Two Spirits Documentary

Hannah Christensen
WGS 260
Two Spirits Extra Credit Opportunity

The documentary, Two Spirits, explores the Navajo tradition of gender norms, and the acceptance and reverence within the Navajo nation of people being able to embody both a male and female, i.e. two spirits. The film focuses on the life of Fred, a Navajo born male who identified as a female, referred to as nádleehé (a feminine male). Through interviews with ones who knew him, and native Americans who are followers of the teachings of two spirits, the viewer comes to understand the tradition, the acceptance within the traditional Navajo nation, and the struggles that present themselves in modern times for those who are two spirits.
Prior to viewing this documentary, I was not aware at all of this practice. I, obviously, was aware of transgender, but I did not know that there was a name, recognition, and extreme acceptance that occurred within Navajo tradition. The film educates the viewer on this topic by interviewing individuals who know about it. The documentary operates through a persona perspective lens; interviewing Fred’s mother, his close friend, and scholar and other two spirits. The goal of this documentary, I believe, is to simply educate those outside of the Navajo nation (Native American nation, that is, as it is not just Navajo’s who accept it) of the views on genders and the essential normalcy that transgendered individuals were regarded with.
The personal aspect, especially the interviews with Fred’s mother, struck me the most. The belief within the nation to not impose beliefs on children was also very powerful to me. The issue was not an ‘issue’ for Navajo people’s, until conquistadors made there way to North America. Along with Christian teachings and beliefs, came the rise of homophobia. I think the goal of this film was to show viewers how things were before present times, and that anti-normal gender definitions outside of western normalcy, is actually very common.
My response to the film is one of pleasant surprise. Seeing as how I was not aware of the term two spirits and its implications in traditional Navajo teachings, I found it to be awe-inspiring. Imagine a world where people who identify as more than just western defined gender roles, homosexuals, are not only accepted rather than tolerated, but seen as mentors and as beings to trust (as seen with the orphans being cared for traditionally by to spirits). As a homosexual I think it would be wonderful to live in that kind of society (as well as thinking, ‘well… duh, obviously’).
I reacted extremely emotionally, crying especially when Fred’s mother gave accounts of her dealing with his murder, and her dream of him being in a place where he can be happy. I react this way because I understand what it is like to be seen as different to conventional society. I know what it is like to have a supportive mother who only wants happiness for me. It all became extremely personal toward the end of the movie.
This topic reminds of the “Juchitan, queer paradise” documentary we viewed early I the semester. The sense of simple acceptance and non-issue of homosexuality seems very similar to me. It reiterates the fact that society, and what is viewed as socially ‘normal’ plays such a huge part in people’s lives and happiness. It honestly makes me question why it is so difficult still today for people like me, people like Fred, when it seem so simple and straight forward to these other societies.

 

Two Spirits, Dir. Lydia Nibley, Writ. Russell Martin, 2009

http://www.imdb.com/title/tt1296906/

 

