http://www.democracynow.org/2007/8/7/freedom_next_time_filmmaker_journalist_john

From Democracy Now!:

“Liberal Democracy is moving toward a form of corporate dictatorship. This is an historic shift, and the media must not be allowed to be its façade, but itself made into a popular, burning issue, and subjected to direct action,” said John Pilger. “That great whistleblower Tom Paine warned that if the majority of the people were denied the truth and the ideas of truth, it was time to storm what he called the Bastille of words. That time is now.” We spend the hour airing a recent lecture by the acclaimed Australian filmmaker and muckraker.

Watch it here with realplayer.

Or listen to the mp3 here.

It's a really good speach full of great analysis, and definitely worth the time.

One part I thought was really good:

BBC news routinely describes the invasion as a miscalculation. Not illegal, not unprovoked, not based on lies, but a miscalculation. The words mistake and blunder are common BBC news currency. Along with failure. Which at least suggests that if the deliberate, calculated, unprovoked, illegal assault on defenceless Iraq had succeeded, that would have been just fine.

Whenever I hear these words, I think of Edward Herman's marvelous essay about normalizing the unthinkable. For that's what media cliqued language does and is designed to do. It normalizes the unthinkable of the degredation of war, of severed limbs, of maimed children, all of which I've seen. One of my favorite stories about the cold war concerns a group of Russian journalists who were touring the United States. On the final day of their visit they were asked by their host for their impressions. "I have to tell you," said the spokesman, "that we were astonished to find after reading all the newspapers, and watching TV day after day, that all the opinions on all the vital issues are the same. To get that result in our country we send journalists to the goulag. We even tear out their fingernails. Here you don't have to do any of that. What's the secret?"

And this:

Last year a study published by the Johns Hopkins School of Public Health found that since the invasion of Iraq 655, 000 Iraqis had died as a direct result of the invasion. Official documents show that the Blair government knew this figure to be credible. In February, Les Roberts, the author of the report, said the figure was equal to the figure for deaths in the Fordham University study of the Rwandan genocide. The media response to Robert’s shocking revelation was silence. What may well be the greatest episode of organized killing for a generation, in Harold Pinter’s words, “Did not happen. It didn’t matter.”

It's interesting how killing is so different when Americans/Westerners are the ones doing it.

I felt that the Domecracy Now! clips in between really highlighted the fact that the corporate media just places government figures on our televisions and newspapers with quotations and interviews all day long. They don't place independent people who will challenge and dispute the institutional figureheads.

( also on youtube.. )

The U People Podcast is produced by Sucka For Life and Single Handed Films better known as Hanifah Walidah and Olive Demetrius. We are partners in art and love and we feel fortunate to be able to live as we love and share that with all of you. U People is our documentary film about what happened in a brownstone in Brooklyn one spring weekend where 30 gay, straight women and trans folks of color got together to shoot a not so typical music video. What was caught on B-roll are moments that most can relate to how ever you live your life. So to promote the film we began producing the U People podcast and found their is a community out there that not only supports the film but its message. U People is more than a movie but has been embraced as a movement and we hope this site is a second home for all of U People. -- http://suckaforlife.com/upodcast/about/

Dear Community,

U People is a film that was born out the possibility that our voices are more powerful than ever. If you have heard of U People it is because two women saw an opportunity to do something that hadn’t been done. It is also because our community has lifted us up along the way. We’ve come this far with what we have.

Background in Brief
Hanifah Walidah and Olive Demetrius are two artists who on one spring weekend in Brooklyn, brought together 30 women and trans people of color to create a music video that was the first of its kind. What was captured behind the scenes of the shoot would become a cultural benchmark for a generation. The documentary U People has been met with standing ovations from audiences spanning NY to California. The associated weekly video podcast at iLoveUPeople.com at this point has over 60,000 views.

Click here to watch the U People trailer.

The Crossroads
With everything we have worked towards we have finally reached the inevitable crossroads. LOGO, MTV’s queer network, has proposed broadcast of U People to a nationwide audience. With this blessing come its challenges. In order for the film to be broadcast it must acquire Errors and Omissions Insurance and obtain closed-captioning for the hearing impaired. These combined costs amount to $7,000. An amount that must be raised no later than September 15th, 2008.

We need you to support U People now at this most crucial point in our work. We have provided numerous ways you can support our cause. Whether you pre-order a DVD, buy a download card, donate small or large amounts, together the community that U People has supported will be integral to its eventual broadcast.

