GABNet LA celebrates International Women's Day, 2006
GABNet LA celebrates International Women’s Day, 2006, Los Angeles. Photograph courtesy of GABNet Los Angeles Archives
92
Amerasia Journal 35:1 (2009): 92-107
GAB[riela]Net[work]:
A Case Study of Transnational Sisterhood and Organizing Annalisa V. Enrile and Jollene Levid For decades, women’s organizing has been predominately territorial-bound and geographically placed.1 However, since the 1990s there has been a shift to broader theorizing of global sisterhoods and the opportunity for solidarity, especially around gender justice and liberation movements.2 The United Nations Decade for Women (1976 to 1985) opened a dialogue of North/South and First World/Third World dichotomies. The 1995 Fourth United Nations Conference on Women and NGO Forum in Beijing, China brought the issue of solidarity practices to the forefront. The rise of international women’s conferences has aided in the push for more transnational feminist organizing and the need to address economic, political, and social arenas of women’s struggle.3 Transnational feminism, or international feminism, began as collective actions found themselves crossing border-states and countries. However, transnational feminism has grown to transcend the familiar boundaries of nations and race, emphasizing instead, the common visions and goals of women engaged in political struggles.4 This border crossing reflects women’s struggles against racism, sexism, colonialism, and imperialism, and recognizes interlinked inequalities rather than generic commonalities.5
Annalisa Enrile received both her MSW and her Ph.D. from the University of California, Los Angeles. Currently, she is an Associate Clinical Professor at the USC School of Social Work. Her areas of interest are around community practice for social change, feminist paradigms, and transnational community building. Dr. Enrile has been involved in GABNet since 1994 and is the current Interim National Chairperson. Jollene Levid received her MSW from the University of Southern California. She is the former National Organizing Director and current Secretary-General of Gabriela Network. Jollene works as a union organizer for the Service Employees International Union at Los Angeles County and USC Medical Center.
93
What feminist theorists have thus called “imagined communities” have created a deep, horizontal comradeship.6 It is only within this praxis that solidarity may be achieved and global sisterhood achieved. This essay examines the relationship between GABRIELA, a Philippines-based women’s organization and GABRIELA Network (GABNet), GABRIELA’s network in the United States, as a case study and example of transnational alliance building within an ever-changing terrain of women’s organizing. GABNet has strived to not only work with their sisters in the Philippines, but to acknowledge transnational organizing as a balance of power relations under concrete conditions. In the case of GABNet, this practice has given way to a transformative style of organizing that is guided by actions and political campaigns in the Philippines but made concrete in the United States, sensitive to the context of American mainstream and the marginalized Filipino immigrant communities.
Amerasia Journal 2009
Martial Law in the Philippines
94
In 1972, Philippines President Marcos declared Martial Law.7 Overnight, barricades were set up, curfews enforced, and military personnel stationed everywhere against the people.8 Activists fled to the hills, organizations became outlawed and driven “underground,” and progressive media was censored. Even with growing evidence of massive human rights violations, the United States continued to support the Marcos dictatorship. The anti-Marcos opposition movement proliferated with more people joining the New People’s Army (an armed struggle waged in the countryside) and through various organizations demanding an end to martial law.9 During this time, women’s organizing also swelled. MAKIBAKA,10 the free movement of women was first led by Lorena Barros.11 Although the initial members of MAKIBAKA were students, young professionals, and urban petty bourgeoisie— peasants, workers, and urban poor were recruited. It is during this historical moment that the distinct nature of the progressive Philippine women’s movement solidified: the women’s movement was a dimension of the overall transformation of society and not merely an endeavor which pitted women against men.12 Women could not expect to be free if half of its population was oppressed.13 By extension, a liberated nation required a free people.
GABNet
In addition to the armed struggle and underground movement of women, the theory of “liberation theology” ignited organizing in the church, traditionally a conservative structures. Catholic nuns devoted themselves to educating the poor about their rights. Nuns also provided data to Amnesty International on the political repression and torture under Martial Law.14 Later, these nuns placed themselves in front of oncoming tanks sent to disperse protestors, and they led thousands of people in “peaceful” revolt. In 1983, the assassination of opposition leader Benigno Aquino resulted in an outpouring of protest among the middle classes. Since all progressive organizations had been declared illegal and forced underground, new organizations had to be formed on the legal front. Small women’s groups formed first as support groups and then as service providers for health and other areas. As these groups began to connect and work with one another a coordinating committee was established.15 Thus, GABRIELA was formed to serve as an umbrella group of women’s groups and represent the growing unrest of women.16 Economic and social life was equally affected. It is at this juncture when the Philippines began to experience “brain drain,” the exodus of experienced personnel and professionals who left the Philippines for other countries in the hopes of making a better living.17 The United States, short of both professionals and military personnel, was a recipient of Pilipino migration. Pilipinos had a long history of meeting the demands of U.S. labor from the canneries in Alaska to the fields of Watsonville and Delano. Immigration during the 1970s and 1980s took on a distinct characteristic of being composed of either professionals in the health field (nurses) or military recruits (the U.S. Navy). For the first time, whole families emigrated from the Philippines to the U.S.18
Pilipino American Communities Pilipino immigrants have lived in the United States since the first Pilipinos jumped ship on the Spanish Galleon trade at the Louisiana coastline.19 The first Pilipino communities in the United States date back to 1800s. However, much of this migration occurred with the intent to return to the homeland.20 In some ways, a similar attitude has permeated the community with each new wave of immigration.21 Even with the establishment of more stable Pilipino American communities there was still no widespread investment based in the U.S.—there was always a turn towards
95
Amerasia Journal 2009
96
the other side of the Pacific, a hope of returning “home.” This was certainly the case with many activists, who, fearing for their lives sought asylum in the United States. Many of these activists felt that though they had come to the United States, they could return to the Philippines once Marcos was deposed.22 In the meantime, activists created ways to be part of the movement against martial law. Organizations such as the Anti-Martial Law Alliance (AMLA), the Katipunan ng mga Demokratikong Pilipino (KDP), the National Committee for the Restoration of Civil Liberties in the Philippines (NCRCLP), and the Alliance of Philippine Concerns (APC) were formed.23 Even within these groups, the idea of returning to their homeland was a strong one. One activist stated, “My involvement with a U.S.-based activist group was premised on the notion that it would only be temporary and that one day I would go back to the real struggle—in the Philippines.”24 The Aquino assassination and the subsequent formation of a number of legal progressive organizations affected organizing within Pilipino American communities. Philippine groups began to directly work with these organizations. Many of these organizations focused on work that brought to light the atrocities of the Marcos dictatorship.25 By 1986, both the Philippines and the United States found themselves on the cusp of change. It was during a snap presidential election called by Marcos (who thought he would win) that the people of the Philippines marched to EDSA (Epifanio Delos Santos Avenue). For four days crowds camped out on the crowded avenue. During this time, known as “People Power,” the power of the women and the potential of women’s organizing were apparent. Women ran the clandestine airwaves that kept confusion to a minimum and guided the people.26 It was women who negotiated with the soldiers not to roll out the tanks and women who stood in front of them when they eventually did.27 Many people thought that when Marcos left the Philippies, so would its problems. After all, the Philippines had a female president—a victory not just for the people, but also for the women’s movement. However, this proved to be another false start. President Corazon Aquino personified the elite class, coming from an affluent, landowning family and educated in the United States. Yet, she portrayed herself as a proper, traditional housewife who had never worked for a living. This was not the symbol that would bring genuine liberation and reform to the country.28 In fact, Cory Aquino heightened the “war” in the countryside against the New
GABNet
People’s Army and allowed Marcos cronies such as would-be president Fidel Ramos back into the political scene. Despite the Aquino government’s pronouncements to protect human rights and women’s rights, many women were illegally arrested, denied legal counsel, held hostage, summarily executed, and tortured while in military and police custody. On the other side of the Pacific, the removal of the dictatorship and the end to martial law was the genesis of other types of struggles. For Pilipino American organizations, this meant deciding to be Philippines-focused or to begin work within their local, U.S.-based communities. In the words of one activist, the quandary was, whether the “primary goal was to support the Philippine struggle” or to be “part of a broader movement for political changes in U.S. society?”29 It is not as if the work against martial law ever occurred within a political vacuum. There were a number of issues at the time such as anti-war sentiments, affirmative action, and immigration reform centered on U.S. issues. In fact, Pilipino Americans took leadership in the landmark Bakke vs. the University of California, Davis decision on affirmative action. Despite their intention to return to the Philippines, most activists in these organizations found that they had created their own homes and communities in the U.S. They would not be returning to the Philippines anytime soon. Again, many felt that with the victory and overthrow of the dictator, that they had met the primary goal of the Philippine struggle.30
