‘What the Water Gave Me‘, Frida Kahlo, 1938
The other day while I was researching these topics I came across a book called Intersectionality: An Intellectual History by Ange-Marie Hancock, which calls out the lack of intersectionality within the academic circles that , ironically, work around Intersectionality . The author specifically denounces the privileging of white, bourgeois and dead scholars such as Michel Foucault over more current ones who directly deal with the overlapping issues of race, gender and class. For instance, they mention the works of Patricia Hill Collins, a contemporary scholar specialized in black feminism, or Gloria Anzaldúa, one of the founders of Chicana studies, whom I have mentioned in previous entries. This made me realised that I had made that mistake myself. When I first started my research journey and I was working around the idea of power and abuse of such, I immediately went on to read and develop on Foucault. Although I still find his Critique of Disciplinary Power brilliant, I should have sought for wider and more contemporary perspectives, specially ones that expand beyond the theoretical realm. As the author rightfully states, ‘how, as theorists of power and identity, are we able to ethically ignore the way in which these choices involve complicated understandings of whose work is worthy of rigorous intellectual engagement as well as what constitutes “genius”?’[1]. For this reason I believe that part of my mission as a researcher is to be critical of the stablished canons and take into account as many perspectives as possible so to produce ethically and insightfully.
That being said…
What is Intersectionality and why is it relevant to my project ?
According to the Centre for Intersectional Justice ‘the concept of intersectionality describes the ways in which systems of inequality based on gender, race, ethnicity, sexual orientation, gender identity, disability, class and other forms of discrimination “intersect” to create unique dynamics and effects.’ In this line, ‘all forms of inequality are mutually reinforcing and must therefore be analysed and addressed simultaneously to prevent one form of inequality from reinforcing another.’ As mentioned earlier, Patricia Hill Collins understands Intersectionality as a Critical Social Theory however she finds a nuance: ‘because ideas in and of themselves do not foster social change, intersectionality is not just a set of ideas. Instead, because they inform social action, intersectionality’s ideas have consequences in the social world’[2]. She believes in its potentiality for social action, and remarks the importance of accessibility, of making such ideas expand beyond the academic sphere.
I talk about Patriarchy, Capitalism and Colonialism because these are systems that have historically perpetuated violence, exclusion and exploitation and encompass larger issues of class, race and gender as well as sexuality (not to leave out health and wellbeing regarding the current climate crisis). We often think of these systems as separate entities yet throughout my research journey I have come to realised that these depend very much on each other and originate from the same sources. Therefore, if problems need to be targeted from the root, solutions to such problems will not be found while ignoring the other since it is likely for both roots to be interconnected or even be the same. Right?
I really like scholar Ashley J. Bohrer’s definition of Capitalism:
‘Capitalism is the grammar of our world. But for all of its ubiquity, it is a concept and system that is rarely understood. While often capitalism is taken to refer to a purely economic system, marked by markets and exchange, this characterization only begins to scratch the surface. Capitalism is an economic system, one that continually uses violence, brutality, and exclusion to ensure that the relatively few live off the endless labours of the many (…) it is a system that produces and reproduces inequalities at every turn, not only in the economic realm, but in the political, social, academic, intimate, educational, and imaginative dimensions of contemporary life. And this system, which is overall based in the justification of domination and dominion, came into being and continues to exist, in and through a whole series of oppressive practices and discourses. Far from being a single, univocal operation of power, capitalism is a web of institutions, inherited histories, modes of access, strategies of confinement, and tactics of accumulation, with different and varying configurations across history and across the world.’[3]
I find it interesting because it acknowledges Capitalism as an intersectional issue that expands beyond the economy. It is overall a system that justifies domination and historically the outcome of many violent processes. Capitalism didn’t just appear one day as an economic system, it had to make its way from somewhere. For instance Cuban-Caribbean scholar Antonio Benítez Rojo explains that the birth of modern Capitalism had everything to do with Colonialism :
‘Let’s be realistic: the Atlantic is the Atlantic (with all its port cities) because it was once engendered by the copulation of Europe-that insatiable solar bull-with the Caribbean archipelago; the Atlantic is today the Atlantic (the navel of capitalism) because Europe, in its mercantilist laboratory, conceived the project of inseminating the Caribbean womb with the blood of Africa; the Atlantic is today the Atlantic (NATO, World Bank, New York Stock Exchange, European Economic Community, etc.) because it was the painfully delivered child of the Caribbean, whose vagina was stretched between continental clamps, between the encomienda of Indians and the slaveholding plantation, between the servitude of the coolie and the discrimination toward the criollo , between commercial monopoly and piracy, between the runaway slave settlement and the governor’s palace; all Europe pulling on the forceps to help at the birth of the Atlantic: Columbus, Cabral, Cortes, de Soto, Hawkins, Drake, Hein, Rodney, Surcouf … Mter the blood and salt water spurts, quickly sew up torn flesh and apply the antiseptic tinctures, the gauze and surgical plaster; then the febrile wait through the forming of a scar: suppurating, always suppurating.’[4]
In this excerpt we are introduced to the Caribbean context by using terminology related to that of birthing, however, Benítez Rojo’s description of the Caribbean’s birth is quite sordid as he concludes by remarking that there is a scar in the Caribbean which is ‘suppurating, always suppurating’. He proceeds to talk about the essential role that the Trans-Atlantic Slave Trade played in the consolidation of our modern socio-economic model, since it enabled mass exploitation of natural resources and it justified domination over other human beings for the benefit of (Western) society. I personally really enjoy reading Benítez Rojo’s essays because he emphasizes how these violent processes have shaped Caribbean society and culture and how its effects. In this line, Kara Walker’s art piece Fons Americanus is ‘an allegory of the Black Atlantic, that honours the interconnected histories of Africa, America, and Europe through a flux of historical facts and fiction’. I was deeply moved by this artwork because, growing up in the West, one becomes used to seeing great monuments of battles and historical events so it felt really good to see such a monumental and detailed fountain dedicated to your history.