http://www.xtranormal.com/watch/13962999/a-roommate-conversation

WGS Blog #4 Maquilapolis

Hannah Christensen

11/16/12

Blog Assignment #4

Maquilapolis

Prior to watching the film Maquilapolis, I was aware of the fact that Mexico, northern Mexico in particular, is home to hundred of factories considered to be ‘sweat shops’. I honestly did not know much more than that; that sweatshops are places where workers rights are infringed and people are subjected to awful conditions. I was not aware of how much of an impact these factories had on the neighboring cities in terms of environmental hazards. The documentary takes a personal approach to the issue presented, through the eyes of the women who work and live in the realm of these factories. The directors focus intensely on the personal stories, accounts and worries of the citizens who are subject to the negative affects of the ‘maquiladoras’. By following the women and their struggles to gain proper rights throughout the film, the directors succeed in portraying the companies and multinational corporations for what they are; cheap, exploitative, capital-hungry entities.
The film argues that the results of the factories, such as the low wages, environmental hazards, poor living conditions, health problems and treatment of workers is not acceptable or ethical, however it continues. The film describes the women who work for the companies as ‘commodities’ and I completely agree with this analogy. The women are seen as cogs in a money making machine that are easy to discard when demands for basic worker rights are raised. It is a double edged sword for the workers as they are faced with two options; work and make a small living to try and support a family, but risk dire health issues and unfair treatment, or suffer unemployment and still live with the dangerous environmental affects being created. The film explores the ways in which the women working at the maquiladoras attempt to obtain better conditions environmentally for their communities and receive wages due to them by law. The obstacles facing them are a government that denies any problem, companies who avert the law with no punishments, and factories that exploit workers with no remorse. It is all in the name of money. As seen in the video, the factories begin leaving Mexico for Asia, where labor is even cheaper than $11 a day.
I found this documentary to be very informative and personal. I found myself emotionally empathizing with what these workers must live with everyday. I also found it to be extremely frightening that governments, corporations and work places basically control the lives of citizens, and have no moral fiber or reasonable ways to be held accountable. I can imagine the feeling of hopelessness that must permeate the lives of citizens who are subject to the actions of the maquiladoras. I also see the strong ties to globalization and the negative consequences I continually see when studying the subject. The victims are the everyday people who are just trying to make it by. The winners are the companies that can pawn these people like commodities to make an easier buck. I thought it was very pertinent to show the legal struggles of the women, for environmental justice and legal rights to wages/severances, because it showcases the reality of a world where there are no legal due processes, but only money to make.
The women are bound to the corporations that are hindering their legal rights, health and prosperity, because without them they would be even worse off. The companies know this and that is why they continue to do so. The women need the money to survive, but at the cost of life itself in terms of health and ability to provide for themselves and their children. It is almost a no-win situation. In addition most of these women are single mothers or the majority income makers, and in turn this prevents them from being mothers how they wish to be. The domestic roles are still placed on the women who must fill multiple positions in society. One women talks about how she worries about her children the whole time she working, and that stuck with me. The women do not want to be in this position, but they must  be. They are forced to chose between two evils. I cannot fathom raising multiple children, not sleeping, and then going off to work before repeating it all the next day.
I think the personal testimonies provided by the women bring home the message of this film, and I think that the directors and the women in the film did accomplish their goal of having their voices heard and struggles understood. The evidence of the negative affects of the maquiladoras cannot be argued after watching this film.

 

 

Works Cited:

Funari, Vicky, dir. Maquilapolis. Dir. Sergio de la Torre, and Prod. Vicky Funari. 2006. Film. 16 Nov 2012. <https://bblearn.nau.edu/bbcswebdav/pid-1306356-dt-content-rid-12168173_1/courses/1127-NAU00-WGS-260-SEC1-6403.NAU-PSSIS/Media Files/DVD2964_MAQUILOPOLIS.html>.

 

 

WGS 260 Blog #3

Hannah Christensen
WGS Blog # 3
Borderless

            I have always had an interest in the topic of migrant workers, being from Tucson, AZ, I grew up surrounded by controversy dealing with border issues and ‘border security’. I was 16 when SB-1070 created uproar on the streets. I attended a predominantly white high school where students commonly held racist views towards Hispanic or non-Caucasian ethnicity. I remember people complaining ‘They take our jobs and mooch off our health care’, but then proceeding to comment ‘we wouldn’t want the jobs they do anyways, I won’t work construction in 100 degree heat’. Growing up surrounded by people who so adamantly opposed the migration of others to our country to find opportunity, I felt conflicted, because I saw no problem with this. I have always honestly felt that the concept of a human being ‘illegal’ was asinine. Watching the short film, Borderless, gave me more perspective of just how it is to live as an undocumented worker in a foreign country.  Although people in the U.S. often pin those peoples as lazy and stealing or ‘mooching’, it is in fact quite the opposite, and from what I understand not a simple or ‘lazy’ life to live at all.