A Means to a Dream
* If 700 people donate only $10 we will reach our goal. If you are that 1 in 700 click here

U People is fiscally sponsored by Women Make Movies. If you can make a tax-deductible contribution of over $100 please click here. Contributions over $500, receive a free DVD and prominant credit in the film.

* For more information on ways in which you can support U People click here.

Thank you for being a part of this movement by forwarding this message far and wide.

Hanifah Walidah and Olive Demetrius
U People LLC

http://www.iloveupeople.com/
http://www.suckaforlife.com/upodcast/pages/sugarfund.html

I started my day by reading an article, The Orgasmic Mind: The Neurological Roots of Sexual Pleasure which I was linked to by Delux. The article describes what is going on in your partner's mind as they are reaching an orgasm with you, which is pretty much just totally amazing to read about. One thing the article brings up is that for women, an orgasm requires a certain level of safety and comfort with ourselves and our partners:

Brain activity fell in the amygdala, too, suggesting a depression of vigilance similar to that seen in men, who generally showed far less deactivation in their brain during orgasm than their female counterparts did. “Fear and anxiety need to be avoided at all costs if a woman wishes to have an orgasm; we knew that, but now we can see it happening in the depths of the brain,” Holstege says.

I won't go into how I believe that need is at least in part a reaction to the patriarchal society, which is so violent towards women, that we live in here. But at the end of the article, it talks about how drug companies are creating pills that make it easier to reach orgasm, thereby decreasing our visible need for safety and comfort:

One such experimental compound is a peptide called bremelanotide, which is under development by Palatin Technologies in Cranbury, N.J. It blocks certain receptors in the brain that are involved in regulating basic drives such as eating and sex. In human studies bremelanotide has prompted spontaneous erections in men and boosted sexual arousal and desire in women...

So hold the thought about these orgasm-enabling pills for a minute, and let's talk about love. In All About Love: New Visions, bell hooks speaks to self-love, the act of loving yourself unconditionally, being the foundation for all other love that you are able to give and to receive:

Self-love is the foundation of our loving practice. Without it our other efforts to love fail. Giving ourselves love we provide our inner being with the opportunity to have the unconditional love we may have always longed for receive from someone else. Whenever we interact with others, the love we give and receive is always necessarily conditional. Although it is not impossible, it is very difficult and rare for us to be able to extend unconditional love to others, largely because we cannot exercise control over the behavior of someone else and we cannot predict or utterly control our responses to their actions. We can, however, exercise control over our own actions. We can give ourselves the unconditional love that is the grounding for sustained acceptance and affirmation. When we give this precious gift to ourselves, we are able to reach out to others from a place of fulfillment and not from a place of lack.

One of the best guides to how to be self-loving is to give ourselves the love we are often dreaming about receiving from others. There was a time when I felt lousy about my over-forty body, saw myself as too fat, too this, or too that. Yet I fantasized about finding a lover who would give me the gift of being loved as I am. It is silly, isn't it, that I would dream of someone else offering to me the acceptance and affirmation I was withholding from myself. This was a moment when the maxim "You can never love anybody if you are unable to love yourself" made clear sense. And I add, "Do not expect to receive the love from someone else you do not give yourself." (emphasis mine)

Which then leads me to a quote from this interview at clamor, which I found through brownfemipower later today, that connects love for our own bodies to social justice organizing:

Unfortunately, what I most often witness is people’s trauma around their bodies getting in the way of uniting. As queers, as fat people, as people with disabilities, as people of color, we have often located so much of our pain in our bodies. We internalize so much anger, we get sick from it and throw up walls and make divisions. I get inspired when I see the connections made on an individual level. But on a larger scale I don’t really see it happening yet.

I think there are two main obstacles: 1) Most of us spend a lot of time outside of our bodies. I’m not sure how many people are willing to get into their bodies in the way it would require in order for this kind of movement to build. Phat Camp was an amazing place to witness people going through this. They come in with their brains in a tizzy, wondering “What is empowerment? What is self-acceptance?” and then they realize we don’t want their brains to do the work—we want to go to a deeper place. A place where all of our bodies are unified in the struggle to be whole and real.

2) People who don’t have to think about their power usually don’t. Sometimes I wonder if we can really build anything effectively without figuring out how to cross over and get people to examine their privilege. There is so much mythology about health and wellness, that it’s hard for me to picture having a deep moment with someone who more than anything believes I just need to lose weight. Even if we agree that the prison system needs to end and Bush is a motherfucker.

