Reading Assignment: Your reply (under Comments) is due before class on Friday, January 20. Remember, you don’t need to answer all or even any of the questions, but your response should demonstrate you’ve done and thought about the readings.
- Estelle B. Freedman, “Race and the Politics of Identity in U.S. Feminism” (from Unequal Sisters 1-14),
Readings from Alma García’s Chicana Feminist Thought
- Elena Hernández, ”La Chicana y ‘El Movimiento,’” (83-86)
- Anna NietoGomez, “La Femenista” (86-92)
- Enriqueta Vasquez, “¡Soy Chicana Primero!” (197-199)
Optional: Here Comes Everybody – Chapter Two
If you were writing a message to Chicanas and Latinas now, what would you say? What do you feel the most significant issues are? (Note: this could be the basis of a blog post.) Where do you see Chicanas as fitting in to the larger U.S. women’s movement, as discussed by Freeman?
Is there still any taboo against divorce? If so, do you think divorce effects women and men equally? If not, what do you think has changed?
Based on your readings so far, where was the resistance to feminism coming from for both Chicanas and Chicanos in the Movement? Do you agree with Hernández that Chicanas couldn’t afford to fight against their men? What about NietoGomez’s writing that Chicanas have specific issues that the Movement must address? Do these attitudes contradict or complement? From what you’ve read so far, do you agree with NietoGomez that the split between Chicanas was one between Loyalists and Feministas? What does she see as the differences between Anglo feminism and Chicana feminism? What stereotypes about Chicanas and Latinas do the writings address?
In reading “Soy Chicana Primero”, Enriqueta Vasquez’s notion of Chicano connection to La Tierra forced me to consider how sexism towards Chicanas might stem from racism towards Chicanos as a whole. America, and much of the Anglo world, is known to be industrialized and capitalist. Factories, heavy machinery, and imperialism play large parts in white American and European history. Chicanos, however, have a cultural history steeped in farming and connected to nature and the earth. For cultures who work closely with the land, there is an understanding and appreciation of both the male and female forces of nature. Furthermore, the thinking might follow that if Chicano men have seen their wives and daughters and sisters toiling productively in the fields, they will understand that women can be strong and powerful. Why, then, is sexism such an issue in the Latin culture?
This may be due in large part to Anglo influence. Firstly, as Vasquez points out, “This [Gringo] society is only able to function through the…human instinct of rivalry…[the] social structure has reached the point of fracture and competition of the male and female” (198). In trying to break into this “social structure” and gain some upward mobility, Chicano men may have adopted the views of male/female competition. The Chicano is clearly oppressed in Anglo society. In seeing that women are also oppressed in Anglo society, it becomes easier for Chicano men to cite Chicano women as further barriers in the movement for Chicano rights and representation.
In reading “Race and the Politics of Identity in U.S. Feminism” one of the things that sparked an interest is on page 10 where Estelle B. Freedman quotes African American poet Audre Lorde “What color is your goddess?” In response to that question Freedman states, “[a] white female deity matched the white male deity, ignoring the heritage of African spirituality” (Freedman, 10). I think she proves the point in hinting at what the dominant discourse does; even in spirituality or religion we constantly see fair skinned icons, except in the case of La Virgen de Guadalupe. I think it is also important to notice that this is the first essay in the book, and I think it does provide some of that background historical information and places African American, Asian American and Chicana Feminists side by side to look at how their experiences as feminists during the movement were alike. For example African American women were constantly told by black nationalists to focus on the “racial rather than sexual politics” and support the men by taking “women’s roles as wives and mothers” (Freedman, 10). Chicanas were being asked the same thing, the oppressions they faced within the movement were not allowed to be challenged.
