Tag Archives: Indigenous

A storify re: Reclaiming our Narratives: Racial and Gender Profiling in Toronto

Storify just collects tweets, so you can use it to tell a story about an event or issue.  Here’s one I put together after attending this event, (you can see the event announcement here).
It was great. Congratulations to the organizers on a really well put together public event.  I met some really great women, learned a lot, had feelings and thoughts at the same time (!), wallowed in being one of the oldest people in the room.  Sometimes folks ask me, what’s up with the younger feminists, what are they reading, what are they doing, what are they thinking?  Here’s one piece of the answer.  Been to any really great events related to feminism and law lately? Want to post about them, even after the fact? About the experience of being there? Let me know.

-sonia

 

NIP & Not unrelated to the IFLS book club: Emily Snyder: Indigenous Feminist Legal Theory in the CJWL

Emily Snyder (previous IFLS post mentioning her here) has published “Indigenous Feminist Legal Theory” (2014) 26:2 Canadian Journal of Women and the Law 365.  Link is to Project MUSE.

Here is the abstract

This article considers the necessity of critical gender analyses of indigenous laws. “Gender neutral” approaches dominate in the field of indigenous law, ignoring the gendered realities of indigenous laws and also the gendered aspects of theorizing. There is a need to develop theoretical frameworks that explicitly address these problems, and, thus, in this article I articulate Indigenous feminist legal theory. This theory is an analytic tool for examining Indigenous laws as gendered. I build this theory by bringing three bodies of work together, which are presently speaking past one another—feminist legal theory, Indigenous feminist theory, and Indigenous legal theory. Indigenous feminist legal theory generates an intersectional, multi-juridical, anti-colonial, anti-essentialist reading of law that is crucial to a multitude of fields.

Not Taking a Break from Feminism: Reflections on the Criminal Law on the Aboriginal Plains: Gavigan at the Berks

[Part II in a series.  For part I, click here]

Following the IFLS co sponsored panel at the Berks (Cutting Edge Contributions and Critical Reflections in Canadian Feminist Legal History, featuring Constance Backhouse (University of Ottawa Law), Mary Jane Mossman (Osgoode) Bettina Bradbury, York University (History at York University)  & Shelley Gavigan (Osgoode), the blog is posting texts from the talk.  Earlier this week, we posted Mary Jane Mossman’s  Gender and Professionalization Projects: Rethinking Stories of Early Women Lawyers.  Today, Osgoode’s Shelley Gavigan on….

Not Taking a Break from Feminism:  

Reflections on the Criminal Law on the Aboriginal Plains

*we have left the references intact although they are not clickable. Just scroll down to the bottom of the page for all the references. 

Introduction

My title derives its inspiration from the challenge issued by Harvard Law Professor Janet Halley in her book, Split Decisions: How and Why to Take a Break From Feminism.[1] Professor Halley is an American legal theorist whose book reflects her engagement with what she regards as a number of, fundamental flaws in feminist premises and theorizing with respect to sexuality, notably queer sexuality, and hence the importance of taking a break and to work outside feminist frameworks. When I first heard her present this work in its early stages – on this campus – I confess that I was more provoked than inspired. My research and writing since the mid 1980 has been engaged by and with the concerns of feminist theory and activism in law: the legal regulation of abortion, patriarchal relations, family forms, same sex relationships, lesbian parenting, women and welfare, together with a few forays into social justice, poverty law and clinical legal education. On the feminist spectrum, I have usually pitched my tent in the socialist feminist camp (a camp I might add that did not figure in Professor Halley’s critique of feminist bodies of thought).

For this book,[2] I spent the better part of a decade reading and working through lower criminal court records from 19th century western Canada, trying to understand the context and the events in these records, trying to find something more about the participants, trying to identify themes from within the seemingly mundane, seeking to resist the self-evident ways of organizing criminal law, not wanting to write a token chapter devoted to “women”. The more immersed I became in the court records, the more I was drawn to the ones that in different ways involved First Nations or Aboriginal participants – because I felt that I was seeing something new – or at least new to me – in these records.   Very few of these records involved women as central actors, and only slightly more than a handful involved women as accused persons. So, it is fair to ask: Have I (too) taken a break – or drifted away – from feminism? In some ways, this book does represent a break from my earlier work – both methodologically and in its focus – it represents my first real foray into archival research and into the law-state-First Nations relationship. And, to state the obvious: I am not an Aboriginal woman.

