I simply had to steal the following passage from Spanish Prof because she explains it much more succinctly than I ever could:
Latin American Feminist: somebody who doesn’t necessarily believe that Josefina Vazquez Mota is the best candidate in the upcoming Mexican elections. Somebody who doesn’t believe that if Josefina Vazquez Mota doesn’t win, it is due to Mexican “machismo”. A Latin American feminist would never link to this stupid article, where not only are basic facts wrong (Andres Lopez Obrador was the 2006 presidential candidate by the PRD, not the PRI), but it doesn’t even bother to explain what are the political leanings of the three major political parties in Mexico (PAN, PRI, PRD). Because, as we all know, political ideas are not important. Electing a women president, on the other side, would be a great victory. Even if she comes from the conservative and right-wing PAN.
I can only add that if Vazquez Mota
has said that her gender will help bring the war on drugs to a peaceful end, and that male politicians are responsible for its escalation and the growing power of drug cartels,
then she is a blabbering fool who is not fit to run a lemonade stand, let alone a country.
Feminism is not about electing people with vaginas irrespective of their political beliefs. You need to invest a little bit more effort than figuring out the candidate’s gender and, at least, look at their election platform.
A certain university I know (khm, khm) is considering hiring for the top administrative position a person who is known for destroying entire departments because they are not profitable enough. I am sick and tired of hearing people drawl, “But at least she is a woman,” whenever this candidate is discussed. I don’t care if she is a woman, a man, or an iguana. If she is in the habit of destroying programs in the Humanities, I don’t want her anywhere near my campus.
Clarissa's Blog 
In other bad news, the Board of Trustees at a certain multi-campus university kicked their president from the position because the old Board president (gasp!) questioned the judgement of administrators.
LikeLike
I’m still not completely sure what happened there. I need to investigate. 🙂
LikeLike
Thanks for the link. Some of those websites, like the one you linked to regarding the Russian women imprisoned, can produce real gems:
http://www.genderacrossborders.com/2011/10/31/second-time%E2%80%99s-a-charm-re-electing-cristina-kirchner-in-argentina/
While the analysis is not completely off target (and I am not Cristina Kirchner biggest fan), the last paragraph is a gem:
“While it is an exciting moment for women in Latin America, Fernandez doesn’t seem very engaged in gender issues. Rather, she has spent most of her time doing all she can to keep the national economy growing, as it is one of the few that is on the rise in a time of global economic crisis and the main reason she was reelected. Financial growth would mean benefits and increased economic freedoms for many Argentineans (Argentina ranked 135 out of 179 in 2008 in The Wall Street Journal/Heritage Foundation’s Index of Economic Freedoms). But if Kirchner can take a stronger stand against corruption, and improve maternal health and other social issues, she can show the world, and women, that she isn’t — as critics call her — a “puppet of her husband”, but rather that she has transformed herself into an admired political leader.”
“Fernandez doesn’t seem very engaged in gender issues, but has spent most of her time all she can to keep the national economy growing”. I haven’t seen a sentence that shows it’s classicism so obviously in a long time. We are talking about 2007-2011. While most of the world was collapsing, Argentina grew (whether that is sustainable of not is another question). And who does poverty affect the most? Women. But apparently, trying to maintain your country’s economy afloat is not feminist enough. It doesn’t specifically focus on gender issues. And for the record, I don’t know what sources they have, but Cristina Kirchner has always said she was against abortion. I don’t know why they claim she reversed her position. My favorite part, though, is the last sentence:
“But if Kirchner can take a stronger stand against corruption, and improve maternal health and other social issues, she can show the world, and women, that she isn’t — as critics call her — a “puppet of her husband”, but rather that she has transformed herself into an admired political leader.””
a) She was a well-known national senator in the 90s. In fact, you could say she became famous before her husband
b) The article was written in 2011. So there is at least a grammatical problem with the fragment “she can show the world…that she isn’t… a ‘puppet of her husband'”. When the article was written, Nestor Kirchner had been dead for a year. So there is no way that “she is” a puppet of her husband. It’s either poor grammar, or straight ignorance. I believe the latter.
