GENDER ROLES

Learn more about one of the precursors of the struggle for women's rights in Chile.

Today I don´t want to move far from our latitudes to share with you about an amazing Chilean woman, she was the first woman studying law. She should receive her class sitting behind a curtain because her presence was considered a huge distraction for her fellow men. She had to obey that order because if she didn´t, she could not study at the University of Chile.

Nowadays we can find many women studying without rules at any university in our country. Thus we want to recognize her contribution as a student leader, her fight for female suffrage among others.

This woman was the Chilean Elena Caffarena Morice  ( 1903-2003) an emblematic model of the feminist leaders that were at that time.

Elena Caffarena was a Chilean feminist leader who fought throughout her life to change the traditional view of women: limited to motherhood and housework.

She was born in Iquique, on March 23, 1903 when the saltpeter made the city shine. Daughter of Italian textile entrepreneur Blas Caffarena Chiozza, was the third of seven brothers. She studied Law at the University of  Chile and was one of the first women to participate in the Federation of Students of the University of Chile (FECH).

Elena, devoted her entire life to fighting for female emancipation. She defended the right of women to develop in a democratic society and with equal opportunities with men. She graduated as a lawyer in 1926, becoming one of the first 15 female jurists in the country.

In 1935 she founded the Movement for the Emancipation of Women in Chile (MEMCH), whose great contribution was to organize mobilizations of women in the struggle for their rights as workers, mothers and citizens.

She got in 1935 that the Chilean women voted in the municipal elections. However, it was only in 1949 that allowed female suffrage in the presidential elections.

She published the book “Capacity of the married woman in relation to her goods”, where she exposes some of her ideas that were very advanced for the time. By the 1980s, she was one of the founders of the Committee for the Defense of People's Rights (CODEPU).

Elena Caffarena died on July 19, 2003.

Today we all know her granddaughter, Pamela Jiles, famous journalist and writer who is the daughter of her son Juan Jiles Caffarena.

Her famous sentences:

"My studies of law convinced me of the legal inferiority of women."

“I am a feminist by a democratic vocation". 

Mona Lisa Smile - by Rosse Mary

This movie was released in 2003 and it was starring by Julia Roberts who is Kathernine Ann Watson, a history of art revolutionary teacher who decided to work in a very conservative ladies school in the beginning of the 50s decade, in order to leave her mark in her students. She has a very modern sense of the gender roles: she wants that her students enter to the University and not only be married women, that was the ideal concept of woman in those times. In acorder to her ideas, she tried to teach, through the art, there is a different way to think and people have to see more than the social rules say. Her ideas bring her a lot of problems with the school headmistress: Jocelyn Carr.

Contrary we think, this movie was made by men: it was directed by Mike Newell, was produced by Fredward Johanson and was wirten by Lawrence Konner and Mark Rosenthal, so, in my opinion, this work represents a double hit to the social gender roles rules itself. 

Elizabeth "Betty" Warren

This movie shows how a woman should be in the 50s: polite, submissive and economically dependent of her husband, therefore, Ms. Watson was a "bad influence" for the young students, because of her independence and her ideas. Also, the movie shows some signs of classism and the high society way of mind, it was reflected thought the Betty Warren's articles, that reported "inmoral practices" like the use of contraceptives and the "subversives ideas" of Miss Watson. But, to everyone's surprise, even Miss Watson, Betty became in the only student who decided to live her own life, after her failed marriage and the unhappiness that learned of her conservative rising, in spite of her mother: a classist and moralist woman.

Miss Katherine Ann Watson

In this century we can see that women are like Ms Watson: we can see that her ideas were accepted with the pass of years and we can admire a lot her revolution inside the ladies school, and we ask ourselves "why is she wrong?, why the headmistress can't open her mind to Ms Watson ideas?" The answer is because the stereotype of a woman was different: they "were born to be housewifes to their husbands's service and good mothers". It was politically correct, but now is a retrogade idea.