Philippines’ Women’s Organizing As the movement against the Marcos dictatorship occurred in the Philippines and extended to the United States and abroad, one area left out of the equation was the women. The women of the anti-martial law movement found themselves fighting against political oppression within patriarchal organizations. Male leadership with a primarily female workforce morphed into an internal system of hierarchy and gender inequity that women were trying to dismantle on a governmental level. The immediate response was for women to form their own organization that embodied the same beliefs but also focused on the distinct and specific concerns of women. This plan was met with heated resistance, as critics felt that it was divisive to the movement as a whole. The role of a separate women’s movement within a larger nationalist or liberation movement has usually been met with resistance.31 This complex paradigm is not unique to the Pilipino
97
Amerasia Journal 2009
98
American community. It is also present in other movements such as the Frente Sandinista de Liberation National or FSLN (Sandinista Front for National Liberation) in Nicaragua, and also in the Farabundo Marti Liberation Front in El Salvador, where women felt that their needs were not met by the movement, as they continued to encounter sexism from their male revolutionary colleagues.32 Pilipina women from the anti-martial law movement responded to the call for women’s organizing. Despite the enthusiasm for a new organization, the resistance from the anti-martial law movement was fierce. Given the hostile environment, the women found shelter in the mainstream women’s movement of the United States, with other human rights organizations, and with the women of the Philippines, who could understand the need for a separate women’s formation. Thus, the beginning of GABNet occurred with only the support of the Philippine women, the women in the U.S., and the human rights’ community.33 A new organization, with few allies—the daunting task of GABNet to do work against imperialism and patriarchy was coupled with the challenge of redefining transnational organizing. Transnational movements require attention to the shifts of power in national structures due to: the challenges they pose; the micropolitics of power dynamics within the transnational organizations themselves; and, the ideological foundations that frame the praxis of these movements. Transnational organizing recognizes the need to move from local action to collective global action; the global protest that results in a shift in the scale of protest with national actors redirecting their strategies toward a larger level of governance.34 Women who organize around contentious national issues are viewed as symbolic packages challenging the assumed role of women within the boundaries of their nation. For example, Women In Black, an organization composed of Jewish women who stood in solidarity with the people of Palestine, was accused of breaching Israeli national solidarity.35 Similarly, GABNet in the U.S. vocally identified the United States and its international counterparts (the World Trade Organization, World Bank, and International Monetary Fund) as the main culprits for the underdevelopment of the Philippines. As women living in the United States, GABNet faced criticism from other Americans as being “traitorous” to their country of residence and were accused of being ungrateful for the privileges received living in the United States. How to negotiate both was a challenge to organizing and called for a rethinking of how to carry out work and
GABNet
campaigns from the international to local levels and back again. Crucial to successful organizing would be the structure of GABNet. Of utmost concern was the formation that GABNet would take. The most convenient option—to become a U.S. chapter of GABRIELA Philippines—raised problematic issues, especially around power relations. Power relations amongst membership of transnational movements themselves are important to examine because they may mimic that of oppressive structures the movements combat. For instance, North American members of transnational feminist organizations during the Vietnam War directed condescension towards their Asian sisters as the North American women highlighted their own role in potentially “rescuing” their “Third World” sisters.36 This “rescue” paradigm, a product of the socio-political environment within which many Western feminists and North American women operate, needs to be identified and avoided when organizational decisions are made.37 Though it is tempting to think that equal sisterhoods can be forged in a transnational sense, to ignore the power dynamics would be folly. It could be a pre-cursor to politics that are laden with tension, competitiveLos Angeles GABNet members with Congresswoman Liza Maza, after a discussion on Political Repression in the Philippines. (top, from left): Ivy Quicho, Jollene Levid; (bottom, from left): Milady Quito, Congresswoman Liza Maza, and Annalisa Enrile. Photograph courtesy of GABNet Los Angeles Archives
99
Amerasia Journal 2009
100
ness, and pain.38 Theorist Gayatri Spivak further raises the question not just of place but also of socioeconomic and political space as to whether men can theorize feminism, whites theorize racism, and so on. She states, “It is only when the former groups theorize that the situation is politically intolerable. Therefore, it is crucial that members of these groups are kept vigilant about their assigned subject positions.” Cognizant of this threat, the idea of becoming a chapter of GABRIELA Philippines would give power of decision making into the hands of women who neither resided nor worked within the Philippine political terrain. For this reason, GABNet decided to remain outside of the decision making body of its Philippine counterpart, recognizing the potentially detrimental effects of that positionality.39 Members decided that GABNet would fulfill a dual role— that of a support network and a national mass organization comprised of chapters in the major cities of the U.S. (New York, Chicago, San Francisco were original chapters). While a national organization could operate on its own and provide material resources as well as launch political campaigns for its international counterpart; there was also a need for the women doing the work in the United States to be more than just a support group. Just as one would take precaution against falling into the role of a “rescuer,” women must also avoid falling into the role of “provider” with no political growth and empowerment of their own. Thus, a plan for mass organizing was drafted which served as the foundation for chapters to be set up. A group of women organized into a chapter would then be mass organizing around women’s own political education and training, campaigns, and movement building, as well as providing support for the Philippines. Local chapter organizing would address the immediacy of issues occurring at the local/city/community level and the recognition that the concrete circumstances of each area might be vastly different from one city to another. Local chapters would have the autonomy to launch local campaigns. At the same time, national leadership would coordinate chapters and national campaigns as well as be the liaison for international relations with the Philippines. Notwithstanding its growing pains, the national leadership of GABNet reached an integrated work pace—balancing the need to address local issues, project a national character, and mediate international needs. This type of organizing model attracted women inside and outside of the Pilipino community committed to the idea of doing international work that was integral and tied
GABNet
to their own lives in the U.S. Women were also drawn to GABNet for their own development and empowerment. Despite the quasi-autonomous nature of GABNet, the organization still carried the ideological line of its Philippine counterparts. Some points of unity included a strong anti-imperialist stance, while some points were specific to the Philippines, such as the call from the Philippine Left for national democracy. GABNet supported both. The distinctive feature of this political ideology is the “national” aspect, which underscored the issue of sovereignty and a removal of foreign control in all aspects of Philippine life. In other words, this ideological line determines a course of relationships that must be attuned to the nature of power, particularly sensitive to the threats of colonial mentality and practices. As stated earlier, if not, there is a threat of falling into the trap of colonial provider and overseer of work. It cannot be emphasized enough that transnational feminist activism faces the difficult task of historicizing and denaturalizing the values of global capitalism in order to expose the underlying exploitative social relations and structures.40 Having grappled with the organizational structure and reaching consensus about the political ideology, GABNet was left to create a practice of transnational work which would manifest itself into solid campaigns, relevant to the Philippines and the United States. The system for work became this: an annual meeting with GABRIELA Philippines in which their current yearly plan of action would be shared. For example, they could indicate a need a do a campaign on militarism because of an upcoming policy that would activate U.S. military bases or a campaign on migrant labor because of a global trend of recruitment for Pilipina nurses. After their one-year plan was laid out, a discussion ensued as to what would be the best way for GABNet to carry out these campaigns in the U.S. Because GABNet is not a chapter formation of GABRIELA, the freedom to articulate and interpret international campaigns became the backbone for successful campaigns in the United States. The following are examples of recent transnational campaigns of GABNet:
Globalization and Women (1996-1998) Policies such as the North American Free Trade Association (NAFTA) treaty and the Asia Pacific Economic Cooperation (APEC) agreements prompted women in the Philippines to examine the effects of globalization. Using the Philippines as an example, the campaign aimed to raise awareness of the deleterious effects of glo-
101
balization on the women of third world countries. Through strategies including intensive two-day retreats, weekly community educational discussions, and the creation and distribution of chapbooks and pamphlets, GABNet worked to raise awareness and rally people to protest the negotiations of treaties such as the Visiting Forces Agreement (VFA) and the Status of Forces Agreement (SOFA). The organization also facilitated trips to the Philippines for GABNet members, created documentaries and websites, and invited leaders of Pilipino and ethnic groups to community forums. These leaders were then asked to bring the information back to their members. This campaign consolidated members, who were able to experience the Philippine condition first hand. Because of its broad outreach due to the use of various multi-media, GABNET was able to increase membership, open chapters in new areas (San Diego South Bay, Irvine), and revive old chapters (San Francisco).
