In this chapter titled “Women’s Daily Mobility at the U.S.-Mexico Border” by Ellen R. Hansen speaks about how mobility (getting around) for the women is effected, and how “…women’s mobility illustrates gender roles and relations”(36). For the women to travel between Douglas, Arizona & Auga Prieta, Sonora, Mexico for work their daily mobility was effected vastly by the attacks at the world trade center on September 11, 2001. I honestly never even really thought about how anyone was affected by September 11th other than Americans. I understand that goes with nationality and being unaware, but I honestly never really considered it. Because the U.S.-Mexico border is so unpredictable and can be opened and closed over time, September 11th caused harsher security measures where people were being watched and inspected and it increased the time in which these women spent going over the border to work. For many of the women their days are so specifically planned on when they leave home, coordinating with their childcare providers, transportation, grocery shopping, etc.
Transportation out of all of the women’s day it probably the most important key to their mobility. However transportation is gendered as well. There was a story of one woman who would coordinate dropping off various family members with their families’ only vehicle to her own work schedule. There was a woman where she and her husband would do a lot of driving and trading off driving throughout the day, but whenever she and her husband were together in the car he would always drive. This part of the gendered aspect speaks volumes of how these couples may be modern or the new generation, but yet many traditional values/roles still present themselves in small situations.
The last piece about transportation that was brought up that was very interesting the in Auga Prieta there is a public transportation system that is reliable although it is considered unreliable so most women choose to walk. Compared to the public transportation system in Douglas, Arizona that does not exist although the roads are modern and paved and the roads in Auga Prieta are not. It is interesting that here in the United States that there is no transportation system where you would that there would be one. I wonder if one has not been developed for a reason. Is the government and local officials trying to make a way where it would be harder of these Mexican and Indigenous women to get to work? This sounds like a nationality based discrimination to decreased mobility. Just a few thoughts.
Saturday, November 15, 2008
Women and Change Pg. 19-35
This chapter of Women and Change titled “The Unsettling, Gendered Consequences of Migration for Mexican Indigenous Women” by Elizabeth Maier speaks about how the traditionally gendered roles have been dramatically changed thanks to women entering the workforce/who have been working. In recent years since more and more women have been going to work, more and more families are moving away from patriarchal control, and through these changes women are finding empowerment, entitlement, and citizenship.
Migration which is often times hard creates a new type of network of these migrant workers who move to communities along the U.S.-Mexico Boarder. It is said that “migrant networks ease adaptation in unknown socioeconomic and cultural environments. They are cultural support systems wrapped around gender-based social diversions that orient recent arrivals as to how to satisfy basic needs, administer natural resources, and find employment, or contact coyotes for crossing the boarder” (23). This sounds like a self-serving kind of network where people who do migrate to different areas and would not otherwise know anyone or anything, it is set up for people to acquire what they may need without having to go to the government for it, or worse, starve. This kind of networking is not only just amongst migrant workers, but it is gendered.
The gendered networking helps the “new” and “progressive” women who are working with a different set of necessities than those created for migrant workers. These women not only have to worry about basic needs, or finding jobs, but they have their families to worry about. These women have created networks where solidarity is created first. Other women understand and sympathize with each other and understand although they may work and feel like “modern” women, they still have to care of their families, the home, etc.
For these women this gendered work can be helped in some ways and hindered in others. One woman recounted how she always asks her sons to help her out with house work by cleaning their rooms or making their beds, however they don’t which adds to the work that she has to do in the home after putting a full day outside of the home. I quickly scribbled as a side note asking the question if machismo will ever change as new generations come in that have been used to home where gendered roles are much more progressive? Really I want to know will these sons ever get off their lazy behinds and help their mothers.
Secondly, for the women who are doing gendered roles, it is lucky for those who can get their hands on modern convinces like cars or dishwashers, refrigerators, etc. because the workload is cut into half. I could see that possibly happening because it is said that gender is ever changing thanks to relocation, generation differences, but it takes time. It is said that
“…gender is particularly prone to readjustments and rearrangement. Newfound niches of female socioeconomic activity, together with the evolving demise of arranged marriages, second-generation access to sexual education and family planning, bilingual and trilingual proficiency, increased schooling for girls, and the emergence of some women professionals all suggest an ongoing blurring of the strict sexual divisions of hometown community life” (27).
In these women is an increased sense of entitlement. What kind of entitlement is the first question that came to my head. These younger women who work as maquiladoras are a new generation and “they have a better understanding of mestiza culture, exhibit greater participation in intercultural institutions, and display more complexity and determination in the formulation of chains” (30). These women understand where they still need to respect their culture and cultural expectations however, they have found that place where they are able to negotiate what they want, who they want to be and still have that respect for culture. These women are educated, they decide when they marry, but still be able to honor traditional values as much as possible without conflicting too much with their new set of traditions and values.