However, in as many ways, it represents a continuity of the pre-occupations and theoretical frameworks that have informed my life and my work: a commitment to interdisciplinarity, to the interrogation of the form and content of law and socio-legal relations, the contradictory nature of law and legal regulation, to historically informed analysis, and the importance of human agency. I do not suggest that this book involved the simple use or application of tried and tested research methods and theoretical frameworks to a new subject matter. On the contrary, it took me a very long time and lots of work to produce what I wanted to be a respectful analysis and representation of the experiences and agency of the First Nations people that I found in the court records. But this project was determined to move me out of my ‘feminist’ comfort zone, where I had only researched and written about expressly feminist issues. I had to sort out how to identify the relevance of gendered relations. I wanted to avoid carving out women (or the cases in which they were involved) or to write discrete chapter(s) on gender or women but rather to attempt to integrate attentiveness to gendered relations throughout the book.

I drew on a wide range of archival, other primary and historical sources while endeavouring at the same time to stay close to my data. And, it was only at the very end of the process, when I was trying to think through why – in spite of my commitment to a particular organization for the book – I found myself committed to writing a separate chapter on six accused women’s stories, that the intellectual penny dropped for me – and I realized that the stories of the six women actually advanced the argument of the book. I say in the book that it tells a little known story, relying on voices seldom heard. It is a study in low law – in the sense that Douglas Hay uses that term.[3] The research for this book derives from the court records of a lower territorial trial court – in its everyday application of ordinary criminal law – where lawyers were seldom present, especially in the early period, where accused persons appeared as prisoners, without counsel, with or without interpreters, where appeals to higher courts were not available, I could go on (and I do in the book). I should also say by way of contextualizing the work – struggling with the possibility that all scholarship is in fact autobiographical – that this research returned me to the kinds of issues and challenges that I had encountered in law as a young feminist lawyer practising criminal law on the Aboriginal Plains in the 1970s: I was a low law lawyer, I teach poverty law (inevitably low law) and I am a legal historian of low law.

Lessons From Feminism?

(i)The Importance of Method in How a Story is Told  I accept completely the insistence that legal historical research into court records work with broader contexts and take a “broad view” of the evidence in court records.[4]   This I attempted to do. Inspired by the insights of feminist legal scholarship, I departed from conventional legal methods to identify and analyze this complex relationship. I decided not to use the analytic and substantive categories of criminal law (e.g. offences against property, offences against the person) as its organizing principle. I was interested in taking an approach that would allow me to identify the relations (familial, property, employment) in the context of the alleged offences contained in the criminal court files. However, the question of how to find, identify, and interpret forms of participation and treatment of subordinated peoples, such as Aboriginal peoples of the Canadian Plains, in the criminal processes required another methodological decision.   I looked beyond the dyadic relationship between the state and the accused in orderto capture a wider spectrum of Aboriginal involvement and participation in the criminal law. And, when I did this – when I moved away from both a preoccupation with particular kinds of offences and a traditional focus on the accused – I found more Aboriginal people in the court records – informants, complainants, interpreters, and witnesses, in addition to accused persons – and notably more women. But I had to read all the records to do this. And, finally, I suppose the important point I want to make here is that even though I was not engaged in a project that might easily, if at all, be characterized as feminist, I never stopped bringing a feminist lens and a feminist sensibility to the research.

