Showing posts with label women. Show all posts
Showing posts with label women. Show all posts

Thursday, February 24, 2011


LOCAL EVENTS WINNIPEG
NO MEANS NO RALLY THIS FRIDAY:

A recent decision by Judge Robert Dewar has aroused a lot of ire here in Manitoba. The basic story is that the judge allowed a convicted rapist to serve a two year conditional sentence because the "attire" of the woman involved "provoked" him to assume that "sex was in the air". Love those wind currents. Here is a call for a demonstration outside the Manitoba Law Courts Building to protest the idea behind this sentence.

LELELELELELE
Judge Dewar: No Means No! Rally
Information about the Rally:

Who
: Campus and Community Women’s Centres
What: Rally against Judge Robert Dewar’s rape case ruling
Where: Manitoba Law Courts Building
When: Noon, Friday, February 25, 2011
Why: Judge Dewar said: "inviting circumstances" and survivor’s attire make rapist less morally responsible for rape.

Everyone is more than welcome to bring your own signs with your own message but there will be signs available at the rally.

Please spread the word about this event to everyone you know. There is also an event created for the rally through this facebook group that can be shared.

In order to show your support please change your facebook profile to the no means no picture and change your facebook status to express your views on Judge Dewar's ruling.

Saturday, January 01, 2011


ANARCHIST HISTORY:
RADICAL WOMEN OF THE IWW:
Here's a great little piece that Molly recently discovered at the website of the Irish Workers' Solidarity Movement.
@W@W@W@W@W@W

Radical Women of the IWW
Donal Fallon profiles some of the women who played a large part in the illustrious history of the Industrial Workers of the World.

Women have been at the forefront of the IWW since its inception. The IWW was the first union of its kind to attempt to organise prostitutes in major US cities. While the percentage of female representatives at their inaugural convention (around 12 in total) may seem quite small, the issue of gender equality was always at the front of the organisations agenda.The women profiled here are just three of the famous female faces among the wobblies of the past. There are many others whose names remain unknown.

During one strike, in Lawrence, Massachusetts, female strikers carried homemade placards proclaiming “we want bread and roses too!” committed to improving not just the conditions of the working class in the work place, but indeed the general living conditions of working class people. During the strikes in Lawrence, local media reported that more female strikers than males were arrested by the local police force! Their crimes included, according to the police, “intimidating strikebreakers."

There are countless other chapters to the history of women within the IWW, not least the Patterson Silk Strike of 1913 when around 25,000 striking silk workers managed to shut down 200 silk mills and dye houses in New Jersey for 5 months in 1913. The IWW’s attitude to the state is what sets it apart from many unions. Its bold mission statement stated that the working class and employing class held nothing in common, a philosophy it continued to work by through good times and bad. The women, and indeed men and children of the IWW are, I feel, best remembered in the lines of the classic IWW ballad Everett County Jail:
In the prison cell we sit
Are we broken hearted—nit.
We’re as happy and as cheerful as can be,
For we know that every Wob Will be busy on the job,
Till they swing the prison doors and set us free

Elisabeth Gurley Flynn

Elizabeth Gurley Flynn is one of the many women who stand out in the history of the Industrial Workers of the World. She was just seventeen when she shared the platform with a certain James Connolly, who she described as a “Short, rather stout, plain looking man, [...] a scholar and an excellent writer [whose] speech was marred for American audiences by his thick North of Ireland accent.” Connolly thought very highly of her too.
“She started out as a pure utopian, but now she laughs at her former theories. Had she stuck by her first set of opinions she would have continued a persona grata with the Socialist Party crowd,” Connolly wrote, “but her advocacy of straight revolutionary socialism and industrial unionism alienated them and now they hate her.”

Gurley Flynn once famously remarked, when responding to criticism of the IWW for using women as shields:
“The IWW has been accused of putting the women in the front, the truth is- the IWW does not keep them at the back- and they go to the front”

Lucy Parsons

Lucy Parsons was one of the founders of the IWW She had been involved in the foundation of the journal of IWPA in 1883. In a piece entitled ‘To Tramps, The Unemployed, the Disinherited, and Miserable,’ published in the IWPA journal, The Alarm, in 1884, she called on the poor and disenfranchised to:
“Avail yourselves of those little methods of warfare which Science has placed in the hands of the poor man, and you will become a power in this or any other land. Learn the use of explosives!”

In 1905, she displayed similar radicalism when speaking at the IWW’s foundation (a speech that was reputedly interrupted several times by loud applause).
“We, the women of this country, have no ballot even if we wished to use it, and the only way that we can be represented is to take a man to represent us. You men have made such a mess of it in representing us that we have not much confidence in asking you !We [women] are the slaves of slaves. We are exploited more ruthlessly than men. Whenever wages are to be reduced the capitalist class use women to reduce them, and if there is anything that you men should do in the future it is to organize the women.....”

A very powerful orator, said to be more dangerous than a ‘thousand rioters’ by the Chicago Police force, she quickly took to editing The Liberator, the newspaper of the IWW in the Chicago area. While class struggle was always to the front of her political agenda, she used the space this paper offered to push for, among other things, women’s right to access birth control and the legalisation of divorce. Interestingly, Parsons was highly critical of the idea of ‘free love’, and disagreed with attacks made on the traditional institutions of marriage and family by other anarchists, in particular by Emma Goldman. It is thought that Lucy Parsons married twice, firstly to Oliver Gathing, and later to Albert Parsons - a fascinating character, who had fought as a confederate soldier before becoming involved in union activism and gaining an interest in anarchism, leading to his eventual execution as one of the famous Haymarket martyrs.

Mother Jones

We can even find an Irish connection when we look at the historical role played by women in the early days of the wobblies. Mary Harris Jones, better known as Mother Jones and born in the rebel county of Cork. She was once described as “the most dangerous woman in America,” which must be up there with being “more dangerous than a thousand rioters”! She stated in her autobiography that her family had been involved in the ‘struggle against British rule’ in Ireland. Indeed her grandfather was hanged as a result of his activity in the nationalist movement. Mother Jones played a huge role in bringing the issue of Child Labour to the forefront of the political agenda, writing in her autobiography
“In the spring of 1903 I went to Kensington, Pennsylvania, where seventy-five thousand textile workers were on strike. Of this number at least ten thousand were little children.....“I called upon the millionaire manufactures to cease their moral murders, and I cried to the officials in the open windows opposite, “Some day the workers will take possession of your city hall, and when we do, no child will be sacrificed on the altar of profit.”

Mother Jones famously led a group of striking children on a march all the way to the front door of a certain Theodore Roosevelt. The march, from Pennsylvania to New York City, was designed to take the issue of child labour right to the Presidents doorstep. Around 100 children took part in the march, designed to show what she termed the “New York millionaires” the suffering of working class children. She led the children all the way to the Presidents Long Island home, and when they reached the home, she was informed by the president’s secretary that Teddy himself was “unavailable”. Still, the campaign had succeeded in drawing public attention to a shocking issue. In her own words:“We are told that every American boy has the chance of being president. I tell you that these little boys in the iron cages would sell their chance any day for good square meals and a chance to play. These little toilers whom I have taken from the mills --deformed, dwarfed in body and soul, with nothing but toil before them -have never heard that they have a chance, the chance of every American male citizen, to become the president.”

The children carried banners with slogans like “We want time to play!”, “We miss our parents” and “We want time to go to school” and demanded a new federal law prohibiting the exploitation of children in the work place. While they failed in this, it was clear Mother Jones was standing by her own life philosophy to “pray for the dead, and fight like hell for the living.”

