US Economics and Feminicide in Ciudad Juarez, Mexico
The following is a guest post that I composed for In Media Res: A Media Commons Project. The post was part of an interactive theme week that had four posts related to human rights issues and gender–a lot of good dialog was generated. Please go to In Media Res to see the other posts and the conversation around them.
–Sarah
Original title:
She is Me: Gender, Immigration, and Economics in Ciudad Juarez, Mexico
Public discourse in the U.S. about Mexican immigration rarely moves beyond a discussion of how it affects economics on our side of the border: Minutemen say that Mexicans steal our jobs, while conservative fear-mongers debating public health claim that “illegals” prevent Americans from receiving care. But there is more at stake than ecomomics–the implicit discourse is about gender: a masuline discourse of young Mexican (read: ”violent” and “other”) men arriving to emasculate the U.S. by hitting us where it hurts–in the economy and the ability of our men to work and provide for our families. However, there is a mirror image at work here, too–one that this video illustrates by calling attention to the relationship between “American Economic Interest” and the act of feminincide (the targeted erradication of women) in Ciudad Juarez, Mexico. Since the 1990s, hundreds of women in Juarez have been kidnapped, raped,and murdered, presumably by desperate and dispossessed men suffering from unbearable economic conditions created by U.S commerce with Mexico. These women disappear as they travel to or from their jobs in U.S.-owned maquilladoras (sweatshops) where they fill the posts abandoned by men who cross the border. We see a mirror image of Mexican social structure–one that is inverted and turned inside out. But it is also a mirror image of us (or U.S., if you prefer). American economics–our consumer choices as individuals and our corporate choices as industires–create the structural necessity of immigration that then leads to violence against women. In another twist of the mirror, the narrator tells us that they are us; She is Me. The narrator uses video to powerfully evoke this reversal, drawing on the violence of hip-hop and the shock of unexpected reflections to illustrate that the only difference between us and them is the where we stand vis-a-vis the border. At the end of the day, we help create the need for immigration because our consumer decisions at home shape the political and economic conditions of Mexico. And if this is true, then we are faced with a very ugly reflection indeed: Personal responsibility for economically disenfranchised Mexican men and the feminicide of their women.
Slow Communication: A Manifesto
By Douglase Jones
Need I say anything more? This article by John Freedman at the Wall Street Journal sums up many of my Little Luddite feelings perfectly! Here is a pithy excerpt, but please read the full article here.
The ultimate form of progress, however, is learning to decide what is working and what is not; and working at this pace, emailing at this frantic rate, is pleasing very few of us. It is encroaching on parts of our lives that should be separate or sacred, altering our minds and our ability to know our world, encouraging a further distancing from our bodies and our natures and our communities. We can change this; we have to change it. Of course email is good for many things; that has never been in dispute. But we need to learn to use it far more sparingly, with far less dependency, if we are to gain control of our lives.
Now go sit down to write a letter by hand or have a cup of coffee with a dear friend. Let us pledge to slow down and appreciate community, the beauty of our world, and all that makes us who and what we are! Let us add Slow Communication to Slow Food as yet another means of appreciating our social nature.
This is my job… (WARNING–disturbing content)
Friends and family often ask me, “what do you do at work?” My response is usually something along the lines of , “Oh, well, you know–I follow how digital media and the internet impact human rights work. I try to figure out what to do with digital documents and websites and stuff that could be useful to human rights work in the future–that kind of thing.” Ironically, given my Little Luddite status, I spend much of my day following social-media on-line, looking at YouTubes, reading webpages about digital technology, and that sort of thing. It’s all pretty peaceful and sometimes boring, or even frustrating (since I’d really rather not spend this much time with technology on any given day).
Witnessing
But sometimes I come across something that is so utterly heartbreaking and enraging that I just don’t know what to do with it. This is one of them: The shooting of Oscar Grant by BART Police in San Francisco on New Year’s Day this year. In viewing this video, I have, in effect, witnessed the murder of a citizen of the United States by those who are supposed to protect him.
WARNING!!!! The link above leads to graphic video footage of the shooting. This footage was created by a witness with a cell phone. It really does show a man being shot and killed.