LikeLike
And there’s that word again — “exciting.” What is it with this genderacrossborders website and the need to call political happenings in other countries “exciting”? I’m American and all I can say is I disapprove of the idea that other countries exist to provide us with thrills. Also, a lot of the work needed to change things for the better is not exciting — it’s boring, tedious, and difficult. Don’t tell American political activists, though — that’s a good way to get them to lose interest in your cause double-quick. They didn’t get into politics to be bored or to work hard! [/sarc]
LikeLike
“And there’s that word again — “exciting.” What is it with this genderacrossborders website and the need to call political happenings in other countries “exciting”? I’m American and all I can say is I disapprove of the idea that other countries exist to provide us with thrills. Also, a lot of the work needed to change things for the better is not exciting — it’s boring, tedious, and difficult. ”
– I love this comment! Very insightful.
LikeLike
@twisted spinster: Great observation! I am pretty familiar with the behind the scene process that lead to Argentina being the first Latin American country and the 10th in the world to pass a federal law legalizing same-sex marriage. In that website, they probably would have gotten bored early in the process: it took five years of careful planning, activism, political lobbying and a remarkable demonstration of unity among many organizations.
“I disapprove of the idea that other countries exist to provide us with thrills”
I’ve seen a variation of this in academia: when courses like “Introduction to Latin American Studies” become “Introduction to how the US oppresses Latin American countries and/or Latin American countries make revolutions that we wished we had in the US”. I am all for highlighting the role of US intervention in the development of Latin America, which has certainly been critical, but I have a problem when you can’t stop thinking of the region in terms of the US relationship and/or involvement in it.
LikeLike
There was a time (like, a couple of months ago maybe) when the use of “exciting” in that way would have passed me by, but now stuff like that really jumps out at me. The problem with the US isn’t so much with conservative vs. liberal politics is that we as a culture are very unreflective — we tend to look outward for practical, mechanical solutions to everything, and don’t like to have to do “soul searching” and uncomfortable stuff like that (as Clarissa pointed out in a previous blog post way back, we don’t do analysis-type therapy much over here, preferring to take a pill to make the bad mood go away) — and also, oddly enough, we are almost completely self-involved, tending to see other countries and other ways of life as reflections of our own activities or plays put on for our benefit. Actually it’s not so odd — people who don’t know themselves tend not to be able to relate to others properly. It’s narcissism in a nutshell, which is why we keep treating reality like it’s a Hollywood movie. “We’ll invade Afghanistan and depose the Taliban and set them free and they’ll love us!” Someone forgot to tell the Afghan people they were walk-ons in an American movie. And so on.
LikeLike
““We’ll invade Afghanistan and depose the Taliban and set them free and they’ll love us!” Someone forgot to tell the Afghan people they were walk-ons in an American movie. ”
– The topic is not funny but I love your sense of humor! 🙂
LikeLike
“We’ll invade Afghanistan and depose the Taliban and set them free and they’ll love us!” Someone forgot to tell the Afghan people they were walk-ons in an American movie. ”
I would add that somebody forgot to tell the Americans what happened when the Soviets and the British tried it before they did.
LikeLike
“While most of the world was collapsing, Argentina grew (whether that is sustainable of not is another question). And who does poverty affect the most? Women. But apparently, trying to maintain your country’s economy afloat is not feminist enough. It doesn’t specifically focus on gender issues.”
– Well, you need to actually analyze what’s going on to figure this out, and who needs all that aggravation? 🙂
“The article was written in 2011. So there is at least a grammatical problem with the fragment “she can show the world…that she isn’t… a ‘puppet of her husband’”. When the article was written, Nestor Kirchner had been dead for a year. So there is no way that “she is” a puppet of her husband. It’s either poor grammar, or straight ignorance. I believe the latter.”
– I know, this is too bizarre!
LikeLike
Watch me be wrong but I think the PRI is going to win. Not saying I’m for them – it’s just a feeling on what’s going to happen. Will know more in June.
LikeLike
I’m not that familiar with Mexican politics, so I’m making no predictions.
LikeLike