 

(ii) Adjusting the Research Questions As I worked my way through the historiography, wrestling in particular with two dominant themes in the literature(criminalization and sexualization) I was struck by a question posed by Jean Barman in a piece in which she analyzed the racialized and sexualized construction of Aboriginal women in 19th century British Columbia, question that raises both epistemological and methodological issues: “… what happens when we turn the past on its head and make our reference point Aboriginal women instead of Aboriginal men?”[5] Historians interested in accepting Barman’s challenge face methodological hurdles not least of which is the fact that the names of First Nations women and children are often ‘hidden from history’[6] or, as Hugh Dempsey has observed in reference to the lost name of the mother of the important Cree leader, Big Bear, they have been “forgotten in the mistiness of the past”.[7]   The women of the First Nations are difficult to locate,their voices almost indiscernible, in the legal history of the Plains. Val Napoleon captures this concern when she argues of the context of aboriginal rights jurisprudence, “it appears that indigenous women have been erased off both the land and the legal landscape.”[8] Of the many methodological and interpretative challenges in historical work concerning Aboriginal people, perhaps, as Sarah Carter has observed, none is more important than the dearth of “first hand voices of the women of this era.”[9] We legal historians are heavily reliant on reported cases, and on official records and documents that were produced by the police and other government men.[10] Not many women’s hands or voices to be found there. Historians of oppressed, marginalized and colonized women -such as Constance Backhouse, Sarah Carter and Joan Sangster to cite but three in the Canadian context – are thus necessarily a resourceful and creative lot, because they are writing about people whom conventional legal and social ‘history’ has ignored or misinterpreted. Backhouse’s case studies document Aboriginal women’s victimization, agency, and resistance; Carter and Sangster make the important point that in these official state records, together with those of the religious and missionary records, the voices and perspectives that are recorded are those of the ‘observers’ – not the Aboriginal women themselves. That said, it seems to me that, paradoxically, the lower court records I study may offer a small rejoinder to ‘observers’, and to the silences, erasures, and dominant images that one finds in the historical or contemporary official documents, records, the media, and so on. I do not suggest that the voices and interpreted words of Aboriginal women in the depositions before the justices of the peace and trial transcripts were unmediated by the context and often involuntary circumstances in which they were spoken and recorded. But, as John Beattie has observed in relation to 18th century court records,[11] while such recorded words surely cannot be taken at face value, they do contain valuable information.

 

Some of the Voices I Found: Six (Women) Prisoners’ Stories

Between 1876 and 1903, only six Aboriginal women and one girl, Julia Cote, (who was charged with stealing the clothes she was wearing when she and Alex Bone ran away from the Regina Industrial School), appeared as accused persons and prisoners before Hugh Richardson, the longest serving and most experienced magistrate and judge in the Canadian North-West Territories.   These six women and one girl represent about 1% of all accused persons (589) and 5% of all Aboriginal accused persons (136) who appeared in Judge Richardson’s courts over the period. They are not the sexualized women that one encounters in some of the historiography; their ‘crimes’ such as they were, reflected the social, material and economic realities of their hard everyday lives. Four women (Caroline Gouin, Margaret Favel, Bone Child, and Marie Martin Daniel) were charged with forms of theft (of white people’s property), mostly small items or (in Caroline’s case) money from her employer’s pocket book. Betsy Horsefall was charged with horse theft – a serious offence – even though it involved a charge that she had stolen her own pony. Scholastique Cardinal was charged with murder and concealment of birth in the death of her newborn infant. The court records of these criminal prosecutions indicate that four women were convicted, and received deferred or suspended sentences; there is no disposition indicated in two cases, and in Horsefall’s case, the prosecution in the end did not proceed. Although the voices of Scholastique and Bone Child are not heard, and even Betsy’s voice is muted, it seems to me that Caroline and Margaret were not intimidated by the legal process or by their status as prisoners such that they did not to participate. They challenged their accusers, and in their challenges can be seen very clear theories of their own defences. And, even without benefit of counsel, they achieved some measure of success. There is no record that Caroline was ever convicted of the theft of Mr. McDougall’s coins, and Margaret Favel – accused of stealing a veritable shopping list of a school teacher’s personal property – in the end was convicted of stealing one solitary silver spoon.