Unfortunately, Miss Watson could't achieve that Joan Brandwyn were a professional lawyer, because she decided to get married with her boyfriend and become a housewife. She said that, to the teacher, a housewife hadn't interest, personality and she sold her soul, but it was her decision, because she wanted to form a family more than to be professional. In that moment, Katherine understood that some women found the happiness in their own families and houses, with men that they loved, and it was meaningful too. She saw it wasn't only an archaic model to follow, but it represented the fullness for some women like Joan,

Giselle Levy

Finally, there was a character who, at first, felt a great admiration by the new teacher, because, like her, she was a different kind of woman, who hadn't feel fear to broke the social rules, but when she saw that the italian teacher was interested in Katherine, she felt envy, cause she had a relationship with him. She was Giselle Levy and her principal ability was to have some secret romances with different men, even if they were married. That's the reason why Betty decided to getting even with her when compared her as a "prostitute", only because Betty wasn't happy in her marriage. An important Betty's phrase about the Mona Lisa's smile says: "not everything is what it seems", because we will never know if the model of Da Vinci's painting was really happy or not, but she looks very happy and, to Betty's mother, appearances were more important than realities and feelings.

However, at the end of the movie, they became best friends and Betty decided to live with Gisselle and study laws in Yale, while Katherine refused to continue in the school to start a new life in Europe, after her failed relationship with the italian teacher and the obstacles that the institution impossed in her profession, for example, her study plan of a year had to be aproved by a special commission before its started, among other things.  

This movie shows us we can change the world, only if we have the courage and the different way of think to do it, although we could be women in the 50s and the world wasn't in our favor. Sometimes all we only need is a litlle space, to people listen our ideas and decided if we have the reason or not. The efforts of Katherine to shift every single conservative student in more than the stereotype were valuable for them, so she left her mark and, at the same time, started a social change that today is considered normal.

Medical technology advances - by Rosse - Mary

Hello everyone

I found this insteresting vídeo about new thecnology advances in medicine. For me, the most impressive was the nano-robots that can be used to cure Cancer. I invite you to watch and comment here. 

Australian history by Rosse Mary

• The beginning

European convicts sent to Australia.

In 19th century, the goverments of Britain decided to send their convicts to a continent who today is known like Australia, as a punishment to their crimes. Those criminals - mostly stealers - were sent in ships, like the "First fleet", and they were travelling a lot of months to fight for their freedom. The most of these criminals were Scotish, Irish and British, and they had to work hard to be pardomed. This price could have given in two forms: Absolute - that were a ticket to come back to their home - or Conditional - that was a big piece of land of their propiety to work and stablish in New Saouth Wales. 

With the pass of months, the passingers of the ships were felt hungry and they were showed another neededs, because the most of them were men, so then, in the middle ot the trip, near from Africa, some men started to find black women to satisfied their neededs and their children, whose father were white and their mother were black, started to be called "the Half-Caste". 

Aboriginal australians.

When Europeans arrived to Australia, after a lot of them died by hungry and other illness, they saw to Aboriginal people for the first time. Some of the white people strarted to kill them, but other ones strarted a paceful relationship, in order to have servants, but, at the same time, Europeans convicts always felt fear of this new kind of people and they saw them like a threat, but white people were still thinking in work hard on the fields to reach the forgiveness of the British Goverment or to set up in the new land.

• Social Darwinism

Australian stolen Generation.

However, once white settlers were established in Australia, they realized aboriginal women were paceful and they started to have children again, but those children were taken from their real mothers to be like their fathers and they were raised for white families. They started to deny their aboriginal heritage. Children started to be adopted by white and rich families who sent them to the school and started to teach the white modals and lifestyle. But, moreover, a lot of those children were victims of mistreatment, because of their origins - they didn't complete their education and were left or died of hungry and dangerous illness -. It produced the death of a big part of this generation and that was the reason why they were called "The stolen Generation".

In 2008, the Australian First Minister apologized for all the crimes commited agnaist the children of the Stolen Genaration and australian people created the "Sorry Day" in memory of them. Here is a vídeo that shows how some members of this generation were treated by white people, especifically the Val Linnow's testimony: Watch vídeo.

