Sharing Our Stories of Survival: Native Women Surviving Violence (36 page)

The History and Root Causes of Violence Against Native Women

The history of Native women is often distorted or absent because colonization has caused our memories and stories to be filtered through an unnatural belief system that ignores and devalues women. Femicide (killing women) is an untold part of the
genocide
of Native people. Colonizers targeted Native women for torture, rape, and murder for two reasons: first, because they were Native, and, second, because they were women. The colonizers understood on some level that to destroy Native culture, Native women must be destroyed. Attempts to destroy tribal sovereignty began with the destruction of women’s sovereignty.

Before colonization, the vast majority of tribal peoples had nonviolent lifeways based on the natural belief system, usually represented by a circle (see
figure 3.3
in chapter 3). The natural belief system is based on nonviolence, the relationships between all things, respect, and compassion. Battering does not occur within a belief system that acknowledges and honors the power, role, and sovereignty of women.

“Where are your women?”

The speaker is Attakullakulla, a Cherokee chief renowned for his shrewd and effective diplomacy. He has come to negotiate a treaty with the whites. Among his delegation are women “as famous in war, as powerful in the council.” Their presence also has ceremonial significance: it is meant to show honor to the other delegation ... Implicit in their chief’s question, “Where are your women?” the Cherokee hear, “Where is your balance? What is your intent?” They see the balance is absent and are wary of the white man’s motives. They intuit the power of destruction.

—from the work of Marilou Awiakta, Cherokee
¹

The imposition of an unnatural belief system through colonization denies Native women the right to control their own bodies and lives. The unnatural belief system condones and encourages violence against women by endorsing the misperceptions of male superiority, ownership and control of women and children, and men’s rights to control the environment. Domestic terrorism cannot occur without these unnatural beliefs that objectify women and justify violence against them.

The unnatural belief system is internalized in most Native communities and takes the form of a hierarchy. Hierarchy, represented by a triangle (see
figure 3.1
in chapter 3), is a theory that people have a right to control or be dominant over others based on status or physical and/or economic strength. The colonizing culture created institutions, including governments and nuclear families, to justify, support, and enforce relationships based upon dominance. Hierarchies are built and maintained by violence. It’s like playing “King of the Hill.” People push, kick, punch, pinch, and act violently to get to the top of the hill and must continue to be violent to stay there. Since this is a male-dominated hierarchy, there is no “Queen of the Hill” game.

Colonization is
oppression
. Internalized oppression is a weapon and consequence of oppression. Oppression becomes internalized when Native people believe and act according to the oppressor’s belief system, values, and lifeways as if they were their own. One result of internalized oppression is shame, which can result in Native people disowning their individual and cultural reality. Increased levels of violence, especially against women and children, are the products of internalized oppression. The oppressor doesn’t have to exert any more pressure, because the oppressed now do it to each other and themselves.

The systemic oppression of people through racism, sexism, classism, ableism, and heterosexism is a result of this hierarchy. Native women are harmed by multiple forms of oppression, diminishing their ability to live safely and autonomously. From this perspective, advocacy, safety, and accountability are framed as civil and human rights issues. Identifying the root cause of violence against women as culturally based expands our work to proactive social change with the aim of sovereignty of women throughout society.

Indian tribes must act like Indians. That’s the only justification for preserving internal sovereignty . . . So if we’re going to have internal sovereignty, we’re going to have to bring back the majority of social traditions . . . if we don’t bring those traditions back, then the problems those traditions solved are going to continue to grow. Then we’ll have to get funding to set up programs to deal with those issues ... When you set up programs, you are exercising your internal sovereignty, but the funding sources determine how the program is going to operate and then the funding source defines internal sovereignty.

—Vine Deloria, Jr., American Indian Research and Policy Institute
²

Be clear. Alcohol contributes to, but does not cause, violence against women. Witnessing violence in childhood contributes to, but does not cause violence. Everybody feels stressed, depressed, or angry at some time; not everybody chooses to act violently. Just like childhood abuse and witnessing violence, alcohol is a contributor to violence that intensifies and increases its frequency. These issues must be confronted. But that alone will not end violence.

The Dynamics of Battering

First and foremost, battering is a crime. Therefore, it is also a criminal justice and human rights issue. Battering and the other forms of violence are tactics of terror. The destruction of a person’s or nation’s sovereign rights through acts of terrorism is the destruction of the very essence of who we are as individuals and nations. Amnesty International’s
Report of Torture
includes Biderman’s “Chart of Coercion,” which describes techniques used to torture and brainwash prisoners of war: isolation, monopolization of perception, induced debility and exhaustion, threats, occasional indulgences, demonstrating “omnipotence,” degradation, and enforcing trivial demands.
³
These are the same tactics batterers use to maintain control over their partners. It is no coincidence that they are the same tactics used in the colonization of Native people.

It is imperative that advocates have an intimate understanding of the tactics of battering, especially how tactics interact and overlap in a continuous pattern of behavior. Advocates must remember that when a battered woman seeks the assistance of advocates, this signals to the batterer that he is losing control, which can result in an escalation of physical and sexual violence.

The best source of information on the use of battering tactics is the woman who is being battered. She has expertise about the response of the many programs and institutions from which she has attempted to get help. An advocate needs to look to the woman she is working with for information and often guidance to figure out how to assist her in reestablishing power and control over her life.

