I found this chapter, including the documents, very interesting as it provided a broad range of perspectives from people who thought differently about race and gender throughout the 19th century in Latin America. In Peru for example there was a clear racial divide– deep fragmentation became noticeable, where clearing of indigenous lands left new territory open for white settlers to turn to “productive” ends. This is still actively being done today. Although in quieter ways, the Peruvian government is still trying to force indigenous peoples out of the territories they have been living on for years.
Clearly, emancipation was perceived and experienced differently across Latin America. This involved complex stories of pressured from the outside world, internal elite conflicts and pressure from slaves themselves. Additionally, the reaction of people to emancipation in their country was also very different across the continent. Former slaves in Cuba focused on creating stable families and communities, leaving political organizing for individual rights for later. The Cuban government made it difficult for coloured people to move up the social classes, while in Brazil it was very much facilitated.
Something that struck me was the amount of discrimination in Cuba towards coloured people. They were casted out for being “dangerous primitives, a threat to national progress.” However, how was progress defined then? What kind of development were they looking at? Afro-Cuban traditions were particularly targeted as they were perceived as an epidemic of savagery, creating a widespread idea of fear towards these people.
Out of the five documents at the end of the chapter, I really enjoyed the last one. Although I didn’t really agree with the purpose of the text, it portrayed a very different perspective on gender equality that I had never seen before. Josefina Pelliza de Sagasta believed the emancipation of women was unattainable and even harmful if ever attained and that God made women the way they are for a reason. Thus, the destiny of women could not be the same as the destiny of men as women have that loving, nurturing, caring characteristic that defines who they are. Overall, the compilation of documents were people or either against or for the abolishment of slavery and/or emancipation of women provided a very diverse set of perspectives that is very much a feature of Latin American culture.
The link you make to modern Peru is quite apt. I however would not call their actions very quiet. There have been several violent encounters between indigenous peoples and government forces in the past few years. The largest number of deaths in the military have been a direct result of these conflicts. Many indigenous lives were lost as well.
David:
I think you misunderstood me. I say “quieter ways” in terms of the government wanting to hide the fact that they are stealing indigenous land from the media and thus the rest of the country and the world. In 2009 there was a masacre in Bagua, Peru (the high Amazon jungle). Indigenous people were killed, wounded and disappeared and the establishment of secret detention centers were discovered later. Army helicopters had thrown the bodies of killed indigenous people into rivers. In response to the massacre, indigenous people who had occupied an oil field operating within Indian territory, killed more than 20 policemen who were guarding the property. However, mainstream media represented the events in such a way that the indigenous protestors turned out being savages that opposed progress and development from transnational corporations.
I guess I could have said “distorted the ways in which they were invading indigenous land”
I find it interesting (and perhaps a bit strange..) how you wrote in response to Josefina Pelliza’s article, that how she expressed women, you have never seen before. The portrayal of women just as she described in her text is still prevalent today. Yes, there have been many changes. However, there is dominant stereotype that persists in society about women and their roles that continues. You wrote that you have never seen that perspective on gender equality before… I’m curious as to what kind of world you are living in?
Jla:
I feel like you are right about the dominant stereotype that still exists in todays society regarding gender roles. I, however, have never heard a woman admit this and believe this is how society should stay like. Pelliza says in her article that “the emancipation of women is unattainable and even harmful if attained.” In todays society, you hear about roles women have to follow and learn about how this has persisted throughout the years until streams of feminism became more prominent/popular. However, I haven’t really met/read about women who believe emancipation is a complete monstrosity. If you have, then I guess we are living in different worlds.
Cody, I enjoyed a lot you post.
I gotta tell you that I found extremely curious what you said about women, because in Latin America, the stereotype of women is exactly how you described it. I think, I’m none to judge it… but the fact is because I’m “Latina” so, I’ve seen that and lived it too. There’s the positive and negative side and effect of being like this.
Also, it is true that women are loving, nurturing, caring characteristic, and may be we have that in our nature, but I’m not sure if that’s our “destiny”.
Unfortunately, there are women with this perspective today. More than you think. Perhaps the reason why you are not aware of this is because you are male? You have never had the experience of being a women and being told by another women that we are inferior to men..
Jla:
That was offensive… I am a female, and I obviously have lived a different reality than you have. I think its okay to have a different perspective on a certain topic… you shouldn’t be making others feel inferior about their own belief
s/perspective just because it is different than yours.
My apologies. We indeed live in different worlds.
Hi Cody. I think I understand your feeling about the last document. Maybe you think it’s more common that we hear a male chauvinist derogating the position of women, than hearing a woman abjuring her own rights and freedom. However that is our perspective. What we deem as “rights”, “freedom”, or “happiness” for her, she might not agree. What position are we in to decide what’s best for others? There is always a mainstream value that more or less influences everyone, making some happy and others not. And the mainstream changes constantly. In every time there exist people comfortable with the mainstream and people struggling against it. Maybe we can see it more calmly and detachedly. And there should always be respect for people with different beliefs.