Wednesday, September 15, 2010



LOCAL EVENTS WINNIPEG:

TAKE BACK THE NIGHT 2010:





The annual Take Back The Night march will be held here in Winnipeg this coming September 30. Here's the particulars.
TBTNTBTNTBTN


Take Back the Night 2010
Time September 30 · 7:00pm - 9:00pm

----------------------------
Location Magnus Eliason Recreation Centre
430 Langside Street
Winnipeg, MB

---------------------------

More Info
Shine a Light: Take Back the Night

Take Back the Night is an annual march which takes place all over the world. It is a collective display of solidarity to reclaim the streets as safe for all, and calls for an end to violence against women.

This year we will "shine a light" on violence against women which takes place in the street, but also that which happens under the cover of darkness and behind closed doors.

Rally begins at 7:00 p.m. March to follow. Reception with refreshments after the march.

There will be drumming, and music provided by Little Hawk after the march.

Speaker TBA

All are welcome to attend the march.

Bring your noisemakers, drums, banners, placards and your voice!

**Take Back the Night 2010 in Winnipeg is a World March of Women 2010 event**

Please share widely and invite others!!

Monday, August 23, 2010


HUMOUR:
POINTS OF VIEW:

Tuesday, August 17, 2010


LOCAL EVENTS WINNIPEG:
WALK FOR THE SHELTERS:


Here's an interesting event beginning today in Winkler and ending on the 21st in Memorial Park here in Winnipeg...the 'Walk for the Shelters'. The cause is the support of shelters for battered women in Winkler and in Winnipeg, and you can see more about it at the walk's website.


Yes, I know, I know, I know. The purists out there amongst the anarchists will complain about any event that asks for more government money, and doubtless they are right in an abstract sense. Yet, this is one of many situations where the government actually doles out its funds to things that are useful, and there is little immediate prospect of funding coming from elsewhere. Aside from the absurdity of waiting for the revolution that will never come there are, of course, other solutions that could be applied in the intermediate to long term. One would be to expand the category of "tax credits" such that donations to certain things would be deductible from income tax.


This is certainly not an impossibility, merely something that would be difficult to get enacted in anything but the very long term. Especially when so much of the opposition to our conservative rulers are either just as statist as they are or are under the delusion that protest is all that has to be done. Yet it would go very far to making the operation of such worthy things as shelters for battered women independent of state control. It's an idea well worth considering.


Here's the story from the Canadian Union of Public Employees (CUPE) about their support for this walk.
MLMLMLMLML

CUPE Respect Campaign supports Walk for the Shelters
Text size
(What are these?) Aug 13, 2010 01:32 PM

WINNIPEG – CUPE’s Respect Campaign is honoured to support Steve Braun’s Walk for the Shelters as he walks from Winkler to Winnipeg to raise money for two women’s shelters, drawing attention to the fact that women’s shelters across Manitoba lack the funding necessary to provide adequate services to victims of domestic violence.

On August 17 at 9:00 a.m., Steve Braun will begin his 150 kilometre walk. Kathy Macdonald, president of CUPE Local 2343 and member mobilizer for the CUPE Respect Campaign, will be walking alongside Steve during part of his four-day journey which will conclude on August 21 at Memorial Park.

“I’m proud to walk alongside Steve in his quest to make people aware of just how under-funded our women’s shelters really are,” said Kathy Macdonald. “These shelters need adequate resources to provide women and children who are victims of domestic violence a safe alternative.”

CUPE Manitoba represents social services workers in women’s shelters across Manitoba. The goal of the Respect Campaign is to raise the profile of what CUPE members contribute to the people in their care and for their communities.

“In a perfect world, shelters would receive adequate funding from the provincial government and efforts like Steve’s would not be necessary,” said Kathy Macdonald. “Sadly that is not the case. I’m very impressed with the leadership Steve has shown on this issue.”

The funds raised by the Walk for the Shelters will go directly to address staff and resource shortages at the IKWE-WIDDJIITIWIN shelter in Winnipeg and Genesis House in Winkler.

For more information about the Walk for the Shelters or to make a donation, please visit the Walk for the Shelters website.

For more information, contact:

Liam Martin
Communications Representative
Tel: (204) 612-0901

Kathy Macdonald
Respect Campaign Member Mobilizer
Tel: (204) 942-0343, ext. 214

Sheree Capar & Allan Bleich
Social Service Coordinators
Tel: (204) 942-0343

Tuesday, July 13, 2010


INTERNATIONAL POLITICS IRAN:
STOP THE EXECUTION OF SAKINEH ASHTIANI:



In response to wide international protest the judiciary of Iran has relented and said that Sakineh Ashtiani will not be executed by "stoning". It is left open, however, whether she will be executed in another fashion for the "crime" of adultery. It should be noted that generally in Islamic jurisprudence it is almost impossible to prove adultery as it takes the eyewitness testimony of four male witnesses to the act. There is, however, an out as confessions are taken as equivalent evidence. Ashtiani's so-called "confession" was obtained by duress ie during the course of her whipping. That apparently can be done even if there is not the standard of proof required for the death penalty to be applied. She has later recanted her forced confession. Here's at item from the Canadian Union of Public Employees (CUPE) calling you to sign a petition demanding that Ashtiani not be executed by any method.
IWIWIWIWIW
Help save lives in Iran


People from across the world are organizing to save the life of Sakineh Ashtiani, the Iranian woman who faces death after having been tortured for alleged adultery.

Act now and join the hundreds of thousands of people demanding that the Iranian government halt Ashtiani’s execution.

Sign the international petition

In 2006 Ashtiani was convicted of having an illicit relationship and received 99 lashes. Since this time the 43-year old mother of two has been in jail where she recanted the confession she made under the duress of the lashing.

She was recently re-tried and again convicted. Her sentence: death by stoning.

Due to international pressure Iran’s government has indicated that she will not be executed by stoning, though her death sentence may still be carried out by some other method, likely hanging.

Even if Sakineh Ashanti is not executed she may still face a long prison term. Right now fifteen more people are on death row in Iran waiting stoning, in which victims are buried up to their necks in the ground and then large rocks are thrown at their heads.

Don’t let Sakineh Ashtiani become another victim of the debasing, inhuman treatment of women that has become the daily reality in Iran. Make your voice count and encourage others to do the same.

Take action against the practice of stoning; take action against abuse of women. Sign the petition at the link below. Encourage your friends and family to do so to.

By working together we can help make a difference by keeping up the international pressure on the Iranian government to stop this brutal violation of human rights.

Take action now
IWIWIWIWIW
THE LETTER:
Please go to this link to sign the following petition to the Iranian authorities.
IWIWIWIWIW
To Ayotollah Ali Khamenei and the leaders of Iran
We call on you to finally put an end to capital punishment by stoning and to reverse the unjust judgment in the case of Sakineh Mohammadi Ashtiani.

Thursday, June 17, 2010


WEIRD STUFF:
INSTANT SONS- JUST ADD MILK:


The following from the Care2 site is way off the beaten path. I mean it, way off the beaten path. I present it here as a cautionary example of why clerics of all persuasions should never be allowed even the slightest tiny morsel of political power. There are those amongst the religious right in North America who harbour schemes that are just as strange when viewed from the outside. Anyways, for all you connoisseurs of human irrationality here's the article.
WWWWWWWWWW

Saudi Clerics Advocate Breastfeeding Adult Men
posted by: Robin Marty 1 day ago


I haven't pulled any punches in the past discussing how bothered I am by the laws against women in Saudi Arabia. From ridiculous "guardianship" laws to burdensome rules on being in public with men, to arresting women who even have too much of a tan, it's no wonder the public is beginning to physically fight against the authority in the land.

Obviously, the religious authority knows it has a problem that must be dealt with. But is this really the answer?


Women in Saudi Arabia should give their breast milk to male colleagues and acquaintances in order to avoid breaking strict Islamic law forbidding mixing between the sexes, two powerful Saudi clerics have said. They are at odds, however, over precisely how the milk should be conveyed.

