Feminist Border Thought Elena Ruiz-Aho In Larin America, one of chc ways in which Amerindian and mmizo (mixed-race) peoples have come 10 experience themselves as marginalized, boch in cheir concrece public dealings and in history, concerns rhe ways in which the incerprecive traditions of cheir indigenous communicies have been coveted-over and forced into concealment by European colonialism. In chis cegard, one of rhe greaces1 impacts of coloniution has been a sense of inarticulacy (or discucsive lirnir.irion) due co the loss of prior social concexcs and rhe imcrprccive alternatives chey made possible, particu larly with regard ro conceptions of selthood and culcural identity. This is especially important given chat, as colonialism incroduced new gendered, ethnic, and racial categories not native to Mesoamerica (Quijano and Walletstein 1992; Quijano 2000; Lugones 2007), it simulr.ineously instituted exclusionary practices on che basis of chose cateBorics. The need to theorize identity based on new social, historical, and episcemk realities chus marks the surting point of Latin American social and cultural theory in general (Samuento 1946; Vasconcelos 1948; Zea 1953; Paz 1961; Mariategui 1971: Kusch 1973: R.ernmar 1974). In the 1980s, the emergence of neoliberal economic policies. hyperinAacion, increased migration of Latin Americans into the U.S .. along wich rhe shifting paradigms of globa lization, multed in a need co develop cultural analyses chat took these new circumscances inco account. The discoutse of 'hybridiry' came into being as a way co theorize the complex constellation of these factots in Latin American culture (Canclini 1995 [1989)). More specifically, che cenn was originally used by Argentine-born culrural anthropologist Nestor Garcia Canclini as an explanatory paradigm for social processes and identity fonnations in Latin American culture chac rcAected 'more modem forms of cross-cultural contact' than chc racial mixture of European colonizacion (thereby absorbing the older paradigms of 'mestizaje' or cultural 'syncretism' within hybrid discoucses) (Canclini t 995: x:xxii). More recently, however, the discoucses of modcmiry chat gave rise co models of hybridiry in the social sciences and the hyphenated. cransnarional identities they helped theorize have once again undergone significant shifts. As Linda Marrin Alcoff and Mariana Ortega argue in Comtnictirrg Tht Na1io11 (2009), in the rwenty-fitst century, the posc-9/ 11 geopoljcical realignment of ethnic territories and the rhetorical conscn1ction of national idenciry based on the concept of 'homelands' have brought new issues into the mix (t 12). Among chese are the pressing concerns of racial prejudice, anti-immigrant sentiment, and the privileging of idenriries 350 Feminist Border Thought based on cultural and hngmsoc assan11.b11on into the donunam North Amencan, U.S culture As a ~ult of dus shift, soci•l and poh11cal life becomes chnactented by the ocd1wo11 of difference in the name of absnact umverub like freedom. Steadfasrness and unity, rather than the inclusion of plural, mulocultural 1dennucs and social pcrspccuves (Anzaldua 2009b: 308). One place chis tension is particularly visible, moreover, is at the borderland region.s between the U.S. and Mex.ico (Gracia 2010). Given these developmencs, 1t 1s not 1urprising that in recem ye~rs a new turn has also taken place in l4tm Amencan social theory, this rime towards ptmamitnto fro111trizo , or 'bordtr thought'. Border dunking can be very br<»dly undemood as a soc10-pohucal perspecuve or organmng concept around which complex namtives of d1spbcemem associated with muluethmc 1denmy, migratory life, and muluculrural citizenship an be theonzed It not only emerges from aadenuc discounes of formally tramed social sc1enmcs but from the cultural and amsoc producnon of mulncultural women of color, as weU as from ' the critical reflections of (undocumented) inunigrancs, migrantS, bracero/a workers, refugees, campesmos, women, and children on the major scructurcs of dominance of our ttmes' (Saldivar 2006: 152). In this chapter I wtll mtroduce this emerging field of research by way of the borderland theories of 'U.S. Third-World feminists' (Anzaldua and Morag:i 1981; Sandoval 1991), or what l oil 'fenumst border thought' (pm!amimro fenttnzo fe111niJta) I do so, both as a way ro cast emphasis on the complex antersccnora of race, gender, and ethn1ciry that arc so central to contemporary discourses of c1u~enship and rhetoncal comcructions of 112tional