I have been asked by a First Nations historian why I included a chapter on this handful of women. Perhaps he and others wonder if their numbers or stories are of any consequence. Here’s what I have to say: These women’s stories demonstrate the larger context and new relations that had arrived: the sanctity of white men’s property, new laws that changed how property ownership could be asserted, and new, coercive, forms of educating and transforming First Nations children into Indian children: Betsy Horsefall’s lost horse and the transformation of property relations through ordinances administered and enforced through low law officials; Scholastique Cardinal’s hidden pregnancy, and the ongoing role of the community in the new legal order; Margaret Favel and Marie Martin Daniel, on white man’s property, and the importance of the Plain; Caroline Gouin’s industry and employment, and her agency and advocacy in court; and, not least the casually enforced anonymity of the woman alleged to have stolen curtains and bells from a settler’s bachelor shack. Their stories are not a side story, and their numbers serve to remind us that the criminal law was not necessarily the first or most important means of subjugating the First Nations of the Plains in the period. And in the end, I decided that if I did not write about these women, I did not know who would. What they had to say and what they contributed to the development of our knowledge of the operation of criminal law in Western Canada is important.

[1] (Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press, 2006). Professor Halley’s analysis and argument are developed through her engagement with different strands of feminist theory and thought (notably but not exclusively with what she characterizes as ‘power feminism’) throughout the book.

[2] Shelley AM Gavigan, Hunger, Horses, and Government Men: Criminal Law on the Aboriginal Plains, 1870 – 1905 (Vancouver: UBC Press & The Osgoode Society for Canadian Legal History, 2012).

[3] Douglas Hay, “Time, Inequality, and Law’s Violence” in Austin Sarat & Thomas R. Kearns, eds Law´s Violence (Ann Arbor: University of Michigan Press, 1995) 141.

[4] Stephen Robertson, “What’s Law Got to Do with It? Legal Records and Sexual Histories” (2005) 12 J Hist Sexuality 161 at 171.

[5] Jean Barman, “Taming Aboriginal Sexuality: Gender, Power, and Race in British Columbia” in Mary Ellen Kelm & Lorna Townsend, eds In the Days of Our Grandmothers: A Reader in Aboriginal Women’s History in Canada (Toronto: University of Toronto Press, 206) 270 at 271.

[6] To borrow from Sheila Rowbotham’s early contribution to women’s history: Sheila Rowbotham, Hidden From History: Three Hundred Years of Women’s Oppression and the Fight Against It (Middlesex: Penguin Books, 1975).

[7] Hugh A Dempsey, Big Bear: The End of Freedom (Vancouver: Douglas & McIntyre) 11.

[8] Val Napoleon, “Aboriginal Discourse: Gender, Identity, and Community” in Benjamin J. Richardson, Shin Imai, and Kent McNeil, eds. Indigenous Peoples and the Law: Comparative and Critical Perspectives (Oxford: Hart Publishing, 2009) 233 at 235.

[9]Sarah Carter, “First Nations Women of Prairie Canada in the Early Reserve Years, the 1870s to 1920: A Preliminary Inquiry” in Christine Miller & Patricia Chuchryk, with Marie Smallface Marule, Brenda Manyfingers, & Cheryl Deering, eds Women of the First Nations: Power, Wisdom and Strength (Winnipeg: University of Manitoba Press, 1996) 51 at 55.

[10]See Franca Iacovetta and Wendy Mitchinson, eds, On the Case: Explorations in Social History (Toronto: University of Toronto Press, 1998).

[11] John Beattie, Crime and the Courts in England, 1600 – 1800 (Princeton: Princeton University Press, 1986) at 21-22.

©Shelley AM Gavigan 2014

Osgoode Hall Law School

York University

Toronto, Ontario

M3J 1P3

(sgavigan@osgoode.yorku.ca)

Notes for Presentation at

Cutting Edge Contributions and Critical Reflections in

Canadian Feminist Legal History

Berkshire Conference on the History of Women

Toronto, Ontario, Canada

May 22 – 25 2014

 

Feb 28-March 1 in Kingston: Feminist Legal Studies Queen's presents Arctic/Northern Women: Situating Law & Justice in Development and Equality

This picture of a woman's hand holding an ulu is taken from http://www.flickr.com/photos/lac-bac/6347653013/in/set-72157628135696830 - the Flickr stream of the Rosemary Gillat Fonds held by Library and Archives CanadaArctic/Northern Women: Situating Law and Justice in Development and Equality: In celebration of Dr. Patricia A. Monture

Click here for FLSQ queens page for this workshop

via Prof. Kathy Lahey (Kingston) with a reminder that students will have free registration, daytime meals, and a break on the dinner price as well.