I see the goal of all work like this to be community building, healing, and revolution. In that order.

A lack of acceptance of our bodies, which can be a very difficult part of self-love, gets in the way of building communities, organizing, and creating healthy interpersonal relationships. And I also find it difficult to picture myself having a deep moment with someone who defines who I am inside by the shape or other characteristics of my body, and who places expectations on my self or my body, one based on the other.

At the 2008 AMC I heard a lot of talk about how the greatest movements of today are built around, and defined in terms of, our love for each other, rather than only on the oppressions we face. About how instead of only focusing on our anger and bringing down our oppressors, this allows us to also act from a place of love and gives us the ability to envision new, positive futures, built upon love, which we can work to replace our oppression with. The above mentioned interview also speaks of this idea in the context of our bodies and otherwise:

LF: Part of what I appreciate so much about this roundtable is being able to listen to and learn from activists who have taken this approach. Some people like to argue for unity on the basis that we all have the same experience—for me that just plants landmines that are going to blow up later. In my activism and my travels, I’ve been able to work with so many different types of people, which teaches me to appreciate our differences and recognize the burdens that people are forced to carry. This helps me learn about what it is to be a human being and break out of the isolation that’s been imposed on me as a transperson. GF: I taught a group of young girls of color last weekend, ages 9 to 12. They’re African-American and Latina. At least one of them had starved herself from the age of nine. We talked about how they wanted to create new magazines and images of beauty. I asked them how this conversation related to self-defense and violence-prevention. One girl said, “You have to know your life is worth something before you can fight to save it.” Others talked about their belief that one can’t work for justice in any community without starting from a place of self-love, or at least working toward that.

If love in our closest relationships can only be found by loving ourselves first, then I see a pill which can replace or obscure our need for love as an assault on, or at least an direct obstacle to, women realizing our need to and thus finding our ability to love ourselves. And if love is at the heart of our movements for social justice, then self-love is at the center of them as well, and I see medicinized apathy towards love as an attack also on our movements for justice, peace, prosperity, health, love, and wholeness for us all.

Instead of pills, or self-help books that teach us to cope without love, what we need is awareness and knowledge about love, knowledge of how we can achieve it through self-love first, and the wisdom and experiences of those who have found it. Awareness of what love is is important because we can't talk about love, or realize and acknowledge where our lives lack love, without this grounding. bell hooks gives us her understanding of love in All About Love: New Visions:

I spent years searching for a meaningful definition of the word "love," and was deeply relieved when I found one in the psychiatrist M. Scott Peck's classic self-help book The Road Less Traveled... he defines love as "the will to extend one's self for the purpose of nurturing one's own or another's spiritual growth." Explaining further, he continues: "Love is as love does. Love is an act of will - namely, both an intention and an action. Will also implies choice. We do not have to love. We choose to love." Since the choice must be made to nurture growth, this definition counters the more widely accepted assumption that we love instinctually. (bolding mine)

I think this definition exposes how unselfish real love is, as loving someone else has nothing to do with yourself, but rather their own independent spiritual growth. (spiritual as in the core of our being, the place where our mind, body and spirit meet, or our whole selves.) hooks then later goes on to clarify and expose our myths about love:

To truly love we must learn to mix various ingredients - care, affection, recognition, respect, commitment, and trust, as well as honest and open communication. Learning faulty definitions of love when we are quite young makes it difficult to be loving as we grow older. We start out committed to the right path but go in the wrong direction. Most of us learn early on to think of love as a feeling. When we feel deeply drawn to someone, we cathect with them; that is, we invest feelings or emotion in them. That process of investment wherein a loved one becomes important to us is called "cathexis." In his book Peck rightly emphasizes that most of us "confuse cathecting with loving." (bolding mine)

These definitions are powerful, as our culture generally defines love simply as some combination of care and affection, which may or may not even be consistent. These definitions expose the truth that where there is no respect, there is no love, regardless of how much care is involved, and likewise for all of these components. Domination, abuse and neglect can not coexist with love when love is acting in a way that continuously embodies all of these ingredients.

We need to know how to find love if we are ever going to have success in our search. But giving and receiving love to and from others is difficult when we are not working toward loving ourselves as well. Using medication to diminish our need for love, teachings that tell us to simply accept a lack of love from others, and beliefs that the love lacking in our lives needs to be found in some external place, as are prominent in mass media, do nothing to help. They all function to hide the need for us to work on loving ourselves, which only pushes us farther away from the love we hope to obtain.

