticizing too) about critical thinking?

1. Criticizing is not critical thinking
2. Not all people are critical thinkers
3. Not all people of colour or people with disabilities are critical thinkers
4. Critical thinking exists on a continuum where sometimes the most oppressed holds more of the skill
5. Being involved with social justice for a long time in itself does not make a person a critical thinker
6. Being an older person does not mean that said person holds the wisdom of critical thinking
7. Critical thinking can be taught and honed through critical thinking disciplines and training such as sociology, anthropology, African Studies, and Indigenous Studies ... .
8. Saying someone is not a critical thinker is not arrogant, not at all
9. Everyone has gifts, critical thinking is just one that we need to value rather than assuming we all have this skill
10. Thinking all people are critical thinkers is an act of anti-intellectualism

When it comes to addressing social justice issues, critical thinking is a process of thinking deeply about the limitations of society's oppressive structures such as employment standards and requirements, standard operating procedures, policies, and legislation that are causing certain people from living a good life.  Critical thinking is also a way of being and acting that challenges, at the front end, oppressive structures for the purpose of serving people. Critical thinking and acting on it is much more than relying on the Charity Model at the back-end. Here is a short video:  https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ZLyUHbexz04

What has caused me to think about this issue of the limitations of the Charity Model and the need for genuine critical thinking in social justice? Recently a video was posted in a facebook group titled “Carol's Place” that was clearly rooted in the Charity Model of social justice. In this video a privileged person was walking around a city offering small tokens to homeless people thinking he was doing a good thing when in fact what he was really doing was exploiting the homeless for the purpose of his own “feel good moment”. Sadly a few members of the Peterborough community clicked like on this posting thus endorsing the Charity Model. This small example of a misplaced facebook posting is a sure indication that some people in Peterborough remain stuck in a Charity Model and further, lack the gift of critical thinking. (I have chosen not to post this link here as I do not want to give it anymore currency than it is already gaining.)
 
It is my thought that the Charity Model of social justice emerges from: the inability to really value where structures of oppression come from; the inability to really value that oppressed people are indeed consciously oppressed through standard operating practices, policies, and laws; and the inability to perceive that Indigenous people do indeed have a valid knowledge system and paradigm that is being actively thwarted and denied by the government of Canada. As a result, sometimes the Charity Model marches forward only addressing back-end solutions and failing to address the root causes of structural oppression.
 
Here are two insightful videos that address the deeper issues with the Charity Model. In the second video the speaker uses the anger that exists between “the haves” and “the have nots” to perform what he knows. As a man he is more easily afforded the right to be mad.
​
 https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=0Wmtjnp-7wg
 https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=telgvKBdY9E
 
The City of Peterborough can do better.

​​​​Lynn Gehl, Ph.D. is an Algonquin Anishinaabe-kwe from the Ottawa River Valley. In 2017 she won an Ontario Court of Appeal case on sex discrimination in The Indian Act, and is an outspoken critic of the Algonquin land claims process. Recently she published Claiming Anishinaabe: Decolonizing the Human Spirit.  You can reach her through, and see more of her work, at www.lynngehl.com

Recently I was interviewed about my work.  Below is a excerpt of the text from the interview.  To listen to this entire interview here is the link to the video production.

1. Lynn, what drew you into the work of social change in your life and specifically in this community?
 
The issues I work on are intergenerational issues that I was born into.  And they are national issues, not just local; they travel with me everywhere I go, in my feet, in my body, in my heart, and in my nightmares.  They have always been there; Canada is determined to cage my heart, my mind, my body, and my agency.  I am sure that I will die with them and from them.
 
Right now I am working on three main issues:
 
First, the Algonquin land claims process that continues to force Indigenous Nations to extinguish our land and resource rights.  The Algonquin Anishinaabeg are not a nation without our land for our citizens; we are not a nation without our resources needed to build our institutions such as schools and courts according to our tradition.
 
Many know that Canada’s parliament buildings squat on Algonquin territory.  The Algonquin are being forced into extinguishing our land rights in exchange for accepting 1.3% of our traditional territory and accepting a $300 million buy-out.  This is not nation-to-nation and this is not reconciliation.
 