A fatwa issued recently about adult breast-feeding to establish "maternal relations" and preclude the possibility of sexual contact has resulted in a week's worth of newspaper headlines in Saudi Arabia. Some have found the debate so bizarre that they're calling for stricter regulations about how and when fatwas should be issued.

Sheikh Al Obeikan, an adviser to the royal court and consultant to the Ministry of Justice, set off a firestorm of controversy recently when he said on TV that women who come into regular contact with men who aren't related to them ought to give them their breast milk so they will be considered relatives.



One cleric claims simply pumping and having the men drink the milk is enough to create this familial bond. Another, however, does say that "men should suckle the breast milk directly from a woman's breast."

The logic behind the edict is an apparently common practice known as "breast milk siblings" where according to the article, if you provide 5 "fulfilling" breastmilk meals to a male child before the age of two, you and your female family members will not have to cover your faces in front of him later in life, something that is apparently common among nieces and nephews.

But, when translated into somehow trying to provide this connection to an adult, and use it as a loophole in order to allow women to be in the presence of men who are not blood relations, a lot of obvious problems jump to mind. The first, of course, is the assumption that every woman is lactating, when in fact the only candidates for this process would be married mothers with children under the age of two, the traditional cutoff point for breastfeeding in that country. Women aren't just wandering around with milk in their breasts all of the time, married or not, mothers or not. This would provide no outlet for any unmarried woman, who tend to suffer the most under these strict guardianship laws, nor for widows or the elderly.

The second problem is what is meant by "fulfilling" meals. A grown adult obviously would take much more to be "fulfilled" than an infant, or even a toddler, whose stomachs are smaller than an apple.

Third, even with this loophole available, clerics have decreed that it cannot be used with a driver. As women in Saudi Arabia are not allowed to have driver's licenses, no woman would be able to go anywhere outside walking distance without having a man drive her. If this breastfeeding loophole can't be used with someone who can drive them from place to place, they are still essentially trapped without a family member to accompany them, regardless.

Breastfeeding adult males in order to be allowed to be with someone of the opposite sex who is not a family member is no real solution to the issues of Sharia law. In fact, it actually exacerbates them, as it simply reinforces the idea that a woman sole purpose in existence is to extend and tend to the family unit. Women in the country deserve real freedom, not that which is only granted to them if they act as the "sustenance" of the family.

Sunday, December 06, 2009


VIOLENCE AGAINST WOMEN:
THE MONTRÉAL MASSACRE- 20 YEARS AFTER:
It was 20 years ago that Marc Lepine went on a rampage at the École Polytechnique in Montréal. Blaming "feminists" for his failures in life he entered that engineering school armed with a semi-automatic rifle and a hunting knife. In the end 14 people, all women, were dead and 14 others, ten of them women, were injured. Lepine ended by killing himself. The full details of the incident can be read at a Wikipedia article on the subject.




Since that day November 6 has become an officially recognized 'National Day of Remembrance and Action on Violence Against Women'. Here in Winnipeg two events were held today, one a showing of the film 'Polytechnique' at the University of Winnipeg and the other a candlelight vigil in front of the office of Conservative MP Shelley Glover. Tomorrow there will be a candlelight march beginning at 7:30 am (!!!) from the Union Centre at 275 Broadway to the Legislature down the road. A memorial service will follow. Here are several statements on the import of this day. First, from the Canadian Labour Congress.
†††††††††††††††††
National Day of Remembrance and Action on Violence against Women December 6, 2009:
Posted: Friday, 27 November 2009
On December 6th, we mourn the 14 women killed in Montreal in 1989. On this day we remember all women who are murdered or experience violence by partners, family members and strangers throughout this country. On this day we recommit to take action against all forms of violence against women in our society.

This December 6th will mark 20 years since those 14 young women were murdered in Montreal simply because they were women. Ironically, as this anniversary approaches, our government is trying to do away with the firearms registry, the one concrete measure taken to reduce gun violence against women.

We recognize that ending this violence will only be possible when all women in Canada live in economic and social equality. We know that fighting violence requires governments to pursue an integrated legal, social and economic agenda.

For twenty years, women have been waiting for action. Twenty years is too long. On this anniversary of the December 6th murders, Canadians can take action to demand a serious government commitment to ending violence against women.

The Canadian Labour Congress has developed a campaign asking Canadians to send 20 postcard messages to the federal government. The campaign is called “20 Days 20 Ways to End Violence Against Women”.

Beginning on November 16th, Canadians can send a postcard every day to the Prime Minister to remind him that we need action now.

The CLC’s 20 Days 20 Ways campaign recognizes that a law and order agenda will never end violence against women. Women need a series of comprehensive social and economic policies including:
*maintaining the long gun registry, which has reduced gun-related spousal homicides by 50% since it was started.
*access to affordable, safe housing;
*a living minimum wage;
*effective pay equity laws;
*a national publicly-funded child care programme;
*equal access to Employment Insurance;
*access to justice, including the resources to challenge discriminatory government action and legal aid;
*increased governmental support for women’s centres, rape crisis centres and women’s shelters;
*legal protection and support for women who report sexual assault.

Rather than promoting women’s equality, the federal government is severely limiting women’s capacity to organize, advocate and lobby. They won’t support women’s equality in the workplace and have limited women’s rights to challenge discrimination before the courts.

Canadians cannot accept an erosion of our hard-won and still fragile equality rights. We will not be silenced by the socially conservative government agenda.

We call on the federal government to reverse its policy decisions on childcare, pay equity, the gun registry, the Court Challenges Program and Status of Women Canada. We call on the government to drop its law and order agenda and instead, develop an effective women’s equality agenda.
†††††††††††††††††
†††††††††††††††††
20 years later, remember and take action:
December 4, 2009 01:11 PM
This December 6 marks the 20th year that we remember and mourn the 14 women who were shot and killed at Ecole Polytechnique in Montreal in 1989.
While December 6 is a day of remembrance, it has also become a national day of action to address the many outstanding issues that continue to threaten the safety and security of women.
CUPE is participating in the Canadian Labour Congress (CLC) December 6 postcard campaign, which outlines 20 different measures that the federal government can take to improve the safety and security of women.
At our recent national convention, the National Women’s Committee highlighted the issue of violence against women by encouraging delegates to participate in The Handkerchief Project to end violence against women and girls.
The money raised was matched by CUPE National and a donation was sent to the Sisters in Spirit, an organization addressing violence against Aboriginal women - in particular the high rates of missing and murdered Aboriginal women in Canada.
In recognition of the 20th anniversary of the tragic events of December 6, CUPE has updated its poster “Until all Women are Free to Be”, available from the Equality Branch.
There are ceremonies across the country honouring the memory of those women who died on December 6. We encourage CUPE locals and members to participate in these events in your communities.
CUPE will continue to do whatever is necessary to ensure that women have economic and social security so that they truly can be safe at home, at work, and in our communities
†††††††††††††††††
And from the United Food and Commercial Workers (UFCW)
†††††††††††††††††
December 6 — National Day of Remembrance and Action on Violence Against Women:
04/12/2009
Downloadthe 2010 National Day of Remembrance and Action on Violence Against Women in Canada poster