idenuty. as wdl as to shed bght on the remarkable reach of tnfluence border ferrun1srra are expenencing across a broad range of disciplines today. Although she is by no means the sole or even pnncipal architecl of this field, the work of Gloria Anzaldua (19422004) stands out in paruculu for its widespread cnucal acclaim and uncrdisciplinary receplton . For this reason. tt will serve as the primary example in thu chapter. Border Thought vs Border Feminisms It is important to d1ffercnua1e Anzaldua's fenunist border thought from Walter M1gnolo's influenual analysis of the 'modem/colonial world system' as producing new fonns of knowledge that cnll for 'border clunking' or 'border gnosu' (2000: 9. 11). Although not mutually exclusive to each other (Mignolo, for example, often draws on Anzaldua's work to help dismantle Eurocentric knowledges or practices), the two branches of thought are informed by different imeUectual traditions and by different methodological approaches to the problem of coloruzauon While both can be seen as pursuing a 'decoloruztng' agenda, Mignolo's program IS pnmartly resporaive to the problem of Eurocemrism in modem thought, as well as to lacunae left in Anglophone postcolomal theory (or occidental thought) with respect to Lmn Amenca (Said 1978). For chIS reason, M1gnolo advances a fonn of. what he calls, 'posr-occidenral reason' (2000: 91) w11h rhc basic aun of 'decencering theoretical pracnces' through 'the politics of geoh.istorical locations', meaning by taking into account the specificities of regions (hke unn America and the C:anbbean) that, due to European colomahsm, are historically marked by a convergence of knowledge/power systems at all levels of culture (107; Foucault 1980). Because modem capitalism has only intensified the rclauons set up by colonialism. the goal, for Mignolo, is ro produce a more pcrspcctival standpoint epistemology (or 'pluntop1cal hermcneuucs1 based on one's posmon outside, or at the border of, what the Peruvian sociologiSt Anibal Qu1pno calls 'the modem/ colonial world system' (Qu1pno and Wallentem 1992; M1gnolo 2003 [1995).11, 2000: 52). Although dynamic 1n 1cs range and pluralized through 1cs use of Qu1J3no's notion of 'the colo111al difference', the primary model by which Mignolo 351 Elena Ruiz-Aho under:swids 'border t.hought' remains rooted in the conceptual &.mework of world-system analysis (2000: 18, 2006; WaUcrstem 1974; W.Ucrstein and Hopkinsl982). Through groundbreaking empirical research programs on MesoameriC2n literary practices and subaltern knowledges (Mignolo 2003 {1995)). Migriolo's project can thus be seen as an applied effort towards epistemjc decoloniunon, one tlut is merhodologically gl'OUnded on the peripheral locations of marginalized social actors and world-views. In thu mpect, it is a scholarly effort to bnng the anti-colonial thcoreuc:al succ~s of South Asian Sub2ltem Studies to utin Amerie> (sec Rodriguez 2001). By contrast. fenurust border thought ongi.iuted in MeXJcan-American (or Ch1e>no/>) involvement in the U .S. prõssive social movements of the 1960s (Sandoval 1980, ~gura and Pasquera 1992; Gracia 1997; Hurtado 1998), has strong roots in social activmn, and is primarily concerned wnh amculating the complex workings of intersectional oppressions such as race, class, gender, and ethnicity on w omen of color. Unlike thctr counterparts in the Anglophone feminist movement or the African-Amcrie>n ovtl nghts movement, the dilfctence bes an tlm Clucan.as' identmcs were inscnbcd wuh added layers of differences that further marginah:ted rhem Wtthin these movements, and an SOCJcry at ~ Th= included their legal or irrtrnigration sutus, indigenous heritage. spiritual practice, o r language (whether Jt was heavily accented English, Spanish, Spanglish. Tex-Mex, or a hybrid of aU these infused with indigenous dialect!