Amerasia Journal 2009
Purple Rose Campaign (1998 to present)
102
The Philippines is one of the top three source countries for trafficked women and children. Although there were existing antitrafficking campaigns, especially around forced prostitution and mail order brides, no campaigns specifically targeted the general public. The Purple Rose Campaign thus aimed to raise public critical awareness of the commodification of women and children, to ask the public to consider the factors contributing to trafficking— including national sovereignty, patriarchy, and economic stability. The Purple Rose was chosen as the icon of this campaign, because this flower was artificially created and exoticized, for no other purpose than to satisfy desire. It is no different from other roses and yet remains apart, because it does not exist in nature and is not a product of evolution. So are women in the sex trade: artificially created and exoticized and willed to be apart and different. A pin in the image of the purple rose icon is sold as a statement of support for the campaign. The campaign was conceived in the United Stated and tested out countrywide during 1998. In the summer of 1998, GABNet formally presented the Purple Rose Campaign to GABRIELA Philippines and its allied organizations during an international women’s conference. It was at this time that the Purple Rose Campaign was adopted internationally. The planning meeting in the Philippines was composed of actual concrete planning and actions to be coordinated in all countries on specific days (October 28—Philippine Women’s Day of Protest; November 25—Day Against Violence towards Wom-
Photograph by Mary Uyematsu Kao
GABNet
Ninotchka Roska and Stephanie Santos at a local GABNet event in Eagle Rock, California. Roska gave a reading of her work, marking the Purple Rose Campaign, July 2008.
en; March 8—International Women’s Day) as well as activities that could be held specific to each area. Activities ran the gamut from fundraising dinners, to movie showings, to community forums. The Purple Rose Campaign also launched a media blitz of public service announcements, testimonials via print media, and an online website. The Purple Rose Campaign is incorporated into every major holiday. For example, purple roses were delivered for Valentine’s Day, and supporters wore purple leis for graduation. A public service announcement on the Purple Rose Campaign has been distributed and shown on various television channels, including the Discovery Channel, Lifetime TV for Women, and TLC. Mainstream venues such as parties, poetry readings, and even beauty pageants have served as vehicles for the campaign to gain momentum. The Purple Rose Campaign’s success lies in its appeal to a broad range of concerns: violence towards women and children as well as the nature of its issues being at the same time political, economic, and social. Gloria Steinem wore the Purple Rose pin during a Baltimore meeting of the Feminist Majority. The campaign has helped organizations meet the challenge for innovative, groundbreaking campaigns that challenge the status quo as well as expose the sex industry.
103
Stop the U.S.-led War against Terror (2001 to current) With the current state of the U.S. War against Terror, there has been a resurgence of militarization in the Philippines. In 2001, the U.S. and Philippine governments launched “Balikatan,” billed as joint military exercises under the guise of quashing the terrorist threat. In the summer of 2002, an international human rights commission recorded numerous human rights violations, including murder, as a result of these exercises. This GABNet campaign aims to raise awareness of the presence and the implications of U.S. military occupation in the Philippines as well as to build coalition and international solidarity within the growing global anti-war movement. This national campaign is based mostly on solidarity work with the global anti-war movement, under the umbrella of A.N.S.W.E.R. (Act Now to Stop War and End Racism) anti-war coalition, of which GABNet chapters are members of their local steering committees. Also, GABNet has found very innovative ways to discuss the issue of war. Notably, in Los Angeles, a “Passion” show, a parody of the traditional fashion show, was held. A number of organizations were invited to design “fashion” depicting the state of women in war. In the Bay Area, the local chapter has been able to work consistently with the Women in Black Actions held by the Revolutionary Association of the Women of Afghanistan (RAWA). This campaign has successfully raised greater awareness of the effects of U.S. military presence in the Philippines. Organizers employed a variety of ways of presenting anti-war issues, from traditional protests to more artistic endeavors. Another important result of this campaign was the inclusion of Third World countries within the larger, mainly White, anti-war movement.
Amerasia Journal 2009
Twenty Years of Struggle
104
In 2009, GABNet celebrates its twentieth anniversary. The past twenty years have been full of struggle and of sisterhood. Since its inception, GABNet has grown to over eleven chapters (Seattle, Portland, San Francisco Bay Area, Santa Barbara, Los Angeles, Orange County, San Diego, Chicago, Boston, New York, and New Jersey) with a membership of hundreds of women. The work of GABNet has been conducted with many lessons learned, the most salient of which is the ability to be independent and develop a course of work that best fits with the environment. In doing so, GABNet has been able to make a true contribution to the women of the Philippines, conceptualizing such campaigns as the Purple Rose Campaign which moved the anti-prostitution
GABNet
and anti-trafficking issues of Pilipina women worldwide to new arenas and pushed the issue into the mainstream. The success of GABNet must be attributed to it’s ability to develop its own strategies for working within U.S. society, building new pathways and new formulations. As U.S. imperialism tightens its grip on neocolonies like the Philippines, the talons of oppression will be felt all the way to immigrant communities in America. Therefore, the work of an organization like GABNet can never hesitate or turn complacent. For the years that GABNet has focused on the Philippines, it has become apparent that if true women’s liberation is to be gained, it must be fought for and acted out on a truly international stage. Having created a space for Philippine women in the United States and having Philippine issues included in the discourse of human rights, GABNet will now be part of the convening committee of the “Mariposa Alliance.” This alliance will bring together like-minded, anti-imperialist women’s organizations, institutes, and individuals. The need for the Mariposa Alliance developed out of the 2007 incident known as the “GABNet 3” when three GABNet members were detained and not allowed to leave the Philippines under the newly legislated Human Security Act, a law similar to the U.S. Patriot Act. Absurdly, the GABNet 3 were accused of having ties to Al Qaida. The outpouring of support from the women of the United States and other countries indicated an intensified need for coordination and movement building among progressive women. While GABNet will continue to do work in solidarity with the Philippine women, it cannot ignore its responsibilities to respond to shifting world contexts and situations, which demand the maximization of women’s organizing to achieve liberation. The transnational sisterhoods GABNet has created must now transcend the U.S. and the Philippines, declaring, “For liberation, Women of the World unite!”
Notes 1.
Niamh Reilly, “Cosmopolitan Feminism and Human Rights,” Hyapatia 22:4.
2.
See bell hooks, Feminist Theory: From Margin to Center (Boston: South End Press, 1984); and Chandra Talpade Mohanty et al, eds., Under Western Eyes: Third World Women and the Politics of Feminism (Bloomington: Indiana University Press, 1991).
3.
Chandra Talpade Mohanty, Feminism without Borders: Decolonizing Theory, Practicing Solidarity (Durham: Duke University Press, 2003).
4.
Debbie Lunny, “Out of Canada: The Pedagogy of Transnational Feminist Activism,” Canadian Women’s Studies 25(2006): 85-90.
105
Amerasia Journal 2009
106
5.
Chandra Talpade Mohanty, “Under Western Eyes Revisited: Feminist Solidarity Through Anticapitalist Struggles,” Signs 28 (2003): 499.
6.
See Benedict Anderson, Imagined Communities: Reflections on the Origin and Spread of Nationalism (New York: Verso, 1991); and Mohanty, Feminism without Borders.
7.
Teodoro Agoncillo, History of the Filipino People (Quezon City: Philippines, 1990).
8.