December 6, is the National Day of Remembrance and Action on Violence Against Women – still one of the most important days of commemoration on our calendar. It marks the sombre anniversary of the day in 1989 when a disturbed young man used a rifle to murder 14 women at a Montreal engineering school – singling them out simply for being women.
Most of us remember vividly learning the grim details of the Montreal massacre as the news emerged. Such a calami­tous event, it was fair to think, would certainly result in posi­tive changes for women in the future. And there have been changes for the better – the general awareness of issues involving violence against women has definitely grown.
But, 20 years from the Montreal tragedy, are we really farther ahead? Aware­ness and education are vital factors, but women are still victims of violence with alarming regularity. And today our federal government continues to procrastinate and even move backwards on legislation and policies that affect women’s safety and well-being.
At a time when vision and action are needed, the Harper Conservative government is sadly lacking. Programs that would help women are being cut or ignored rather than growing or being enhanced. The 20th anniversary of the events in Montreal must be a wake-up call to our leaders to take action for positive change for women in Canada.
In solidarity,
Wayne Hanley
National President
††††††††††††††††††††
Many other statements could be appended, and I am sure that they would all express noble and lofty sentiments. There is a problem here, however. Most of these statements express the sentiment that the government must do something. Such opinions are, of course, common in any statist society where it is seeming "common sense" that for anything to be done effectively it has to be done by government. It is, however, sad to see this way of thinking expressed by labour groups who should know better than others that government action tails effective action by those most concerned rather than initiates it. At best government action makes achieving a certain goal that many people are already working towards a little bit easier. It never initiates such action, and it quite often derails and prevents such civil society action from achieving the fullest expression of its goals.
That doesn't mean that such legislation should be opposed, though I think the long gun registry is one piece of repressive legislation that should be abolished. It can, after all, have minor benefits. In relation to the subject of women and their advancement one should ask the old chicken and egg question. How many of the gains that women have made over the past decades were due to government action ? How much of such legislation was merely a response to formalize gains that were already well under way by the "molecular action" of society outside the state ? How much does a focus on government detract from a focus of what people, women included and especially, have to do themselves ? Questions to ponder now that the day of remembrance and (entirely) symbolic action is over.

Sunday, August 09, 2009


PEOPLE:
MALALAI JOYA:
The following is an interesting mini-bio of that most rare of all breeds, a politician who actually stands on principle. Here, from Z Communications (originally published in The Independent) is the story of the Afghani woman Malalai Joya.
PPPPPPPPPPPP
Joya: The Woman Who Will Not Be Silenced:
By Johann Hari
Source: The Independent
Johann Hari's ZSpace Page
I am not sure how many more days I will be alive," Malalai Joya says quietly. The warlords who make up the new "democratic" government in Afghanistan have been sending bullets and bombs to kill this tiny 30-year-old from the refugee camps for years - and they seem to be getting closer with every attempt. Her enemies call her a "dead woman walking". "But I don't fear death, I fear remaining silent in the face of injustice," she says plainly. "I am young and I want to live. But I say to those who would eliminate my voice: 'I am ready, wherever and whenever you might strike. You can cut down the flower, but nothing can stop the coming of the spring.'"

The story of Malalai Joya turns everything we have been told about Afghanistan inside out. In the official rhetoric, she is what we have been fighting for. Here is a young Afghan woman who set up a secret underground school for girls under the Taliban and - when they were toppled - cast off the burka, ran for parliament, and took on the religious fundamentalists.

But she says: "Dust has been thrown into the eyes of the world by your governments. You have not been told the truth. The situation now is as catastrophic as it was under the Taliban for women. Your governments have replaced the fundamentalist rule of the Taliban with another fundamentalist regime of warlords. (That is) what your soldiers are dying for." Instead of being liberated, she is on the brink of being killed.

The story of Joya is the story of another Afghanistan - the one behind the burka, and behind the propaganda.
"We are our sisters' keepers"
I meet Joya in a London apartment where she is staying with a supporter for a week, to talk about her memoir - but even here, her movements have to be kept secret, as she flits from one safe house to another. I am told not to mention her location to anyone. She is standing in the corridor, small and slim, with her hair flowing freely, and she greets me with a solid handshake. But, when our photographer snaps her, she begins to giggle girlishly: the grief etched on to her sallow face melts away, and she laughs in joyous little squeaks. "I can never get used to this!" she says.

Then, as I sit her down to talk through her life-story, the pain soaks into her face once more. Her body tightens into a tense coil, and her fists close.

Joya was four days old when the Soviet Union invaded Afghanistan. On that day, her father dropped out of his studies to fight the invading Communist army, and vanished into the mountains. She says: "Since then, all we have known is war."

Her earliest memory is of clinging to her mother's legs while policemen ransacked their house looking for evidence of where her father was hiding. Her illiterate mother tried to keep her family of 10 children alive as best she could. When the police became too aggressive, she took her kids to refugee camps across the border in Iran. In these filthy tent-cities lying on the old Silk Road, Afghans huddled together and were treated as second-class citizens by Iran. At night, wild animals could wander into the tents and attack children. There, word reached the family that Joya's father had been blown up by a landmine - but he was alive, after losing a leg.

There were no schools in the Iranian camps, and Joya's mother was determined her daughters would receive the education she never had. So they fled again, to camps in western Pakistan. There, Joya began to read - and was transformed. "Tell me what you read and I shall tell you what you are," she says. Starting in her early teens, she inhaled all the literature she could - from Persian poetry to the plays of Bertolt Brecht to the speeches of Martin Luther King. She began to teach her new-found literacy to the older women in the camps, including her own mother.

She soon discovered that she loved to teach - and, when she turned 16, a charity called the Organization for Promoting Afghan Women's Capabilities (OPAWC) made a bold suggestion: go to Afghanistan, and set up a secret school for girls, under the noses of the Taliban tyranny.

So she gathered her few clothes and books and was smuggled across the border - and "the best days of my life" began. She loathed being forced to wear a burka, being harassed on the streets by the omnipresent "vice and virtue" police, and being under constant threat of being discovered and executed. But she says it was worth it for the little girls. "Every time a new girl joined the class, it was a triumph," she says, beaming. "There is no better feeling."

She only just avoided being caught, again and again. One time she was teaching a class of girls in a family's basement when the mother of the house yelled down suddenly: "Taliban! Taliban!" Joya says: "I told my students to lie down on the floor and stay totally silent. We heard footsteps above us and waited a long time." On many occasions, ordinary men and women - anonymous strangers - helped her out by sending the police charging off in the wrong direction. She adds: "Every day in Afghanistan, even now, hundreds if not thousands of ordinary women act out these small gestures of solidarity with each other. We are our sisters' keepers."

The charity was so impressed with her they appointed her their director. Joya decided to set up a clinic for poor women just before the 9/11 attacks. When the American invasion began, the Taliban fled her province, but the bombs kept falling. "Many lives were needlessly lost, just like during the September 11 tragedy," she says. "The noise was terrifying, and children covered their ears and screamed and cried. Smoke and dust rose and lingered in the air with every bomb dropped."

As soon as the Taliban retreated, they were replaced - by the warlords who had ruled Afghanistan immediately before. Joya says that, at this point, "I realized women's rights had been sold out completely... Most people in the West have been led to believe that the intolerance and brutality towards women in Afghanistan began with the Taliban regime. But this is a lie. Many of the worst atrocities were committed by the fundamentalist mujahedin during the civil war between 1992 and 1996. They introduced the laws oppressing women followed by the Taliban - and now they were marching back to power, backed by the United States. They immediately went back to their old habit of using rape to punish their enemies and reward their fighters."

The warlords "have ruled Afghanistan ever since," she adds. While a "showcase parliament has been created for the benefit of the U.S. in Kabul", the real power "is with these fundamentalists who rule everywhere outside Kabul". As an example, she names the former governor of Herat, Ismail Khan. He set up his own "vice and virtue" squads which terrorized women and smashed up video and music cassettes. He had his own "private militias, private jails". The constitution of Afghanistan is irrelevant in these private fiefdoms.

Joya discovered just what this meant when she started to set up the clinic - and a local warlord announced that it would not be allowed, since she was a woman, and a critic of fundamentalism. She did it anyway, and decided to fight this fundamentalist by running in the election for the Loya jirga ("meeting of the elders") to draw up the new Afghan constitution. There was a great swelling of support for this girl who wanted to build a clinic - and she was elected. "It turned out my mission," she says, "would be to expose the true nature of the jirga from within."
"I would never again be safe"
As she stepped past the world's television cameras into the Loya jirga, the first thing Joya saw was "a long row with some of the worst abusers of human rights that our country had ever known - warlords and war criminals and fascists".

