In Viva Zapata!, a commander protecting the city from Zapata and the rebels warned his men that they could not trust the women, even the ones that were just going to the market. He said they were just as likely as the men to aid Zapata in a revolt. As it turns out, the women were the ones who sacrificed their lives to light the dynamite that blew up the city's walls. This shows that, in poor communities, women were seen as strong individuals who not only understood what went on with the revolution but were a big part of it.
It seems to me that poor and middle class women in Latin America had a degree of strength and a certain level of respect attributed to them that was not found in many other societies at the time. Poor mulatto and indigenous women ran the home. Familial lineages tended to go through the mother. Women sold things in the markets. I think the best example is the one from Viva Zapata!, because it shows that women were seen as valuable even in politics and war, an arena that would traditionally be reserved solely for the men. Perhaps these women were used solely because the rebels were desperate and would take any advantage they could get. But I think that for a majority of Latin Americans, women were given a lot of respect and were seen as more than just child-bearers.
In the early 20th century, feminism in the US was merely non-existent. What may have been called feminism was just information made available to women on how to become better cooks and mothers. Like Roosevelt said in his speech, the main goal in life for women was to find a good husband and produce children. The United States was to be brave and manly. I think that Latin America, however, was more open to feminist ideas. Obviously, women were not seen as equal to men, even in poor communities. I'm just arguing that, compared with other countries, Latin America as a whole was more open to feminism.
Dario's poem to Roosevelt highlights these differences. It's subtle, but Dario displays a view of Latin America that is more accepting of feminism. He says that Latin America "lives on love" and is the "daughter of the Sun". I know, it's not much. But, the fact that Dario is willing to call Latin America a daughter speaks a lot about the importance he attributes to women's roles in Latin American society. I really don't know a ton about this subject and I'm only going off what I've read for this class. So, I'd like to pose a question to anyone who reads this: in your opinion, who is more open to feminism in the early 20th century, Latin America or The United States?
I really like that you chose to focus on women for your blog post this week, I found it very interesting! I think it meant a great deal that the rebels included women in their fighting and gathering of supplies. I have to disagree with you though on your point saying feminism in the US was merely non-existent in the early 20th century. Elizabeth Stanton and Susan B. Anthony were women of the late 1800's. They were the founders of the women's suffrage movement here in the United States. And the Seneca Falls Convention which is now viewed as the start of the feminist movement in the U.S, took place in 1848. In 1861 the Civil War erupted, pushing women's rights aside for a time. But once the war was over, women pushed even harder for equal rights. In 1920 women gained the right to vote in all parts the United States. This did not happen in Mexico until 1947, twenty seven years after the United States. So in my opinion, the U.S. was more open to feminism than Latin America in the early 20th century.
ReplyDelete