Analysis Of Claiming Anishinaabe: Decolonizing The Human Spirit

Claiming Anishinaabe: Decolonizing the Human Spirit by Lynn Gehl is a simple and extraordinary book that has the power to inspire. Gehl shows the reader through her immense amount of research, introspection, and will to fight against Canada that not only is Indigenous knowledge important to compare with Western philosophy, but so is the fact that everyone has the right to achieving mino-pimadiziwin, or, the good life. I enjoyed reading this book as it educated me about the changing lifestyle Aboriginals have faced in the last century, but also showed me they live a very special way of life that is important to be kept a tradition. Gehl has a great knowledge of the subject she is writing about and has worked very hard to gather evidence to show
She showed how her knowledge from Western schooling pushed her to learn more about Indigenous knowledge and how both forms can have a strong impact on the world. Also, it took a vast amount of strength for Gehl to overcome her position in society according to the Indian Act and fight against the government to achieve for herself, the good life. In this book, many topics are touched upon that bring to surface the problems within the Canadian government and the issues the government imposes onto the Aboriginal population. Lynn Gehl in Claiming Anishinaabe: Decolonizing the Human Spirit proves that sexism within the Indian Act of 1876, racialization and discrimination, colonialism through unfair treaties and denial of traditional Aboriginal land are all issues that affect the lives of the Aboriginal community and make their struggle towards Aboriginal status and mino-pimadiziwin much greater. In my analysis, I will show how racialization, discrimination, and colonialism has affected the Indigenous community and how sexism has both directly affected women in the Aboriginal community and Gehl in the process of achieving Indian
The sexism also made young women and mothers vulnerable as they and their children could lose status and the rights of the treaties. The Indian Act made it so women who marry non-Indians to diversify the genetic makeup of a nation lose their Indian status. From the article “The Queen and I: discrimination against women in the Indian Act continues” written by Lynn Gehl, she states that the law saying Indian women lose their status after marrying a non-Indian “stripped women of their rights socially, politically, and economically and made them dependent people” (Gehl, 2000). According to the government, Indian people who no longer held Indian status also no longer had access to traditional land and the bounty it provides and traditional hunting and gathering practices. With this view, having less people acquire Indian status means that there is less land that they have to “sacrifice” treaty rights for them. This act made women and children very vulnerable because it took away their access to traditional land, hunting and gathering grounds, healthcare and education systems. For women that strive to have children and marry a non-Indian man in order to provide genetic diversity and live in remote locations in Canada, treaty rights for themselves and their children is a must. Another example of how