She could see the men who invited Osama bin Laden into the country, the men who introduced the misogynist laws later followed by the Taliban, the men who had massacred Afghan civilians. Some had got there by intimidating the electorate, others by vote-rigging, and yet more were simply appointed by Hamid Karzai, the former oilman installed by the U.S. army to run the country. She thought of an old Afghan saying: "It's the same donkey, with a new saddle."

For a moment, as these old killers started to give long speeches congratulating themselves on the transition to democracy, Joya felt nervous. But then, she says, "I remembered the oppression we face as women in my country, and my nervousness evaporated, replaced by anger."

When her turn came, she stood, looked around at the blood-soaked warlords on every side, and began to speak. "Why are we allowing criminals to be present here? They are responsible for our situation now... It is they who turned our country into the centre of national and international wars. They are the most anti-women elements in our society who have brought our country to this state and they intend to do the same again... They should instead be prosecuted in the national and international courts."

These warlords - who brag about being hard men - could not cope with a slender young woman speaking the truth. They began to shriek and howl, calling her a "prostitute" and "infidel", and throwing bottles at her. One man tried to punch her in the face. Her microphone was cut off and the jirga descended into a riot.

"From that moment on," Joya says, "I would never again be safe... For fundamentalists, a women is half a human, meant only to fulfil a man's every wish and lust, and to produce children and toil in the home. They could not believe that a young woman was tearing off their masks in front of the eyes of the Afghan people."

A fundamentalist mob turned up a few hours later at her accommodation, announcing they had come to rape and lynch her. She had to be placed under immediate armed guard - but she refused to be protected by American troops, insisting on Afghan officers.

Her speech was broadcast all over the world - and cheered in Afghanistan. She was flooded with support from the people of her country, delighted that somebody had finally spoken out. One dirt-poor village pooled its cash to send a delegate hundreds of miles across the country to explain how pleased they were.

An extremely old woman was brought to her in a rickety wheelbarrow, and she explained she had lost two sons - one to the Soviets, one to the fundamentalists. She told Joya: "I am almost 100 years old, and I am dying. When I heard about you and what you said, I knew that I had to meet you. God must protect you, my dear."

She handed over her gold ring, her only valuable possession, and said: "You must take it! I have suffered so much in my life, and my last wish is that you accept this gift from me."

But the U.S. and NATO occupiers instructed Joya that she must show "politeness and respect" for the other delegates. When Zalmay Khalilzad, the U.S. Ambassador, said this, she replied: "If these criminals raped your mother or your daughter or your grandmother, or killed seven of your sons, let alone destroyed all the moral and material treasure of your country, what words would you use against such criminals that will be inside the framework of politeness and respect?"

She leans forward and quotes Brecht: "He says, 'He who does not know the truth is only a fool. He who knows the truth and calls it a lie is a criminal.'"

The attempts to murder her began then with a sniper - and have not stopped since. But she says plainly, with her fist clenched: "I wanted the warlords to know I was not afraid of them."�
So she ran for parliament - and won in a landslide. "I would return again to face those who had ruined my country," she explains, "and I was determined that I would stand straight and never bow again to their threats."
"In every corner is a killer"
Joya looked out across the new Afghan parliament on her first day and thought: "In every corner is a killer, a puppet, a criminal, a drug lord, a fascist. This is not democracy. I am one of the very few people here who has been genuinely elected." She started her maiden speech by saying: "My condolences to the people of Afghanistan..."

Before she could continue, the warlords began to shout that they would rape and kill her. One warlord, Abdul Sayyaf, yelled a threat at her. Joya looked him straight in the eye and said: "We are not in [the area he rules by force] here, so control yourself."

I ask if she was frightened, and she shakes her head. "I am never frightened when I tell the truth." She is speaking fast now: "I am truly honoured to have been vilified and threatened by the savage men who condemned our country to such misery. I feel proud that even though I have no private army, no money, and no world powers behind me, these brutal despots are afraid of me and scheme to eliminate me."

She says there is no difference for ordinary Afghans between the Taliban and the equally fundamentalist warlords. "Which groups are labeled 'terrorist' or 'fundamentalist' depends on how useful they are to the goals of the U.S.," she says. "You have two sides who terrorize women, but the anti-American side are 'terrorists' and the pro-American side are 'heroes'."

Karzai rules only with the permission of the warlords. He is "a shameless puppet" who will win next month's presidential elections because "he hasn't yet stopped working for his masters, the U.S. and the warlords ... At this point in our history, the only people who get to serve as president are those selected by the U.S. government and the mafia that holds power in our country."

Whenever she would despair in parliament, she would meet yet more ordinary Afghan women - and get back in the fight. She tells me about a 16-year-old constituent of hers, Rahella, who ran away to an orphanage Joya had helped to set up in her constituency. "Her uncle had decided to marry her off to his son, who was a drug addict. She was terrified. So of course we took her in, educated her, helped her." One day, her uncle turned up and apologized, saying he had learnt the error of his ways. He asked if she could come home for a weekend to visit her family. Joya agreed - and when she got back to her village, Rahella was forced into marriage and spirited away to another part of Afghanistan. They heard six months later that she had doused herself in petrol and burned herself alive.

There has been an epidemic of self-immolation by women across the "new" Afghanistan in the past five years. "The hundreds of Afghan women who set themselves ablaze are not only committing suicide to escape their misery," she says, "they are crying out for justice."

But she was not allowed to raise these issues in the supposedly democratic parliament. The fundamentalist warlords who couldn't beat Joya at the ballot box or kill her chanced upon a new way to silence her. The more she spoke, the angrier they got. She called for secularism in Afghanistan, saying: "Religion is a private issue, unrelated to political issues and the government... Real Muslims do not require political leaders to guide them to Islam." She condemned the new law that declared an amnesty for all war crimes committed in Afghanistan over the past 30 years, saying "You criminals are simply giving yourselves a get-out-of-jail free card." So the MPs simply voted to kick her out of parliament.

It was illegal and undemocratic - but the President, Hamid Karzai, supported the ban. "Now the warlord criminals are unchallenged in parliament," she says. "Is that democracy?"

We in the West have been fed "a pack of lies" about what Afghanistan looks like today. "The media are 'free' only if they do not try to criticize warlords and officials," she says in her book, Raising My Voice. As an example, she names a specific warlord: "If you write anything about him, the next day you will be tortured or killed by the Northern Alliance warlords." It is "a myth" to say girls can now go to school outside Kabul. "Only five per cent of girls, according to the UN, can follow their education to the 12th grade."

And it is "false" to say Afghan culture is inherently misogynistic. "By the 1950s, there was a growing women's movement in Afghanistan, demonstrating and fighting for their rights," she says. "I have a story here" - she rifles through her notes - "from The New York Times in 1959. Here! The headline is 'Afghanistan's women lift the veil'. We were developing an open culture for women - and then the foreign wars and invasions crushed it all. If we can regain our independence, we can start this struggle again."

Many of her friends urge her to leave the country, before one of her wannabe-assassins gets lucky. But, she says, "I can never leave when all the poor people that I love are living in danger and poverty. I am not going to search for a better and safer place, and leave them in a burning hell." Apologizing for her English - which is, in fact, excellent - she quotes Brecht again: "Those who do struggle often fail, but those who do not struggle have already failed."

Today, she fights for democracy outside parliament. But, she says, any Afghan democrat today is "trapped between two enemies. There are the occupation forces from the sky, dropping cluster bombs and depleted uranium, and on the ground there are the fundamentalist warlords and the Taliban, with their own guns." She wants to help the swelling movement of ordinary Afghans in between, who are opposed to both. "With the withdrawal of one enemy, the occupation forces, it (will be) easier to fight against these internal fundamentalist enemies."

