gender

Eduardo Galeano’s Soccer in Sun & Shadow

Standard

I do not know much about sports but Galeano’s work was a fun read. The writing is playful yet authoritative so it made the book easier to read. Anywho, I wanted to bring some aspects about how spectator sports like soccer are similar to the act of war in some ways, from the technical layout of the game, the politics associated with it, and its romanticization.

What I found most interesting was the comparison of soccer to actual warfare from pages 17-23 because it makes complete sense. Wars have been romanticized for as long as I remember (even with the fallouts of WW1 and the Vietnam war) as with key figures being iconified in history. Political decisions obviously depended on who won and who did not and who would gain territory; soccer players and those betting on them would decide who would rise to fame and receive money while the losers become more invisible. With soccer matches being romanticized and representing pride and dignity, countries began to use their teams to promote nationalism and economic endeavours, as with gaining new territory and building an army, down to the matching outfits. Just like Jon said, soccer can be a whole course, because even though I do not know how to play soccer or the teams, the game itself is a far-reaching phenomenon that can be used in reference to most in life.

In another realm of popular culture, I also found it intriguing that the poorer folks in Latin America appropriated soccer from the upper-class English rather than vice versa that brought the game to the continent. I automatically assumed soccer came from Latin America because of how fused it is with everyday life but I was wrong. The game also emphasizes a few themes like machismo and opportunity. At the beginning of Galeano’s book, he notes how it is every young man’s dream to rise up the ranks, become famous, woo every woman and become wealthy through soccer while also including that a lot of players in Latin America reference the soccer ball as a woman because it is loyal (21).  A lot of things to unpack there. The woman in both senses is objectified figuratively and literally and feeds into the narrative of manliness. This narrative also serves to gatekeep women from playing soccer or being paid equally if they do. And to bring it back to the war comparison, women were expected prizes when men came back from war successful or participated in tournaments. Soccer’s chauvinistic roots live on.

My question for the class: what do you associate soccer with?

The Fighting Cholitas

Standard

I think this is my favourite reading so far. The Fighting Cholitas documents the ‘double life’ of traditional, Indigenous women in Bolivia who wrestle regularly. Really though they are challenging stereotypes on what it means to be a woman, as well as traditional to create a more fluid identity. Wrestling also helps as a cathartic release for everyday stresses and creates a sense of community in El Alto.

One of the more obvious features of the fighting Cholitas is that they choose to wear their traditional layered skirts when they fight, even if it seems unreasonable to an outsider. However, choosing to wear the layered skirts is to proudly express their identity not only as a woman but as an Indigenous woman as well. There is also the direct challenge to masculinity or machismo by 1) displaying aggression in the ring 2) wearing traditionally feminine attire 3) all while being wives, mothers, sisters and so forth, and they do it with confidence. These women could easily be scrutinized but choose to fight anyways as a testament to their strength and sense of self.

Moreover, being able to put the social norms aside to fight is reasonably a cathartic experience. To let your walls down and express yourself through wrestling is truly la Lucha libre. In addition, there is the aspect of being ‘idolized’ or cheered on by spectators that is also a confidence booster. People gather to see these women fight in an auditorium regularly, supporting their favourite Cholita wrestlers or booing the Rudas (the fighters who don’t obey the rules) because of its novelty and the show they put on. Children, little girls in particular, are seen in the documentary as well imitating the Cholitas fighting in the auditorium which is warming to see. The fights are usually a spectacle between good and evil or the Technicas (wrestlers who follow the rules) and the Rudas so they are also reinforcing values about justice for the young ones to emulate. 

Thinking about how this was filmed in 2006, the message about challenging social norms is even more potent since there was not a widespread movement of women’s rights just yet in Latin America. There is a quote by G.D Anderson that goes “Feminism isn’t about making women stronger. Women are already strong. It’s about changing the way the world perceives that strength” which resonated with me especially in context to the Fighting Cholitas. These women lead complex lives but chose to fight the good fight regardless of which side they fight on in the ring.

My question for the class: What do the Fighting Cholitas represent for you?