}. Because of these layered dilfercnccs, Chicanas not only faced class and raced-based discriminauon, but also suffered a conunual erasure or muting of their voices, rcgardlc:s1 of wluch group Klcnoocs and al!ifuuons they attempted to Org2ntZC around. Even in their own corrununiues, where SCXJSt, patemahsl. and maclusuc amrudes prevailed, their status as women or lesbians threatened their ability to feel fully integrated o r 'at home' 111 any one place. For these reasons border feminum emerged out of a particular social context favorable to the development of what W .E.B. Du Bois called 'double consciousness' (1983 (1903]). only in their case it was a tripled, even quadrupled (or in Anuldua's case, as C hicana lesbian woman of color \vith a disability, quintupled) consciousness-1 Chie>na writers' positionality 111 multiple cultural and social realities enabled them to shili pcnpcctivcs more easily and to ground their methodologies on destabilizing pr.octiccs, that is to say. by pcrsisiently 'finding abscn= and exclusions and atguing from that standpoint' (Hurtado 1998: 135). But C hicanas' multiple perspecti ves also meant that their lived-expenenccs were particularly difficult 10 theorize, as they often fell o utside the dominant cultural constructions ofselfhood or normative idcnuty In this regard, through their bndmark anthology. *n1iJ Bridgt Ca/led My &tk: Writings by Radita/ Womtn of Cc/or (1981), Glona Anuldua and Cherne Moragã uking steps towards a more robust aniculauon of the unique expcnences that ansc out of multiculrural ltfe, and to develop contcxt-d•pcndcnt ucucs for successful cop111g 1n the absence of social, insmuuonal. and culrural inclusion. In its wake. border feminists bcg2n not one, but a series of conversations and overlappitig political, literary, scholarly, and anastic movements that together conS1itute Chie>na literary, academic, and artistic production since the 1980s. (~e Morag:a 1983; Anzaldua 1987; A.larcon 1990; Hurtado 1996; Gracia 1997; Sandoval 2000; Saldivar-HuU 2000; Cantu and Najiera-R.amire:t 2002.) Arguably. the most significant publication to ansc from this vibrant culrural producuon has been Gloru Anzaldiia's &rdnla11d1/U. Fromtra (1987). Confronting Contradictions: Anzaldua's Borderlands/ La Frontera According to Anzaldua, postcolonial life in general, and borderl2nd life in panicular, 19ve nsc to a unique set of contradictory cultuta l experiences that result from inhab1ung muluple yet confltcting frames of reference. In her m0st celebrated work. 8ordala11d1 II.A Frotlltra (1987) Anzaldua gives a first-hand account of how being *a border woman* can result 1n heavy cosu. 3S2 Feminist Border Thought boch co ones sense of self and policical agency, as chc experience of bcmg caughc beiween mukiple cuhural nonns •nd s1>ndards (or *worlds1 makes it very difficult to effectively address che numerous oppressions chat affect one's life. For Anuldua, borderlands cxisc 'whenever iwo or more cultures edge each other. where people of different races occupy the same territory' (1987: preface). However, because she uses this tenn in rwo ways that often overlap, chey arc easily and often confused . On her account. bordetiands are concrete, geospatial, cultural, and political fom>ations chat define cemtories. such as rhe physical border sep•rarmg the United Smes and Mexico. But in a wider sense, they arc •lso psychic spaces that develop out of an experience of exclusion or marginality, rrom being oucside a cultural norm or dominant cultur:il fonnation. A borderland 1s, on this alternate use of rhc teml, 'a vague and undetemt.ined place created by the emotional residue of an ummural boundary' chat is constantly changing due co challenges from both sides of the exclusion (25).2 As a psychological state. the experience of borderlands 1s endemic to what she calls 'los atnvcsados.' as in chose who continually 'cross-over' or transgress the boundanes of proscribed nomtative identities m culture, hke gays and lesbians or che iUegal alien. Because this category can apply to such a wide r:ingc of soci•I groups and actors across culmrc-s, including those unaffeeted by the markers of race or ethruciry. it should not be lost that Anzaldua's fomiulation of the borderlands arises out a specific need co theorize the complex experiences of women of color living in the wake of Spanish coloniution. Thus, as Anzaldua describes, 'to live in the Borderlands means you arc neither hispmUJ i11dia 1~ta espaiiolo 11i gabatlta, nts matiza, nwlata, half-breed caught in the crossfire between e>rnps/ while carrymg aU five races on your back' an image of which she is painfully renunded by living at che edge of the U .S.Mexico border (216). le is through this context-specific lens that she wrires &rdm11nds. &nfrrlands IS a hybnd text, a 'mos:iic' of genres (poerry, history, testimony, creative nonfiction) chat, in i<S polyphonic scnicture, is also an illusion towards the assumptions of a unified, stable self char Anzaldua tries to dismantle throughout her writings. Commually shifting in and out of English. Spanish, and Nahuatl (• nar1vc Amenndian language), she begins by tracing the history of rhe southwestern United