Everything started because white settlers believed - following the science of those times - that aboriginal people were weak and inferior than theirs. This way of thinking was called "Social darwinism2, because it was a misunderstanding of the Darwin's evolutionist Theory, and  that was the reason why they wanted to "protect" aborigins through an act , but it was a lie. Also white people started to move on the north of the continent in order to "escape" to aborigins, but they only had problems like alcoholism and drogadiction, so this false paradise was left.This social darwinism increased with the discovery of gold in Australia, and white people became racist, powerful and rich.

• The secret River

The australian writer Kate Grenville published, in 2005, "The secret river". This novel talks about a british family who was sent to Australia and learned how to live there. They also met aboriginal people and the book shows how the white settlers saw aborigins and how it chaged with the pass of months. This is explained in the next line that is talked about a black man was called Scabby Bill: "he was the same as the ants or the flies, a hazard of the place that had to be dealt with" (The secret river, page 91). Also we can see the social darwinism of those times in the next lines: "Men came from all the streets around, cheered to watch this black insect of a man capering before them, a prerson lower in the order of things even that they were" (The secret river, page 92). 

In adition, Stolen Generation survivers talked about their mistreatment in official documents that are in power of the Australian Goverment, like the one that was written by Gilbert, K, about the aboriginal people in special camps: there was like institution that were created by the Goverment in order to "educate" half-caste children as their European heritages. In the first part of the first Act - that was created to "protect" aboriginal people - says "The thing was, it wasn't good to see these little parts of breed running around the black camps because you didn't know who to blame...So they came out with all these sincerest motices, you know...to give these poor little devlis a chance in life". (Introduction to Australian history, page 113).

In these days, although the mistreatment and the social darwinism aparently have gone, people still think that some aboriginal people - not only in Australia, but in others parts of our world, too - are weak and inferior than white European or their descendents from the West side of the world and the duty of white people is "protect them", but they survived a lot of centuries before that European settlers arrived to Australia or America and they didn't need any help. Another case like the Australian is the Mapuche in Chile, because white people (who are mostly part of the Half-caste) look them in a bad way and, by another hand, the chilean Goverment creates documents in favor of them, but, there are only apparience, because mapuche people are still suffering injustices and discrimination. I really ask why this is happening in the 21st Century; why are we following the wrong Social Darwinism? I let you this question to create a debate.

I hope you like this post. Thank you for reading.

The Stolen Generation:

Those who weren´t recognized as heroes or braves.

We all know Australia of today, few knew about the suffering of  people who lived there .

Did you know that happen in Australia between 1910-1970?

Indigenous children born to white fathers and black mothers called Half Caste.   They were taken from the side of their families, forced to deny their indigenous heritage.

They were deceived, saying that their  parents had died or  they had abandoned them.

They were forbidden to speak their original language. They were abused, punished, suffered hunger and cold in government institutions, received the minimum level of education.

These children suffered posttraumatic stress, depression, abandonment, no love, some could not resist and ended their lives ... nobody ever called heroes.

Today I honor them and say thank you for contributing to such a high consolidation and the growth of Australia.

Soon, we´ll be publishing more extensively on the history of this country, but it seems fair to start with them, who paid the highest cost in the history of this great nation.

Catalina's Django Unchained Recommendation

Cato Level 9October 18, 2016 at 3:45 PM

In our last class we discussed about the film Quentin Tarantino, Django-unchained. A very shocking story very Tarantino style, developed in the United States in 1858, two years before the Civi War.
This is a kind of revenge against slavery and racism. I tell you a little, without going into deeper analysis because you must see the entire movie.

Django, a Southern slave who join to a german dentist Mr. Schultz to hunt the murderers Brittle brothers, in exchange for his release.
When they do, they continue their way together, and Django sets out to find his wife Broomhilda. Following the clues , they reach 'Candyland', where Monsieur Candie lives and retain slaves and train them to fight among themselves. Mr. Schultz and Django must infiltrate and escape with the wife of Django. You can´t loose the awful and amazing details and plot of this movie.