            The director takes a realistic approach to the harsh realities of life for immigrant workers, but also sympathizes with them as well. I think the goal was to make people more aware of the logistical means which people deal with when being an undocumented worker. The fact that these people are also working without guarantee of pay, no health insurance, literally supporting two economies, maintain relationships with loved ones back home and risking deportation/legal ramifications, is what the director was trying to convey. As I mentioned, it is easier for legally documented residents of a country per se to blame others who are undocumented of being lazy or taking the easy way or trying to unfairly benefit, however, when put in the lens of Borderless, it is absolutely the opposite. The thesis of the film is that life for borderless peoples are harder than people know, happens more often than understood, and is strenuous for every part of a worker’s life. I would also argue a movement for making work more accessible to those looking to migrate, so as to prevent these obstacles like pay, insurance and family ties.

            I agree with the film, given my perspective on what I have seen while living semi-near to the border with higher rates of undocumented workers. Life is anything but simple for them, and improving the ability and accessibility of work across borders could help this. I suppose I have a very humanistic view of the world, and I dislike seeing anyone struggle. I acknowledge people will always struggle, however, I value empathy and effort. I was very moved by the film, and found myself tearing up at parts where the interviewees would call home. It is so apparent how difficult it is for the entire family unit. It calls for the removal of a parental figure, which is negative to both the parent and child. The child feels a sense of abandonment and a sense of guilt burdens the adult. Migrant labor arrangements estrange the family structure. I think that economic necessity due to collapse of the home economy would be the main reason people migrate to work. Debts owed, as the male worker said, are definitely a reason as are unforeseen circumstances, like his son’s leukemia. When money is needed to survive or support your family, but is not available where one lives, it understandable that one would re-locate. This could be in large part due to neoliberalism and the inability for peoples to find work outside of large businesses. Living as an undocumented worker places the burden of uncertainty on people; will I get paid? Will it be enough to support my family? Will I be caught and deported? I do not think that living as a undocumented worker sounds easy or simple, but rather it is necessary for hundreds of thousands of peoples.

            Overall I thoroughly enjoyed the film, and think that anyone who wants a more personal perspective on this issue would gain from viewing it.

 

 

 

 

–

 

 

 

Works Cited:

Lee, Min Sook, dir. Borderless. Pro. Tanya Chute Molina, and Lisa Valencia-Svensson. Film. 26 Oct 2012. <http://vimeo.com/31158962&gt;.

WGS Blog #2, Flow Documentary

Flow

Before watching the documentary, Flow, I was aware of the water crisis around the world. As a member for the Action Group for Water Advocacy on campus, I have actually been involved with the THIRST project that attempts to implement fresh water wells in communities without access to potable drinking water. I was not as aware, however, about the actual facts of private water companies and the World Bank’s involvement in the water crisis. I think that the documentary’s perspective for this subject matter was that of opposition to the privatization of water and bias against the companies who promise people help and then in reality just make water as unattainable as before. I cannot say I disagree. The findings of the impoverished peoples still not having adequate access to the drinking water is proof that the privatization of water for profit is not beneficial for those who really need it.
The film argues that companies who claim that privatizing water, or using the water for profit by selling it back to the people it originally belonged to in the first place, is not a positive or helpful strategy. For instance, the peoples of South Africa who were supposed to have easier and safer access to water did not due to the fact that most of the people in such a position were impoverished, and could not afford the card needed to access it form the taps. The fact that a natural resource is claimed and owned by a private corporation, and in turn makes it unavailable for people who should by right of human necessity have access to it, is a very negative consequence of neoliberalism and globalization. Countries with resources to develop corporations like Vivendi and Suez should not have the right to dictate access to water for people in other countries. The simple truth is that these companies do not honestly care about those peoples or the workers they employ within the countries, as seen by the cut off access and lay offs. The truth is that it is all for profit, and in reality it is people’s lives and most often, people’s children, who are to suffer due to the greed and capitalist mindset of a corporation. The corporations who run the water plants and water treatment facilities are those who profit, not the people’s they claim to help.
The World bank also plays a significant role in this situation, as is seen with Bolivia. “The World Bank told Bolivia in 1997 if they did not privatize water sources that they would be cut off from water development loans from the World Bank” (Flow). What is essentially an ultimatum, forces countries to impose the privatization of water upon their people, who never asked for such a practice. I think that the power the World Bank holds over countries and the peoples within those countries that have no say is unfair and unjust when used in that way. The Suez Corporation also falsely claimed they spent $80 million to implement a water treatment pant, again, blatantly showing the callous nature of the corporations toward individuals who need access to safe water.
This film expresses negative side effects of neoliberalism. The rules of neoliberalism claim ‘self regulation’ and propagates for privatization. In reality these practices are harming people who have no voice in the matter. The globalization of water as a commodity, not a resource, does not help the water crisis. I think that this film was very accurate in its portrayal of the water crisis and I appreciates its ability to unveil the reality behind the situation. I, personally, believe water is human right and it is not to be negotiable amongst men in suits at a board meeting. But then again, I also have lived in Southern Africa (South Africa, Botswana, Mozambique) and have seen first hand the ramifications of lack of drinking water. I am definitely bias because I f understand the helpless struggle those without drinking water go through. I find it awful and heartless that others try to profit off such a plight.