If she were president of Afghanistan, she would begin by referring all the country's war criminals to the International Court of Justice at The Hague. "Anybody who has murdered my sisters and brothers should be punished," she says, "from the Taliban, to the warlords, to George W Bush." Then she would ask all foreign troops to leave immediately. She says that it is wrong to say Afghanistan will simply collapse into civil war if that happens. "What about the civil war now? Today, people are being killed - many, many war crimes. The longer the foreign troops stay in Afghanistan doing what they are doing, the worse the eventual civil war will be for the Afghan people."

The Afghan public, she adds, are on her side, pointing to a recent opinion poll showing 60 percent of Afghans want an immediate NATO withdrawal. Many people in Afghanistan were hopeful, she says, about Barack Obama - "but he is actually intensifying the policy of George Bush ... I know his election has great symbolic value in terms of the struggle of African-Americans for equal rights, and this struggle is one I admire and respect. But what is important for the world is not whether the president is black or white, but his actions. You can't eat symbolism."

U.S. policy is driven by geopolitics, she says, not personalities. "Afghanistan is in the heart of Asia, so it's a very important place to have military bases - so they can control trade very easily with other Asian powers such as China, Russia, Iran and so on.

"But it can be changed by Americans," she adds. She is passionate now, her voice rising. "I say to Obama - in my area, 150 people were blown up by U.S. troops in one incident this year. If your family had been there, would you send even more troops and even more bombs? Your government is spending $18m (�11m) to make another Guantanamo jail in Bagram. If your daughter might be detained there, would you be building it? I say to Obama - change course, or otherwise tomorrow people will call you another Bush."
"It's hard to be strong all the time"
"It's not good to show my enemies any weakness, (but) it's hard to be strong all the time," Joya says with a sigh, as she runs her hands through her hair. She has been speaking so insistently - with such preternatural courage- that it's easy to forget she was just a girl when she was thrust into fighting fundamentalism. She was never allowed an adolescence. The fierce concentration on her face melts away, and she looks a little lost. "Yes, my mother is proud of me," she says, "but you know how mothers are - they worry. Whenever I speak to her on the phone, the first sentence and the last sentence are always 'Take care'."

Two years ago, she got married in secret. She can't name her husband publicly, because he would be killed. Her wedding flowers had to be checked for bombs. She will only say that they met at a press conference, "and he supports everything I do". She has not seen him "for two months", she says. "We meet in the safe houses of supporters. I cannot sleep in the same house two nights running. It is a different home every evening."

Where does this courage come from? She acts as if the answer is obvious - anyone would do it, she claims. But they don't. Perhaps it comes from her belief that the struggle is long and our individual lives are short, so we can only advance our chosen cause by inches, knowing others will pick up our baton. "When I die, others will come. I am sure of that," she says.

She certainly has a strong sense of belonging to a long history of Afghans who fought for freedom. "My parents chose my first name after Malalai of Maiwand. She was a young woman who, in 1880, went to the front line of the second Anglo-Afghan war to tend the wounded. When the fighters were close to collapse, she picked up the Afghan flag and led the men into battle herself. She was struck down - but the British suffered a landmark defeat, and, in the end, they were driven out."

When she ran for office, she had to choose a surname for herself, to protect her family's identity. "I named myself after Sarwar Joya, the Afghan poet and constitutionalist. He spent 24 years in jails, and was finally killed because he wouldn't compromise his democratic principles ... In Afghanistan we have a saying: the truth is like the sun. When it comes up, nobody can block it out or hide it."

Malalai Joya knows she could be killed any day now, in our newly liberated Warlord-istan. She hugs me goodbye and says, "We must keep in touch." But I find myself bleakly wondering if we will ever meet again. Perhaps she senses this, because she suddenly urges me to look again at the last paragraph of her memoir, Raising My Voice. "It really is how I feel," she says. It reads: "If I should die, and you should choose to carry on my work, you are welcome to visit my grave. Pour some water on it and shout three times. I want to hear your voice." I look up into her face, and she is giving me the bravest smile I have ever seen.

'Raising My Voice' by Malalai Joya is published by Rider. All profits will go to supporting the cause of women's rights in Afghanistan.

Sunday, March 08, 2009


INTERNATIONAL WOMEN'S DAY:
ONE FINAL NOTE:
Before I shut it down for the night here's one more item on International Women's Day, this one a reprint of a post here at Molly's Blog from this time last year.
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
HOLIDAYS (OR IT SHOULD BE)
INTERNATIONAL WOMEN'S DAY:
Today, March 8, is celebrated as 'International Women's Day'. Way back when, on March 8 1908, 15,000 women marched through the streets of New York City demanding shorter hours, better pay and voting rights. In 1910 the first international women's conference was held in Copenhagen, Denmark, under the aegis of the Second Socialist International. The German socialist Clara Zetkin was the originator of the proposal. No fixed date was set at this event. The conference called for the establishment of an international women's day. This had been preceded by a declaration of the Socialist Party of America in 1909 calling for such an event on the last Sunday of February.

The date of March 8 gradually became an accepted time because it commemorated an 1857 protest in NYC by garment workers who later went on to establish the first labour union in the USA two years later. March 8 was also the day when women in Europe held peace rallies in 1913 as the clouds of WW1 gathered. IWD also gathered force from the Commemoration of the Triangle Shirtwaist Factory Fire on March 25, 1911 when 140 garment workers were killed in a factory fire because the owners had locked the doors, barring any escape.

On the persuasion of Alexandra Kollontai IWD was declared a holiday in the USSR shortly after the Revolution. But.....this "holiday" remained a regular working day until May 8, 1965. Wags might remark that this is the usual stuff of communist pronouncements, with the name and the reality usually at significant variance. Nonetheless IWD remains an official holiday in many countries today. Most are members of the ex-Soviet bloc or other communist countries. By 1975, International Women's Year, the United nations began to sponsor the day. Today there is pressure in many countries to declare it an official holiday. In 2005, for instance, the British Trade Union Congress passed a resolution calling on the United Kingdom to issue such a declaration.

Nowadays celebrations are held across the world on this day. The global women's group Aurora hosts a semi-official list of events and resources. For an anarchist take on the day and its significance see THIS and THIS from the Anarkismo.Net news site. Also 'Feminism, Class and Anarchism' by Deidre Hogan (also available as a downloadable pdf).

INTERNATIONAL WOMEN'S DAY:
WORKERS' SOLIDARITY ALLIANCE IWD STATEMENT:
The following statement from the American anarchosyndicalist Workers' Solidarity Alliance was published today at the A-Infos website.
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
US, WSA: International Women's Day statement:
One hundred and one years ago today, on March 8, 1908, thousands of women left their jobs in the sweatshops of New York City's Lower East Side and took to the streets to demand their rights as women and as workers. In 1917, their sisters in Russia followed suit, and helped to bring about the revolution that overthrew the Tsarist autocracy. And in Spain in 1936, the anarchist women of Mujeres Libres helped to free their sisters from centuries of oppression.
----
In more recent times, women have played key roles in the civil rights and anti-war movements of the 1960's and early 1970's. In the 1990's and into the 21st century, women workers are still in the forefront of the continued struggle against sweatshop conditions in many industries and services. This vibrant movement has already won important victories, both against the institutions relationships of women.
The Workers Solidarity Alliance honors these women, as well as the countless others in every corner of the world, who, generation after generation, rise up against inequality, oppression and domination.
We salute their struggles and the sacrifices they made.
Still, the dream of freedom, equality and peace for all people is far from reality. Every day, women continue to confront sexism in their personal relationships as well as sexual harassment and violence on the job, in the streets, and at home. Millions of women workers are still ruthlessly exploited. The right-wing and religious fanatics threaten women's most basic right to control our own bodies.
The roots of sexism and all oppressive relationships are intertwined deep within the systems of hierarchy, authority and militarism that dominate society. These principles are the basis for every modern state and established socio-economic power. We know that this is not simply "the way it is." There are other, better possibilities for a more livable world. Faced with overwhelming webs of oppression and subjugation, we must fight back and take control of our own lives. We can begin by organizing with our sisters and brothers in our communities, our schools, and our workplaces.
We strive for a society in which one person or group of people do not dominate or exploit another. In such a society there would be no basis for sexual oppression, domination or class exploitation. We must work to replace the institutions of power, the nation-state and capitalism with a worldwide system of grassroots empowerment and self-management of all facets of social and economic life. See the dreams of these women workers fulfilled; join us in a movement with an extraordinary history and an inspiring future.
Help us build this new world of freedom and self-management.
Workers Solidarity Alliance
Related Link:
Workers Solidarity Alliance:
339 Lafayette Street-Room 202
New York, NY 10012