This outrageous violation of human rights took place right here in the United States? Oscar Grant was unarmed. It appears that the police officers lost their temper, pinned him down, and shot him in the back at point-blank range, execution-style. It breaks my heart. It makes me furious. This isn’t supposed to happen here. We live in a civilized society where police officers defend the good. My stomach hurts….
Only a coward…
How do the sayings go? Hmm… Let me see…
Only a coward shoots a man when he’s down.
Only a coward shoots a man in the back.
Only a coward shoots an unarmed man.
The pros drop the ball and the amateurs run with it
If you look further into this story, you’ll find out that not even local news media paid it much attention. It seems that everything that could be done to hide this event from the public view was done, which is deplorable and despicable.
This is wrong–every fiber of my being rejects this!
Fortunately, plenty of people captured this event with portable digital devices (you’ll see another person in this recording using their digital camera to record this execution). And those videos got circulated around the web, raising awareness and calling for action. The particular video at the link above, at the time that it was imported to that particular website, had been viewed over 4000 times.
That is powerful social action.
Of Bicycles and Human Relations
The humanizing bicycle
A few weeks ago, I was talking to a colleague about why I resent some forms of technology so much–mostly because I feel that they separate us more than they bring us together. Now, I know that there is the argument that technology, especially social media, are actually creating community rather than destroying it. But I question what kind of community that is: you never see the people, you can’t hear their voices, you can’t sack-out in their living rooms and share a bowl of popcorn while watching a movie. In fact, I wonder sometimes how well we actually know people that we are linked to virtually. I mean, yeah, I know my friends that I’ve reconnected to on Facebook, I think. Or is it that I know them as they were and not so much as they are?
So anyway, I was arguing with my colleague that technology separates us from our fellow humans and is so doing, makes us somewhat less than human because we are physically isolated when we should be physically close. “Ah ha!” says she, “but technology alters our biology–it becomes part of who we are. how can that make us less than human?”
She had me there–after all, it is precisely our human brains that make us human and our brains allow us to create the technologies that we use in our everyday lives. And yet… I could not and cannot shake the feeling that technology, if not necessarily making us less than human, nevertheless separates us from something that is essentially human–direct relationships unmediated by telephones, computer keyboards, broadband signals or anything else. Unless you are riding a bicycle.
Whoa wait a minute here. A bicycle. And human relations. Huh????
Imagine how you get around and think about how that piece of technology impacts your relationships. The technology could be anything–sneakers for walking, a skateboard, a bike or a car. In all of these cases, the piece of technology affects the nature of our interactions with our environment and each other, but the less technologically advanced that piece of technology, the closer the human relationships you engage in. Take the cars and bikes as a point of comparison.
The car
Cars are tremendously useful things–they carry us great distances and allow us to schlep all sorts of things with us that we wouldn’t otherwise carry anywhere. They get us to the grocery store a mile away or our parents’ house 300 miles away. I don’t doubt their power and utility. But they fundamentally change our relationships with people. They allow us to move hundreds of miles away from mom and dad. They form a bubble around us so that we can’t hear or feel what’s going on outside–no voices of neighbors, no fresh, cool breeze or smell of flowers (well, OK, you can roll the window down and get some of this I suppose, but I’m speaking generally here). You’re in a metal bubble hurtling down the highway at high speed hoping not to run into anyone or anything and hoping that no one or nothing runs into you. You are fundamentally cut off from the interactive world outside of your car as long as you are traveling inside of it.
The Bike
Now, the bike also carries you places, and it can do so at pretty high speeds so that you hope that you won’t run into anyone or anything, but it also keeps you in the world. If it’s raining, you feel it, if the flowers smell good, you smell them. And if someone shouts and says hello you can respond. It’s easy to stop to have an impromptu chat and you can pull off the road at any time. What’s more, you have to make eye contact with others–with drivers in their cars to ensure that they see you and won’t hit you, with pedestrians to be sure they aren’t crossing in front of you, with neighbors as you smile, wave and say hello on your way by. Yes, the bike is a piece of technology that becomes a part of who we are and how we interact with the world, but it doesn’t separate us from the world like a car does, therefore it doesn’t separate us from each other like a car does. It’s harder to ride hundreds of miles from home and expect that you can easily return, so you have to think about where you want to be and with whom. I would argue that it’s a more humanizing technology than a car is.