Carol Ojeda-Kimbrough, “The Chosen Road,” Steve Louie and Glenn K. Omatsu, eds., Asian Americans: The Movement and the Moment (Los Angeles: UCLA AASCPress, 2001).
9.
Judy Taguiwalo, ““The Women of the First Quarter Storm of 1970: Women Fully Engaged in the Making of History,” paper presented to the International Conference for Filipino Youth, Celebrating the 35th Anniversary of the First Quarter Storm, Vancouver, Canada, November 25-27, 2005.
10.
Translated, MAKIBAKA, is an acronym meaning “Free Movement of New Women”
11.
Ibid.
12.
Lorena Barros, “Liberated Women,” Ang Malaya, 3 (1971).
13.
Mary John Mananzan, Woman in Philippine History: The Woman Question in the Philippines (Philippines: Institute of Women’s Studies, 1997).
14.
Ceres Doyo, “The Prostitution Problem Must be Viewed from a National, Even Global Perspective,” Philippine Panorama 12 (1983).
15.
GABRIELA, GABRIELA Convention Proceedings (Quezon City: Mt. Carmel Community Center, GABRIELA, 1985).
16.
See Mary John Mananzan, Essays on Women (Philippines: Institute of Women’s Studies, 1991). Additional information from O. Mataro, personal communication to Annalisa Enrile (Manila, 2000)
17.
Donna S. Kline, “Push and Pull Factors in International Nurse Migration,” Journal of Nursing Scholarship 35:2 (2003): 107-111
18.
See Royal F. Morales, Makibaka: The Pilipino American Struggle (Mountain View, CA: Mountain View Press, 1974); and Rhacel S. Parrenas, Servants of Globalization: Women, Migration, and Domestic Work (Stanford: Stanford University Press, 2001).
19.
Morales, Makibaka and Parrenas, Servants of Globalization.
20.
See Antono J. A. Pido, Filipinos in America: Macro/Micro Issues of Immigration and Integration (New York: Center for Migration Studies, 1986); OjedaKimbrough; and Parrenas, Servants of Globalization.
21.
Morales, Makibaka: The Pilipino American Struggle.
22.
Liza Masa, personal communication to Annalisa Enrile (Manila, 2000); Ninotchka Rosca, personal communication to Annalisa Enrile (Manila, 2000); and R. Sancho, personal communication to Annalisa Enrile (San Jose, California, 2000).
23.
Rosca, personal communication to Annalisa Enrile (Manila, 2000), and Sancho, personal communication to Annalisa Enrile (San Jose, California, 2000).
GABNet
24.
Ojeda-Kimbrough.
25.
Morales, Makibaka: The Pilipino American Struggle; Rosca, personal communication to Annalisa Enrile (Manila, 2000); and Ojeda-Kimbrough.
26.
Mary John Mananzan, Woman in Philippine History: The Woman Question in the Philippines (Philippines: Institute of Women’s Studies, 1997).
27.
O. Mataro, personal communication to Annalisa Enrile (Manila, 2000); and Liza Masa, personal communication to Annalisa Enrile (Manila, 2000).
28.
Liza Masa, personal communication to Annalisa Enrile (Manila, 2000).
29.
Ojeda-Kimbrough.
30.
R. Sancho, personal communication to Annalisa Enrile (San Jose, California, 2000).
31.
Veronica Gago, “Dangerous Liaisons: Latin American Feminists and the Left,” Nacla Report on the Americas 40 (2007): 17-21.
32.
See Jo-Marie Burt, “The Revolution Question: Feminism in El Salvador, Chile, and Cuba,” Journal of Third World Studies 23 (2006): 257; Karen Kampwirth, “Resisting The Feminist Threat: Antifeminist Politics In Post-Sandanista Nicaragua,” NWSA Journal 18 (2006): 73; and Gago, “Dangerous Liaisons: Latin American Feminists and the Left.”
33.
Ninotchka Rosca, personal communication to Annalisa Enrile (Manila, 2000).
34.
See Donatella Della Porta and Sidney G. Tarrow, eds., Transnational Protest and Global Activism (New York: Rowman and Littlefield Publishers, 2005); and Pascale Dufour and Isabelle Giraud, “Globalization and Political Change in the Women’s Movement: The Politics of Scale and Political Empowerment in the World March of Women,” Social Science Quarterly 88 (2007): 1152-1173.
35.
Sandra J. Berkowitz, “Can We Stand with You? Lessons from Women in Black for Global Feminist Activism,” Women and Language 26 (2003): 94.
36.
Judy Tzu-Chun Wu, “Journeys for Peace and Liberation: Third World Internationalism and Radical Orientalism during the U.S. War in Vietnam,” Pacific Historical Review 76 (2007): 575-584.
37.
S. Zwingle, “Global Feminism: Transnational Women’s Activism, Organizing, and Human Rights,” Contemporary Sociology 36:5: 492-495.
38.
Mohanty, Feminism without Borders.
39.
Chao-ju Chen, “The Difference That Differences Make: Asian Feminism and the Politics of Difference,” Asian Journal of Women’s Studies 13 (2007): 7-38.
40.
See Mohanty, Feminism without Borders and Mohanty, “Under Western Eyes Revisited.”
107
Amerasia Journal Stylesheet For articles being submitted for publication in Amerasia Journal. Three copies must be submitted, including one original typed/printed, or clear xerox. Mail to:
UCLA Asian American Studies Center Press 3230 Campbell Hall Los Angeles, CA 90095-1546 Attention: Russell Leong, Editor
Do not send electronic versions of articles unless they have been accepted for publication. Amerasia Journal follows a modified style based on the University of Chicago Manual of Style. 1. Manuscript length: Article text must not exceed 8,000 words (18 typed pages, including footnotes). Be sure to show the wordcount at the top of your manuscript. Text: Text must be typed doublespaced, with one inch margins at sides and bottom to accommodate editor’s and printer’s marks. There are two spaces after the end of a sentence; two spaces after a colon. 2. Block quotations: Typed doublespaced—indented one-half inch, at right & left margins, within the text. 3. Endnotes (Please note that book titles and periodicals are italicized, not underlined. Endnotes not conforming to the following styles will be sent back for correction): a. Please keep endnotes to a minimum, eliminate wordiness but keep the essential citation. For example, several citations can be grouped in one note instead of giving each in a separate note. . . .labor markets can be summarized from the work of Piore, Harrison, and Gordon.19 19. Piore, Manpower Policy; Harrison, Education, Training, and the Urban Ghetto; Gordon, Theories of Poverty and Underemployment. b. In books: The following must be included in the first citation: Russell C. Leong and Edward T. Chang, eds., Los Angeles—Struggles toward a Multiethnic Community (Seattle: University of Washington Press, 1994): 77-78. c. Article in a periodical (Volume:Number must be shown as 37:2): Edna Bonacich, “A Theory of Ethnic Antagonism: The Split Labor Market,” American Sociological Review 37:2 (October 1972): 547-559. d. Article in edited volume: Iftikhar Dadi,“The Pakistani Diaspora in North America,” Gita Rajan and Shailja Sharma, eds., New Cosmopolitanisms: South Asians in the US (Palo Alto: Stanford University Press, 2006). e. Shortened references: After the first reference to a particular work, all subsequent references to that work should be shortened. Omit the title of the work and give only the last name of the author followed by a comma and the page number of the reference; when more than one work by the same author has been cited, a short title is necessary, as well as the author’s last name. A shortened reference to an article in a periodical should omit the name of the periodical, volume number, and date. It should include only the last name of the author and the short title of the article and the page number of the reference. Example: 27. Leong and Chang, Los Angeles, 78. f. Op. cit. and loc. cit.: In their place, use the short title form adopted above. g. Ibid.: Ibid. (ibidem,“in the same place”) refers to a single work cited in the note immediately preceding. It should not be used if more than one work is given in the preceding note. Ibid. takes the place of the author’s name, the title of the work, and as much of the succeeding material as is identical. The author’s name is never used with ibid., nor is a title. Ibid. may also be used in place of the name of a journal or book or essays in successive references to the same journal or book within one footnote. Please note that Ibid. appears in italics, not underlined. 4. Forms of dates: standard form both in text and footnotes: July 4, 1984. 5. Tables: there is a limit of four tables to an article. (Use tabs—NOT spaces—to line up your data).
