Questions to the Readings: Alicia Gaspar de Alba

-“Out of the House, the Halo, and the Whore’s Mask: The Mirror of Malinchismo” -

While reading the first article, "Out of the House, the Halo and the Whore's Mask..." by Gaspar de Alba, many topics resonated with my life regarding patriarchy and many questions were sparked in my mind. I am interested in these questions because they are vital to address in order to achieve successful social movements and affect me directly as I identify myself as a feminist.

1. Is it possible for a group of people to be involved with the same causa and movimiento, when there are intersections regarding class, race and gender differences? In order to minimize the argument that "some members of the Movement are more equal than others", should groups that have different intersectionalities segregate? Would that be contradictory to the over all message of mobilization?
2. Would you agree that it is a juxtaposition for Chicanos to devalue the humanity of the females but try to fight for their right to be recognized and valued as artists? Yes, machismo and patriarchy are present in the Mexican home, but doesn't being a Chicana/o mean that they are conscious enough to know about the cultural deficiency that comes with machismo and therefore at least try to give women an equal voice? By definition then, weren't the men the traitors?
3. Why did some of the women resist the word feminists? What gave that word a negative connotation?

-"There's No Place Like Azlan: Embodied Aesthetics in Chicana"-

-When speaking about "race-aesthetics", it was mentioned that not only do we have to define race and identity through the equation presented, which included topics such as race, political identity, religion and more, but all the space in between those identifiers. As I was reading this section, I though of my roommate from last year who argued that she did not identify herself as African American but as "black" instead. She was almost offended when I would try to speak "politically correct" and call her African American. She felt this way because she felt no connection to Africa. She said she was not from there and that she was a reproduction of someone who was from there. I found this troubling because as she was neglecting her direct association with her ancestor's place of origin, she was also denying the culture that came with being born into a family with African roots. I also found it intriguing that she would identify more with a sociological term that was created to dehumanize the slaves at the time. My roommate was a strong advocate for political equality and took part in many Black Lives Matter protests and events. I don't believe that as she as denying her Africanism, she was making herself superior in the social hierarchy but I do believe that she was wrong to say this because her meals are culturally from Africa, her customs and family ideologies are custom to African families. Because of this, many questions come to mind. Is she "politically correct" to neglect Africa as an identifying characteristic while supporting the term black as her identifier? Is she denying her cultural identity by denying her Africanism? Although the term black has been widely accepted by people of color and in turn taken control over its affect, was it not a term constructed with an African culture? Does this mean that every person who identifies as black would also be identifying as African American?