Men, Masculinity, and the Indian Act

Men, Masculinity, and the Indian Act reverses conventional thinking to argue that the sexism directed at women within the act in fact undermines the well-being of all Indigenous people, proposing that Indigenous nationhood cannot be realized or reinvigorated until this broader injustice is understood.

---

Canada’s Indian Act is infamously sexist. Through many iterations of the legislation a woman’s status rights flowed from her husband, and even once it was amended to reinstate rights lost through marriage or widowhood, First Nations women could not necessarily pass status on to their descendants.

That injustice has rightly been subject to much scrutiny, but what has it meant for First Nations men? Martin J. Cannon challenges the decades-long assumption of case law and politics that the act has affected Indigenous people as either “women” or “Indians” – but not both. He argues that sexism and racialization within the law must instead be understood as interlocking forms of discrimination that have also undercut the identities of Indigenous men through their female forebears.

By restorying historically patriarchal legislation and Indigenous masculinity, Men, Masculinity, and the Indian Act makes a significant contribution to a transformative discussion of Indigenous nationhood, citizenship, and reconciliation.