And of course, the lower tech the travel technology, the more humanizing it is. Running shoes take us running, where we say hello to our neighbors and fellow runners as our paths cross. Walking shoes slow us down even more, giving us even more opportunities to talk to each other, look each other in the eye and be in human contact.
Yes, at the end of the day, to create technology is to be human–it is a fully human act, the result of our very biology and in turn a shaper of beings. But paradoxically, though it is human to create technology, it is somehow dehumanizing to use it. So, give me a bike over a car any day–except perhaps when it’s twenty below zero….
Then I’ll take the bus!
Connecting the Dots
Connections, connections everywhere–We are LinkedIn, we appear on Facebook and renew friendships, some have SecondLives, we tweet and blog and comment and chatter chatter chatter (or is that clatter clatter clatter) all day long across keyboards and cyberspace. We are arguably more interconnected as humans than we have ever been because of digital technology (at least those of us who have access to technology to let us connect in virtual space).
And yet, complete and utter dissatisfaction. What gives?
What gives??? Well for one thing, in the booming buzzing chaos of the digital world, we assume the primacy of words. This is understandable–language is arguably what makes us human. Well, that and social cognition and theory of mind–what others might call soul. But I digress; the point is that if we assume that words are all we need to connect, we lose track of the fact that communication and connection is so much more than words. It’s people’s eyes and the way they tilt their heads and move their hands expressively. It’s tone of voice, and changes in skin tone as we get excited or upset. It’s a handshake, a hug, a kiss (or many!) and tickling. A child’s laugh, a grandmother’s soft hands as she smooths your hair. Fully, truly, completely human communication is as much a dance as it is words and it is that dance, that connection that social media simply cannot capture, communicate, or even recreate. There is a spontaneous choreography that emerges between people as they interact in person–and therein lies the beauty and the connections that make us whole as individuals and in relationships with others.
Of Air Conditioners and Wars
Every year my husband and I toy with the idea of not using our air window conditioner units. After all, we live close to the lake and therefore have lovely cool breezes when the rest of the city is melting. And we’re environmentalists–those things use up resources like no body’s business! After all, electricity in our part of the world comes from coal that gets shipped in from hundreds of miles away. And that coal pollutes the air as it burns, thus increasing the air temperature, making us want our A/Cs even more. Couldn’t we give up a mere convenience for the betterment of the world? And don’t humans living in the rest of the world survive just fine without A/C? Just as our ancestors did before us for generation upon generation? Surely we can adapt ourselves–change our behavior and expectations and do without this “mere luxury”. Surely….
But then–July hits Chicago. Like a sledgehammer. With no mercy. The temperature and humidity rise, and along with them tempers. Gang killings go up, domestic violence increases, and people just get plain surly and crabby–they won’t even say hello to you at the store! And you know what happens then? Into our windows pop our portable A/C units, tout-de-suite, and out of those same windows fly our ideals, just as quickly! As that blessed cool dry air washes over us we reflect; surely the A/C could save the world from madness and violence. It could be the ultimate tool of world peace! Think about it–where are the wars happening? In really hot places where people don’t have A/C. No wonder they’re cranky and easily infuriated–they’re too damn hot! Maybe if they had A/C they would be happier and they wouldn’t fight… Maybe???
So, when it comes to A/C and July in Chicago–I admit it, I am a hypocrite. I want that piece of technology and I want to use it and to heck with all my idealistic dreams. Now–just ask me how I feel about it in the fall when my idealism returns….
Be still my Luddite heart!
Hmmm... Is this the US in 2000?