Jan. 31, 2014 draft

FLSQ Program: Arctic/Northern Women

Friday, Feb. 28, 2014
11:30 Registration – Robert Sutherland Hall, Policy Studies room 202 – light lunch

12:30 Welcome and introduction to conference themes

Janice Hill, Four Directions Student Centre, Queen’s University
[Elder]

Åsa Gunnarsson, Umeå Forum for Studies on Law and Society, Umeå
University, Sweden

1:00 Keynote address: Eva-Maria Svensson, Gothenburg and Tromso
Universities, Principal’s Development Fund International Visitor –
‘Approaches to Gender Equality in Regional Governance of the Arctic Region’

2:20 Break

2:35 Panel I Governance and Voice: Indigenous Peoples, Women,
Climate, and Corporations

Tahnee Prior, Global Governance Program, Balsillie School of International
Affairs, University of Waterloo — ‘The Rights and Role of Indigenous Women
in Climate Change Regulation’

Vrinda Narain, Faculty of Law and Institute for Gender, Sexuality, and
Feminist Studies, McGill University – ‘Postcolonial Constitutionalism:
Complexities and Contradictions’

Kathleen Lahey, Faculty of Law, Queen’s University – ‘Gender, Indigenous
Peoples, and the Paradox of Plenty in Resource Rich Regions’

4:00 Panel II Appropriations and Dependencies: Women and Earnings,
Livelihoods, Knowledges, and Aging in Arctic Regions

Elena Kotyrlo, Demographic Data Base, Umeå University, Sweden – ‘Earnings
and Labor Force Participation of Native and Immigrant Women in
Vasterbotten and Norrbotten’

Shahnaj Begum, University of Lapland, Rovaniemi, Finland – ‘Livelihood
Transformation in the Arctic: Effects on Older People from a Gender-based
Perspective with a Special Focus on Finnish Lapland’
Lena Wennberg, Umeå Forum for Studies on Law and Society, Umeå
University – ‘Women and Aging in the Arctic Region’

Bita Amani, Faculty of Law, Queen’s University, Kingston, Ontario –
‘Restitution, Repatriation, and Resistance: Reframing the Biopiracy Dialogue
toward Women’s Work and Traditional Indigenous Knowledge’

5:30 Cash bar
6:00 Dinner

7:30 Celebrating Patricia Monture – Her Legacy in Activism and Learning

Kim Pate, Canadian Association of EFrye Societies and University of Ottawa –
‘Canada Corrections and Marginalized Women – Trish Monture’s Legacies’

Rakhi Ruparelia, University of Ottawa – ‘Legal Feminism and the Post-Racism
Fantasy’

Saturday, March 1, 2014

8:30 Registration

9:00 Keynote Address: Rauna Kuokkanen, Department of Political Science and
Aboriginal Studies Program, University of Toronto – ‘Indigenous Economies,
Self-Determination, and Women’s Rights’

10:20 Break

10.35 Panel III Women and Economic Development: Roadmaps and
Strategies

Louise Langevin, Faculty of Law, Laval University – ‘Gender-based Analysis of
Discrimination against Women – ‘Economic Development and Women’s
Bargaining Power’

Kate McInturff, Canadian Centre for Policy Alternatives – ‘Gender Equality
and Women in the Arctic: Mapping the Future’

Gail Baikie, Faculty of Social Work, Dalhousie University – ‘Rhetoric and
Realities: The Mokami Status of Women Council’s Environmental Assessment
Submission’

12:00 Lunch

1:00 Panel IV Gendered Dislocations, Ruptures, and Violences

Hege Brækhus, University of Tromsø, Norway – ‘International Marriages:
Russian Women Marrying Norwegian Men’

Rachel Kohut, Arctic Institute, Montreal – ‘Imagining Birth Dislocated from
Medicine: The Interconnectedness of the State and the Birthing Process
in Canada’s North’