Migration which is often times hard creates a new type of network of these migrant workers who move to communities along the U.S.-Mexico Boarder. It is said that “migrant networks ease adaptation in unknown socioeconomic and cultural environments. They are cultural support systems wrapped around gender-based social diversions that orient recent arrivals as to how to satisfy basic needs, administer natural resources, and find employment, or contact coyotes for crossing the boarder” (23). This sounds like a self-serving kind of network where people who do migrate to different areas and would not otherwise know anyone or anything, it is set up for people to acquire what they may need without having to go to the government for it, or worse, starve. This kind of networking is not only just amongst migrant workers, but it is gendered.
The gendered networking helps the “new” and “progressive” women who are working with a different set of necessities than those created for migrant workers. These women not only have to worry about basic needs, or finding jobs, but they have their families to worry about. These women have created networks where solidarity is created first. Other women understand and sympathize with each other and understand although they may work and feel like “modern” women, they still have to care of their families, the home, etc.
For these women this gendered work can be helped in some ways and hindered in others. One woman recounted how she always asks her sons to help her out with house work by cleaning their rooms or making their beds, however they don’t which adds to the work that she has to do in the home after putting a full day outside of the home. I quickly scribbled as a side note asking the question if machismo will ever change as new generations come in that have been used to home where gendered roles are much more progressive? Really I want to know will these sons ever get off their lazy behinds and help their mothers.
Secondly, for the women who are doing gendered roles, it is lucky for those who can get their hands on modern convinces like cars or dishwashers, refrigerators, etc. because the workload is cut into half. I could see that possibly happening because it is said that gender is ever changing thanks to relocation, generation differences, but it takes time. It is said that
“…gender is particularly prone to readjustments and rearrangement. Newfound niches of female socioeconomic activity, together with the evolving demise of arranged marriages, second-generation access to sexual education and family planning, bilingual and trilingual proficiency, increased schooling for girls, and the emergence of some women professionals all suggest an ongoing blurring of the strict sexual divisions of hometown community life” (27).
In these women is an increased sense of entitlement. What kind of entitlement is the first question that came to my head. These younger women who work as maquiladoras are a new generation and “they have a better understanding of mestiza culture, exhibit greater participation in intercultural institutions, and display more complexity and determination in the formulation of chains” (30). These women understand where they still need to respect their culture and cultural expectations however, they have found that place where they are able to negotiate what they want, who they want to be and still have that respect for culture. These women are educated, they decide when they marry, but still be able to honor traditional values as much as possible without conflicting too much with their new set of traditions and values.
Tuesday, November 11, 2008
Women and Change at the U.S.-Mexico Border pg 3-16
The book “Women and Change at the U.S.- Mexico Border” by Doreen J. Mattingly and Ellen R. Hansen opens up with speaking about the roles such as family life and working in factories, home life, etc. for the women who work in cities along the U.S.-Mexico boarder. They say that these women are apart of a larger force. They are apart of a movement. The chapters in the book helped the reader though stories learn about these women's experiences which include genders as a changing social construct, how gender is still a challenge in which these women must negotiate when working in these factories and raising families, and also that the U.S.-Mexico boarder is a type of window that allow a way in which women will cross boundaries if not physically but mentally.
Section one of book titled Women’s Mobility speak of gendered roles for men and women and that geographic mobility it in fact effected by gender. Through the different chapters in the section one will learn how migration effects indigenous women along the boarder, also how mobility is gendered through the division of labor- the reality is that men and women hold different jobs and have a different set of responsibilities and obligations.
The next section is about Labor and Empowerment in the Boarder Region it is said that a woman being employed is a “catch-22” or a “double-edged sword”. This section also offers theories to the reasoning of why industrialization has gendered impact.
In the last section titled Activist Women Changing the Border touches on how working conditions are for these women and problems and reasons why they choose to cross the border. Some reasons has been that there is a development of colnias at a very staggering rate creating new communities along the border. These women became activists due to the needs that we not reached in the lower-income communities. Also these women have formed NGO’s which are like unions.
Section one of book titled Women’s Mobility speak of gendered roles for men and women and that geographic mobility it in fact effected by gender. Through the different chapters in the section one will learn how migration effects indigenous women along the boarder, also how mobility is gendered through the division of labor- the reality is that men and women hold different jobs and have a different set of responsibilities and obligations.
The next section is about Labor and Empowerment in the Boarder Region it is said that a woman being employed is a “catch-22” or a “double-edged sword”. This section also offers theories to the reasoning of why industrialization has gendered impact.
In the last section titled Activist Women Changing the Border touches on how working conditions are for these women and problems and reasons why they choose to cross the border. Some reasons has been that there is a development of colnias at a very staggering rate creating new communities along the border. These women became activists due to the needs that we not reached in the lower-income communities. Also these women have formed NGO’s which are like unions.