Sates and the creation of the C hicano people as an artificial political category rooted in imperialism •nd social prejudice. The 1848 Treary of Guadalupe Hidalgo that ended U.S. occupanon of Mexican temtories, for example, resulted m more than the loss of over h•lf of Mexico's lands (through the ann.exation of what is now Texas, Arizoita, New Mexico, Colorado, and Oihfomia); beyond the loss of physical temins, it lcfi Mexicans and indigenous peoples residing in these areas (now Mexican-Americans, or 'Chicanos') with a government, national language, and culture that was not their own (289). Because thi$ is a general outcome whenever political borders are redrawn, Anzaldua is careful to also chromcle the racial rhetoric and discursive strategies used in the jusaficaaon of western expansion in the U.S. (2835) . As Anzaldu• •rgues, the history of Chicano cultur:il identity is further complicated by the fact that this politico! remapping of homelands was not • fine, but second conquest. It followed sixteenth-cenrury Spanish coloniuuon of Meso•mencan Azdan, out of which the new racial mixmrc of lndi•n and Spanish blood, the mestizo, or 111exiroi10, was cre•ted (27) . Because, as earlier suggested, Spanish colonialism introduced new categories of racial purity and hierarchical social systems based on these categori~. Chic.nos faced the difficult expenence of being m ulticult-ural in a social context where certain aspecrs of one's Ldenticy were seen as inferior, not only in relation to Spanish, but now also Anglo-American cultural nomis and standards: Cradled in one culture, sandwiched beiwcen rwo cultures, straddling all three cultures and their value systems. la 111es1iza undergoes a struggle of Aesh, a struggle of borders, an inner war. Like all people, we perceive the version of reahry chat our culture commurucates. Like 353 Elena Ruiz-Aho others having or living in more than one culture, we get multiple, often opposing messages. The coming together of two self-consistent but habitually incompatible frames of reference can= 1111 thoqut. a cultural coUision (100). This mulricultura 1 'struggle of borders' is especially pernicious for women given chat colonization \V<tS also 'a twofold process of r.acial infeioriution and gender subordination' (Oyewumc 1997: 124}, a type of double oppression that has. histonc•lly. been neglected in favor of nationalpopu list constructions of the oppressed subject (•s in the collecrivity. el pueblo) in anti-colon ial movements (Schutte 1993). Gender, in this regard, adds a umque layer of episcemic violence or oppression multicultural subjects such as Anzaldua face, so that 'alienated from her mother culrure. •lien in the dominant cu lture, the woman of color docs not feel safe within the inner life of her Sdf (1987: 42). Because the dominint Western philosophic and humanist paradigms for understanding self. hood in the modem era have relied on a conception of the self that is unified . stable, coherent , and whose inner working. as a rational mind can be made uansparem chrough imrospcctive reflexivity, subjects whose lived-experience is struetured by Aux, change, and cultural discontinu ity have a. sense of selfhood that docs not map on to, or 'feel safe' within these dominant framework$. In f:ict, the multJculrural subject herself feels muted by these frameworks because they do nol acoount for her sense of ruptured subjectivity that comes as a result of being stradclled in multipe, yet asymmetrically valued cultural contexts (such as the Anglo, che Mexican, and the Indigenous). It is this constant clash of differently-positioned cultural nomu tha< make lived-experience painful for postcolonial subjects because one is never fully able to engage tacitly or pre-reflectively with one's own worldly context, having to stop frequently co negoti.ue the various ~al standards encoumered though everyday activities (Ortega 2001). Moreover, this loss of namtive continuity in the experience of selfhood means chat, to maneuver in d iffe rent cultural contexts (whether successfully o r not) one often has to frequently shift states, thus suffering from a form of 'psychic restlessness' (78) or psychological exertion. In this regard, the e:xperience of being multicultu ral in lhe sense described here is homologous co border-li ne states of consciousness. where one is neither neatly situated in o ne state nor che other, but rather finds oneself 'cught between Ion i11i.rs1iriof, the spaces berween the different worlds' one is forced to inhabit