Saturday, March 07, 2009


INTERNATIONAL ANARCHIST MOVEMENT-BOLIVIA:
WOMEN AND LIBERATION IN BOLIVIA:
Continuing on with our feminism theme in the run-up to International Women's Day here's yet another opinion, this time from the Mujeres Creando (Women Creating) anarcha-feminist group in Bolivia. What it is is an indictment of the "anti-imperialist" government of Evo Morales and its ignoring of the situation of women. Molly herself has few opinions on Bolivia, not knowing enough to comment on the situation. Still...this is another view that should be heard.
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,

Evo Morales and the Phallic Decolonization of the Bolivian State:
por María GalindoTraducción: April Howard

The Law of Convocation to the Constitutional Assembly: Society didn't propose a change of government.
In Bolivia there are hundreds of thousands of Evos, in each public high school, on each neighborhood soccer team, in each little workers union, from the taxi drivers to the ice cream vendors. There are intuitive Evos, with beautifully dark complexions, casual and unorthodox in terms of cultural identity. They are Evos as modern as they are indigenous but, above all audacious in their use of words and careless and macho in sex and love. They use ponchos, suits or sports jackets and they choose their clothes with the liberty that patriarchal societies prohibit women, and above all those that are called Indigenous and who, for that reason, have to carry their cultural identity on their hips and backs, undrawing their curves in the use of masculine mandates.
This Evo whose face is an immediate and magical social mirror did not receive just a presidential mandate in the past elections, he received a historic mandate that, moreover, consisted of the nationalization of the hydrocarbons and the sentencing of Sanchez de Losada, in the convocation of a constitutional assembly that would permit the redesign of the Bolivian political system. An assembly that was past of an agenda installed by the social movements and not the political parties, an assembly that marked Bolivian society's need not for a change of government, but instead for a historic meeting at which to redesign the bases that had created crisis together with the neoliberal model.
Due to that clear responsibility and his Indigenous condition, the hope existed that Evo would convoke an assembly that was open to all possible forms of participation.
However, though the Law of Convocation created by the government of Evo Morales, with the direct responsibility of Alvaro García Linera, promulgates a law that:
- Restitutes the legitimacy of the political parties defeated by the revolt in October of 2003, including those that committed genocide against the people of El Alto.
- Closes all possibility of direct representation of social movements, which has obligated many movements to seek out alliances with MAS in order to be able to propose candidacies or opt to stay out of the assembly and therefore the socio-political discussion that this has unleashed in Bolivian society.
- Ratifies the technocratic neoliberal criteria of representation of women as a biological quota within political parties, with the addition of the Otherness which inhibits all form of alliance between women by needing to alternate each woman with a man.
- Leaves out the important sector of Neoliberal exiles who are a migrant population in countries like Argentina, Brazil, U.S. and Spain. This population has grown steeply in past years and now constitutes a quarter of the economic support of our society.
- Closes the character of the constitutional assembly to session during a year in a framework that addresses powers already constituted, with which the assembly converts itself into a mere constitutional reform.
With this exclusion and weakening of social movements, Evo Morales and his indigenist-leftist government has the security of obtaining an absolute majority within the assembly. This permits him to co-opt social sectors like clients of the party, to carry out a plebiscite in place of assembly elections and to rewrite the text of the constitution from a place of executive power. So the project plans to annihilate spaces of dissidence and political autonomy in respect to the party of the government.
With this assembly then, we witness the silencing of the social movements in our society. We also witness a re-accommodation of the social movements from the role of being the forces of the veto and the Bolivian social mobilization, to being the cheap clients of a liberal state. They are left to be rats tricked by state power. It isn't the silencing of the bullet, and it isn't the silencing of censure, but rather a cynical exclusion. A silencing as could only come from Œone of ours¹ (in quotes): an ex prisoner who took up arms, like Alvaro García Linera and an indigenous union member, like Evo. In this way, the assembly converts itself in the scenario for the substitution of liberal representative democracy that we defeated in the streets, hundreds of thousands ,without leaders or parties, in unheard of mobilizations, to substitute this for a mono-partied democracy that offers us MAS as an alternative without alternative. In this way, the magic Evo, the Evo who wakes up identities, can convert himself into an identitive antidote that inaugurates a regime closed around its leaders.
I don¹t want to campaign for a candidate, I want to vomit: The electoral campaign.
It is not casual chance that the most conservative sectors have taken enthusiastically to the electoral campaign as a chance to make ridiculous reparations that will allow them to prolong their agonizing mediocrity by displaying gargantuan portraits of themselves which are unmistakable invitations to vomiting.
Other sectors that are taking advantage of the occasion are the great proliferation of Churches and Evangelical sects. They have presented their own candidates, thanks to thousands and thousands of their faithful, to defend their interests in the assembly and, like all churches, to go on eating the pieces of social life.
The military, which today enjoys important attributes in the present constitution, and which is not disposed to lose even the obligatory military service with which it installs in our youth its model of chauvinist virility, have also proposed their own candidates, borrowed and rented in all of their varieties. They range from pro-government to the extreme right, all coinciding in defense of their corporate interests.
Even the Catholic Church, using its intuitive instincts for the accumulation of power, has suffered an unexpected love-affair with MAS in order to put the brakes on the process toward a Secular State. Their campaign is characterized by efforts to delay, restrain, and confuse the processes of political recreation that a society as dynamic as Bolivia had proposed.
We, the Mujeres Creando [Women Creating], are street agitators, autonomous, self-summoned to all of life. We are women who have questioned representative democracy and the vision of equality proposed by the gender technocracy. We have proposed a candidacy, and so with our queerness, are entering a terrain that is a farce of representation. Our almost tiny candidacy has entered through a crack in the law, in the institution and the system, like rainwater that filters itself by simultaneously seeking and creating leaks. A crack in the roof of the houses, of the Palace and the institutions from where we let our dissidence leak.
To say that women are a political subject that for centuries was denied the right to speak, with which they emptied us of our own contents whether with arguments of complementariness, of submission, of exclusion or inclusion. In the end, all women come to the same end, women are ahistorical, apolitical and invisible. And all social pacts are pacts are made between categories of men according to the culture they pertain to, their skin color, the social class they pertain to or the ideology they subscribe to. And this social pact signifies a convivial pact regarding the interests of categories of men about hegemonic projects in which some are above others.
Today in Bolivia, Indigenism and Leftism repeat themselves and find themselves next to neoliberalism in the same phallic, patriarchal posture, a posture that ratifies the confusion between social projects and power projects, the control of society, the submission of the other, as the only interest around which history and politics should revolve.
I'm not native, I'm original: The colonial character versus the patriarchal character of the Bolivian State
As feminists we want to be neither underneath nor on top of anyone. That is why we will not find our own place in this process. As quasi undesirable tenants of the candidacy that we postulate, we use this space to affirm that the decolonization of the State is not possible without its depatriarcalization.
We affirm that the social pact rests on a sexual contract that has expropriated from women the sovereignty over our own bodies. And that this is a phenomenon of all political systems, of all ideologies and all cultures. A renovation of this social pact that does not question the sexual contract that sustains it can only reiterate forms of colonial and patriarchal submission at the same time. And looking at supposedly original cultures is not the mechanism that will permit us to decolonize our society, nor make it fuller, more livable or freer.
