Political Science

The argument presented by Briggs about Western feminists (read: U.S. feminists) relationship to Puerto Rican feminists reminded me greatly of the argument Renda presents in Taking Haiti concerning the relationship between America and Haiti. Essentially, U.S. feminists are looking at Puerto Rican feminists through an American lens, placing unfair constraints on what “feminism” should look like. In an attempt to universalize and homogenize the meaning of feminism and its ideals and values, U.S. feminists patronized and belittled the experiences of Puerto Rican women. One way in which the U.S. infiltrated Puerto Rican culture was with regard to prostitutes. Briggs says that “between 1917 and 1918, then, gender and women’s bodies became a significant idiom in which colonial relations were negotiated.” Again, I can’t help here but to look to the idea of Laura Bush calling on American women to help the “trapped” women in the Middle East. Briggs claims that the way prostitution was framed in the U.S. made it seem as though Puerto Rican women were damaged and needed to be contained somehow.

Now, just on a very personal level: I am curious about the way in which we integrate science and technology into our political conversations. The idea of fixing the overpopulation of Puerto Rico with sterilization was horrifying to me. While it may work in practice, the idea behind it is appalling. Women are not to be blamed for the overpopulation. Let’s look to science for that answer as well. Where do we draw the line, though? What role does government have in the regulation of women’s bodies in Puerto Rico? Here?