Last week I posted about how I had to grudgingly admire Twitter for providing Iranians with a means of organizing their movement for free elections, but today, I get to gleefully report that my Luddite self has been vindicated! According to this report from NPR (http://www.npr.org/templates/story/story.php?storyId=105679927), it’s probably impossible that the Iranian protests were organized mainly via Twitter. There are too few Iranians with an active Twitter presence to account for the scale of protest activity. Instead, the report claims, people share information through good old fashioned, face-to-face interaction. Ah, music to my Luddite soul! This makes sense, really, if we think about it. The Iranian government has cracked down on access to internet bandwidth, and shut down text messaging, so what better way to mobilize people than by word of mouth? Unless the Basiji shadow every last one of the more than 3 million people protesting, there’s no way to shut down truly social channels of communication. I might even go so far to say that it is the hubris of the technophile world to believe that only technology can mobilize such broad-scale political action. But I won’t go that far (though I am tempted to end it there!) Technology is a nothing more than a tool, and as such, it can fail. Fortunately, we have the best back-up-system ever conceived for sharing information–speech and social connections. We *talk* to our friends, family, co-workers, and peopel we do commerce with everyday and we don’t need Twitter for that.
So Twitter isn’t the mighty force we thought it was in Iran. That must be disappointing for many. But for you technophiles out there, there’s a bit of vindication in this historical moment for you, too. What Twitter has accomplished is provide a means for those of us not in Iran to show our moral support for their fight for democracy. Twitter has also helped many to participate in active protesting in the US and Europe–protesting that might show Iran that the world cares about what happens there. Perhaps the strength of Twitter really shines in a culture such as ours–our country is so much bigger than Iran is, and perhaps we don’t have the same sort face-to-face interactions that give rise to organized protest in Iran (I don’t beleive that is true, though, not in my heart of hearts, we are human afterall!) Whatever the case maybe, I do see that, through Twitter, we can overcome some of our distance (physical and social) to show solidarity and to organize, deomonstrate, and support a peaceful world community. And I really can’t argue against that!
Freedom to speak–electronically
As you now know, I’m a Luddite–at least a little bit. I don’t like cell phones. I’m not crazy about digital cameras. I’m dubious about iPhones. I do love my laptop, though (it’s true!). If I had my druthers, I’d do away with these things and force people to talk to me to my face (or on a land line) and encourage us to build community where we live, rather than focusing our efforts on the virtual world. But then there’s Iran…. Now I have to rethink this whole thing (though I’m not sure anyone can convince me to believe that cell phones aren’t a hazard to self, community, and world, but that’s a topic for another post)
For work today, I am following the Iranian elections protests as people mobilize action through social networking media–things like blogs, SMS, texting, YouTube, and more than anything else, Twitter. The Iranian government has attempted to quash the peaceful expression of dissent by shutting down mainstream communication media, but the people have circumvented this action by taking to Twitter and Facebook. Web 2.0 is changing real face-to-face lives on the ground and I am watching it unfold second by second, tweet by tweet, YouTube post by YouTube post. Ironically, Twitter, a program that strikes at my Luddite soul with little daggers, is enabling a movement that could potentially change the way Iran is governed. It is creating a potential for face-to-face interaction via virtual space. It is serving as a means for reinforcing local community by reminding one another of shared beliefs and values –beliefs and values that millions are willing to stand up for. In the end, Twitter, a virtual social space, is physically bringing people together–something I doubted it could do. I have been shown otherwise it seems. Now to tweet my friends to read this post… 
Ponytails on the brain
Adrian Paul--Oh yes, he's male!
Most mornings, my husband and I go running on the shores of Lake Michigan and yesterday morning was no exception. However, a small, but exceptional thing happened that my brain has been chewing on ever since; as a cyclist pulled up to pass us, he shouted, “On your left, Ladies!” Yes, “Ladies.” Plural.
Now why on earth would he do that? I am clearly female, but my husband? Well, not so much. He’s built like a man, runs like a man, is square shouldered, strong, and handsome–like a man. And…he has gorgeous, shoulder-length, glossy, curly black hair that many women would kill for. Said hair was pulled back in a pony tail at the nape of his neck where men who have long hair tend to put a pony tail when they wear one (my own hair was pulled in a tail higher up on my head, where women tend to wear theirs) and that ponytail of his seems to have shorted out the cyclist’s brain. All other signs of masculinity to the contrary, the ponytail emphatically signaled “feminine, “ so that’s how my man came to be called a lady. Thankfully he’s secure in his masculinity and wasn’t in the least fussed by this event–it certainly wasn’t the first time this has happened (there’s a hilarious story about a waitress who was so mortified about having called my husband a lady that she refused to return to our table). But still—what’s going on here? My husband was the one called a lady for having long hair and he isn’t worried about it, but here I am, a day later, still ruminating on it.
