Advertisement

“Who Will Use My Loom When I Am Gone?”: An Intersectional Analysis of Mapuche Women’s Progress in Twenty-First-Century Chile

  • Serena CosgroveEmail author
Chapter
Part of the The Politics of Intersectionality book series (POLI)

Abstract

According to many measures, Mapuche women have become empowered due to education, employment, and a demographic shift from the countryside to the major cities of Chile where their income-generating opportunities are greater. The Mapuche comprise 10% of the population of Chile and were only subjugated and incorporated into the Chilean nation as of the late 1800s. This chapter applies an intersectional and postcolonial framework to analyse a series of interviews with Petronila Catrileo, a Mapuche woman leader and elder, who worries that the achievements of the twenty-first century may pale when compared to the loss of Mapuche ways of life, connection to the land, and language in present-day Chile. This research is particularly important for Chile on a policy level where government offices serving women and indigenous people seldom interact, and when they do, they tend to reify differences between state employees and the people they serve. This chapter is also relevant for researchers and policymakers, more broadly, who often apply their own particular analytical lenses instead of an intersectional one when working with marginalized populations.

References

  1. Bengoa, J. (2000). Historia del Pueblo Mapuche: Siglos XIX y XX. Santiago: LOM Ediciones.Google Scholar
  2. Blackwell, M. (2012). The Practice of Autonomy in the Age of Neoliberalism: Strategies from Indigenous Women’s Organising in Mexico. Journal of Latin American Studies, 44(4), 703–732.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. Brah, A., & Phoenix, A. (2004). Ain’t I a Woman? Revisiting Intersectionality. Journal of International Women’s Studies, 5(3), 75–86. Retrieved from http://vc.bridgew.edu/jiws/vol5/iss3/8.Google Scholar
  4. Carastathis, A. (2016). Intersectionality: Origins, Contestations, Horizons. Lincoln, NE: University of Nebraska Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. Cervone, E. (2002). Engendering Leadership: Indigenous Women Leaders in the Ecuadorian Andes. In R. Montoya et al. (Eds.), Gender’s Place: Feminist Anthropologies of Latin America. New York: Palgrave Macmillan.Google Scholar
  6. Collins, P. H. (1998). It’s All in the Family: Intersections of Gender, Race, and Nation. Hypathia, 13(3), 62–82.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. Collins, P. H. (2000). Black Feminist Thought: Knowledge, Consciousness, and the Politics of Empowerment (2nd ed.). New York: Routledge.Google Scholar
  8. Collins, P. H., & Bilge, S. (2016). Intersectionality. Malden, MA: Polity Press.Google Scholar
  9. Cosgrove, S. (2010). Leadership from the Margins: Women and Civil Society Organizations in Argentina, Chile, and El Salvador. Piscataway, NJ: Rutgers University Press.Google Scholar
  10. Crenshaw, K. (1991). Mapping the Margins: Intersectionality, Identity Politics, and Violence Against Women of Color. Stanford Law Review, 43(6), 1241–1299.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. Crenshaw, K. (2000). Background Paper for the Expert Meeting on the Gender-Related Aspects of Race Discrimination. Zagreb: Croatia.Google Scholar
  12. Delgado, R., & Stefancic, J. (2012). Critical Race Theory: An Introduction. New York: New York University Press.Google Scholar
  13. Grzanka, P. (Ed.). (2014). Intersectionality: A Foundations and Frontiers Reader. Boulder, CO: Westview Press.Google Scholar
  14. Hancock, A.-M. (2016). Intersectionality: An Intellectual History. New York: Oxford University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. Huinao, G. (2009). Walinto: Poesía. Santiago: Editorial Cuarto Propio.Google Scholar
  16. Lugones, M. (2007). Heterosexualism and the Colonial/Modern Gender System. Hypatia, 22(1), 186–209. http://www.jstor.org.proxy.seattleu.edu/stable/4640051.Google Scholar
  17. Mithlo, N. M. (2009). ‘A Real Feminine Journey’: Locating Indigenous Feminisms in the Arts. Meridians, 9(2), 1–30.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. Radcliffe, S. A. (2015a). Geography and Indigeneity I: Indigeneity, Coloniality and Knowledge. Progress in Human Geography, 41, 1–10.  https://doi.org/10.1177/0309132515612952.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. Radcliffe, S. A. (2015b). Dilemmas of Difference: Indigenous Women and the Limits of Postcolonial Development Policy. Durham: Duke University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. Radcliffe, S., & Pequeño, A. (2010). Ethnicity, Development and Gender: Tsáchila Indigenous Women in Ecuador. Development and Change, 41(6), 983–1016.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. Reuque Paillalef, R. I. (2002). When a Flower Is Reborn: The Life and Times of a Mapuche Feminist (F. Mallon, Ed. & Trans.). Durham: Duke University Press.Google Scholar
  22. Richards, P. (2013). Race and the Chilean Miracle: Neoliberalism, Democracy, and Indigenous Rights. Pittsburgh: University of Pittsburgh.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  23. Tuhiwai Smith, L. (2012). Decolonizing Methodologies: Research and Indigenous Peoples (2nd ed.). London: Zed Books.Google Scholar
  24. van der Hoogte, L., & Kingma, K. (2004). Promoting Cultural Diversity and the Rights of Women: The Dilemmas of ‘Intersectionality’ for Development Organisations. Gender and Development, 12(1), 47–55.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  25. Warren, S. D. (2009). How Will We Recognize Each Other as Mapuche? Gender and Ethnic Identity Performances in Argentina. Gender & Society, 23(6), 768–789.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© The Author(s) 2019

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.International StudiesSeattle UniversitySeattleUSA

Personalised recommendations