Loving ourselves is not an easy thing to do, but by following a definition such as above, hooks says in All About Love: New Visions, we can see that "action we take on behalf of our or another's spiritual growth provides us with a beginning blueprint for working on the issue of self-love." She goes on to claim self-esteem as being a critical first step toward self-love and gives a clear path toward building self-esteem from the work of Nathaniel Branden:

The wounded heart learns self-love by first overcoming low self-esteem. Nathaniel Branden's lengthly work Six Pillars of Self-Esteem highlights important dimensions of self-esteem, "the practice of living consciously, self-acceptance, self-responsibility, self-assertiveness, living purposefully and the practice of personal integrity."

This approach to self-love rings very true with me, as I can clearly see how working on those same dimensions, without meaning to directly improve my self-esteem, has strongly impacted my ability to love myself and others. Working on any one of these dimensions has strengthened my ability to work on all of the others, and I can see clearly how continuing to work on these will continue to improve my ability to give and receive love. I also greatly appreciate that none of these directions toward self-esteem depend necessarily on the involvement of other people, even though support and exemplary love from those around us can make a huge difference.

There are many books, movies, etc. on the topic of love, but true knowledge about love needs to come from those who have done the work to find self-love. As bell hooks says in Communion: The Female Search for Love:

The women in our culture who have the most to teach everyone about the nature of love are the generation of females who learned through feminist struggle and feminist-based therapy that self-love was the key to finding and knowing love.

We, the women who love, are among a generation of women who moved beyond the patriarchal paradigms to find ourselves. The journey to true selfhood demanded of us the invention of a new world, one in which we courageously dared to rebirth the girl within and welcome her into life, into a world where she is born valued, loved, and eternally worthy.

And I think that "invention of a new world" parallels so perfectly with the work of envisioning, transforming, and rebuilding that is the goal of our movements for social change and justice. That transformation can be done within each of us, and as we work on our own transformations, it will allow us enact them on the world around us. And as queers, as fat people, as people with disabilities, as people of color the act of learning to love ourselves in our bodies is already a radical and powerful movement.

Kabbalists differentiate between two types of jealousy.

The first is the one we're all familiar with, whether we want to admit it or not. It's the pinch in our hearts when our friend gets what we want. That part of us that says, "why him, why not me?"

This is the worst type of jealousy we can ever have.

When we question why someone else is getting something instead of us, that's it, we're cooked. Why? Because when we question why our friend would receive something, we actually disconnect from our friend.

We create division. What happens the moment we create division with our friend? We create a separation between us and the Light. The Light, of course, being the best, most reliable, loving friend we could ever have.

Not only do we not have what we want, but we're also not happy with our friend; we've created a wall between us and them - and ultimately between us and the Light. This keeps us from getting what we want.

It's a vicious circle. Nothing good comes of it.

What shall be done?

Kabbalists explain there is a form of jealousy that is very positive. It's that voice that says, "Wow, I'm so happy for my friend, I'm glad he has that ! You know what, I want that too! I'd be glad to work for that!"

The first type of jealousy emanates purely from the realm of ego and separation. The second is motivational, and it empowers us to work with the law of cause and effect. It shows us the reason we want what our friend has is because they were sent into our life to make us want what they have - to show us that we can have it too!

Of course, we have to work for it, but when we're chasing down our dream, there can't be a consciousness of lack.

In fact most of us wear the Red String to protect us from evil eye, but do we know where evil eye comes from, and what its effects are? Evil eye is the very consciousness of lack. It's the automatic thought that fires off the second we envy someone, "why don't I have that? They don't deserve it - I do!"

Spiritually, it is equated to stealing energy from a person.

This week, find the things you are jealous of. Realize the reason you are seeing these things is to show you - you can have it too!

Next time you're jealous, go positive.

All the best,

Yehuda

-- from kabbalah.com's weekly tune up.

From the Ottawa XPress, by Sara Falconer:

You'd think it would make national headlines: two grandmothers arrested at a border crossing, one forced to the ground by four armed guards, the other in handcuffs, having a heart attack. But a telling silence surrounds these allegations of brutality against Mohawk women by the Canadian Border Services Agency (CBSA).