due to legacies of conquest and imperialism (42). The problem, from a political perspective, is that this ne w hybrid, multicultural self has the added burden of reconciling different strands of one's identity at the same ume she u forced to address pressing issues of oppression and social violence, which generally require one to speak, make claims, or advocate for particular incerestS or on a group's behalf. To put it simply. in comexa of donunation, 'we need to voice our needs' (Anzaldua 1987: 107). This is particularly difficult, as Anzaldua herself suggests, if one's voice is constantly under erasure, or if the normative categories in which social and political demands are publicly anicu lated do not accommodate ceruin realities or expenences of oppression. The cask, then, 1s to produce bodies of work that can speak to the compkx, multiplicitous experiences that emerge from borderland li fe, forming what Cherrie Moraga aptly calls a 'theory in the Resh* (198 l: 23). This theme o f fmding (or creating new) resources of expression for giving voice to lived-experience nons through all of An2aldua's writings. whether it takes the fonn of phenomenological descriptions, fictional narratives. children's stories, poetry, drawings, or theoretical construccs: 354 We need teorlns that will enable us to interpret what happens in the world . Necesitamos teorias that will rewrite history using race, class, gender, and ethnicity as Cltegones of analysis, Feminist Border Thought theories thac cross borders, blur bound.mes .. . And we need pr.>cncal appltemons for tho"' theories. We need to de-acade1nize theory and to connect community to the academy. (A11zalrl1la 1990: xx11) To this end, many of the concepts used to rethink difference and identity in &rderla11ds have had a profound impact on comcmporary feminism and gender studies, as well •S in applied contexts of coalition work and grassroois orgamzing (Saldivar-Hull 2000, 2006; Alarcon 2002; CastJlo and Cordoba 2002: Gonzalez 2003; Oarcinsk1 and Kalia 2005: Segura and Zavclla 2008; Falcon 2008; Olackwell 20 10). The first of theS<: is the notion of the 'New Mesttza,' which, simply put, foml>lly posus a need for new concepnons of gender and race (mtstizaje) that can accommodate the unique lived experience of 111ulticultu1al, postcolomal subjects like Anzald(1a . Thus, in her view, 'the """ mestizo is a liminal subJ<et '"ho lives in the borderbnds between cultures, races, languages. and genders' but is not totally incapacitated or silenced by this complex positioning: 'm this scatc of in-bccween-ness' the new 1nesciza can also 'mediate, translate, negotiale, :md navigace these different locations' (Anzaldua 2009b: 209). Although the force of th!! concept seems to be merely descnptive, 1t rests on the insight t~at social and political liberation will require the prepamory act of visualizmg that liberation, of concretely conceiving the possibilities for transfom 1ing 'Llving in the Oorderlands from a nightmare into a numinous experience' (Anzaldua 1987: 73). This is important because the barriers that stand in the way of such liberation are often significant when considering the historical contexts in which borderland women of color theorize. Anzaldua. for example, is very aware that in order to decolonize, the postcolonial subject is faced with the dau nting ta<k of mobilizing projects of liberation against Anglo-Eurocentric and colonial thinking using the very language which originally constrained one a problem which has been powerfuUy amcula<ed by Audre Lorde's concern of whether 'the mascer's tools' can ever 'dismantle the master'< house' (1981: 98). One possible remedy, as A nzaldua S<:es it, is to try and decolonize the tools and cau:gories by which one comes to understand and describe one's livcd-c><perience in the first place. Anzaldua pursues this strategy but with a heavy e mphasis on still being able to communicate with the dominant culture in order 10 voice one's needs. as well as 10 build bridges and pathways for solidariry with other margultlized groups 2nd soci21 acrors. In this sense. a powerful strategy for postcolo nial 'theorists-of-color' is to formulate 'marginal theories that are partially outside and partially inside the Wesccm frame of reference' (Anzaldua 1990: xxvi). Anzaldua contributes to this effort by crc2rively depl<>ying prc-Colomb12n, indigenous thought and imagery at the same time that she pursues social and political projects rooted in the liberal, Western-democratic frameworks o f inc1usion, social justice. freedom, and emancipacion. It is in the service of this libcraaonal, inclusive, mtstizn poJ;cics that Anzaldua fonnubtcs several of her most important theones. Alongside the 'New Mesciza', these concepts include 'autohistoria-teoria'. 