how indigenous people navigate the difficulties of their experiences within spaces which contest their epistemology. Utility of this approach stems from diverse background of marginalized groups across societies and cultures whose unique experiences have been rejected and suppressed within a majoritarian intellectual knowledge production. However, the analysis of these experiences is not the cycle of accumulation of stories, of lived experiences, and in turn, doesn’t produce limitless subjective narratives to obstruct objective knowledge. Martin Nakata is the foremost propounder of indigenous standpoint theory. Indigenous standpoint, as well as feminist theory, expect the “knower” to address their social status of privilege to those they are researching. When addressing ourselves as ‘knowers’ into the setting, the intention isn’t to realign the focus, however, to include the social relations within what we as “knowers” know. This is a matter of respect as the researcher is expected to declare who they are and on what basis they write. This “self-awareness is fundamental to the research process because it should result in a researcher role that is respectful and not disruptive, aggressive or controlling”. An Indigenous ‘knower’ does not possess a predisposed ‘readymade critical stance’ on the world, rather it presents questions required to answer before able to produce objective knowledge. Thus, this engagement enables us to create a critical Indigenous standpoint. This in itself doesn’t determine truth, however, produces a range potential argument with further possible answers. The arguments established, however, still, require its basis to be rational and reasonable and answer the logic and assumptions on which they were established. Thus, arguments cannot assert a claim of truth on an idea because they, the Indigenous individual, are a part of the Indigenous community as the theory wouldn’t allow to authorise themselves solely truthful on the basis of their experience. Indigenous standpoint theory is facilitated by three principles, defined by Martin Nakata. Nakata's first principle states: “It would, therefore, begin from the premise that my social position is discursively constituted within and constitutive of complex set of social relations as expressed through social organization of my every day”. This denotes that one’s social position is established and acknowledgement of social relations within factors such as social, political, economic and cultural, impacts and influence who you are and structure your everyday life. Nakata's second principle states: “This experience as a push-pull between Indigenous and non-Indigenous positions; that is, the familiar confusion with constantly being asked