(In)dependencia

I'm returning to my trip to Bogota several weeks ago and my unusual love for museums. You all are overlooking the fact that this blog completely lacks a linear narrative. 

July 20, 2010 marked Colombia's bicentennial independence day celebration. In honor, one museum had a special exhibit of student-created political cartoons meant to "put in question the sacredness and solemnity of official history." The artists ranged from elementary to graduate level students. While the cartoons drew on Colombian symbols and history, the majority also used American symbols to critique the United States' heavy military/social/political presence in Colombia since independence. And so, primarily American blog readers, I bring you a critique of American foreign policy, South American style:

 (high fives for whoever can explain to me what those numbers are.)

 

200 years.

"200 years of inDepedence." Those are the 7 new American military bases that have been established in Colombia under the Obama administration. U.S. military presence in South America is  controversial (at best).*

Colombian independence hero Simon Bolivar shackled by Corruption and EEUU (the United States).

Current President of Colombia Juan Manuel Santos. "Yo reinare" = "I will reign."

*(In Ecuador, current President Rafael Correa refused to renew the US military's lease on a base in Manta in 2009. Correa explained: "We'll renew the base on one condition: that they let us put a base in Miami -- an Ecuadorean base." This ranks among my top 10 favorite Correa foreign policy moments.)

As someone between 2 Americas, I invite you to get informed about the historical consequences of the U.S. presence in Latin America. And realize how important that presence must remain for  students in Colombia to critique their country's 200th independence day in terms of Colombia-USA relations. The exhibit aims to "demonstrate that the importance of this occasion extends to many young people who formulate their own reflections about the current condition of our country, reflections which become evident in opinion cartoons (...) these graphics constitute an effective vehicle for political participation."

Smart Girls

March 8 is International Women's Day/ Dia Internacional de la Mujer. And, as if this wasn't already the most exciting UN holiday in existence, 2011 marks its 100th anniversary. I am working on a few small projects with a Peace Corps volunteer at the University to promote gender equality. I also thought I would ruminate on gender for a few blog posts.

My 10th grade history teacher used to call me a "feminazi" during class. Although he used the label regularly, it first arose when I vocalized an opinion which, though informed, was in direct contradiction to his."Well that's what all you feminazis say." To be honest, my recall of Modern European History is not great. I do remember that "feminazi" got a good laugh. My classmates used it against me the rest of the year, eager to pin it on someone other than themselves. I remember that anger only seemed to solidify the term, so I couldn't get angry. I remember that the teacher said he was only joking, so I wasn't allowed to feel hurt. The only way to resolve the issue and avoid the label, it seemed, was to just be quiet. 

1st day of school. Ready to kick ass.

In high school, no one wants to be too much of anything. Girls can like sports or comic books or playing clarinet, but liking them too much puts you soundly into the "freak" pile. Likewise, being too emotional or too masculine or kissing too many/too few guys are recipes for female disaster. 

And then there's the issue of being too smart. As a teacher, I like to think I would never blatantly silence groups of students based upon gender/sexuality/race/belief system, etc (as, I might suggest, my history teacher did). But I do think a lot about who speaks in my classroom, who doesn't, and why. Both in the States and here in Ecuador, girls continue to be evaluated in public spheres based upon physical beauty/feminine traits above intellect (i love this article). I've found that classrooms are not exceptions.

'08 throwback: my students in Muisne.

But this isn't just a public issue, but a fight for the hidden parts of girls' hearts/minds as well. I recently read this article entitled "The Trouble with Bright Girls", about a psychological study conducted with smart boys and girls. While the "brightest" young boys tended to double their efforts when presented with a difficult task, young girls with the highest IQ were the least confident and most willing to give up. The author suggests we think critically about what society tells girls versus boys to think about their intellectual capabilities. While boys are raised to believe they are capable of changing/making achievements based on their own efforts, girls just believe they are. They are/aren't good in school, they are/aren't gifted in sports, they can/can't do this, and it's unchangeable (which is false, by the way).

Oswaldo Guayasamin

I realize this is kind of an obscure gender issue to broach on International Women's Day. However, I would like to suggest that, even as women are now outperforming men in educational spheres, they're still encouraged to dumb-down and just be sweet/pretty/quiet in those same spheres. Moreover, young girls often delegitimize their own bodies/feelings in unique and detrimental ways-- as Ruth Behar suggests in this essay, extremely capable adolescent girls "choose to not know what they know, beginning already the process of silencing of self that is so emblematic of women’s depression."

Schools can and should be places for girls to safely express themselves without fear of retribution from classmates/teachers, be valued for what's really important, and learn that they are capable of actively shaping their futures.