Category Archives: Immigration

Women of Color and the Violence Against Women Act (VAWA)

May 14, 2012

By Susan Mendez

Photo by javacolleen on Flickr

This past academic year, I have served as the Women Studies liaison to the Women’s Center on my university campus. In this capacity, I had the privilege of working with work-study students on a variety of issues, one of which being gender-based violence. The culmination of programming and events on this issue was our “Take Back the Night” rally in April. To prep for this event, the work-study students and I read “Domestic Violence Policy in the United States: Contemporary Issues” by Susan L. Miller and LeeAnn Iovanni, which brought our attention to the timely issue of the congressional debates surrounding the reauthorization of the “Violence Against Women Act” (VAWA).

The “Violence Against Women Act” was a federal law passed in 1994. It was groundbreaking at the time because it was national-scope recognition of the problem of gender-based violence; it acted as an agent of social change and had the large budget of $795 million dollars a year. It targeted underserved and rural populations and ultimately saved on future victimization costs over the years. It was renewed in 2000 and 2005 and consistently had congressional bipartisan support at all these times. Back in November 2011, the Act was up for reauthorization and this process started with a bipartisan bill written by Senators Michael D. Crapo, Republican of Idaho, and Patrick J. Leahy, Democrat of Vermont. The bill attracted fifty-eight sponsors including Republican Senators from Maine, Illinois, and Massachusetts. Although the new version of this Act passed the Senate on April 26, by a vote of 68 to 31, the House Republicans are not pleased with the Act as is and are drafting their own version that will be submitted for a vote at the House of Representatives level during this month.

So just what has made House Republicans so upset? The new version of the VAWA is ground-breaking yet again for it expands efforts to reach Native American lands and rural areas, increases the availability of free legal assistance to victims of domestic violence, expands the definition of domestic violence to include stalking, allows more battered “illegal” immigrants to claim temporary visas, and includes same-sex couples in programs for domestic violence. These very points that would rejuvenate the VAWA in its efforts to target underserved populations, one of its original goals, are the ones most objectionable. House Republicans believe the new VAWA unfairly expands immigration avenues by allowing “illegal” immigration survivors to claim battery, dilutes focus on domestic violence by expanding protections to new groups like same-sex couples, and fails to place safeguards to ensure domestic violence grants are well-spent. Senator Charles E. Grassley of Iowa phrased Republican opposition to this new version of the “Violence Against Women Act” best when he stated that this legislation “creates so many programs for underserved populations that it risks losing the focus on helping victims, period.” Other critics of the Senate-passed version of the VAWA explain that their reservations lie in the fact that the VAWA takes away from the state and local levels’ abilities and resources to address domestic violence; such efforts should not rest solely with Washington as this would go beyond constitutional limits. Lastly, a fear of fraud and abuse of the U.S. Immigration system is another specific reason for some to object to the Senate-passed version of the VAWA.

Needless to say, Democratic Senators and Representatives have come to defend the Senate version of VAWA and oppose the House-revised version of the VAWA, which strips away protections given to Native American women, the gay and lesbian community, and “illegal” immigrants who are battered. Senator Dianne Feinstein, Democrat of California, and Representative John Conyers, Democrat of Michigan, are just two Democrat congressional members who have labeled the House-revision of the VAWA as the latest evolution of the Republican War on Women, where rights and services provided to women are systemically being cut-back. Moreover, those active in the Native American community are taking issue with the House-revised version of the VAWA. According to Karla E. General and Robert T. Coulter’s “Violence Against Women Act: Overdue Justice for Native Women” in Indian Country Today, “Tribal Authority to prosecute non-Indians for crimes against tribal citizens was removed by the Supreme Court in 1978, creating an Indian country landscape where non-Indians violate Native women with impunity…. Because 77 percent of residents of Indian lands are non-Indian, and because 88 percent of these offenders are non-Indian, the long-standing jurisdictional loophole creates a human rights crisis where some of the most heinous crimes go unpunished solely because the victim is Native and was assaulted on an Indian reservation.” There is a desperate need to close this legal loophole on Native lands so as to ensure that those guilty of domestic violence are punished. Relying on federal and state law enforcement agencies in the past to prosecute these crimes has not worked well; General and Coulter assert that federal and state authorities have failed to properly address 67 percent of sexual abuse and related matters that are referred to them from Indian country.

Notably, the revision of the Senate-passed “Violence Against Women Act” does not honor its original goals: to be national in scope and to serve underrepresented populations who experience domestic violence. It appears to regard domestic violence as a crime that only happens to heterosexual, “legal” white women. Notions of wanting to handle the problem of domestic violence in a “clean” Act does not leave room for dealing with the “messy” intersectional aspects of life such as race, class, gender, legal status, and sexual orientation.

