Metis.  There are so many complex questions that continually circulate around what Metis is and who should be considered Metis. Some people question whether there is a difference between the big M and little m Metis people.  People wonder if only the Red River descendants should be allowed to address themselves as Metis. Others suggest that individuals of European and Aboriginal ancestry should be allowed to call themselves Metis.  There are so many questions that go into trying to define these unique people under one definition forgetting to recognize the complexities of these individuals.  These complexities are what make Metis individuals so distinct.  My big idea focusses on the concept of the complexities of being Metis in relation to the multiple definitions that these individuals are faced with. Each person that claims to be Metis is defining themselves based on their preconceived notion of what they believe a Metis person, all Metis people are culturally unique.  This cultural uniqueness comes from the many definitions that are used to describe Metis, there is not one set standard of who is Metis.  This idea contributes to the recent Canadian Supreme Court Case between Daniels vs. Canada which yet again alters the definition of what it means to be Metis. The  of defining Metis peoples has continually been evolving, changing the manner that society approaches Metis people. My big idea contributes to the idea of allowing Metis people and other Aboriginal people to define themselves. Leading into the discussion that people are having about the effects of  having one definitions to describe a vast variety of culturally unique people.  Society should reframe from dictating the way in which people describe themselves.

When researching the complexities of Metis people I focussed on three different ways that individuals seem to define them. The first way individuals defined was through a historical context. This approach to defining Metis peoples looks at their ancestry and allows that to dictate whether or not that individuals will be considered Metis. Many of the provincial Metis Nations across Canada seem to use this definition looking at whether or not an individuals Aboriginal background goes back far enough for them to be allowed to be considered Metis by that particular Nation. Then there is a legal way of defining these individuals,  that addresses the system that the government uses to recognizes Metis individuals today. The historical and legal way of defining people are very connect when it comes to receiving Metis status in Canada or being recognized by any Nation as Metis.  The most influential reason for this is The Powley Supreme Court of Canada decision it the reason that Metis people must prove their ancestry too be eligible for Metis Status in Canada. But the legal definition of Metis people has recently changed again in light of another court decision that now defines Metis peoples as Indians. The way that the government has been delineating Metis people also been changing throughout the years. The last way that people categorize Metis people is based on contemporary definitions, this approach looks at the manner today’s society looks at Metis or how Metis people living today look at themselves. The contemporary definitions are also parallel to the previous definitions that I described, much of the way that individuals define themselves is based on the groups that will accept them or how the government looks at them.  The more I research the more I come to realize the applicability  of these three definitions to the way that Metis peoples have continually been defined.