'El Mundo Zurdo', 'Nepantili.sm' (or 'Nepamla'), 'mestiza consciousness', the 'Cuatlicue state', 'u Facultad'. the 'Coyol.xauhqui impcrarive', 'conocinurnto'. and, in her later writings. 'Nos/Otras'. 'sp11imal activism', and 'new tribalism'. Although many of these cheo1ies arc interrelated, they have often been received in ways th•t do not reflect this linkage (Keating 2006) . Thus. with<>ut S<:venng them &om one another, two of the rn05t mfluenrial concepts to come out of &rrltrla11ds (along with the 'New Mestiz.1') are ' nepanda' and 'mesriza consclousness'. The word 11epa111/a 1s a Nahuatl word signifying a type of process or acriviry rhat p2bces things berween categories, 3 type of 'middling' or ' thirding' quality that rests on native 355 Elena Ruiz-Aho Mesoamerican principles of ambiguity, reciprocity, and change (Maffie 2007). Anzaldua uses the term 'mental nepondism' to descnbe the sense of being caught in between cultures rather than widun them (1987: 100). Hencefonh, she uses 'nepantb' to 'theorize limin:ility' an such a way that she IS able 'to shift &om one world to another' wnh a bit more case (2009d: 248). Through 'nep•ntla ', old epistCnt.K: &amcworh arc called into qucsuon, pamcubtly those thu depend on exclu11onary dualisms for the construction of identity, and which make thinking about being 'middled' or sin1ultanwusly situated m mul11ple cultural reahucs very difficult. This is related to whar Anzaldua alls 'mcsnza consciousnm' (1987: 102). In Anzaldua's view. ' uprooti ng dualistic thinking' (80) IS one of the most impo rtant tasks of mestiza consciousness, especially for removing some of the harmful weight of Anglo-Eurocentric thought and social pncnces on the hvcs of postcolonial women. Take the experience of gender, for example. In A 11dt1t1 Maya Cemlt r ldwriry a11d R tlar10111, Kuen Oassie-Swect describes how, 'in the male/female principle, a human being was conS1dettd to be both male :tnd female, wtth the nght side of 1he body nulc md the left side female' a concept which can be found throughout Mesoamenca and in Uto-Aitecan cu Ito res such as che Hop• Indians (2002: 169; Williams 1986; Allen 1992). This is conunuous with anchropological accounts of balanced opposioons and rcoprocal dualisms in pre-Columbian thoughc (Mallie 2007) . Now, consider Anzaldua's asscmon chat 'what we •re suffenng from is an absoluce despoc duality that says we arc able co be only one or the other.' en.her male or female but no< both (1987: 41 ). As a lesbian woman , when growing up, Anzaldua suffered deep prcJudiccs and al1enauon form her own community on accounc ofhcr sexuality. 'The people ofHargill. in south Texas,' she comments, 'believed that if you were a lesbian, you were • womon for six monchs of che yea r and had periods, and for the ocher six monchs, you were a man and had a penis' (Anzaldua 2009c: 90). It would seem to be the case chat, given the apparent continuation and resilience of (ar least some aspecu of) the male/female principle, so-called 'half and ha!&' would not be nonnauvcly devalued to the extent chat Anzaldua recounts. But w hen we recall that European colonialism imported a system of exclusionary logic (which would include the laws of identity and non contnd1cuon) that was rcinforced through. among other chings, gendered articles (in Spon1$h) and sub)Cct-prcdicate grammar, we see that for beings caught 'between and betwlXt' these categones, the resources of expression necessary co dcscnbe and do JUSUCc to such experience arc no longer at arm's length. lnscead, due to the logical rules built into the language wt use to describe cxpcnence, whac falu oumde chcsc caregones or cinnot be assmulaced chrough them becomes devalued as Ocher. as ouu1de the norm. Thus, we sec here a v1v1d example of the internal clash es, che 'choque' Anzaldua talks about when rcftmng to che muluple, but osymtntric4.I contexts of reference borderland subjects must inhabit, ond which often lead co experiences of being 'an outsider' at multiple levels ofbei.ng 'always the ouuide of the our.1ide of the outside' (A112<1ldc1a 2009c: 90). • Mesu u conM'.1ousn css' o n, in this respect, be a powertul tool of analysis for thinking through the 'subject-ObJect dualisms' that keep the rnestiza woman