Thus, the ultimate fate of the “Violence Against Women Act” should be on the minds of all of us who deal with and care about the rights of women, especially women of color.

Susan Mendez is on the faculty at University of Scranton.

Comments:

Mujeres Talk Moderator June 2, 2012 at 6:10 AM

Thanks Susan for this update on where VAWA stands. You’ll be happy to know that the week of your post there were 311 visits to the page so many were interested in reading more about this!

Petition to Governor to Sign CA Dream Act

Tuesday, October 4, 2011

From: Educators for Immigrant Rights
Subject: Petition to Governor to Sign CA Dream Act

October 2, 2011

Dear Colleague:

We are writing you to ask you to join this petition to urge Governor Brown to sign AB 131, The California Dream Act Part II. AB 131 would make undocumented/AB 540 students eligible for Cal Grants and other state financial aid for college. This bill was passed by the state legislature and has been on the governor’s desk since September 13. Governor Brown has one week — until October 9 to — take action and he is receiving much pressure from conservatives to veto the bill. As educational professionals, we see that financial aid is a formidable obstacle faced by undocumented youth in their pursuit of higher education. AB 131 would help thousands of undocumented students attend college and contribute to California’s future prosperity. This is an important step in the fight for social justice in California.

There are two ways that you can pressure Governor Brown to sign this important piece of legislation. First, open the attached letter and click on the link (http://salsa.democracyinaction.org/o/2119/p/dia/action/public/?action_KEY=8269) to add your name to the list of signatories. To present your perspective as an educator, please feel free to cut and paste the letter included here into the letter box to be sent to the Governor. Secondly, please forward this email to five other educators urging them to do the same.

Dear Governor Brown:

We are educators in California signing in support of AB131. We teach children from infancy through college and see every day how undocumented students are engaged in our society, how they contribute and want to expand their active participation in civic life. We watch our students grow and strive towards an education in spite of the enormous obstacles they face. Too often we lose students because they are stopped in their tracks when they are denied access to a higher education. There are kids who are leaders in their schools, achieving success in their classrooms, contributing to their families and building their communities. We witness that financial need is the single largest obstacle faced by undocumented students in their transition from high school to college, especially in this time of rising educational costs.

AB131 is not just about helping students, it is about helping ourselves as a state. California has invested in providing education to these young people for up to 12 years. It doesn’t make sense to stop now and throw away that investment. In order to rebuild California’s strength we will need to educate all of our young people. Education should be a right for all Californians regardless of their place of birth or immigration status.

For all of these reasons we stand united in support of AB 131. We urge you to follow the legislature in passing this bill by signing AB 131. Help these dreamers achieve their dreams. We all will benefit by opening the door for these young people to continue their paths to success.

Respectfully

We have less than one week to pressure Governor Brown to do the right thing. Let’s mobilize to ensure that AB131 becomes California law!

Respectfully,
Educators for Immigrant Rights

Cynthia Cortez
College Adviser
Destination College Advising Corps at Silverado HS

Jesse Henderson
Real Estate Consultant

Ester Hernandez
Associate Professor of Chicano Studies
California State University Los Angeles

Paige Leven
Teacher
Ed Roybal Learning Center (HS) LAUSD

Alejandra Marchevsky
Professor of Liberal Studies and Women’s and Gender Studies
California State University Los Angeles

Enrique Ochoa
Professor of History and Latin American Studies
California State University Los Angeles

Francesca Ochoa
Retired Middle School Teacher
Fred M. Sparks Middle School, HLPUSD

Gilda Ochoa
Professor of Sociology and Chicano/a-Latino/a Studies
Pomona College

Maria Gutierrez de Soldatenko
Professor of Chicano/a Studies
Pitzer College

Michael Soldatenko
Professor of Chicano Studies
California State University Los Angeles

Pensamientos from the “Field”: An Excerpt from My Research on Mexican Women Caring for North Americans

by Maria Ibarra, Ph.D.

“Que valoren, que sepan que este trabajo tiene valor…que uno da su vida.”