92
Amerasia Journal 35:1 (2009): 92-107
GAB[riela]Net[work]:
A Case Study of Transnational Sisterhood and Organizing Annalisa V. Enrile and Jollene Levid For decades, women’s organizing has been predominately territorial-bound and geographically placed.1 However, since the 1990s there has been a shift to broader theorizing of global sisterhoods and the opportunity for solidarity, especially around gender justice and liberation movements.2 The United Nations Decade for Women (1976 to 1985) opened a dialogue of North/South and First World/Third World dichotomies. The 1995 Fourth United Nations Conference on Women and NGO Forum in Beijing, China brought the issue of solidarity practices to the forefront. The rise of international women’s conferences has aided in the push for more transnational feminist organizing and the need to address economic, political, and social arenas of women’s struggle.3 Transnational feminism, or international feminism, began as collective actions found themselves crossing border-states and countries. However, transnational feminism has grown to transcend the familiar boundaries of nations and race, emphasizing instead, the common visions and goals of women engaged in political struggles.4 This border crossing reflects women’s struggles against racism, sexism, colonialism, and imperialism, and recognizes interlinked inequalities rather than generic commonalities.5
Annalisa Enrile received both her MSW and her Ph.D. from the University of California, Los Angeles. Currently, she is an Associate Clinical Professor at the USC School of Social Work. Her areas of interest are around community practice for social change, feminist paradigms, and transnational community building. Dr. Enrile has been involved in GABNet since 1994 and is the current Interim National Chairperson. Jollene Levid received her MSW from the University of Southern California. She is the former National Organizing Director and current Secretary-General of Gabriela Network. Jollene works as a union organizer for the Service Employees International Union at Los Angeles County and USC Medical Center.
93
What feminist theorists have thus called “imagined communities” have created a deep, horizontal comradeship.6 It is only within this praxis that solidarity may be achieved and global sisterhood achieved. This essay examines the relationship between GABRIELA, a Philippines-based women’s organization and GABRIELA Network (GABNet), GABRIELA’s network in the United States, as a case study and example of transnational alliance building within an ever-changing terrain of women’s organizing. GABNet has strived to not only work with their sisters in the Philippines, but to acknowledge transnational organizing as a balance of power relations under concrete conditions. In the case of GABNet, this practice has given way to a transformative style of organizing that is guided by actions and political campaigns in the Philippines but made concrete in the United States, sensitive to the context of American mainstream and the marginalized Filipino immigrant communities.
Amerasia Journal 2009
Martial Law in the Philippines
94
In 1972, Philippines President Marcos declared Martial Law.7 Overnight, barricades were set up, curfews enforced, and military personnel stationed everywhere against the people.8 Activists fled to the hills, organizations became outlawed and driven “underground,” and progressive media was censored. Even with growing evidence of massive human rights violations, the United States continued to support the Marcos dictatorship. The anti-Marcos opposition movement proliferated with more people joining the New People’s Army (an armed struggle waged in the countryside) and through various organizations demanding an end to martial law.9 During this time, women’s organizing also swelled. MAKIBAKA,10 the free movement of women was first led by Lorena Barros.11 Although the initial members of MAKIBAKA were students, young professionals, and urban petty bourgeoisie— peasants, workers, and urban poor were recruited. It is during this historical moment that the distinct nature of the progressive Philippine women’s movement solidified: the women’s movement was a dimension of the overall transformation of society and not merely an endeavor which pitted women against men.12 Women could not expect to be free if half of its population was oppressed.13 By extension, a liberated nation required a free people.
GABNet
In addition to the armed struggle and underground movement of women, the theory of “liberation theology” ignited organizing in the church, traditionally a conservative structures. Catholic nuns devoted themselves to educating the poor about their rights. Nuns also provided data to Amnesty International on the political repression and torture under Martial Law.14 Later, these nuns placed themselves in front of oncoming tanks sent to disperse protestors, and they led thousands of people in “peaceful” revolt. In 1983, the assassination of opposition leader Benigno Aquino resulted in an outpouring of protest among the middle classes. Since all progressive organizations had been declared illegal and forced underground, new organizations had to be formed on the legal front. Small women’s groups formed first as support groups and then as service providers for health and other areas. As these groups began to connect and work with one another a coordinating committee was established.15 Thus, GABRIELA was formed to serve as an umbrella group of women’s groups and represent the growing unrest of women.16 Economic and social life was equally affected. It is at this juncture when the Philippines began to experience “brain drain,” the exodus of experienced personnel and professionals who left the Philippines for other countries in the hopes of making a better living.17 The United States, short of both professionals and military personnel, was a recipient of Pilipino migration. Pilipinos had a long history of meeting the demands of U.S. labor from the canneries in Alaska to the fields of Watsonville and Delano. Immigration during the 1970s and 1980s took on a distinct characteristic of being composed of either professionals in the health field (nurses) or military recruits (the U.S. Navy). For the first time, whole families emigrated from the Philippines to the U.S.18
Pilipino American Communities Pilipino immigrants have lived in the United States since the first Pilipinos jumped ship on the Spanish Galleon trade at the Louisiana coastline.19 The first Pilipino communities in the United States date back to 1800s. However, much of this migration occurred with the intent to return to the homeland.20 In some ways, a similar attitude has permeated the community with each new wave of immigration.21 Even with the establishment of more stable Pilipino American communities there was still no widespread investment based in the U.S.—there was always a turn towards
95
Amerasia Journal 2009
96
the other side of the Pacific, a hope of returning “home.” This was certainly the case with many activists, who, fearing for their lives sought asylum in the United States. Many of these activists felt that though they had come to the United States, they could return to the Philippines once Marcos was deposed.22 In the meantime, activists created ways to be part of the movement against martial law. Organizations such as the Anti-Martial Law Alliance (AMLA), the Katipunan ng mga Demokratikong Pilipino (KDP), the National Committee for the Restoration of Civil Liberties in the Philippines (NCRCLP), and the Alliance of Philippine Concerns (APC) were formed.23 Even within these groups, the idea of returning to their homeland was a strong one. One activist stated, “My involvement with a U.S.-based activist group was premised on the notion that it would only be temporary and that one day I would go back to the real struggle—in the Philippines.”24 The Aquino assassination and the subsequent formation of a number of legal progressive organizations affected organizing within Pilipino American communities. Philippine groups began to directly work with these organizations. Many of these organizations focused on work that brought to light the atrocities of the Marcos dictatorship.25 By 1986, both the Philippines and the United States found themselves on the cusp of change. It was during a snap presidential election called by Marcos (who thought he would win) that the people of the Philippines marched to EDSA (Epifanio Delos Santos Avenue). For four days crowds camped out on the crowded avenue. During this time, known as “People Power,” the power of the women and the potential of women’s organizing were apparent. Women ran the clandestine airwaves that kept confusion to a minimum and guided the people.26 It was women who negotiated with the soldiers not to roll out the tanks and women who stood in front of them when they eventually did.27 Many people thought that when Marcos left the Philippies, so would its problems. After all, the Philippines had a female president—a victory not just for the people, but also for the women’s movement. However, this proved to be another false start. President Corazon Aquino personified the elite class, coming from an affluent, landowning family and educated in the United States. Yet, she portrayed herself as a proper, traditional housewife who had never worked for a living. This was not the symbol that would bring genuine liberation and reform to the country.28 In fact, Cory Aquino heightened the “war” in the countryside against the New
GABNet
People’s Army and allowed Marcos cronies such as would-be president Fidel Ramos back into the political scene. Despite the Aquino government’s pronouncements to protect human rights and women’s rights, many women were illegally arrested, denied legal counsel, held hostage, summarily executed, and tortured while in military and police custody. On the other side of the Pacific, the removal of the dictatorship and the end to martial law was the genesis of other types of struggles. For Pilipino American organizations, this meant deciding to be Philippines-focused or to begin work within their local, U.S.-based communities. In the words of one activist, the quandary was, whether the “primary goal was to support the Philippine struggle” or to be “part of a broader movement for political changes in U.S. society?”29 It is not as if the work against martial law ever occurred within a political vacuum. There were a number of issues at the time such as anti-war sentiments, affirmative action, and immigration reform centered on U.S. issues. In fact, Pilipino Americans took leadership in the landmark Bakke vs. the University of California, Davis decision on affirmative action. Despite their intention to return to the Philippines, most activists in these organizations found that they had created their own homes and communities in the U.S. They would not be returning to the Philippines anytime soon. Again, many felt that with the victory and overthrow of the dictator, that they had met the primary goal of the Philippine struggle.30