of color 'a pnsoner' w1th regard to possibilities for underst:inding and conceptualizing idencity (Anzaldua 1987: 102). Finally. the cnoasms that have anscn 1n rc<p<>nse co &nlolondJ center on possibl• esscnwbnng cendencies of border women's experiences and Anzaldua 's ideahttd renditions of pre-Colombian, indigenous de1t1es (Yu bro-Bejanno 1994) With regard to the latter, in the absence of a chick backgsound of pre-conqutst AnlCnndian cultural riorms and pncticcs to sitwte native Nahunl conceprs 1n more appropnate, contCJtt-dependcnt ways. Anzaldua makes strategic u"' of indigenous images and metophors: m this way she combau what she scoes as marginalizing and oppressive AngloEuropean cultural practices. and can be read as •n oxample of what Spivak calls 'scracegic 356 Feminist Border Thought csscnu•lasm' (Anzald1h 1987: 205). The rcwurces of el<pre1S10n •~11.blc to postcolonul women of color Like Anuldw mw therefore be coruidered in the comcxt of the 'cxmordinary possi!Nhtits wiped out by' colonialism (CCuire 2000: 43). Winh regard to the charge of essencialmng expencnce, although Anzaldua. by her own accoum, ancmpcs to theorizt 'the unanlculated dimensions of !he experience of mcstizas living in between o verlapping and layered spaces of different cultures' (2000: 176). she insists tlm her methodology 1s grounded in the phenomenological rnsights of her own concrcre, boduy livedexpttience (AnzaldU. 2002). In this sense, she limits her discourse by producing ~ivid dcscripoons of everyday lafe and complex expenence which ocher mescizas may (or may not) relate co; m ellher case. what she offers the mes1tu 1s a new vuion for undemanding her idcntiry as plural and muhipbcitous, wluk also postulatlllg concrete $1Iatcgits for building htt own pathways for change. Future Directions: Conclu.sion At the moment, Anzalduan cultural theory is experiencing a surge in interest across a w ide array of fields. These range from w ellknown areas of influence such as Chicano, fenunisr. LGBT, and ethnic studies, where her works have been included in over 100 anthologies (Keaung 2006), to now (more general) areas such as political science (Burke 1999), anchropology (Behar 1993). social psychology (Ayala •nd Torre 2009), sociology (Lamont and MobUr 2002; Mamncz 2005). phlloiophy (Oñ 2001. 2008). and rheology (Gram 2010), co name only a few. One particular dcvelopmg topic chat IS of interest for social scicntlSts 1n genera I is the use of Anzaldua 's theones of mulnplic1tous subJecuvn:y and muluerhnic cultural identity to recast nouons of cosmopolitanism and (Will Kynilicka's notion of) muh.icultural citizenship (Burke1999, 2004). As a leading figure in what I have here called pt1ua111ie1110 fro11tcri20 feminista, or feminist border thought, Anzaldua's influence on contemporary discourses of culru~ diversity, citizenship srudics, identity politics, and minority studies should grow even further in the coming years. pamcularly on account of the posr-9/11 hmorical realities facmg ethnic groups and inunigrants in the U.S. and abroad. As 1t does, one should keep in mind both the specific conrcxt m which her theones emerged as wcU as the lamced network of Clucana and Latina feminimu that helped miuate, susuin, and disseminate the discourse of'borderlands' chat her worlt (along wtth Mignolo's) is now beginning to make mamstteam. The danger, 11 should be noted, 1s in abstracting the border-crossing experience of the mcsti2a the point of covering over the differences marked by iis specificiry and o riginal context o f use {Yatbro-Bcjarano 1994). If one keeps this in mind, it 1s possible to see how 'Anzaldua 's theories have much to offer social scientists especially ~ scholars interested in combuung cutting-edge theory with social JUSricc' (Keating 2006: 7). As a socio-poliocal theory rlur amculatcs the bonien towards mclustvenesl and recognition of cultural cWferencC1 in muloethruc soc1caes, femirust border thouglit can be seen as an emerging JW2digm for uncktsunding and revwng disaplmary discussions that ccmcr on idcnriry-bascd istucs such as class. race, gender, and ethmciry. as well as for forrnulaung new mcthods of cultural analysis that can respond to the complex needs of cultu~ and ethnic mmonucs m multicultural democracies. Notes I Along wuh sulfering &om diabetes and life-long chronic pain, Anzaldua was also bom wuh a r.arc honnonal 1mbabnce <hat resulted on 'precocious menses,' or the onset of pub<rty at die age of sue. H<r lint p<nod wos ii only 3 months of• (Anzald.U 2000: 34). 