Works Cited:
Salina, Irena, dir. Flow (For Love of Water). Steven Starr Productions, 2008. Film. 4 Oct 2012.

WGS Blog #1 Juchitan, Queer Paradise

9/14

Before watching Juchitan, Queer Paradise, I had no idea that a community like this one existed. I know that there are areas of the world where homosexuality is not seen as sinful or used as a means to project prejudice, however, it pleasantly surprised me to glimpse into the world of such a town like Juchitan. While watching this film I think the interviews conducted discussing so many aspects of life within this community was very important. The insight the director chose to give to the individuals and their positions in society gives the viewer a much more personal and deeper idea of Juchitan. The message of the film is to communicate an essence of what life is like for homosexuals in this town, but also to convey the idea that having a community with such unique ideals and ways of society makes it a very happy and vibrant place to live.

I found this film very educating as well as inspiring to watch. The people throughout the community have such acceptance and openness to ideals that more often than not rejected throughout the world. The power of the women in society and total lack of patriarchal structure in the economy and family is very interesting to see. Not only are the women allowed status and voice in the community, the relationship between the males and females do not really seem to have any definite power leaning to one sex or the other.

Of course, the treatment of the all the different kinds of homosexuals was liberating to me. As a homosexual, the existence of a society similar to Juchitan, where homosexuality is just another part of life and prejudice is not inscribed into laws, is very important. I think it is necessary to mention the  ‘hetero normative family roles’ as discussed during 9/12 class are rejected and accepted, as seen with a homosexual man raising a son and fulfilling both the mother and father roles willingly and exceedingly. I think this movie strikes such a chord with me because I am living in a society where I am not as openly and easily accepted as it seems the homosexuals in Juchitan are, and it is refreshing to see a place like that.

The intersectionality of the community is due in part, I think, on its lack of patriarchal structure and heterosexual norms. The lack of fear and rejection and ‘threat to the family structure’ allows for a more open and accepting community to gays. This also gives women the opportunity to literally run the local economy through the town market, again, tearing down the male-dominating sense of business that can be seen in western civilizations, especially the U.S. The labor within the community is not stereotypically gender divided. The religiosity also discussed in the film portrays the lack of adherence to beliefs that discriminate or dismiss others. It also accepts that a saint brought the homosexuals, which is extremely different from most Abrahamic religious beliefs. The sense of community and pride the Juchitan citizens take in their ancestry allows the people to reject outside perspectives and maintain a self sustaining and uniquely happy community.

Works Cited

Henríquez, Patricio, dir. Juchitan, Queer Paradise. Dir. Henríquez. 2002. Film. 14 Sep 2012. <http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0384236/&gt;

Hello world!

Welcome to WordPress.com! This is your very first post. Click the Edit link to modify or delete it, or start a new post. If you like, use this post to tell readers why you started this blog and what you plan to do with it.

Happy blogging!