Now, It isn’t that I’m upset for my husband—like him, I’ve learned to be nonchalant about such errors in perception, but this instance of gender misidentification has me thinking about how enduring traditional signs of gender really are. Despite the fact that many famously handsome (and undeniably male) men have long locks (Johnny Depp or Adrian Paul anyone???) , and despite the strides we’ve made in gender equality in this country, a pony tail still fritzes out the brain. Girls have long hair…end of story…except when they don’t. Hmm. Boys have short hair…end of story…except when they don’t. Hmm once again. So when and how will we learn to see beyond traditional signs of gender? Or do we just relish the moments when something like my husband’s hair forces us out of our narrow boxes? Personally, I live for those instances when something unexpected comes along and pushes us out of our fast-paced-snap-judgment lives and causes us to stop and appreciate the reality of a moment for what it is right before our eyes.
Comments (2)
War in The Congo: Consumer Technology & Human Rights
So if you’ve read my last post (which was an age ago!), you have some idea of what I do for a living. Basically, I spend quite a lot of time trying to figure out what role digital technology is taking on in human rights. In the course of my daily work I come across some pretty outrageous material–outrageous in the original sense of the term–creating outrage. What I read and view inspires outrage, hurt, and heartache. But the flip side of this is that I’m actually in a position to try to do something about it–something that my friend Mike pointed out to me today when he said to me “You should write about this shit!”. He’s right–I should. The stuff I learn is too important to not act on. So, from now on, I’m going to try to post here more often and call your attention to what’s going on in the world out there that you might not know about. What’s more, I’m going to also point out things–small, easy things–that each and every one of us can do to try to combat some of the human rights problems in the world. If we all take these small actions, they will add up to be greater than the sum of each action added to the next–they will turn into a tide that can affect real change in the world.
Today, topic one… Stay tuned for many more
Peace,
Sarah
Cell Phones and Genocide in The Congo
Did you know that our desire for cell phones, lap tops, iPhones, etc. is causing the deaths of millions of people in The Congo of central Africa. Don’t just take my word for it–go visit the Enough! website and watch the videos posted there.
We all know about human rights atrocities in Darfur, but how many of you know about The Congo and the genocide that’s been happening there since the 1950′s? I bet not many of you do–that’s because it’s in a lot of technology companies’ interest that you don’t know. You see, The Congo is an important source of many of the trace minerals that are needed to build cell phones, lap tops, computer towers, iPhones, etc.
In order to build our consumer technology gadgets that we so easily throw away when a newer, better, faster one comes out, companies like Apple, Dell or Nokia need extremely rare minerals and metals. And it just so happens that one of the highest concentrations of these extremely rare minerals exist in The Congo and that these minerals are fueling a decades-old war.
The technology corporations call this “collateral damage.”
Nice.
Stop and think about it…
This “collateral damage” is built into every single cell phone, lap top, PDA, or iPhone that we purchase every day in this country and around the world. Is this something that you really want on your hands? People dying so that you can text your friends or stream your videos? Take a minute and think about the impact that your consumer choice–your choice to buy that new iPhone because you want to look hip and cool–has on people thousands of miles from you. Do you really want your money to be turned into blood money? Think about it and think about it hard…
So what can you do?
Now that you’ve thought about this, and hopefully feel some despair over contributing to the deaths of millions and the rapes of hundreds of thousands, I offer some simple solutions.
1) Use that piece of technology until it falls apart
2) When that gadget falls apart, take it to be recycled so that the conflict minerals can be reclaimed
3) When you replace the gadget, consider buying a refurbished phone or laptop. Dell and Apple both offer factory warranted rebuilt laptops.
4) Vote with your dollars–If a company insists on using conflict minerals, refuse to take your business to them.
5) Spread the word and offer these solutions to all of your friends, families, and co-workers. The more that people are aware of this situation, the more pressure we can put on companies to stop abusing human rights to fulfill our consumer desires.