The author is a professor of literature in Montreal, editor-in-chief of the journal Argument and essayist. He notably published These words qthey think for us (Liber, 2017) and The prose of Alain Grandbois. Where to read and reread The Travels of Marco Polo (Note bene, 2019).
The “positive discrimination” measures imposed on universities for their recruitment of professors-researchers raise many questions related to justice, the egalitarian character, the transparency of the hiring process, not to mention the role of excellence in the choice of the best candidates. These issues, which are fundamental in a democracy, have been mentioned and analyzed by many commentators. There is one, on the other hand, which has not yet received all the attention it deserves: that which surrounds the principle of self-identification.
Indeed, applicants are asked, within the framework of these positive action measures, to self-identify as being Aboriginal people, persons with disabilities, women, or as belonging to one or other racialized or gender minorities.
However, as the requests for self-identification of the genre will multiply (and we can be certain that they will multiply), while becoming more and more imperative for obtaining a chair of the Canada, then from a position at the university, in cultural institutions, in the various administrations, etc., they will inevitably give rise to false declarations.
We have already seen, in recent years, in Canada, at least three women claiming to be indigenous, when, it seems, they were not: filmmaker Michelle Latimer, in 2020; so-called “knowledge keeper” Suzy Kies, also co-chair of the Indigenous Peoples Commission of the Liberal Party of Canada and, incidentally, instigator of book burnings in Ontario; and, more recently, researcher Carrie Bourassa of the University of Saskatchewan, who was also scientific director of the Institute of Aboriginal Peoples’ Health.
“Self-indigenousness”
And we can be absolutely certain that there will be others, just as we will see the number of candidates for positions here and there skyrocket who will assert their belonging to a racialized or gender minority, since these self- identifications will become sought-after sesames.
If one doubts it, it suffices to be convinced of it to consider that a word has already been invented to define the first phenomenon: “autochtonisation”. According to the Employment Equity Act, it is enough to have a parent from a “visible minority” to be deemed to belong to a “visible minority”, which opens the door to interested genealogical research. While declaring oneself non-binary or bisexual, for example, does not commit to anything very specific in terms of behavior or romantic relationships.
In turn, these fraudulent self-identifications will obviously force the institutions concerned to engage in increasingly thorough checks. But how ? Already, following what is known as the “Carrie Bourassa affair”, the University of Saskatchewan has changed its hiring rules. Self-identification is no longer enough, it is now necessary to prove one’s identity, which does not fail to generate other imbroglios.
Thus, this university rejected some time ago the candidacy of Réal Carrière, a professor of Aboriginal studies who had been selected by a unanimous jury and himself composed of Aboriginal professors, because he could not provide written proof of his assumed identity.
Will it then be necessary to restore the honor to these “statutes of purity of blood” which were once current in the Spanish Empire and to require each candidate to prove, family tree in hand, the reliability of his identity through the public exposition of its origins? Will the state also have to go back into the bedrooms of these same candidates to ensure that they really belong to a sexual or gender minority?
This kind of intrusion into privacy is likely to become unavoidable in the verification of these claimed identities. Especially since the disputes that will inevitably arise on this subject will inevitably end up before the courts, which will therefore have the delicate task of deciding these questions of identity, of decreeing who is truly indigenous, truly racialized, authentically non-binary, etc. Good luck !
To settle this question definitively, we could also make sure, as we do in other places for religious affiliation, that this identity is recorded in official documents and the inside pages of our passports. No need then to continue to self-identify. The problem would finally be solved. But at what cost ? And would that really be progress?