Monica Burman, Umeå Forum for Studies on Law and Society, Umeå
University – ‘Men’s Violence against Sami Women — A blind Swedish Spot’

Cindy Hanson, Adult Education/HRD, University of Regina, Saskatchewan –
‘Gender Lens on the Indian Residential School Claims Process’

3:00 Break

3:30 Panel V Arctic/Northern Prostitution and Sex Trafficking

Marguerite Russell, Barrister and Solicitor (Ont. and UK) – ‘Trafficking in
Women: International Legal Perspectives’

Victoria Sweet, Michigan State University College of Law – ‘Rising Waters,
Rising Threats: Human Trafficking and Other Gender-Related Crimes
in the Circumpolar Region of the United States and Canada’

Åsa Yttergren, Umeå Forum for Studies on Law and Society, Umeå University
– ‘Prostitution and Trafficking in the North of Sweden – The “Swedish Model”
in Action’

4:45 Closing discussion: publication and followup plans

The picture is of a woman’s hand holding an ulu.  The full picture can be seen at the source: http://www.flickr.com/photos/lac-bac/6347653013/in/set-72157628135696830 – the Flickr stream of the Rosemary Gillat Fonds held by Library and Archives Canada.   An ulu is a “woman’s knife” ᐅᓗ.

Women use all kinds of tools, of course.  Have you seen this website – Feeding my Family ?  An eyeopener about food security in the North.  See also 15 Sw. J. Int’l L. 223 (2008-2009)
Northern Frontier, Northern Homeland: Inuit People’s Food Security in the Age of Climate Change and Arctic Melting by the University of Ottawa’s Sophie Theriault. Click here for access via Hein online (not open access),  Another article to consider is Isabel Altamirano-Jiménez (U of A) Nunavut: Whose Homeland, Whose Voices? Canadian Woman Studies26.3/4 (Winter/Spring 2008): 128-134 (also not available open access – try  via ProQuest if you have access to the database through your institution.

CFP: Feminist Legal Studies Queen's presents Arctic/Northern Women: Situating Law & Justice in Development and Equality

This picture of a woman's hand holding an ulu is taken from http://www.flickr.com/photos/lac-bac/6347653013/in/set-72157628135696830 - the Flickr stream of the Rosemary Gillat Fonds held by Library and Archives CanadaFeminist Legal Studies Queen’s (Profs Kathleen Lahey & Bita Amani) has put out a really interesting call for papers, “Arctic/Northern Women: Situating Law and Justice in Development and Equality: In celebration of Dr. Patricia A. Monture“.  Proposals can be submitted up to October 4, 2013.

The picture is of a woman’s hand holding an ulu.  The full picture can be seen at the source: http://www.flickr.com/photos/lac-bac/6347653013/in/set-72157628135696830 – the Flickr stream of the Rosemary Gillat Fonds held by Library and Archives Canada.   An ulu is a “woman’s knife” ᐅᓗ.

Women use all kinds of tools, of course.  Have you seen this website – Feeding my Family ?  An eyeopener about food security in the North.  See also 15 Sw. J. Int’l L. 223 (2008-2009)
Northern Frontier, Northern Homeland: Inuit People’s Food Security in the Age of Climate Change and Arctic Melting by the University of Ottawa’s Sophie Theriault. Click here for access via Hein online (not open access),  Another article to consider is Isabel Altamirano-Jiménez (U of A) Nunavut: Whose Homeland, Whose Voices? Canadian Woman Studies26.3/4 (Winter/Spring 2008): 128-134 (also not available open access – try  via ProQuest if you have access to the database).

 

Arctic/Northern Women: Situating Law and Justice in Development and Equality:  In celebration of Dr. Patricia A. Monture (1958-2010)

Feb. 28-March 1, 2014 in Kingston, Ontario

 

Arctic and northern regions of the globe are undergoing rapid climate, economic, and social changes. This conference will focus on how these changes affect women’s legal, economic, and social status with particular reference to challenges facing indigenous, northern, racialized, and immigrant women. Relevant legal frameworks include international human rights, including the UN Declaration on the Rights of Indigenous Peoples, the Universal Declaration on Human Rights, and the Convention on the Elimination of All Forms of Discrimination against Women; constitutional provisions, including the Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms and section 35 of the Constitution Act, 1982; and domestic laws and policies. This conference is designed to accelerate access to legal and policy research concerning Arctic/northern women, people affected by changes occurring in and as the result of policies in circumpolar states, and proposals for governance and policy reforms.