As I wrote in my Manifesto for a Lovelier Future as Cubans (and Latin Americans) we are often taught to be thankful to the Spanish colonisers for language , religion and culture, as well as for “making us more good-looking” . The works of artist Ana Mendieta reminds us that ‘to establish its empire over nature, it has been necessary for man to dominate other men, and to treat part of humanity like objects’, often linking the violence of colonialism with the violence of patriarchy. In this line it is no coincidence that many Latin American regions are known to be some of the worst places in the world to be a woman or a queer person, as machista culture is the norm. But Patriarchy (machista culture) is not only an issue of men, but also of women. Puerto Rican feminists Aurora Levins Morales and Rosario Morales make a brilliant remark about the internalized sexism among their fellow Puerto Rican women:
‘How many times has a Latin woman stood up for me in private, then stabbed me in the back when the moment comes for the support that counts. . . . You have forced me to turn out of my own culture to find allies worthy of the name; you have forced me into a room full of Anglo women who nod sympathetically and say: “Latin men are sooo much worse than Anglo men . . . Why the last time I was in Mexico . . . ” And not to betray you in the face of their racism, I betray myself . . . by not saying: It’s not the men who exile me . . . it’s the women. I don’t trust the women.’[5]
I found this excerpt extremely relatable, having found myself in similar situations. But it also made me realised that the perpetuation of patriarchy is not really a matter of gender, it’s a matter of assimilated power dynamics and long internalised oppressions; a system that can be equally harmful to men as it is to women and queer people, very much powered by colonialism and eternized by capitalism.
And, Why Latinx ?
Well the term Latinx initially refers to a person of Latin American origin or descent (used as a gender-neutral or non-binary alternative to Latino or Latina). This term originated in the United States, and is closely linked to ideas of intersectionality, queerness and diaspora. However, the term is relatively new, and there are many ongoing debates on its potentiality and significance. Back in 2020 my colleague Giovanna Demopoulos and I were granted the opportunity to organise a series of events under the name “What is Latin X?” at King’s College London.
We were inspired by two events : Firstly, a documentary series titled Black in Latin America, in which they exposed how blackness is often silenced within Latin American narratives, and a previous event/debate under the name Conversations About Race, in which they enabled a safe space for people to explore racial issues. The aim of our event was to reflect on the racial dimension of the term Latinx that is often neglected as it is a pan-ethnic term as well as to introduce the term in the UK census in light of the increasing Latin American diaspora communities. We invited Cuban-American photographer and curator Aldeide Delgado to give a talk on the topic followed by a Q&A, as a way of enabling a safe space for black , indigenous , mix raced and white peoples of Latin American background (including the diaspora) to express their thoughts on these topics and reflect on their personal experiences and deconstructing Western perceptions and stereotypes of the Latin American Community. I believe this term could eventually be useful because I find it to be very inclusive :
- The term Latino/ Latina was created by US media in the early 20th century to refer to South American peoples, specially immigrants. Latinx attempts to reclaim that.
- The idea of the term being gender neutral works in opposition of “machismo” and toxic masculinity within Latin American Culture.
- There is a lot of Latin American diaspora around the world, and since this term was born in diaspora it takes into account those who live outside the continent, stablishing a sense of unity.
After this event we came to the conclusion that there has been an increased interest for younger generations of Latinx to have these conversations, something that previous generations have struggled with. However, I believe it is important to provide the right mediums for ideas and conversations to flourish, and this cannot be achieved strictly within the academic realm or high art circles.
It needs to be accessible and take into account all possible layers.
[1] Intersectionality: an intellectual history, Ange-Marie Hancock , New York : Oxford University Press USA – OSO, 2016 , p.4
[2] Intersectionality as critical social theory, Patricia Hill Collins, Duke University Press, 2019, p.2.
[3] Marxism and Intersectionality : Race, Gender, Class and Sexuality under Contemporary Capitalism, Ashley J. Bohrer, p.15.
[4] Antonio Benítez Rojo , The repeating island: The Caribbean and the Postmodern Perspective (Translated by James E. Maraniss) , Duke University Press , 1996 , p.5.
[5] Moraga and Anzaldúa , 1983, p. 54