Philippines’ Women’s Organizing As the movement against the Marcos dictatorship occurred in the Philippines and extended to the United States and abroad, one area left out of the equation was the women. The women of the anti-martial law movement found themselves fighting against political oppression within patriarchal organizations. Male leadership with a primarily female workforce morphed into an internal system of hierarchy and gender inequity that women were trying to dismantle on a governmental level. The immediate response was for women to form their own organization that embodied the same beliefs but also focused on the distinct and specific concerns of women. This plan was met with heated resistance, as critics felt that it was divisive to the movement as a whole. The role of a separate women’s movement within a larger nationalist or liberation movement has usually been met with resistance.31 This complex paradigm is not unique to the Pilipino
97
Amerasia Journal 2009
98
American community. It is also present in other movements such as the Frente Sandinista de Liberation National or FSLN (Sandinista Front for National Liberation) in Nicaragua, and also in the Farabundo Marti Liberation Front in El Salvador, where women felt that their needs were not met by the movement, as they continued to encounter sexism from their male revolutionary colleagues.32 Pilipina women from the anti-martial law movement responded to the call for women’s organizing. Despite the enthusiasm for a new organization, the resistance from the anti-martial law movement was fierce. Given the hostile environment, the women found shelter in the mainstream women’s movement of the United States, with other human rights organizations, and with the women of the Philippines, who could understand the need for a separate women’s formation. Thus, the beginning of GABNet occurred with only the support of the Philippine women, the women in the U.S., and the human rights’ community.33 A new organization, with few allies—the daunting task of GABNet to do work against imperialism and patriarchy was coupled with the challenge of redefining transnational organizing. Transnational movements require attention to the shifts of power in national structures due to: the challenges they pose; the micropolitics of power dynamics within the transnational organizations themselves; and, the ideological foundations that frame the praxis of these movements. Transnational organizing recognizes the need to move from local action to collective global action; the global protest that results in a shift in the scale of protest with national actors redirecting their strategies toward a larger level of governance.34 Women who organize around contentious national issues are viewed as symbolic packages challenging the assumed role of women within the boundaries of their nation. For example, Women In Black, an organization composed of Jewish women who stood in solidarity with the people of Palestine, was accused of breaching Israeli national solidarity.35 Similarly, GABNet in the U.S. vocally identified the United States and its international counterparts (the World Trade Organization, World Bank, and International Monetary Fund) as the main culprits for the underdevelopment of the Philippines. As women living in the United States, GABNet faced criticism from other Americans as being “traitorous” to their country of residence and were accused of being ungrateful for the privileges received living in the United States. How to negotiate both was a challenge to organizing and called for a rethinking of how to carry out work and
GABNet
campaigns from the international to local levels and back again. Crucial to successful organizing would be the structure of GABNet. Of utmost concern was the formation that GABNet would take. The most convenient option—to become a U.S. chapter of GABRIELA Philippines—raised problematic issues, especially around power relations. Power relations amongst membership of transnational movements themselves are important to examine because they may mimic that of oppressive structures the movements combat. For instance, North American members of transnational feminist organizations during the Vietnam War directed condescension towards their Asian sisters as the North American women highlighted their own role in potentially “rescuing” their “Third World” sisters.36 This “rescue” paradigm, a product of the socio-political environment within which many Western feminists and North American women operate, needs to be identified and avoided when organizational decisions are made.37 Though it is tempting to think that equal sisterhoods can be forged in a transnational sense, to ignore the power dynamics would be folly. It could be a pre-cursor to politics that are laden with tension, competitiveLos Angeles GABNet members with Congresswoman Liza Maza, after a discussion on Political Repression in the Philippines. (top, from left): Ivy Quicho, Jollene Levid; (bottom, from left): Milady Quito, Congresswoman Liza Maza, and Annalisa Enrile. Photograph courtesy of GABNet Los Angeles Archives
99
Amerasia Journal 2009
100
ness, and pain.38 Theorist Gayatri Spivak further raises the question not just of place but also of socioeconomic and political space as to whether men can theorize feminism, whites theorize racism, and so on. She states, “It is only when the former groups theorize that the situation is politically intolerable. Therefore, it is crucial that members of these groups are kept vigilant about their assigned subject positions.” Cognizant of this threat, the idea of becoming a chapter of GABRIELA Philippines would give power of decision making into the hands of women who neither resided nor worked within the Philippine political terrain. For this reason, GABNet decided to remain outside of the decision making body of its Philippine counterpart, recognizing the potentially detrimental effects of that positionality.39 Members decided that GABNet would fulfill a dual role— that of a support network and a national mass organization comprised of chapters in the major cities of the U.S. (New York, Chicago, San Francisco were original chapters). While a national organization could operate on its own and provide material resources as well as launch political campaigns for its international counterpart; there was also a need for the women doing the work in the United States to be more than just a support group. Just as one would take precaution against falling into the role of a “rescuer,” women must also avoid falling into the role of “provider” with no political growth and empowerment of their own. Thus, a plan for mass organizing was drafted which served as the foundation for chapters to be set up. A group of women organized into a chapter would then be mass organizing around women’s own political education and training, campaigns, and movement building, as well as providing support for the Philippines. Local chapter organizing would address the immediacy of issues occurring at the local/city/community level and the recognition that the concrete circumstances of each area might be vastly different from one city to another. Local chapters would have the autonomy to launch local campaigns. At the same time, national leadership would coordinate chapters and national campaigns as well as be the liaison for international relations with the Philippines. Notwithstanding its growing pains, the national leadership of GABNet reached an integrated work pace—balancing the need to address local issues, project a national character, and mediate international needs. This type of organizing model attracted women inside and outside of the Pilipino community committed to the idea of doing international work that was integral and tied
GABNet
to their own lives in the U.S. Women were also drawn to GABNet for their own development and empowerment. Despite the quasi-autonomous nature of GABNet, the organization still carried the ideological line of its Philippine counterparts. Some points of unity included a strong anti-imperialist stance, while some points were specific to the Philippines, such as the call from the Philippine Left for national democracy. GABNet supported both. The distinctive feature of this political ideology is the “national” aspect, which underscored the issue of sovereignty and a removal of foreign control in all aspects of Philippine life. In other words, this ideological line determines a course of relationships that must be attuned to the nature of power, particularly sensitive to the threats of colonial mentality and practices. As stated earlier, if not, there is a threat of falling into the trap of colonial provider and overseer of work. It cannot be emphasized enough that transnational feminist activism faces the difficult task of historicizing and denaturalizing the values of global capitalism in order to expose the underlying exploitative social relations and structures.40 Having grappled with the organizational structure and reaching consensus about the political ideology, GABNet was left to create a practice of transnational work which would manifest itself into solid campaigns, relevant to the Philippines and the United States. The system for work became this: an annual meeting with GABRIELA Philippines in which their current yearly plan of action would be shared. For example, they could indicate a need a do a campaign on militarism because of an upcoming policy that would activate U.S. military bases or a campaign on migrant labor because of a global trend of recruitment for Pilipina nurses. After their one-year plan was laid out, a discussion ensued as to what would be the best way for GABNet to carry out these campaigns in the U.S. Because GABNet is not a chapter formation of GABRIELA, the freedom to articulate and interpret international campaigns became the backbone for successful campaigns in the United States. The following are examples of recent transnational campaigns of GABNet:
Globalization and Women (1996-1998) Policies such as the North American Free Trade Association (NAFTA) treaty and the Asia Pacific Economic Cooperation (APEC) agreements prompted women in the Philippines to examine the effects of globalization. Using the Philippines as an example, the campaign aimed to raise awareness of the deleterious effects of glo-
101
balization on the women of third world countries. Through strategies including intensive two-day retreats, weekly community educational discussions, and the creation and distribution of chapbooks and pamphlets, GABNet worked to raise awareness and rally people to protest the negotiations of treaties such as the Visiting Forces Agreement (VFA) and the Status of Forces Agreement (SOFA). The organization also facilitated trips to the Philippines for GABNet members, created documentaries and websites, and invited leaders of Pilipino and ethnic groups to community forums. These leaders were then asked to bring the information back to their members. This campaign consolidated members, who were able to experience the Philippine condition first hand. Because of its broad outreach due to the use of various multi-media, GABNET was able to increase membership, open chapters in new areas (San Diego South Bay, Irvine), and revive old chapters (San Francisco).