From the readings so far, it is evident that the Chicanas felt the most resistance from their fellow brothers (Chicanos) in the movement. The Chicano/a movement as a whole was resisted by the Anglo society. However, Chicana feminists struggled more because they had to overcome the oppression from the Anglos and Chicano [man]. The Chicanas felt more resistance from the Chicanos and were more influence by them because it was coming from their family, their peers, and the cultural group they belonged in. Like Hernandez had mentioned “Chicanos are not accustomed to Chicanas speaking out.” They shot down the ideas of Chicanas, they made them think that they didn’t know what they were talking about, so that the Chicanas would feel disillusioned and keep their mouth shut. Chicanos also accused the Chicanas of being influenced by the Anglo women’s liberation, when in fact feminism had been in their heritage since the Mexican Revolution. There were Mexicana feminists who fought alongside the men, and later went on to fight for their rights. The men could get past their machismo and be sympathetic toward the women.
When reading “Race and the Politics of Identity in U.S. Feminism,” the first few pages struck me how women first were segregated by race but how black women were constantly berated, humiliated, and suppressed more than their white female counters. Black women had to not only deal with antislavery but they too wanted to promote feminism and equality with white women. On page 5 , “Ignoring the voices of African Americans women…” showed how women need to come together, that one group of white women will not help the cause for all women. “Race and the Politics…” was my favorite reading thus far because it was organized and it showed the timeline in which women fought for feminism and included all races. “Women of color who shared feminist goals face dual obstacles,” was an empowering line because all women face suppression and whether being Chicano, Asian, African, or Caucasian, women face the feminism daily. Toward the end of the article speculates how some feminists question if gender and race matter and this surprised me, women have come so far as was described in the reading and feminism continues to struggle so women need to stay together and continue to fight. Thus far this was my favorite article that has been assigned, it showed women’s history and how women of all races came together.
Divorce is definitely still a taboo for families that are conservative, extremely religious and where wives are accustomed to serving their husbands because it’s what they’re familiar with thus, rarely question it. Wives of families that immigrate from another country might endure mental or physical abuse in the U.S. because they fear leaving their husbands and having to create a new life in a country that is foreign to them. They don’t speak the language (English), they are not aware of resources offered to women and it’s difficult to leave their children with strangers in order, to search for a job that does not even pay minimum wage. Divorce still affects women the worst because they usually keep the children and must support them. I strongly agree with Hernandez in “La Chicana y El Movimiento” about double standards and how a divorced woman is sometimes viewed as a “wasted woman” ( from Chicana Feminist Thought 84). I notice that families police each other and especially mother in laws criticize what they view is bad. They feel the need to comment if the daughter in law is not doing her duty as mother and wife. As NietoGomez explains in “La Femenista” wives that speak out against their husbands might be viewed as “Loyalists” making them anti-family, anti-cultural and anti-man . . . (88). Some would think since these wives are in a new country they are letting it go their heads and refusing to do their duty by nature as women which is a stereotype. There’s still a stigma and a guilt women face who ponder or request a divorce since they have always been told to stand by their man no matter what happens for the sake of the family.
Most every time that I read about history in my Chicano Studies classes I’m surprised at how new it is to me after years and years of taking U.S. history. The first three pages alone of Freedman’s excerpt, are events I never could have imagined happening in the U.S. I’d lump it in with my own ignorance of history I’ll admit, but I also recognize the fact that my AP history texts didn’t carry stories about a black woman giving a speech at the YWCA on purpose.
It’s a shame that during the Chicana uprisings, they had to face opposition from not only the Anglo-American community, but from within the movement itself. Chicanas and Chicanos shared that common enemy of the oppressive white man (and still do), but this should have been grounds for understanding, not for Chicanos to continue putting their women down and making “scapegoats” out of them. Chicanas also faced resistance from their female relatives and neighbors who agreed that farmworkers should have their rights as citizens, but did not believe in freedom for Chicanas as well. This is why I believe that Hernández was right in saying that fighting against their fellow Chicanos was not the answer. One of the purposes for the Chicana movement was creating understanding, thus creating strife within the movement would go against that by also creating confusion and disunity.