2 One way to spot die difference is by noung the case uS<d 1n the word. whether it is a cap1al 'B' or lower CJS< 'b'. W11h vcy few exccpCJOns, the lo""'r-a« .-cõ to the physial sate of• geographic borderbnd. while the other co1Tesponds to the psycluc domam. 357 Elena Ruiz-Aho References Alarcbn, N . (1990) 'Chicana Feminism: In 1he Trocks o( "1he" Nanve Woman*. C11lturnl S1111l1N, 4(3): 248-SS -(2002)'Anz.alckh's Frootcn: lnscnbtng Cyneucs, in A Alchma and N . Qwiioncz (eds) o.r..i..."" v.,;,..,, a.,..,,. and 011tn110 C11/111rol S111dits ;,, tltt 21Jt Cnw1ry, Bloomington, IN: lndi.in• Uruversny p.....,, 113-26. Alcoff. L.M. and Oneg:a, M. (eds)(2009) Co1111n1tti11g tl1t Nario11: A Ratt anJ Nnrio11alis111 Rtadtr, Albany. NY. SUNY Ptt11. Allen, P.C . (Im) 711t Soutd Hoop: Rnov<ri11g tltt Ft111111111t in A111triw11 brdin11 Trnd111om. Boston. MA. Beacon Press. Anzaldua. G. (1987) Bordtrlonds/LA Fro11ttra: 711t Ntiv Mmiza, San Froncisco, C A: Aunt lute. --(ed.)(1990) Making Foa, Maki11g Soul I Hontmlo Coins: Crrnt111t and Cn11cnl Pmpntwts by F<111i11ists of Color, San Francisco, CA: Aunt lute Books. --(2000) lttttrvit11'1IE11trrvis1as, A.L. K<ating (ed.), New York: Routledge. -{2002) 'Now u1 Us Shift'. in A.I.. Ktanng (~.) 71111 Bridge Wt Call HotHt: Rod1<al Visions for Tro11sfan11011011, New York: R oudedge, 540-78. -(2009• (1992)) 'The New Mestiza Nation A Mulucultunl Movement'. in A.l . Keating (ed.) 771< ao,,. AnzoldU.. RtadtT, Durlum. NC: Duke Uruvtrs&<y Pr=. 203-16. -{2009b f2002D 'ltt Us lk iM Htabng o( the Wound ~ CoyobJCtuhquo lmptnuve/ la Sombn yd Sutno', m A. l . Ktating (~.) 71tt Cloria Attzoldoia Rtodtr, Durham, NC: Duke Uni~rs1ry Press, 303-17. -(2009c (1983)) 'Spiritu•li<y. &xuahry, and the Body: An Interview wuh Linda Smuekld, in A. L. Kmmg (~.) Th• Ooria Anzllldoia Rtotkr, Curium, NC: Duke Uni~rsiiy PttU.. 74-94 --(2009d (2002)) '(Un)natural Bndges, (Un)safe Spaces'. in A. L. Ktating (ed.) 71tt Clona Anzaldua Rtatltr. Durh•m, NC: Duke Universiiy Press. 243-8. /\nuldua, G. and Mong;., C. (eds)(1981) 711is Bridgt Colltd My &<Ir: Wriring1 by Radical Womttt of Color, W21enown, MA: Persephone Press. Ayala, J. and Torre, M .E. (2009) 'Envi1ioni ng Por1icipa1ory Action R esearch Entremundos', Fe111i11ism & Psychology, 19(3): 38793. Barconslu, M. and Kã. Y. (2.005) 'El«cnd1ng the Boundanes of the Doalogial Self: Spealcing from wilhin the Feminist Perspective', Culturt and Psycl10/ogy, 11(1): 101-9. Bassie-Sweet, K. (2002) 'Com Deities and che Malt/Female Principle', in L. Gustafson and A. Trevelyan (eds) Alftimt /\fr/a Gmda Idmriry anti Rtla110111, Wncpon. CT, and London* Bergin & Garvey, 169--90. lkhar, R.. (1993) 'Expanding the Boundaries o( Anthropology: The Cultural Criticism o( Glona Anzaldua and Marlon Riggs'. Visual All/ltropolo,rry RMtlV, 9(2): 83-91. BlackwtU, M . (2010) 'I.idem Campcsinas: Nepantla Stra1epes and Grassroou Orgaruung at the ln1ersecnon o(G<ndcr and Globabzarion', AzlLin. 35(1): 1347 Buri<e.J.F. (1999) 'Reconciling Cuhurol D1vcn1ty w11h a Dtmocrauc Commun1iy', Cw:unsloip S111r/1tt, 3(1): 119-40. -{2004) Mt1t1zo Dntooaacy: Tht Poltria of Cnm111g &nlm, College mrion. TX: Tuas /\ & M Press. Canclini, N .G. (1995 (1989)) Hybrid C11l111n->: Str•t«~it1 ef En1tri11g n11d Ltaving Modtmity. Monntapolos. MN: Univeniiy of Minneso1a Press. Cantu, N . and Najien-!Umirez. 0 . (eds) (2002) C/1icmrn Traditio11s: Co111i1111ity ntod Chang<. Urb•na, IL: Unovcrsiry o( Illinois Press. Castillo, D. 2nd C6rdoba, M.S.T. (eds) (2002) Bord<r Wo111m: Wri1i11.~fro111 LA Fronttra, Mmneapolis, MN: University o( Minne.SOia Press. CCsatre, A. (2000 (1955)) Dillourst on Coloniol1s1H. New York: Momhly Review Press Du Bois. W .E.B. (1983 {1903)) 17., S..11ls of 8it1<lr F<>llr. New Yori<: Penguin. Falc:On. S. (2008) 'Mcstiza Double Consciowness: Tht Voices o( Afro-Peruvian Women on Gtndered 11.xism*. Cmtltr """ Soatty. 22(5) 660-80. Fouauh. M. (1980) Powrr/Klloctkt!gr: Stltrttd lmrn•twS 0t1d Otlttr Wntfl!\'>, 19721977. Ntw Yorlc * P•nthoon Gontiltt, OJ. (2.003) 'Gender on th< Bordtrbnds: R.c* textualotong 1h• Classics', Fro1111m * A Joumal of Womtn Studots, 24(2): 15-29. Gracia. A (ed.) (1997) Clucano Ftmm111 Thcmglu TI1t &st< Histoncal Wririttgs, New Yori< Routledge. Gncia. M.T. (2010) 'La Frometa: The Sordcr as Symbol ~nd Reabry in Mexman-Amenc•n Thought', m I. Sc.vans (ed.) Bordtr C11l111rr, Sant• Barban, CA: Greenwood Press. 3-26. Grant, K (2010) *uv;ng in t~ Borderlands.: An ldentiiy and • Proposal', Dialog* A jounonl of 11tt0logy. 49(1): 26-33.