On June 14, Katenies and Kahentinetha, publishers of Mohawk Nation News (www.mohawknationnews.com), were crossing the border at Cornwall after a visit to family members in the United States. When it was discovered that Katenies had an outstanding warrant for allegedly "running the border" in 2003, they were forcibly pulled from the car.

Both women say that they were beaten by multiple CBSA guards. Sixty-eight-year old Kahentinetha suffered a heart attack while she was handcuffed. Her brother, a local lawyer who was crossing the border at the same time, intervened and she was taken to a hospital by ambulance.

Akwesasne, where Katenies lives, is a Kanion'ke:haka (Mohawk) community that stretches across so-called Ontario, Quebec and New York. And therein lies the problem: Many indigenous people do not recognize the jurisdiction of colonial law over their lives and territories. It's not lawlessness, but rather adhesion to a constitution and a law that is thousands of years old.

A CBSA investigator who testified against her at her July 16 bail hearing said that Katenies "has nothing but contempt for the Canadian judicial system." He admitted that it is "not uncommon" for Mohawks to cite the lack of jurisdiction to border officials, although he called Katenies "an extreme case." The CBSA did not respond to calls for further comment.

But just as this is no isolated incident, there is little to indicate that Katenies is particularly extreme. Since 2003, she has steadfastly challenged the Canadian government to prove that it has any jurisdiction over Mohawk people or land. Despite the fact that she formally filed a motion to dismiss based on this issue in 2007, there has been no response.

"I've had no respect. No one has looked at what I've put forward," she said. "I don't see why you should incarcerate me and beat me into submission without answering my question." Against protests by the Crown, she was released into the custody of her mother, Nancy Davis, who told the court with a smile, "I'm the only one who has authority over my daughter."

Kahentinetha is now resting at home in Kahnawake. Katenies' next court date is July 14 in Cornwall. Her supporters are encouraging people to pack the courtroom.

"It's this kind of behaviour that motivated criticism of Harper's symbolic apology [for residential schools]," says Karen Cocq of No One Is Illegal Ottawa. "The Canadian state has clearly not relented in its brutal colonial assault on First Nations people in this country. It's a case of their actions speaking louder than words." Visit www.noii-ottawa.blogspot.com for updates.

No One Is Illegal Ottawa blog.

Vote I Like It!

Invincible is part of the amazing all-female hip-hop crew, Anomalies.

"Trans" often comes to mean the idea that your body/sex (possibly at birth) and your gender don't match in some way.

I would like to see some debunking of the idea that people do/should have a recognizably unambiguous gender.

I would also like to see debunking of the expectation that when naked, bodies do/should have a recognizably unambiguous sex.

A new book by Sherene Razack !

Casting Out: The Eviction of Muslims from Western Law and Politics

Mustapha Pasha, Chair in International Relations, University of Aberdeen says:

‘Casting Out is a fabulous contribution to a growing literature on new modes of imperial management since 9/11, combining rich theoretical perspectives, interpretation, and empirical detail. Sherene H. Razack systematically explores the reframing of religious identity within received and innovative imaginaries of race, legal classification, and gender with authority and elegance. In this ambitious, but highly successful book, she examines, with almost surgical precision, the micro-processes of legality, the inextricable link between sexuality, race, and state-sponsored torture, and the inscription of the camp in quotidian practices of Muslim immigrants.’

Amazon's product description:

Three stereotypical figures have come to represent the ‘war on terror’ – the ‘dangerous’ Muslim man, the ‘imperilled’ Muslim woman, and the ‘civilized’ European. Casting Out explores the use of these characterizations in the creation of the myth of the family of democratic Western nations obliged to use political, military, and legal force to defend itself against a menacing third world population. It argues that this myth is promoted to justify the expulsion of Muslims from the political community, a process that takes the form of stigmatization, surveillance, incarceration, torture, and bombing.

In this timely and controversial work, Sherene H. Razack looks at contemporary legal and social responses to Muslims in the West and places them in historical context. She explains how ‘race thinking,’ a structure of thought that divides up the world between the deserving and undeserving according to racial descent, accustoms us to the idea that the suspension of rights for racialized groups is warranted in the interests of national security. She discusses many examples of the institution and implementation of exclusionary and coercive practices, including the mistreatment of security detainees, the regulation of Muslim populations in the name of protecting Muslim women, and prisoner abuse at Abu Ghraib. She explores how the denial of a common bond between European people and those of different origins has given rise to the proliferation of literal and figurative ‘camps,’ places or bodies where liberties are suspended and the rule of law does not apply.