Advocacy

Advocates are the
biased
supporters of women who have been battered. There is no other job or position that allows for this stance. Advocates are 100 percent of the time about the sovereignty of women. We are accountable to the women with whom we work, and there should be no conflict of interest.

Being an advocate is powerful in the best sense of the word. Advocates are afforded the challenge and opportunity to make a difference in the lives of our sisters, other relatives, and societies. This work provides an opportunity to reclaim the connections and relationships devastated by colonization and oppression. Advocacy includes providing the following services to individual women:

• Twenty-four-hour crisis line
  
• Shelter
  
• Food and clothing
  
• Transportation and accompaniment to court and other services
  
• General, legal, and medical advocacy
  
• Consciousness-raising/support groups
  
• Information and referrals
  
• Assistance with rent and utilities
  
• Childcare and crisis intervention
  
• Men’s reeducation groups
  
• Probation departments
  
• Children’s programming
  

Advocacy also includes being an agent of social change and providing leadership for coordinated community responses and national initiatives to end violence against women. The list above can be lengthened to include anything a woman needs to be safe and get her life back. The list can be restricted by victim blaming and lack of funds and support. In addition, advocacy programs might suffer due to a lack of creativity or energy, program politics, or barriers imposed from outside agencies.

As Native advocates, we can use our knowledge about kinship and relations as a model for our work with women. We can take the time to visit with our relatives who have been battered or raped, respectfully listen and believe what we are told, validate their expertise, and then take action. Advocates assist sisters and other relatives to accurately define their experiences and
proactively
work to end violence in individual women’s lives and in our communities and society. Advocates focus on women’s safety, accountability, and social change—not the faults of women.

Our relationships with individual women are the fabric of social change. Advocates work side-by-side with our sisters, trust that women know what they need, and prioritize their safety, integrity, and autonomy. The major elements of these relationships include:

• Validating of the voice, expertise, and leadership of women who are battered
  
• Modeling respect, compassion, and nonviolence
  
• Holding ourselves personally accountable for our internalized oppression and behavior
  
• Believing and nonjudgmentally supporting women as whole human beings
  
• Working for women’s sovereignty
  

Advocacy for Social Change

Advocacy is often inappropriately defined in the context of only responding to the individual crises of women who are battered or raped. This type of emergency response is necessary, though reactive; it is waiting until the violence occurs to jump into action. Advocacy requires us to work toward respectful systems that effectively respond to women who are battered. However, systems reform can also be reactive and will not end the violence against women—it doesn’t confront the root cause of the violence. Ending violence against women requires transforming belief systems—social change. Social change to transform belief systems requires working in the political, economic, institutional, and cultural arenas of society.

Tribal nations have the potential to reclaim their natural belief systems and lifeways. The reclamation of tribal culture and ending violence against Native women are interdependent. One cannot happen without the other. Native advocates are blessed with a vision of women and our communities created by our ancestors.

Social Change, Not Social Services!

Advocacy requires clarity about the differences between social change work and the social service model that we are often taught to accept as the norm. Social change is distinct from social service. The typical social service model requires little analysis outside of the individual experiences. The focus is on individual victimization or “dysfunction,” often resulting in victim blaming. The social service model requires separation and detachment from relationships, from other institutions, and from anything deemed political. The social change perspective, however, requires making connections and relationships between individual experiences, oppression, culture, and history. Social change is political; it requires critical analysis of power and control, oppression, and human rights. Social change is a grassroots, collective effort.

Social change requires a proactive stance that brings change to system structures and cultural beliefs. Social service, in contrast, maintains the status quo; it assumes the current functioning of political, medical, and social systems is “natural.” Social service tends to encourage individuals to adapt to the needs of the established political, medical, and economic systems. Social service is an institutional reaction by people in power and requires accountability to funding institutions. Social change to end violence against women, on the other hand, requires accountability to women who are battered.

A social change or grassroots model of advocacy validates the sovereignty of women in all aspects of the work. Our work should move beyond the limitations of a “direct services” approach of mental health or social services. Our work is advocacy and social change.

Would We Be Talking about “Her” If His Violence Was Stopped?

Advocacy should not attempt to analyze or “fix” women. That is victim blaming and does not acknowledge a woman’s sovereignty and ability to make decisions about her life. Focusing solely on women’s behaviors demonstrates that we have not held the batterer accountable and that his violence is allowed to continue. Unfortunately, mental health approaches to domestic violence are still common. Mental health practice is largely based on the American medical model, which does not make connections between individual experiences, culture, history, politics, or spirituality. Mental health approaches do not address the existence of racism, sexism, classism, homophobia, ageism, and other forms of oppression as outgrowths of the unnatural belief system. Consequently, a mental health approach can be ineffective and revictimizing. For Native women, it often works to minimize battering and “treats” individuals rather than addressing the root cause of violence or offender accountability.

Confidentiality

A major responsibility of advocates is to protect and defend the confidentiality of women who are battered. Confidentiality is the cornerstone of safety and can be a matter of life or death. Confidentiality respects the personal sovereignty of the woman who is battered. Betrayal of trust and confidence is an extremely powerful and dangerous tactic of battering and is also a method of colluding with the batterer. If confidentiality cannot be guaranteed, women who are battered have no logical reason to risk trusting anyone with their story or lives. Therefore, advocates must have the ability to maintain the confidentiality of women who are battered.