Amerasia Journal 2009
Purple Rose Campaign (1998 to present)
102
The Philippines is one of the top three source countries for trafficked women and children. Although there were existing antitrafficking campaigns, especially around forced prostitution and mail order brides, no campaigns specifically targeted the general public. The Purple Rose Campaign thus aimed to raise public critical awareness of the commodification of women and children, to ask the public to consider the factors contributing to trafficking— including national sovereignty, patriarchy, and economic stability. The Purple Rose was chosen as the icon of this campaign, because this flower was artificially created and exoticized, for no other purpose than to satisfy desire. It is no different from other roses and yet remains apart, because it does not exist in nature and is not a product of evolution. So are women in the sex trade: artificially created and exoticized and willed to be apart and different. A pin in the image of the purple rose icon is sold as a statement of support for the campaign. The campaign was conceived in the United Stated and tested out countrywide during 1998. In the summer of 1998, GABNet formally presented the Purple Rose Campaign to GABRIELA Philippines and its allied organizations during an international women’s conference. It was at this time that the Purple Rose Campaign was adopted internationally. The planning meeting in the Philippines was composed of actual concrete planning and actions to be coordinated in all countries on specific days (October 28—Philippine Women’s Day of Protest; November 25—Day Against Violence towards Wom-
Photograph by Mary Uyematsu Kao
GABNet
Ninotchka Roska and Stephanie Santos at a local GABNet event in Eagle Rock, California. Roska gave a reading of her work, marking the Purple Rose Campaign, July 2008.
en; March 8—International Women’s Day) as well as activities that could be held specific to each area. Activities ran the gamut from fundraising dinners, to movie showings, to community forums. The Purple Rose Campaign also launched a media blitz of public service announcements, testimonials via print media, and an online website. The Purple Rose Campaign is incorporated into every major holiday. For example, purple roses were delivered for Valentine’s Day, and supporters wore purple leis for graduation. A public service announcement on the Purple Rose Campaign has been distributed and shown on various television channels, including the Discovery Channel, Lifetime TV for Women, and TLC. Mainstream venues such as parties, poetry readings, and even beauty pageants have served as vehicles for the campaign to gain momentum. The Purple Rose Campaign’s success lies in its appeal to a broad range of concerns: violence towards women and children as well as the nature of its issues being at the same time political, economic, and social. Gloria Steinem wore the Purple Rose pin during a Baltimore meeting of the Feminist Majority. The campaign has helped organizations meet the challenge for innovative, groundbreaking campaigns that challenge the status quo as well as expose the sex industry.
103
Stop the U.S.-led War against Terror (2001 to current) With the current state of the U.S. War against Terror, there has been a resurgence of militarization in the Philippines. In 2001, the U.S. and Philippine governments launched “Balikatan,” billed as joint military exercises under the guise of quashing the terrorist threat. In the summer of 2002, an international human rights commission recorded numerous human rights violations, including murder, as a result of these exercises. This GABNet campaign aims to raise awareness of the presence and the implications of U.S. military occupation in the Philippines as well as to build coalition and international solidarity within the growing global anti-war movement. This national campaign is based mostly on solidarity work with the global anti-war movement, under the umbrella of A.N.S.W.E.R. (Act Now to Stop War and End Racism) anti-war coalition, of which GABNet chapters are members of their local steering committees. Also, GABNet has found very innovative ways to discuss the issue of war. Notably, in Los Angeles, a “Passion” show, a parody of the traditional fashion show, was held. A number of organizations were invited to design “fashion” depicting the state of women in war. In the Bay Area, the local chapter has been able to work consistently with the Women in Black Actions held by the Revolutionary Association of the Women of Afghanistan (RAWA). This campaign has successfully raised greater awareness of the effects of U.S. military presence in the Philippines. Organizers employed a variety of ways of presenting anti-war issues, from traditional protests to more artistic endeavors. Another important result of this campaign was the inclusion of Third World countries within the larger, mainly White, anti-war movement.
Amerasia Journal 2009
Twenty Years of Struggle
104
In 2009, GABNet celebrates its twentieth anniversary. The past twenty years have been full of struggle and of sisterhood. Since its inception, GABNet has grown to over eleven chapters (Seattle, Portland, San Francisco Bay Area, Santa Barbara, Los Angeles, Orange County, San Diego, Chicago, Boston, New York, and New Jersey) with a membership of hundreds of women. The work of GABNet has been conducted with many lessons learned, the most salient of which is the ability to be independent and develop a course of work that best fits with the environment. In doing so, GABNet has been able to make a true contribution to the women of the Philippines, conceptualizing such campaigns as the Purple Rose Campaign which moved the anti-prostitution
GABNet
and anti-trafficking issues of Pilipina women worldwide to new arenas and pushed the issue into the mainstream. The success of GABNet must be attributed to it’s ability to develop its own strategies for working within U.S. society, building new pathways and new formulations. As U.S. imperialism tightens its grip on neocolonies like the Philippines, the talons of oppression will be felt all the way to immigrant communities in America. Therefore, the work of an organization like GABNet can never hesitate or turn complacent. For the years that GABNet has focused on the Philippines, it has become apparent that if true women’s liberation is to be gained, it must be fought for and acted out on a truly international stage. Having created a space for Philippine women in the United States and having Philippine issues included in the discourse of human rights, GABNet will now be part of the convening committee of the “Mariposa Alliance.” This alliance will bring together like-minded, anti-imperialist women’s organizations, institutes, and individuals. The need for the Mariposa Alliance developed out of the 2007 incident known as the “GABNet 3” when three GABNet members were detained and not allowed to leave the Philippines under the newly legislated Human Security Act, a law similar to the U.S. Patriot Act. Absurdly, the GABNet 3 were accused of having ties to Al Qaida. The outpouring of support from the women of the United States and other countries indicated an intensified need for coordination and movement building among progressive women. While GABNet will continue to do work in solidarity with the Philippine women, it cannot ignore its responsibilities to respond to shifting world contexts and situations, which demand the maximization of women’s organizing to achieve liberation. The transnational sisterhoods GABNet has created must now transcend the U.S. and the Philippines, declaring, “For liberation, Women of the World unite!”
Notes 1.
Niamh Reilly, “Cosmopolitan Feminism and Human Rights,” Hyapatia 22:4.
2.
See bell hooks, Feminist Theory: From Margin to Center (Boston: South End Press, 1984); and Chandra Talpade Mohanty et al, eds., Under Western Eyes: Third World Women and the Politics of Feminism (Bloomington: Indiana University Press, 1991).
3.
Chandra Talpade Mohanty, Feminism without Borders: Decolonizing Theory, Practicing Solidarity (Durham: Duke University Press, 2003).
4.
Debbie Lunny, “Out of Canada: The Pedagogy of Transnational Feminist Activism,” Canadian Women’s Studies 25(2006): 85-90.
105
Amerasia Journal 2009
106
5.
Chandra Talpade Mohanty, “Under Western Eyes Revisited: Feminist Solidarity Through Anticapitalist Struggles,” Signs 28 (2003): 499.
6.
See Benedict Anderson, Imagined Communities: Reflections on the Origin and Spread of Nationalism (New York: Verso, 1991); and Mohanty, Feminism without Borders.
7.
Teodoro Agoncillo, History of the Filipino People (Quezon City: Philippines, 1990).
8.
Carol Ojeda-Kimbrough, “The Chosen Road,” Steve Louie and Glenn K. Omatsu, eds., Asian Americans: The Movement and the Moment (Los Angeles: UCLA AASCPress, 2001).
