“This Bridge Called My Back” Part 1 Discussion Post

A theme of internalization of oppression could be found throughout the excerpts of This Bridge Called My Back that we read for Tuesday’s class discussion. I most resonated with the example on page 32 looking at women as both the oppressed but also the oppressor.

“We women have a similar nightmare,for each of us in some way has been both oppressed and the oppressor. We are afraid to look at how we have failed each other. We are afraid to see how we have take the values of our oppressor into our hearts and turned them against ourselves and one another. We are afraid to admit how deeply ‘the man’s’ words have been ingrained in us.”

This passage reminds me of another idea I saw in the beginning of the reading, the idea of division between women. In Genny Lim’s “Wonder Woman,” I see there being an underlying question of if there is a basic unity between all women. Lim questions why women are divided, why they build “…walls that tear them [women] down?”

“Queer Aztlan” Discussion Post

I found this reading a wonderful continuation of the discussion started by Gloria Anzaldua in Borderlands which we finished on Tuesday. Moraga focuses on the intersection of the Chicano movement and gay and lesbian movements in the past half a century, then moving to speaking on indigenous groups and the idea of sovereignty. I enjoyed the entire reading, I thought it was an extremely captivating piece of literature. However, I think I liked the last half a bit more. I really enjoyed seeing her discuss lesbian women and gay men in the Chicano community and how there needs to be a edited movement or push for inclusion of those individuals. She then connects those ideas, placing them in a greater idea and desire for Chicanos/Chicanas as a whole. Fear and exclusion should end. The Chicano community needs to collectively come together to work towards sovereignty, both internal and territorial sovereignty.

“Borderlands” Chapter 5-7 Discussion Post

These last chapters might be my favorite in the entire book. It was fascinating to read about how Anzaldua views language as the same as her ethnic identity, without respect for her language there is no respect for her ethnicity. The culture of the United States is eradicating the Spanish language through the pressure to get rid of accents. I saw a continuation of the theme of duality in the discussion of language. English versus Spanish is a major issue which borderland citizens have to face. This duality is solved for those people through the introduction of Chicano Spanish. Throughout this last section of the book I noticed the idea that the borderland and its people are a created third space. A space made through the relationship of being both Anglo and Mexican (through the inclusion of certain aspects of both cultures), but also neither Anglo or Mexican (because the Chicano culture is not completely the same as either of those cultures). The Chicanos found in the borderlands have a malleability due to their unique identity and relationship to the two nations surrounding them.

“Borderlands” Chapter 4 Discussion Post

I found it hard to fully understand the major idea in this chapter: the state of Coatlicue. From what I can extract from chapter 4, Coatlicue is a state of consciousness which helps draw a person out of a monotonous condition where they hide from harsh reality. People do this by turning to habitual routines, Anzaldua terms them addictions. The author introduced more serpent imagery and I could not completely follow how it related to the core theme. I feel that the idea of Coatilcue is much more complex, however, I cannot grasp the full meaning.

“Borderlands” Chapter 1-3 Discussion Post

Reading chapters one through three of Borderlands, I was amazed at how captivating Anzaldua’s writing style was and how engaged I was throughout the entire first section of the book. Anzaldua has a way of writing that kept me interested because it used descriptive language as well as focused on personal experiences, but it also continued to interweave major points of theory into the writing. I found the idea of the complexity of the United States/Mexico relationship to be particularly fascinating. A sentence on page 32 resonated with me, “The infusion of the values of the white culture, coupled with the exploitation by that culture, is changing the Mexican way of life.” There are dueling forces at work. White culture has a direct effect on borderlands however the United States clearly oppresses and mistreats the Mexican people. How does that/will that effect current and future generations of Mexican decedents who inhabit the borderlands?

“Vendida Logic in the Chicana Movement” Critical Essay

In Maylei Blackwell’s work, ¡Chicana Power!, vendida logic is given as a major setback for the Chicana feminist movement of the 1960s and 1970s. Used by males with the desire to suppress the feminist cause, vendida logic was established by Blackwell as an issue in the history of the Chicana feminist. Effects of vendida logic could be found even at the level of personal histories of former feminist activists. However, vendida logic also played a much more distinct role in damaging the Chicana feminist cause: Chicanas themselves using the logic on each other. With the prevalence of vendida logic, it slipped into the feminist activists mindset, resulting in them using it against each other and disintegrating the 1971 Conferencia de Mujeres por la Raza, and the activists’ hope for national organization.