No Parole Today p. 1-17
No Parole Today by Laura Tohe tells the story of children in Indian Boarding Schools through free verse poems and very short stories. The first story talks about assimilation with the thanks of “Dick and Jane” books and that its helps to subdue the Dine language. Her teacher Mrs. Rolands was a black woman whom she describes as “treat[ing] us the way were people had been treated by white people” (2). I quickly scribbled in the margin that it was a reoccurring racism and about hierarchy. I remember previously in my Anthropology class we learned that the ladder of hierarchy that God came first, then white man, then blacks and insects, then Native Americans were placed on the same level as beasts because of the “savage” moniker placed upon them. Probably the most powerful quote she made in this piece was “utter one word of Dine and the government made sure our tongues were downed in the murky waters of assimilation” (3).
In the short story/free verse poem called “She was Real Quiet, a Letter from the Indian School I” she talks about a girl by the name of Mae Jean who was always quiet, always doing what she was supposed to do, she followed the rules, she had never drank liquor, or sniffed glue or gasoline. I wonder is she the personification of the perfect Indian. Was the perfect Indian achieved here? She said that no one ever messed with Mae, so who was she to the students? It makes me wonder was she once a very strong person who resisted the change until she could not fight any longer then she just went along with the change that was pressed upon her? Did any of the students strive to be like her? I don’t know what to think…just a few questions I thought would be interesting.
In the short story/free verse poem called “She was Real Quiet, a Letter from the Indian School I” she talks about a girl by the name of Mae Jean who was always quiet, always doing what she was supposed to do, she followed the rules, she had never drank liquor, or sniffed glue or gasoline. I wonder is she the personification of the perfect Indian. Was the perfect Indian achieved here? She said that no one ever messed with Mae, so who was she to the students? It makes me wonder was she once a very strong person who resisted the change until she could not fight any longer then she just went along with the change that was pressed upon her? Did any of the students strive to be like her? I don’t know what to think…just a few questions I thought would be interesting.
Don't Let the Sun Step Over You Chapter 5 & 6
In these two chapters of Don’t Let the Sun Step over you, Eva Tulene Watt focuses upon her time spent at St. John Boarding School (Chapter 5) and when she went home after her mother went blind, and her family life with a her new stepfather (Charley Marley). However, for this post I am going to focus specifically on chapter 5 because it relates to my mid-term about the experience at Indian Boarding Schools (good and bad) and her experience is definitely a puzzle piece of the larger picture.
Watt begins with her arrival to St. Johns and her remembering that she and her brother Dewey were tied up with a rope by a priest to keep them inside of the seat because he may have felt that they may stand up. Really it sounds like he was worried that they would run off and parish the thought that he lose “precious Indian cargo”. That seems to be the way in which they were treated, like a crate tied to the top of a car. Once she arrived she was immediately put into a group of girls and ushered around the school.
Her experience with church, religion, and people of the catholic faith is very interesting. She is told her first day in church by another student “this is a church. You’re not supposed to talk loud in here. You have to be quiet ‘til it’s over with”. She just seems to adhere to it. I wonder why this is? Also, she would get oreos or eating the food of the catholic people until they gave her the evil eye. Did she just fall in line because there was some kind of incentive?
Watt’s section of when the children would get names because they needed English names would seem to be a very humiliating and assimilating moment in ones life. Because she already had an English name she would not have to go through the process. She describes that “some of the boys that came to school had real long hair. They cut it bald-headed the first times, not right down to the skin but real short, They cut the girls’ hair too. It’s short on the side and bangs. And they sent the kids’ clothes back to their families. They gave each of them a bag and they told them to put their clothes in there, Then they sent it back to their family. Then they gave them all new clothes”. This sounds like a death of a person. For the males, hair is a big deal, so to be striped of hair, and clothing that connected you to who you were previously as well as your clothes being sent way signifies to your parents that you are gone also.
When it came to learning English the rule was “After you catch on, you’re not supposed to talk your won language anymore. If they catch you talking your won language, they punished you.” Punishment at their school was extra chores, but what about other boarding schools? Was the punishment much harsher?
Other than her reason to not go home because of her new step father, I am still trying to figure out why she would deliberately stay there. What made her experience so good compared to that of other children or even people who went to other boarding schools? Anyway that is a good question to ponder.
Watt begins with her arrival to St. Johns and her remembering that she and her brother Dewey were tied up with a rope by a priest to keep them inside of the seat because he may have felt that they may stand up. Really it sounds like he was worried that they would run off and parish the thought that he lose “precious Indian cargo”. That seems to be the way in which they were treated, like a crate tied to the top of a car. Once she arrived she was immediately put into a group of girls and ushered around the school.