9.
Judy Taguiwalo, ““The Women of the First Quarter Storm of 1970: Women Fully Engaged in the Making of History,” paper presented to the International Conference for Filipino Youth, Celebrating the 35th Anniversary of the First Quarter Storm, Vancouver, Canada, November 25-27, 2005.
10.
Translated, MAKIBAKA, is an acronym meaning “Free Movement of New Women”
11.
Ibid.
12.
Lorena Barros, “Liberated Women,” Ang Malaya, 3 (1971).
13.
Mary John Mananzan, Woman in Philippine History: The Woman Question in the Philippines (Philippines: Institute of Women’s Studies, 1997).
14.
Ceres Doyo, “The Prostitution Problem Must be Viewed from a National, Even Global Perspective,” Philippine Panorama 12 (1983).
15.
GABRIELA, GABRIELA Convention Proceedings (Quezon City: Mt. Carmel Community Center, GABRIELA, 1985).
16.
See Mary John Mananzan, Essays on Women (Philippines: Institute of Women’s Studies, 1991). Additional information from O. Mataro, personal communication to Annalisa Enrile (Manila, 2000)
17.
Donna S. Kline, “Push and Pull Factors in International Nurse Migration,” Journal of Nursing Scholarship 35:2 (2003): 107-111
18.
See Royal F. Morales, Makibaka: The Pilipino American Struggle (Mountain View, CA: Mountain View Press, 1974); and Rhacel S. Parrenas, Servants of Globalization: Women, Migration, and Domestic Work (Stanford: Stanford University Press, 2001).
19.
Morales, Makibaka and Parrenas, Servants of Globalization.
20.
See Antono J. A. Pido, Filipinos in America: Macro/Micro Issues of Immigration and Integration (New York: Center for Migration Studies, 1986); OjedaKimbrough; and Parrenas, Servants of Globalization.
21.
Morales, Makibaka: The Pilipino American Struggle.
22.
Liza Masa, personal communication to Annalisa Enrile (Manila, 2000); Ninotchka Rosca, personal communication to Annalisa Enrile (Manila, 2000); and R. Sancho, personal communication to Annalisa Enrile (San Jose, California, 2000).
23.
Rosca, personal communication to Annalisa Enrile (Manila, 2000), and Sancho, personal communication to Annalisa Enrile (San Jose, California, 2000).
GABNet
24.
Ojeda-Kimbrough.
25.
Morales, Makibaka: The Pilipino American Struggle; Rosca, personal communication to Annalisa Enrile (Manila, 2000); and Ojeda-Kimbrough.
26.
Mary John Mananzan, Woman in Philippine History: The Woman Question in the Philippines (Philippines: Institute of Women’s Studies, 1997).
27.
O. Mataro, personal communication to Annalisa Enrile (Manila, 2000); and Liza Masa, personal communication to Annalisa Enrile (Manila, 2000).
28.
Liza Masa, personal communication to Annalisa Enrile (Manila, 2000).
29.
Ojeda-Kimbrough.
30.
R. Sancho, personal communication to Annalisa Enrile (San Jose, California, 2000).
31.
Veronica Gago, “Dangerous Liaisons: Latin American Feminists and the Left,” Nacla Report on the Americas 40 (2007): 17-21.
32.
See Jo-Marie Burt, “The Revolution Question: Feminism in El Salvador, Chile, and Cuba,” Journal of Third World Studies 23 (2006): 257; Karen Kampwirth, “Resisting The Feminist Threat: Antifeminist Politics In Post-Sandanista Nicaragua,” NWSA Journal 18 (2006): 73; and Gago, “Dangerous Liaisons: Latin American Feminists and the Left.”
33.
Ninotchka Rosca, personal communication to Annalisa Enrile (Manila, 2000).
34.
See Donatella Della Porta and Sidney G. Tarrow, eds., Transnational Protest and Global Activism (New York: Rowman and Littlefield Publishers, 2005); and Pascale Dufour and Isabelle Giraud, “Globalization and Political Change in the Women’s Movement: The Politics of Scale and Political Empowerment in the World March of Women,” Social Science Quarterly 88 (2007): 1152-1173.
35.
Sandra J. Berkowitz, “Can We Stand with You? Lessons from Women in Black for Global Feminist Activism,” Women and Language 26 (2003): 94.
36.
Judy Tzu-Chun Wu, “Journeys for Peace and Liberation: Third World Internationalism and Radical Orientalism during the U.S. War in Vietnam,” Pacific Historical Review 76 (2007): 575-584.
37.
S. Zwingle, “Global Feminism: Transnational Women’s Activism, Organizing, and Human Rights,” Contemporary Sociology 36:5: 492-495.
38.
Mohanty, Feminism without Borders.
39.
Chao-ju Chen, “The Difference That Differences Make: Asian Feminism and the Politics of Difference,” Asian Journal of Women’s Studies 13 (2007): 7-38.
40.
See Mohanty, Feminism without Borders and Mohanty, “Under Western Eyes Revisited.”
107
Amerasia Journal Stylesheet For articles being submitted for publication in Amerasia Journal. Three copies must be submitted, including one original typed/printed, or clear xerox. Mail to:
UCLA Asian American Studies Center Press 3230 Campbell Hall Los Angeles, CA 90095-1546 Attention: Russell Leong, Editor
Do not send electronic versions of articles unless they have been accepted for publication. Amerasia Journal follows a modified style based on the University of Chicago Manual of Style. 1. Manuscript length: Article text must not exceed 8,000 words (18 typed pages, including footnotes). Be sure to show the wordcount at the top of your manuscript. Text: Text must be typed doublespaced, with one inch margins at sides and bottom to accommodate editor’s and printer’s marks. There are two spaces after the end of a sentence; two spaces after a colon. 2. Block quotations: Typed doublespaced—indented one-half inch, at right & left margins, within the text. 3. Endnotes (Please note that book titles and periodicals are italicized, not underlined. Endnotes not conforming to the following styles will be sent back for correction): a. Please keep endnotes to a minimum, eliminate wordiness but keep the essential citation. For example, several citations can be grouped in one note instead of giving each in a separate note. . . .labor markets can be summarized from the work of Piore, Harrison, and Gordon.19 19. Piore, Manpower Policy; Harrison, Education, Training, and the Urban Ghetto; Gordon, Theories of Poverty and Underemployment. b. In books: The following must be included in the first citation: Russell C. Leong and Edward T. Chang, eds., Los Angeles—Struggles toward a Multiethnic Community (Seattle: University of Washington Press, 1994): 77-78. c. Article in a periodical (Volume:Number must be shown as 37:2): Edna Bonacich, “A Theory of Ethnic Antagonism: The Split Labor Market,” American Sociological Review 37:2 (October 1972): 547-559. d. Article in edited volume: Iftikhar Dadi,“The Pakistani Diaspora in North America,” Gita Rajan and Shailja Sharma, eds., New Cosmopolitanisms: South Asians in the US (Palo Alto: Stanford University Press, 2006). e. Shortened references: After the first reference to a particular work, all subsequent references to that work should be shortened. Omit the title of the work and give only the last name of the author followed by a comma and the page number of the reference; when more than one work by the same author has been cited, a short title is necessary, as well as the author’s last name. A shortened reference to an article in a periodical should omit the name of the periodical, volume number, and date. It should include only the last name of the author and the short title of the article and the page number of the reference. Example: 27. Leong and Chang, Los Angeles, 78. f. Op. cit. and loc. cit.: In their place, use the short title form adopted above. g. Ibid.: Ibid. (ibidem,“in the same place”) refers to a single work cited in the note immediately preceding. It should not be used if more than one work is given in the preceding note. Ibid. takes the place of the author’s name, the title of the work, and as much of the succeeding material as is identical. The author’s name is never used with ibid., nor is a title. Ibid. may also be used in place of the name of a journal or book or essays in successive references to the same journal or book within one footnote. Please note that Ibid. appears in italics, not underlined. 4. Forms of dates: standard form both in text and footnotes: July 4, 1984. 5. Tables: there is a limit of four tables to an article. (Use tabs—NOT spaces—to line up your data).