The demand for the original culture as pure, as the culture that will build the nation, the project of power and then nationalism will only drive us to the patriarchal and colonial renovation of power, where power simply exercises power with a mere change of actors.
A sample of this today is the andinocentrism with which one expects to reinterpret Bolivian society. Our society is not a society of pure, original, indigenous people versus undesirable mestizo white-oids. It is much more complex than that; ours is a society of disobediences and cultural mutations in which the technological revolution is sugar to the soul of all kids who, thanks to piracy, conquer it in their quotidian chatting and navigating with the world. It is a society like all societies of the world where we as social actors also construct culture and thus we can talk about youth culture, about an urban culture, about this, that and the other culture, about a culture of queers and a culture of the street and the street vendors and who culturally transform the meaning of the street and public space, for example.
We are not obedient originals and for that reason and because we put in question cultural mandates, starting with clothing and ending with pleasures. Due to and thanks to this disobedience which makes us happy, we propose a decolonizing and depatriarchalizing societal project that has the rise of nationalisms as a principal question.
They want to substitute the project of the united Nation State for a project of autonomous plurinationalisms in order to open an eternal struggle for land, for resources, for power and control. We want to be neither on top nor underneath and so we challenge this project with our body and our skin, sensitive and open to sin.
The only fight you lose is the fight you abandon:
The strategy of concrete proposals.
We have also developed a handful of concrete proposals that matter to us because they are born of our daily life:
Our Father if you are in heaven liberate us from the power of the Church:
Today the Bolivian State has an official religion, which is Catholicism. Freedom of worship is guaranteed but the secular character of social matters is not. In this way the Church has confabulated with State Power in everything. We have religion class in all public schools, the Church exercises a mountain of non ecclesiastical activities, and worst, we have inherited the Judeo-Christian concept of family in our constitution and in all judicial law.
That is why to propose a secular State is to recuperate an hour of class time in schools from religion and to put it, for example, to the service of a secular sexual education, and to our right to know our bodies through school and the classroom. Beyond that, our proposal separates the concept of family from the patriarchal Judeo-Christian vision, reconceptualizing the family, honoring all the complex forms that this has in our society. This opens the doors the recognition of all forms of free union that occur beyond the state, these pretty and unusual forms that make freedom possible in love and in the construction of affectionate and supportive coexistence. Of course this includes couples made of men and women, community unions, houses of mothers and daughters, sons, grandmothers, aunts, uncles, until complexity widens it without impositions, without models and, above all, without imposing suffering nor shortages, nor absences who have the right to grow and live in sympathy and liberty.
Che and Evo are the same Irresponsible Fathers:
Society has expropriated maternity from women, it values and protects reproduction at the same time it imposes maternity as a reason for living for women. However, it subordinates maternity to the existence of a father who gives it legitimacy. While the women give life, the fathers have the power to grant social space, and so convert the act of giving life into a secondary act. That is what invents the concept of the single mother, to whom society grants the burden of condemnation in some cases, in others the burden of the fate of the abandoned mother. Mothers' recuperation of their maternity is a cultural theme, but it also addresses the legal act of the paternal last name, which in our society is the first [of the two last names], the one that counts and, at the same time, is a mechanism of recognition of the ignorance that every man has regarding his sons and daughters. That is why we propose maternal filiation, which is to say that boys and girls should carry the last name of their mothers first. This recuperates the place of the mothers, where women change from being objects of reproduction to subjects of maternity. It also recuperates the daughters' place in the family, a place that all statistics show us is not valued in comparison to their brothers'.
This act also will have consequences in all family jurisprudence, in so much as what is called patria-potestad, which is a concept of patriarchal authority over sons and daughters. Sovereignty in my country and in my body:
They have also expropriated from us, the women, the right to make decisions about our bodies, and this is presented in legal rulings in various situations, one of them is the penalization of abortion. The recuperation of women¹s sovereignty over their bodies is a wider concept than the mere depenalization of abortion. This is why we consider it fundamental to insert within the special constitutional regimes, one that concretely carries the title of women's constitutional regime. This has to do with a chapter that would permit all of those fundamental rights to be concentrated and, as the principal of all rights, a woman's right to make decisions regarding her body.
Every political party is a weapon loaded with blood, machismo and corruption:
We propose to break the monopoly that the political parties have in respect to political representation though the aperture of the exercise of direct representation of all forms of social representation that exist in Bolivian society. In respect to the representation of women, for us it is fundamental to challenge the quotas that were introduced during the neoliberal period and ratified by the Indigenist-Left. This quota converts the political representation of women into a biological quota, empty of content, in which any woman, due to her biological condition of being female, is representative of all women in a situation of non-ideological representation. This quota has been moreover reinforced in its non-ideologization though the concept of alternity, alternity that has as effect the negation of the political alliance between women. Both are mechanisms that deny women political autonomy, which is to say, the sense of organizing from themselves, outside of political parties and mixed organizations.
Long live the deserters, the so-called cowards and all youth who object to the use of weapons
These days military service is obligatory for men, and the gender technocracy has motivated the creation of voluntary military service for women, giving power to one of the densest nuclei of patriarchal culture in our society. Military service in Bolivia has constituted itself as the school of macho virility and the mechanism for the acquisition of manliness. That is why the young men who come back from military service acquire authority in their communities and are celebrated for it.
Conscientious objection is the door that allows the value of the use of weapons and the very existence of an army in society to be questioned. It is a fundamental right for all young men to be able to object to this sense of virility and the possibility of substituting this service for social service allows us to repropose to young men the logic of service to society and the place and sense of masculinity.
Give the Constitutional Assembly back to society, opening deliberative spaces from the Assembly itself
The Assembly is crossed by a series of themes that are axes for Bolivian society. It is a historic irresponsibility to leave it in hands of the political parties that, moreover, have filled the majority of the lists with characters that in many cases do not even correspond to social sectors. There are all kinds of candidates fulfilling even marital quotas, like that of the Mayor of the city of La Paz's wife.
In other cases, the candidates are making proposals that have nothing to do with the constitutional scenario because, if they are elected, they will simply respond to postures that will be cut up into other spaces. ON the other hand, the complexity of the themes converts itself into a species of mosaic that is impossible to assemble from a single perspective. This is why we consider that the scenario of the assembly raises, above all, a methodological challenge that can gather together the knowledge and visions of the actors and protagonists of each theme.
This is why it is urgent that, once the elections take place, departmental, regional and thematic pre-constitutional assemblies are opened by social actors. We have posed to ourselves the proposition of convoking a pre-constitutional assembly of women as a complex political subject.
BECAUSE WOMEN ARE NOT A BIOLOGICAL QUOTA,
NOR A RIB OF ADAM'S,
EVE TO THE CONSITUTIONAL ASSEMBLY.
We, the Mujeres Creando, have a self-managed house that is located at:
2060, calle 20 de octubre
Between Apiazu and J.J. Perez, Tel. 2413764, La Paz, Bolivia.
Our house is named Virgen de los deseos [Virgen of Desires]
There you will find:
A market, a dining room, lodging, an audiovisual hall, classrooms for workshops,
Solidarity, feminist culture in all its forms
And a universe of Indians, bitches and lesbians,
Restless assemblies and sisterhoods.
Our website is: