5/14 Questions, Haleh Mawson

1. There's a story from Rome that one could walk across the Empire and be guaranteed safe by simply saying one was a citizen. There's another story that a man was once beaten in Sicily by guards in the street, and while he screamed throughout that he was a Roman citizen, no one tried to help. Undocumented folks aren't even afforded the legal rights that other Americans have, or that the unknown Roman possessed. They can't even plead citizenship against abuse. Baez seems to be arguing that speaking out is a way of claiming citizenship in theory. Is this correct? And if it is, is her claim that "to be able to speak . . . in cyberspace could be more important than being widely heard" (64)?

2. The quote by Flavia Dzodan, "My feminism will be intersectional," originally referred to racism in feminist circles, but I've also heard it used to refer to trans rights, reproductive rights, etc. Castillo-Garsow argues that part of the power of Somos Mujeres, Somos Hip Hop is its accommodation of "diverse views as well as diverse forms of being women" (342). I have no beef with this, and I approve of folks who strongly disagree on issues working together, but I suspect many would. So what do you think? Are there criteria for being a feminist beyond wanting equal rights for women? Are there any opinions that would strip your membership?

3. What does Taki Amaru mean when she says that we are the serpents?

4. In the US, we often think of wealthy urban women as enlightened and empowered, while rural women are thought of as backwards and probably complicit in their own oppression. In "Taki Amaru on Feminist Learning from Indigenous Women," the opposite claim is (kind of) made. She says that indigenous women living in the country experience greater equality than women in the cities. Is that true in the US as well? Is it true of most rural women?