Second, I also work on the issue of the never-ending sex discrimination in the Indian Act.  Although the Charter of Rights and Freedoms is celebrated by Canadians, it is meaningless to Indigenous women and girls.  In 1985 when Canada was telling Canadians and the rest of the world that they were removing the sex discrimination, it was a lie.  What Canada did was remove a provision in the Indian Act that protected Indigenous children and then through this carefully crafted silence began to assume all unknown / unstated fathers were white.  In the worst case scenario, what resulted was young girls who did not even have the legal right to consent to sex were being further harmed by Indian Affairs and Northern Canada’s (INAC) unstated paternity policy.
 
INAC and the Department of Justice spent $1 million defending its unstated paternity policy.  While Canada had deep pockets from colonizing Algonquin land and resources I have to grovel for gas money in the work I do.
 
The third issue I work on is the continued destruction of Akikodjiwan located in the Ottawa River just upstream from Canada’s Parliament buildings.  Akikodjiwan is a sacred land and waterscape where Creator placed the First Sacred Pipe, the ultimate symbol and ritual of reconciliation.  While people here in Peterborough, and rightly so, readily threw their arms up in the air in disgust when the Mosque was vandalized, for the most part refugee, settler, and Canadian people are not rallying around the need to protect Indigenous sacred places.

On Monday Dec. 11, 2017, Masuma Asad Khan, an Afghan settler and Muslim woman, and I, an Algonquin Anishinaabe-kwe, were interviewed by Alnoor Gova of the Vancouver CO-OP Radio 100.5FM, based in Coast Salish Territories / Vancouver.

In her part of the segment Masuma discusses the backlash she faced as the Vice President of Academic and External for the Dalhousie Student Union after a motion was passed to not support the Canada150 celebration, but rather to recognize Canada day as an ongoing celebration of genocide against Indigenous people.

Previously Masuma posted, "councilors voted to abstain from the Canada 150 celebrations. We recognize that Canada Day and the Canada 150 celebrations are an act of ongoing colonialism that glorifies continued theft from, and disenfranchisement of, the indigenous peoples of Turtle Island." 

In the second part of the segment I discuss my work on the Algonquin land claims process, the sex discrimination in the Indian Act, and the further destruction of the Creator’s First Sacred Pipe, known as Chaudiere Falls, and the Islands.  I argued they are all aspects of Canada’s larger policy of genocide against Indigenous people.

Take the time and listen to the entire podcast.  What is interesting is that Masuma and I had no idea we were part of the same segment. 
​
Here is the link to the podcast: 

​​​Lynn Gehl, Ph.D. is an Algonquin Anishinaabe-kwe from the Ottawa River Valley. In 2017 she won an Ontario Court of Appeal case on sex discrimination in The Indian Act, and is an outspoken critic of the Algonquin land claims process. Recently she published Claiming Anishinaabe: Decolonizing the Human Spirit.  You can reach her through, and see more of her work, at www.lynngehl.com

Do you like my work and want to support it? Contact me here. 

Like and share this blog ...

While many people are aware of the newly entitled registrants resulting from the Stéphane Descheneaux 2015 court victory, few people are aware of the newly entitled registrants resulting from Lynn Gehl's court victory challenging Indian and Northern Affairs Canada's unknown and unstated paternity policy.
​
Through Bill S3, An Act to Amend the Indian Act (the elimination of sex-based discrimination), the Descheneaux remedy will result in as many as 35,000 new registrants; this is an estimated finite number. The Gehl remedy, though, will result in as many as 100,000 new registrants with no finite number, as the policy remedy applies to all situations where the father is unknown.

On Tuesday October 17, 2017 the Standing Committee of Indigenous and Northern Affairs discussed the specific claims and the comprehensive land claims process.  In this short video clip conservative MP Kevin Waugh asks Senior Assistant Deputy Minister of Treaties and Governance and Joe Wild of Indian Affairs and Northern Development the question, “What is nation to nation anyway?”  Wild’s response is telling.  Wild explains that Canada defines nation to nation only in terms of the Indigenous people sitting at the table with Canada.  He offers no discussion at all in terms of it meaning sharing the land and resources with Indigenous nations on a more equal basis which is what genuine nation to nation has to mean.

What the entire meeting at this link:
http://parlvu.parl.gc.ca/XRender/en/PowerBrowser/PowerBrowserV2/20171017/-1/28107?Language=English&Stream=Video&useragent=Mozilla%2F5.0%20(Windows%20NT%2010.0%3B%20Win64%3B%20x64)%20AppleWebKit%2F537.36%20(KHTML%2C%20like%20Gecko)%20Chrome%2F62.0.3202.94%20Safari%2F537.36

​​Lynn Gehl, Ph.D. is an Algonquin Anishinaabe-kwe from the Ottawa River Valley. In 2017 she won an Ontario Court of Appeal case on sex discrimination in The Indian Act, and is an outspoken critic of the Algonquin land claims process. Recently she published Claiming Anishinaabe: Decolonizing the Human Spirit.  You can reach her through, and see more of her work, at www.lynngehl.com.

In this CBC The Current interview I discuss the differences between western laboratory science and Indigenous Knowledge.  I talk about the limitations of western laboratory science as a protector of our water, the profoundness of Indigenous ways of knowing, the need for all peoples to go back to their own Indigenous knowledge because we all have our own, and the destruction of sacred places ‒ in particular Akikpautik located just upstream from Canada’s Parliament buildings.

I also address the $500 million price tag wasted on Canada day 2017, the genocide within Canada’s land claims policy that forces Indigenous people such as the Algonquin Anishinaabeg to extinguish jurisdiction to their traditional territories.  I argue Trudeau is co-opting terms such as "nation-to-nation" and "reconciliation" while at the same time continuing with its larger policy of genocide.  lastly I argue Canada does not care about our water quality – not in terms of practice knowledge.

I end with reminding people to go back to their own Indigenous knowledge as this is where they will learn how to be the human beings Creator intended them to be.

http://www.cbc.ca/listen/shows/the-current/segment/14737775
​
​Please like and share this blog.

​Lynn Gehl, Ph.D. is an Algonquin Anishinaabe-kwe from the Ottawa River Valley. In 2017 she won an Ontario Court of Appeal case on sex discrimination in The Indian Act, and is an outspoken critic of the Algonquin land claims process. Recently she published Claiming Anishinaabe: Decolonizing the Human Spirit.  You can reach her through, and see more of her work, at www.lynngehl.com.

Please join the Feminist Alliance for International Action (FAFIA) and the Famous Six in our struggle to end sex discrimination against Indigenous women in the Indian Act.

Here are 3 things you can do today or by November 7th:

1. Sign this letter at this link or copy and paste this link into your browser: http://fafia-afai.org/wp-content/uploads/2017/10/Prime-Minister-letter-October-18.pdf  

It is addressed to the Prime Minister of Canada asking him to remove the sex discrimination from the Indian Act now.
 
To sign on, send a quick email to bills3@fafia-afai.org with your name. Let us know if you are signing as an individual, or the name of your organization, and/or the name of all the individuals at your organization that would like to sign on.

2. Contact your Member of Parliament. Go to this website to find your MP’s contact information or copy and paste this link into your browser:
https://op.parl.ca/ParlInfo/compilations/HouseOfCommons/MemberByPostalCode.aspx

And then follow this link or copy and paste this link into your browser:
http://fafia-afai.org/wp-content/uploads/2017/10/Sample-email-to-MPs.pdf
 
for a sample email to send to your Member of Parliament.

3.  Contact Senators from your province / territory. Go to this website to find Senators’ contact information or copy and paste this link into your browser: https://sencanada.ca/en/senators-list/  

And then follow this link or copy and paste this link into your browser:
http://fafia-afai.org/wp-content/uploads/2017/10/Sample-email-to-senators.pdf
 
for a sample email to send to Senators from your province or territory.

Please remember the timeline of November 7th. Please take the time and like, tweet, share, and post this blog.  It is a public blog. 

As many know, the Quebec Court of Appeal granted the government an extension to December 22 to pass legislation in response to the Stéphane Descheneaux and Tammy Yantha court case.
 
On Thursday, October 19, 2017, during the First Session of the 42 Parliament of Canada, Senators Lillian Dyck and Dennis Patterson asked Senator Peter Harder, the government representative, about the demographic analysis that the House of Commons commissioned from Mr. Stewart Clatworthy regarding the inclusion of the “6(1)a All the Way” clause.
 
Harder explained, the government is currently reviewing the Clatworthy data and he assured Senators Dyck and Patterson that the numbers would be available to all Senate members and the public in the coming weeks.  Further, he stated the government is committed to meaningful debate and as such ensuring that the pertinent information is brought forward for the Senate’s consideration in advance of the Senate dealing with the issue.
 
Click on this link below to read the details of this Senate discussion: https://sencanada.ca/en/content/sen/chamber/421/debates/149db_2017-10-19-e#27