Blackwell described the idea of vendida logic into four major types of reasoning against the feminist cause. When considering la Conferencia de Mujeres por la Raza, the majority of the variations of the logic can be found in the behavior of actual members of the conference. Individuals who employed vendida logic either focused on, “…(1) race (feminists were agringadas, or race traitors); (2) ideological purity (feminists were sellouts dividing the movement from the primary struggle that they, as members of the movement, did not have the right to shape and articulate); (3) sexual (feminists were sexual deviants or lesbians); [or] (4) culturalist (feminists were inauthentic/outside of/antagonistic to Chicano culture.” (Blackwell, 31) These ways of rejecting feminism, used in such an insidious and frequent manner, became engrained in feminist activist thoughts. Their constant need to dispute against the vendida logic placed on them actually resulted in suggesting that there were some women in the Chicano movement who did conform to the vendida logic arguments. Both the rooting of vendida logic in Chicana activists and the unintended result of growing suspicion of activists pushed Chicana women into using vendida logic themselves inside the feminist activist group, “…shap[ing] the political terrain for years to come…[by] disrupt[ing] the sense of a collective identity and political agenda.” (162) Vendida logic played a significant role in dismantling la Conferencia de Mujeres por la Raza in 1971, which in turn shifted the Chicana political community nationwide. In complaints about the conference leading up to the walkout, roots of vendida logic can be seen. Individuals wanting to protest the convention stated, “‘that Chicanas had no business holding the conference at the YWCA because it was run by gavachas.’” (176) This statement suggests the racial tension found in the vendida arguments. By Chicana activists cooperating with the YWCA and thus white women, some Chicanas saw them as collaborating with the movement’s enemy. Further reiterating this point, the discontented activists explain how the movement’s, “‘…enemy is not with the macho but with the gavacho.’” By stating this, the critics are invalidating the feminist movement. While the statement continues to demonstrate the racial junction of vendida logic, it also shows parts of the ideological facet of vendida logic. The assertion that the true enemy of the Chicano movement rests in the white race, not the Chicano men, stresses that the feminist activists are influencing female movement members into focusing on the wrong issues and the wrong adversary. Many women also criticized other female activists during the conference because they saw them as inauthentic to the Chicano culture, directly relating to the culturalist portion of vendida logic. When needing food for the conference goers, the community contributed hot dogs, however activists criticized this choice of food as not Chicano enough. While unhappy Chicana women voiced their complaints at the conference, there was a general theme of a lack of authentic culture at the conference. One woman, looking back on the events before the walkout states, “‘We had hot dogs; they wanted rice and beans. Bertha [the activist from Magnolia neighborhood who was speaking on stage when the walkout organizers took the mic] wasn’t Chicana enough; we weren’t Chicana enough. They were barrio people, they wanted barrio issues. They wanted you to know they were gung-ho on Chicano things and we weren’t Chicano enough.’” (181) The walkout supporters understood the conference and individuals at the conference to be lacking true Chicana culture. The criticisms stated and subsequent walkout categorized some activists as not Chicana enough, while also seemingly elevating the supporters of walkout for being the true Chicana women.

Men employed vendida logic to restrain the Chicana feminist movement and causes; and due to pervasiveness of the vendida arguments the feminist activists actually internalized vendida logic though time. Actions made at la Conferencia de Mujeres por la Raza demonstrated how Chicana feminists actually took a criticism on themselves and used it against one another. Racial, cultural and ideological vendida logic roots can be seen throughout the criticisms of the conference and its patrons. Vendida logic, first used as a tool to oppose the feminist cause, slowly moved into Chicana feminist activists mentalities, transforming into a mechanism in which the Chicana feminists could actually bring their own movement down by using it. Roots of vendida logic seen in the 1971 conference significantly altered the Chicana feminist movement, obstructing the crusade from reaching a greater level of understanding and constructing a national organization of Chicana feminists.

“Chicana Power!” Chapter 4-6 Discussion Post

In the final portion of Chicana Power!, I was caught by the lack of consensus and unity between the regional groups of the Chicana movement. The groups’ attempt for a national network to support the movement actually resulted in the reveal of core divisions between groups. The conference in Houston uncovered regional discord as well as differences in ideas central to the cause. On top of these conflicts, a portion of women attending the conference executed a walk-out which permanently hurt the Chicana movement. I wonder whether the damage toward the national movement would have been as great if the walk-out had not occurred? Also, in the previous chapter, Blackwell spoke about how print culture gave organizations the ability to learn other groups’ views. Did the widespread literature not illustrate the different views of groups on key issues?

“Chicana Power!” Chapter 3 Discussion Post

When reading Chapter 3, I found the portions on print culture and iconography most interesting. The print culture of the 1960s and 1970s seemed to  play a major role in the understanding of gender roles in the Chicano/Chicana movement. I was fascinated at how the culture could be so beneficial to the feminist cause but also so harmful at the same time. Yo Soy Joaquin was mass distributed and placed women back in their original role on the sideline of the movement. The book re-marginalized Chicana females while pushing the masculine image back into the foreground. However, later in the chapter, print culture can be seen as supporting the feminist cause through the photograph of Hilda Reyes and the multitude of symbolism that can be found in it.

“Chicana Power” Introduction/Chapter 1-2 Discussion Post

This weekend we started our next book, Chicana Power, reading both the introduction as well as the first two chapters. The introduction section did not exactly pull me in, I found it challenging to digest the amount of feminist and Chicana theory packed into that portion of the reading. I very much  enjoyed Chapter 1 “Spinning the Record.” I enjoyed how the chapter delved into how and why Chicana feminist movements had not been given their due importance in history. In almost every aspect, that section of history was almost an afterthought. In feminist history, the women and their history is placed as the third wave of feminism. I found it interesting that though it sounds like a continued progression towards a better society, it actually illustrates the events as an add-on, a simple reaction to the “real” movement.