Her experience with church, religion, and people of the catholic faith is very interesting. She is told her first day in church by another student “this is a church. You’re not supposed to talk loud in here. You have to be quiet ‘til it’s over with”. She just seems to adhere to it. I wonder why this is? Also, she would get oreos or eating the food of the catholic people until they gave her the evil eye. Did she just fall in line because there was some kind of incentive?
Watt’s section of when the children would get names because they needed English names would seem to be a very humiliating and assimilating moment in ones life. Because she already had an English name she would not have to go through the process. She describes that “some of the boys that came to school had real long hair. They cut it bald-headed the first times, not right down to the skin but real short, They cut the girls’ hair too. It’s short on the side and bangs. And they sent the kids’ clothes back to their families. They gave each of them a bag and they told them to put their clothes in there, Then they sent it back to their family. Then they gave them all new clothes”. This sounds like a death of a person. For the males, hair is a big deal, so to be striped of hair, and clothing that connected you to who you were previously as well as your clothes being sent way signifies to your parents that you are gone also.
When it came to learning English the rule was “After you catch on, you’re not supposed to talk your won language anymore. If they catch you talking your won language, they punished you.” Punishment at their school was extra chores, but what about other boarding schools? Was the punishment much harsher?
Other than her reason to not go home because of her new step father, I am still trying to figure out why she would deliberately stay there. What made her experience so good compared to that of other children or even people who went to other boarding schools? Anyway that is a good question to ponder.
Everyday Is a Good Day- Chapter 3
In Chapter 3 titled “Context is Everything” the reader is brought through the frustration of how there has been little or no teaching to Non-Natives about the lives about Native Americans and Indigenous people although this oppressed group has been forced to learn the dominant cultures history. It is said that “People in the United States fail to recognize how much they have been influenced by indigenous people. It is simply amazing that even after hundreds of years of living in our former villages, most American’s don’t know much about the original people of this land.” I can say I understand that this frustration being African-American. In school we are only taught the history of white people although my ancestors helped them to build this country with literally blood, sweat, and tears. However, on the other hand I can say myself that I guilty. Being for the Westside many of our cities hold the names of indigenous nations like the Puyallup which is closets to me, but I can say I do not know much of their history.
Another point that was made was that “rather than appreciate the ancient cultures of indigenous people in the United States, most governmental policies have been designed to assimilate indigenous people into the larger American culture”. I call this the “assimilate and eliminate” factor. Once you are completely assimilated your own culture is cut away, watered down or just eliminated all together through systematic practices.
Beatrice Medicine best describes this frustration in this chapter when she says that “white people can’t understand us or the strength and diversity of aboriginal people, and they don’t even try. That’s why there is such racism and misunderstanding. We have different attitudes toward one another”. This makes me pose the question to everyone: Do you think there is a way to bridge the gap between these vastly different groups of people now or even in the future? Also, Do you feel that there is away we can start to incorporate these teachings of the history in our own curriculum if not college, high school, or even younger? Lastly, How would you go about to bridge this gap in misunderstanding and racism?
Another point that was made was that “rather than appreciate the ancient cultures of indigenous people in the United States, most governmental policies have been designed to assimilate indigenous people into the larger American culture”. I call this the “assimilate and eliminate” factor. Once you are completely assimilated your own culture is cut away, watered down or just eliminated all together through systematic practices.
Beatrice Medicine best describes this frustration in this chapter when she says that “white people can’t understand us or the strength and diversity of aboriginal people, and they don’t even try. That’s why there is such racism and misunderstanding. We have different attitudes toward one another”. This makes me pose the question to everyone: Do you think there is a way to bridge the gap between these vastly different groups of people now or even in the future? Also, Do you feel that there is away we can start to incorporate these teachings of the history in our own curriculum if not college, high school, or even younger? Lastly, How would you go about to bridge this gap in misunderstanding and racism?
Monday, November 10, 2008
Strong Women Stories Chapter 2
Chapter 2 titled “The Drum Keeps Beating: Recovering Mohawk Identity” by Laura Shuwager speaks of her personal journey with her own Native Identity (personally & per the government). Shuwager believes that her journey “is one of recognizing and voicing spirit. It is my ties to my ancestors, it is my reason for why, living in a non-Native society, embracing Native traditions and values had always felt like coming home”. Shuwager feels a deep connect to this portion of her heritage but she is unable to claim it because she is a mixed heritage. So this almost means she can have no voice that happens to the injustice to her people. It makes me connect this with my own identity of being an African-American. The phrase is too problematic because yes I am a person who is descendant of and African person, however I am not an African who lives in America, so I feel that I should not be classified as an African-American. This makes me wonder does she ever find people within her own community who shun her because she “not native enough”? Just a few thoughts.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