I am an anthropologist who studies the labor of Mexicana elder care providers. Every year I spend time in the field, in my long-standing research site of Santa Barbara, and I record women’s stories and experiences about work. I am always affected by the many types of violence that are inherent to the lives of Mexicanas on either side of the border. How many times have I put down my pen and held a woman’s hand, stroked her forearm, while she cries and tells me how much it hurts? Almost every interview reveals pain and anger, the ambushes to her humanity, the metaphorical blows that stack upon each other. “Me despidieron como si fuera un perro, ni siquiera en la casa, pero allí afuera de la puerta.” I asked, “Why, Reyna, I don’t understand, why did they do that?” She answered, “¿Porque no te ven, no les importas – despues de tantos años con la señora que me hicieran eso? No es justo, Maria.” She imploringly looks at me and wants me to help her put it right, to help her understand such a profound betrayal to her humanity. “Di todo por ella – sacrifique tantos momentos que le pude dar a mi hija, ¿y para que?” For what? Such a moral question in a structural economic, political and social context that does not operate by the rationality of what is good for the women who care for the aging, infirm, and dying in our society. “¿Que puedo escribir, Reyna? ¿Que quieres que sepa la gente?” I asked. Without pause she answered, “Que valoren, que sepan que este trabajo tiene valor…que uno da su vida.”

Maria Ibarra is an associate professor in the Department of Chicana and Chicano Studies at San Diego State University. She is currently working on a book manuscript tentatively entitled “Transnational Care: Mexican Women and Aging North Americans in the 21st Century.”

Y las mexicanas migrantes, ¿cuándo?

By Gloria González-López

January 24, 2011

“Compañera, tenga cuidado, what you are suggesting has the risk of dividing our immigrant communities and families.”

The above comment is my paraphrase of the concerned voice of a highly committed community activist, a Mexican man I met more than a decade ago as I completed my doctoral studies in Los Angeles. Back then I was trying to engage in a conversation with him and other activist men about my ongoing research with immigrant women. In these dialogues, I was sharing information about my dissertation project and the ways in which these women were teaching me about their unique experiences of migration to the United States. More and more, this was becoming crystal clear to me: Mexican immigrant women experience their immigration journeys in very particular ways, very differently when compared to men migrating from their same locations and regions, including the men in their families.

Listening in person to the individual sex life histories and stories as told by the 40 immigrant women I interviewed back then made me keenly aware of the very unique social contexts and circumstances surrounding their complex immigration journeys. Sexual violence, for example, as part of the migration experiences in some of these women’s lives (i.e., rape as a reason to migrate, rape as part of the immigration journeys, and/or rape as part of life in Los Angeles after settlement) made me think of the ways in which immigrant women have very specific needs as women who are migrants. I shared this and other concerns with the few activist men I coincided with back then in Los Angeles. I commented that community-based agencies were generously offering attention to immigrant women, but perhaps that was not enough and (in my utopian and naive imagination) special attention sponsored by the Mexican government was additionally needed for Mexican immigrant women. Some of these men expressed how much they cared about these issues, but they were concerned about what this might potentially do to their communities and families, for example, “poner a las mujeres en contra de los hombres y dividir a sus familias.” From these conversations, research I conducted later with men, and influential publications on gender and migration, I have learned that the labyrinths of inequality for both immigrant women and men are complex, frequently surrounded by intricate twists and turns, and fascinating contradictions and tensions. I have also learned that although patriarchy may be challenged and reorganized after migration and settlement, it does not vanish away.

More than 10 years have already passed. In the meantime, I have learned about the networks of allies working tirelessly to understand and help Mexican immigrant women who live in the United States, in person and the cyberspace, and on both sides of the border. During my visits in recent years to Mexico, I have also witnessed the visibility of a Mexican government sponsored institution addressing women’s issues on the Mexican side: el Instituto Nacional de las Mujeres. So, I have asked myself: Would the Mexican government ever consider creating an official, parallel institution in the United States, something like, the Instituto de Atención a las Mujeres Migrantes? Although Mexico as a nation is currently in deep pain while deciphering unprecedented crime and violence, and sexual violence is still a puzzle along the US-Mexico border and in the rest of Mexico, in my naivete, I keep wondering, y las mexicanas migrantes que vivimos en Estados Unidos, ¿cuándo?

[i]Women represent 46% of the estimated 12 million Mexican immigrants who live in the United States, according to the Consejo Nacional de Población, November 22, 2010, Migración y Salud: Inmigrantes mexicanas en Estados Unidos. Capítulo I: Características de las mujeres mexicanas adultas en Estados Unidos. http://www.conapo.gob.mx/

Comment

Mujeres Talk Moderator September 3, 2011 at 5:29 AM

carmen ramona ponce melendez wrote on February 10, 2011 11:48 pm

Estimada Gloria González. Es una utopía pensar que el gobierno de México se preocupe por la mujer migrante, mucho menos al grado de crear una Institución para esos efectos, lo que sucede con las mujeres migrantes de centroamerica que cruzan el país con destino a Estados Unidos le podrá dar una idea de lo poco que les importa este grave problema.Esa lucha la tendremos que dar las mujeres de aquí y de allá en forma organizaday posiblemente con ayuda de financieras internacionales, de este gobierno no se puede esperar nada, lamentablemente.