The story wanders through stormy situations experienced by the protagonists, witnessing injustice and contempt for human life and a sight of the horrors of the Ku Klux clan.
No doubt for me the most important character in the film is Django, his evolution is surprising since the calm of the first scenes to his rawness and vindictive force at the end.
However, the role of the negligibly charming Monsieur Candie is magnificent( played by , Di Caprio).
Magistral contradiction shown in the act of the dentist who uses a slave to achieve his goal , although He declares himsef icontrary to slavery, finally he kills Monsieur Candie sickened by his actions.
Commentary aside for Stephen, the black butler of Monsieur Candie, who despised blacks and had no mercy with them .

This man acted like a “white father “ with his employer, he was invested with full power to manage, punish and kill the slaves . He defends his boss with his life
Finally he dies in the hands of Django exactly as it deserved.
If you agree we can share our comments here, when all of us, must-have seen this movie.
I did my best to hook you!

"Django Unchained". Analysis and reflection by Rosse - Mary Gallardo

I could say a lot of things about this movie, for example, I could say that its special effects were made perfectly, or that it has a powerful message, hide behind its violence, but it´s very common, so I want to put my focous on some characters, curiousities and negative consequences that Tarantino saw after the movie was realized.

1. About the characters 

I think, in general the most of the characters were well realized, everyone had a shocking role and created a surprised feeling to the audience, but there are some that called my attention: 

• Django: He was bought for the German Dentist Dr Shultz and worked with him to kill some people who were wanted by the police in Texas. The life of this ex-slave was changed forever, because he learned how to kill and it was useful to gain the society respect. However, his thrist of vengance went himself to lose the control, in spite of his good intentions. This default of his personality was about to take himself to the slavery again, after Django killed a lot of Mr, Candie´s employees.
• Dr King Shultz: At the beginning of the movie, this German humpty hunter appeared like a kind of hero who was worried about the slavery or the justice, but he was looking for Django to kill the Britlle brothers, who were Carrucan Plantation workers. In spite his interests, he started to feel admiration for Django when he saw that he was like Sigfried, a famous legendary german character, who did everything to rescue Broomhilda, the princess, and this is the reasson why he was a good man, after all.
• Stephen: He was, in my opinion, the most shocking character, because he had a bad treatment to black slaves, although he was a black employee too. I think, like we saw last class, it is because he had a power possition with some priviliges and a lot of years of Candie´s family service.

2. Tarantino talked about his movie

In relation to the first point, Quentin Tarantino did an interview where he talked about all his characteers to "Django unchained" and the perception of the actors. This was posted on Youtube in July of 2013 (watch interview),

3. Quentin Tarantino recieved bad critics

Quentin Tarantino, diffused by Radio Demente.cl

After "Django unchained" were realized, there was a very strong polemic agnaist Tarantino from afroamerican people, who said he used too much the derogatory word "niger" in this movie and "The hateful Eight" (2015), in comparison with the bad word to refering white people. They called people don´t watch Tarantino´s movies, because he was "racist", but the director didn´t feel so much worried about it. This fact was published by The Guardian in 2015, here is the piece of news.

4. Conclusion

As all Tarantino´s movies, this production is very violent, but, at the same time, is very beautiful and metaphoric in some camera shots, like the example with the "white blood" in the cotton field, and the Django´s mission to save his wife and the rest of slaves, killing their owners. 

But I think the most beautiful part of the movie was when Dr Shultz was talking about the German Broomhilda´s legend to Django and he comparised him with a brave hero. That link with literature was very interesting and emotional for me, because it was the first time that Djanjo felt valious and important, and that comparison was decisive to Shultz and the movie in general. 

As final words, I want to say that is a mistake to make a judgue about a director like Tarantino only bassed in the violence or the languague uses, but we have to see the philosophical message there is behind that violence. 

I hope you like this post!

Extra material: This is the movie I talked our last classs. It´s about a black free man that was taken as a slave for twelve years under a trick. It´s called "12 years a slave" and it´s very shocking, because it shows how black slavers were treated in the cotton fields. This is the official trailer and I hope you like it:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Pou85VFf2zQ