The Cultural Life of Coca

Standard

I greatly appreciated this rather short article. It was purely anthropological and did not criminalize coca and by association the people who harvest it, as I find most Western media does.

In her abstract, Alison Spedding does note the stigma associated with the plants that narcotics derive from in the U.S., especially in context to the war on drugs. However, these plants, and in this case the coca plant in the Yungas region of La Paz, has a greater significance for the social fabric across the different cultures in Latin America. One of my favourite examples from the text is that the life cycle of the coca plants is equated to a woman by the Yungas people. There is the direct correlation of plants literally representing life, and thus the life cycle of a Yungas household, but also being fertile and bearing ‘fruits’ like women are traditionally associated with.

And just like the people, plants also hold a socio-historical significance. The excerpt

“After the coca has been picked, the process of drying converts it into a beneficial ancestor, parallel to the dried corpses of the ancestors whose cult was so important in the Andes until the [Spanish] extirpation campaigns of the seventeenth century.”

as well as the dated Cajatambo idolatry trials of 1656 demonstrate how coca has been used and adapted over time but has also been seen as a cultural threat to colonial sovereignty. The plant was so tied to the Indigenous identity in Bolivia that the Spanish sought to extirpate it in the 17th century. Parallels can be drawn to the same demonization of drugs in the US because of their association with self-medication and a foreign presence. Drugs in and of themselves hold no meaning until we give it a narrative, and so it is interesting how we can go from one extreme where we can value the medicinal properties of coca, to where we weaponize the idea of it as a political tool.

Moreover, South America is not listed as one of the continents associated with drug addiction but North America (excluding Mexico) is (UNODC 2019). So the stigma itself is hurting people where it is most prevalent, making it difficult for people to seek support or access unbiased education around illicit drug use. Popular culture, however grand in scale, is so important when disseminating information because of the numerous forms it can take and how abstract it is. A famous study conducted by SFU professor Bruce K. Alexander also notes the implications of social vs. individual use in his famous experiment ‘rat park’, with his findings suggesting that the mere exposure to drugs will not prompt individuals to get addicted as popular western narratives have suggested.

The concept of drugs is a multi-faceted discussion that can go on for hours but perspective is definitely critical for when we choose to project our own cultural values onto objects or practices.

What are some projections of drug use culture that you have seen in the media? Who was producing that narrative?

 

Castellano’s Cooking Lesson

Standard

Rosario Castellano’s literary piece Cooking Lesson felt familiar and yet so foreign. It reminded me of the pain and invisibility the women in my family have endured, and the praise that follows for taking it in silence.

The narrative follows a housewife candidly thinking to herself about the traditional expectations of women while trying to grill broiled beef. Moreover, the cooking of the beef is the metaphor that runs parallel to her discontent with her husband, married and family life. For a piece that was written in 1961, I was surprised by the explicit descriptions of her sexual relationship with her husband but maybe that was the point. To use that stark contrast of the modesty assumed of a woman (and heavily catholic and conservative Mexico) and the reality that consists of doubt, improvisation, and discomfort at times.

For a more political theme, the theme of ownership between a man and a woman is one that I remember discussing in a history of Mexico class a year ago. The particular passage about the protagonist’s maiden name and new surname not being her own is something that resonated with me because it represents the transfer of custody from one man to another. Although this theme has been discussed repeatedly, this dynamic is still prevalent because 1961 is only a generation away from me, and lived through by generations who are still alive today. It is difficult to believe that we have fully healed from what has been ingrained and taught since time and Immemorial. We can talk about it, but it will never fully go away. At least in our lifetime.

In that sense, Castellano’s dialogue with herself as the protagonist is an echo of what can be considered a cultural memory. The lived and shared experiences of women across Mexico, as well as borders and time, are what make this literary work empowering. In addition, there is comfort in the uncomfortable. Being openly vulnerable about the intimacies and insecurities that come with any relationship is an invitation for any reader to see themselves and emphasize. Thus, the cooking lesson for me, metaphysically, is that you are in control of your own narrative, as Castellano is.

Overall, I really enjoyed this piece and was torn between writing about the Cooking Lesson and the article about the Zapatista corn article.  My question to the class – how did you interpret the beef metaphor?