 

This conference is convened in celebration of the life and work of Dr. Patricia A. Monture, Queen’s Law 1988, Hon. LL.D. (Athabaska and Queen’s), a fierce and proud Haudenosaunee woman who graced the Queen’s and Kingston communities with her tireless teachings as she confronted the realities of racism, colonialism, and Aboriginal existences. For those who wish to address the many challenges and contributions made by Dr. Monture in her work and activism, please see Malinda Smith, ‘Thunder in her soul,’ at http://www.idees-ideas.ca/blog/thunder-her-soul-remembering-patricia-monturex.

 

FLSQ invites academic and practicing lawyers, policy analysts, interdisciplinary and comparative scholars and experts, students in law and other disciplines, community members, and those involved in research and governance to submit proposals for papers that examine issues relevant to this broad area of engagement.

Proposals are invited on the following topics, as well as on others proposed in response to this call for papers:

  • First Nations, Inuit, and Metis women, indigenous women in other regions
  • The ‘paradox of plenty’ and nonrenewable resource extraction
  • Traditional economies and reciprocal relationships
  • Self-governance and political agency
  • Environmental issues, including human and ecological degradation, settlements, and human health
  • Fiscal policies and tax jurisdictions
  • Legal education and legal needs of indigenous and northern women
  • Commons, users, and concepts of property, including traditional knowledges
  • Science, nation building, and militarization in circumpolar states
  • Food, shelter, and wellbeing in northern regions
  • State systems and policy options
  • Demographics of northern and extractive regions
  • Sexual assault, trafficking, and violence
  • Globalization and interstate politics
  • Corporate governance
  • De/re/neo/colonizations
  • Economic development and social inequalities
  • Public services and accountability
  • Maternal and reproductive health
  • International human rights
  • Reproductive health and genetics
  • Law and policy reform related to any of these substantive topics, based on doctrinal, theoretical, empirical, comparative, or interdisciplinary approaches

 

Call for papers:

Submissions grounded in Aboriginal studies, domestic or international law, public policy, social anthropology, history, sociology, economics, philosophy, women’s/gender studies, human rights, or political studies are sought.

 

Date and Location:  The conference will be held at the Faculty of Law building, Macdonald Hall, 128 Union St., Queen’s University, Kingston, Ontario on Friday Feb. 28 and Saturday March 1, 2014.

 

Submitting paper proposals:

If you are interested in presenting a paper or organizing a panel on a specific issue, please email a short outline of your proposal (a paragraph in length) to Kathleen Lahey (at kal2@queensu.ca) or Bita Amani (at amanib@queensu.ca).  A proposal may be made at any time until October 4, 2013.  Participation will be confirmed in November 2013.

 

Travel funding:

When submitting a paper or panel proposal, please indicate whether you would be able to obtain institutional support to attend, or whether you could attend only if you receive funding from Feminist Legal Studies Queen’s.

 

Registration:

Attendance without presenting a paper is welcome, as the goal is to discuss a wide variety of equality and justice issues. Contact the organizers to indicate interest and obtain registration information. Some funding is available to assist students to attend. Registration will open on November 15.

 

 

Accommodation and childcare:

Information on accommodation will be provided on request. Anyone wanting childcare should mention this request so appropriate arrangements can be made.

 

For further information please contact:

 

Prof. Kathleen Lahey                                                  Prof. Bita Amani

Co-Director                                                                 Co-Director

Feminist Legal Studies Queen’s                                 Feminist Legal Studies Queen’s

Faculty of Law, Queen’s University                          Faculty of Law, Queen’s University

Kingston, Ontario                                                       Kingston, Ontario

kal2@queensu.ca                                                        amanib@queensu.ca