Combining rich theoretical perspectives and extensive research, Casting Out makes a major contribution to contemporary debates on race and the ‘war on terror’ and their implications in areas such as law, politics, cultural studies, feminist and gender studies, and race relations.

From the back cover, Meyda Yegenoglu, Professor of Sociology, Middle East Technical University, Ankara says:

In Casting Out Sherene H. Razack articulates, in a highly creative manner, several different theoretical frameworks in an effort to unravel the specific nature of racism, or what she calls “race thinking” in the modern world. The results of her examination are of great importance to research into contemporary forms of racism, the making of empire, and the role that feminism plays in the process. This is an original and valuable work that offers insights into such fields as feminist studies, globalization studies, postcolonial and colonial studies, and law.

There is a book launch going on this weekend in Toronto entitled "The War Works Hard":

The University of Toronto Press and the Department of Sociology and Equity Studies in Education of the Ontario Institute for Studies in Education of the University of Toronto, cordially invite you to

An anti-war event to launch CASTING OUT: THE EVICTION OF MUSLIMS FROM WESTERN LAW & POLITICS by
Sherene H. Razack

FRIDAY JUNE 20, 7pm

Noor Cultural Centre
23 Wynford Drive
$5 requested at the door
music, tea and hors d'oeuvres!
wheelchair accessible

Featuring.

Jehad in Motion: video installation by Richard Fung
The poems of Dunya Mikhail, The War Works Hard
Presentation "Is Muslim Now a Race?' by Sherene Razack

From the BBC:

Cuba has authorised sex-change operations and will offer them free to qualifying citizens, officials say.

The move is the latest in a series of policy changes implemented by President Raul Castro since he succeeded his elder brother, Fidel, in February.

Raul Castro's daughter, who heads the National Centre for Sex Education, spearheaded the changes in a country renowned for sexual conservatism.

Heh, "sex-change". It's not clear what all counts as a "sex-change" operation, if they are only supporting a full sex-reassignment for MTF individuals (since MTF trans peeps get all the spotlights and such) or a wider variety of surgical options, and for people along both spectrums. Hopefully the latter.

Raul Castro's daughter, Mariela, has also pushed for the state to recognise same sex unions and inheritance rights.

But yeh, it's cool, and yet another place for Ontario to look up to. Also I can't wait for the anti-homophobia momentum in Brasil and now Cuba to push its way through all of the Caribbean and South/Central America.

From http://www.t-vox.org/index.php?title=Cisgender_Privilege (linked from postqueer)

This list is intended for those who are interested in considering how their privilege as a cisgender (non-trans) person affects their lives, and how that makes their experiences in the world substantially different from transgender, genderqueer, and gender non-conforming people; it is intended to show the reader how ze benefits from being cisgender. It is NOT intended to be a list of things that all cisgender people have and all transgender people do not have.

This list was originally created under the following definition of the word cisgender:

A person whose determinations of hir sex and gender are universally considered valid.

It is the opposite of transgender, or a person whose determination of hir sex and/or gender is not universally considered valid. This definition was chosen in preference to more common definitions (a)someone who identifies with the sex and gender ze was assigned at birth, or (b)someone who conforms to gender norms to:

1. Draw attention to the central role of gender policing in cisgender privilege/trans oppression;
   
2. Validate the identities of gender conforming transpeople as their gender of choice, rather than assignment; and
   
3. Take account of a large variety of gender variant identities and expressions that are not necessarily in direct contradiction with identifying as a member of one's assigned sex/gender, such as crossdressers, butches, genderqueers, drag performers, bigenderists, two spirit, travesti, and so forth. Even highly feminine men and masculine women who in no way identify with the term transgender may find themselves lacking some privileges in this checklist--that is to be expected.

Some highlights from the checklist..

1) I expect non-discrimination acts that apply to me to cover the most prevalent vectors of discrimination against me. I expect laws banning the creation of a hostile work environment will ban the use of offensive language about me.

4) I expect access to healthcare.
a. I cannot be denied health insurance on the basis of my gender.
e. Treatments which permanently or semi-permanently change my body are available to me immediately, based on my informed consent, ability to pay, and, if applicable, medical need.
f. If I am accessing medical treatment, my informed consent is verified in, at most, a one-hour consult made before the beginning of treatment.
m. I expect that medical care will be crafted to suit my own particular needs. I expect to be able to access treatment A without accessing treatment B, if treatment B will do nothing to advance my particular needs.