My message to Latinas and just people in general would be just to have confidence in oneself. Don’t be afraid to pursue something that you want to do because someone else says you cant. They don’t have to be stuck in roles that others tell them they should fill just because of their gender. To me it seems that the resistance that some Chicanas and Chicanos felt with feminism in the movement was that they thought those that supported were taking away from the movement. Also others felt that they were siding with the Anglos, who they saw as their oppressors. To me it seems that there is power in numbers so when trying to say feminist, who were arguing for similar equalities would make the cause stronger. Arguing about how they were not loyal to cause seems to me that they were breaking it and slowing down El Movimiento. They talk about how they want to be one big family but the last time I checked, family supports one another. So by not supporting the Chicanas they weren’t living up to what they wanted to be.
I think that the double standard that was mentioned in Elena Hernández, ”La Chicana y ‘El Movimiento,’” still exists today. Men that sleep with a lot of partners are generally seen as “players” with a sense of admiration from other guys. Yet a woman who sleeps with a lot of partners are looked down upon and label as being “easy”. It just shows how society still holds and judges both men and women at different levels. I don’t think that divorce is as taboo as it used to be. I think that the divorce rate in America is somewhere around 50%. The reason that I think that it has become less taboo is that there are recognize laws that weren’t there before. Like domestic abuse and spousal abuse. I think that the mind set has change from ignoring what happens in the house. Plus I think that the how the mindset of how women should stay by their man no matter what has change. Society has changed its mindset to the point where it recognizes women as an individual person with the same rights as any man.
To identify as a femenista now does not come with the same consequences as it did when this movement first started and I think that says a lot in itself. La femenista shows the limitations of that word which were far more restrictive back then because women wanted to fight for their rights but if they asked for too much or went specific demands they would be seen as traitors and sale outs. This made it a very restricted ground because they wanted to be part of the movement however they also wanted to gain approval, acceptance and recognition. In today’s society however, it is much easier for a woman to identify herself as a feminist without being called a traitor. Nevertheless there is still some criticism towards feminism and up until today there are still many interpretations of the actual meaning of the word. Something that I recently discussed in another class was the way in which women’s success is measured today. The success of a woman seems to be measured based on the male roles that she has taken over. For example, it is thought that women have not been successful in advocating for political power because until present day politics are still male dominated. Women also still create a larger component to secretarial and teaching workforce, but as long as women are aware that they do not have to take what they do not want to take then that counts as our success as well. As Elena Hernandez suggests in “La Chicana y el Movimiento” it is the Chicanas decision to actualize her potential and that does not mean we have to take on every role that a male takes but we do have to take the roles that we want and not those that are expected of us.
Divorce is a very, very sensitive subject for male and females to discuss, but divorced women are looked down on more than divorced men. I think there is a negative conotation when a women says she is divorced because the first thing that might come to mind is most likely was she faithful to her husband. This is unfair to women because not all women get divorces because they were the one that cheated. Perhaps it was their husband that cheated, or their husband was abusing them. I think that the positive and negative aspect of the expectation of married is that they are supposed to be the strongest mentally in the family, whether things are going good or bad. So I guess society expects women, in a subliminal way, to stick out abusive marriages or cheating spouses. If the women decides to get a divorce, she is unfairly stereotyped by society as a familiar. This isn’t fair to women.
Today’s women are strong but I personally think they still need a reminder of their strength. Some of the things mentioned in “La Chicana y ‘El Movimiento'” still hold in today’s society. There still exist a double standard when it comes to love life’s. The double standard about relationships is still held, men can date all the women they want while women are looked down on if she were to do the same. The stigma around divorce is also a big one. If a women is divorced she feels like she has failed in an aspect of life because in the Latino community it is still expected that women should get married, reproduce and stay married. So when this doesn’t occur the women definitely feels like they have failed, but that isn’t so. Back then she was thought of as an instrumental contribution to the movement and just like then we can definitely agree that a divorced woman is NOT a waste of a woman. It takes courage to create change whether it is changing the environment that surrounds us or just our life. So women who find themselves facing divorce should understand and BELIEVE that they are still women, they have not failed anyone and they can do great things even after divorce. As pointed out, a great example of this is Dolores Huerta who went into the United Farm Workers movement. So divorced ladies keep your heads up!