7) I expect my gender to not unduly affect my ability to travel internationally.
a. My gender presentation is legal in all countries.
d. I expect that my documentation will decrease suspicion about me.

8) Information important for me to keep private will not be revealed by:
b. My identification
d. The language used to refer to me
g. Accidental pregnancy
h. My face and neck

9) Perception/acceptance of my gender is generally independent of:
c. My adherence to traditional roles of my gender
f. My sexual choices/desires
g. Being assertive, aggressive, or passive
h. Being in a position of power
i. Being intellectual
n. My musical taste
o. My hairstyle
r. Whether or not I have had a medical procedure

10) Bodies like mine are represented in the media and the arts. It is easily possible for representations of my naked body to pass obscenity restrictions.

12) Wronging me is taken seriously
a. Those who wrong me are expected to know that it is hurtful, and are considered blameworthy whether or not they intended to wrong me.

19) For me, there is little-to-no conflict between being recognized as a member of my gender, and resisting sexism.

24) My potential lovers expect my genitals to look roughly similar to the way they do, and have accepted that before coming to bed with me.

29)My right to inhabit my currently chosen gender is universally considered valid

My whole family was counting on me too. But I couldn't handle the pressure so I ran off with some guy and quit school. By the time I realized I'd made a mistake it was too late. I was left with no education and nothing I was qualified to do. It took me years to get back. And honey, if you wonder why I seem to fit so well here, it's because I worked damn hard to get here and I know I deserve it. And your problem is is that you don't know you deserve it. Will knows it and I know it, but unless you know it there is nothing more I can say.

-- Aunt Viv

Statement by Quebec Native Women’s Association/Femmes Autochtones du Québec
Re : Government of Canada’s Residential School Apology
June 11, 2008

Quebec Native Women recognizes the Prime Minister’s official apology concerning the genocidal experience of Aboriginal people in the history of the Residential School system. While the apology to Aboriginal peoples is long overdue it is contradicted by the oppressive policies of the Indian Act.

The heinous crimes committed against Aboriginal children who were victims and survivors of the Residential School experience must be dealt with beyond mere apologies and monetary compensation.

The damages to our languages, well-being, social and political structures, and sexuality caused by Residential School, demands attention. The policy of assimilation through the Residential Schools system constituted a war against an identifiable group of people.

And while we commend the Canadian Government on the creation of a Truth and Reconciliation Commission we cannot ignore the Auditor General’s recent report substantiating that budgets for child welfare agencies in Canada continue to focus the majority of their efforts on the placement of Aboriginal children outside their communities and Nations. This type of practice is reminiscent of the Residential School policy.

Consequently, the Canadian Government must acknowledge that Residential School was an act of genocide; a crime against humanity. Apologies may be recognized but they are not necessarily accompanied by forgiveness as no nation or groups have ever been forgiven for their acts of genocide.

In order for this apology to be considered genuine, more efforts must be undertaken to correct current oppressive measures under the Indian Act that prevent Indigenous peoples from prospering socially, culturally, politically and economically.

The actions of the Canadian Government in opposing the United Nations Declaration on the Rights of Indigenous Peoples makes the apology feel hollow. Their opposition to the UNDRIP perpetuates the insidious, archaic Indian Act that continues to discriminate and deny Aboriginal nations their rights. The facts and arguments reflecting the manner in which the Canadian Government continues to undermine the rights of Indigenous peoples, can be found in Amnesty International’s 2008 Annual Report.

We therefore urge the Government of Canada to adequately fund Indigenous languages in a manner that is equivalent to the support given to the French and English languages; to adequately consult Aboriginal peoples in good faith on legislation that addresses issues such as matrimonial real property, Bill C-21, Bill C-47; Bill C-30 and to eliminate the sexual discrimination that exists under Section 6 of the Indian Act.

In order for Aboriginal communities to emerge from the negative impacts of colonization they must have access to their lands and resources; they must have the opportunities to build strong and healthy nations by taking to task the social and economic problems whose roots are firmly based in colonization.

Canada has established itself as a rich and prosperous country at the expense and blood of Aboriginal peoples. And while we may recognize the Government’s admission of guilt, the fact remains that many obstacles must be removed in order to give meaning to the spirit and intent of their apology.

i think it can be easy to mistake an experience of not being given privilege that you are used to with being oppressed.