Check out Vida Afro-Latina

I had the pleasure of meeting the creator of Vida Afro-Latina today and realized I never introduced the site to all of you.

Black Latinos are woefully underrepresented in the general market, Latino and African-American media. VidaAfroLatina.com has been created to fill that gap.

When you have a moment (or a few hours), go check it out. As Mrs. Robinson says, I learn more about myself when I’m exploring other cultures. Sounds like a site I’ll be frequenting!

Contact them to submit revelant articles, news tips, links or events.

Fundraiser for challenges & deportations in Michigan

Please help support:

El Centro Obrero and Detroit Summer are hosting a fundraiser for legal funds and challenges to round-ups and deportations in Detroit, which have intensified this summer.

The fundraiser will be held at El Centro Obrero at UAW Local 22 on Michigan Avenue and Clark, in Detroit.

Thursday, August 14, 2008, at 7:00pm.

Community Theatre Teaches ICE Raid Survival Skills

Editor’s Note: A group of college students in San Jose, Calif., is using interactive theatre to teach immigrants what to do to avoid being arrested by immigration agents. Clarisse Céspedes reports for Spanish-language newspaper El Mensajero in San Francisco.

Continue Reading

________________________________________________________________________________

DONATE TO THE NATIONAL IMMIGRANT BOND FUND

“The National Immigrant Bond Fund seeks to reaffirm the values of dignity and due process by assisting immigrants swept up in immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE) actions to post bond quickly in order to secure a fair hearing in America’s courts.”

More information

Film: Gasolina

Ondamax Films is glad to announce the World Premiere of “GASOLINA” at
Locarno Film Festival. Julio Hernandez, director of “GASOLINA”, and Eric
Mathis, CEO of Ondamax will attend the festival from August 9th to 14th
where you can join them @ +33 6 86 28 76 50.

“GASOLINA” tells the story of 3 teenagers friends in Guatemala City who
spend their time stealing gasoline to drive around aimlessly. A high-octane
ride in which each stop is a crash with reality. A test to their friendship
on a borderline between betrayal and a kamikaze-like solidarity. “GASOLINA” won 3 of the 6 awards of the “Cine En Construcion” program at last San Sebastian FF.

“GASOLINA” will screen at the following dates:

*Industry screening: Sunday, August 10, 8pm at The Rialto 3.
*Official screening: Wednesday, August 13, 6h30pm at La Sala.
*Second screening: Thursday, August 14, 8pm at The Rialto 2.

We would love to see you in one of our screenings.

Best regards,

Ondamax Films
info@ondamaxfilms.com
1360 Monad Terrace #1
Miami Beach, FL, 33139, USA
Tel: +1-305-535-3577

Ondamax Films finances, produces, promotes and distributes feature films and documentaries from and about Latin American and Latino topics. Our aim is to bring the creative vision of a new wave of filmmakers to a worldwide audience. In 2007 & 2008, our first 12 completed titles obtains 350 selections and 60 awards in festivals. For trailers of our films:
www.youtube.com/ondamaxfilms

 

 

Those Damn Women of Color Again!

 

TWO ARTICLES: ONE MESSAGE

AND 

Latin American Press (Elsa Chanduvi, June 5, 2008): “Living Well,” a development alternative

Proposal is considered legacy of indigenous peoples to humanity

More than 1,000 representatives from indigenous communities across the Americas gathered in Lima, Peru, have agreed on a new social system, known as “Living Well,” focused on reciprocity between people and the Earth.

A break from market dogmas

“We believe there is a big difference between [living well and] those who believe that living well is to live better than someone else. [The latter] reflects a competition instead of respect and equality. So, ‘living well’ is the exercise of rights, respect, equality and means of life for everyone, said Blanca Chancoso, a renowned leader of Ecuador’s Kichwa women, who formerly served as one of the directors of the country’s largest indigenous organization, CONAIE. She is currently part of the Dolores Ulcuango Indigenous School in Ecuador.

Reading Blanca Chancoso’s description summed up perfectly what women of color and other marginalized groups have been battling against in the feminist movement for centuries: those who believe there is a difference between “living well” and those who believe “living well is to live better than someone else.”

So when Linda Hirshman (feminist author), sitting comfortably in the journalist poshland of the Washington Post, writes an article chastising women of color for dividing the feminist movement, I, like Chancoso, also ask for “a break from market dogma.” In this case, the dogma that feminism is best led and guided by white professional women, and that the ultimate goal of feminism should be to elect a woman president.

Hirshman has the audacity to blame the division and misplaced focus (in that feminism didn’t succeed in getting Hillary the Democratic nomination) of the feminist movement  on “intersectionality.” For those not familiar with the term, “intersectionality” refers to the recognition that various forms of oppression rely on and reinforce one another - not exactly a surprise, but apparently something feminists like Hirshman would prefer everyone ignore.

You couldn’t have asked for a more perfect example of white, upper-class, elite feminism than this article. As the villians responsible for feminism’s current crises, Hirshman points her finger at Brownfemipower and Sudy. Not only does she take their quotes out of context, misrepresent Brownfemipower’s criticism of Amanda Marcotte, and doesn’t even bother to contact them directly, but who does she contact and quote? Jessica Valenti (Feministing) and Jill Filipovic (Feministe) as authorities on how feminism has progressed and translates for all 20-somethings, including women of color.  You demons stay over there and shut up while I talk to white women about you. 

It’s ironic that Hirshman defines herself as a “Chris Matthews-inspired Clintonite,” since she understands as much about women of color as Matthews does about anyone who isn’t white, male, and securely within the Washington power elite. By the way, since when is the election of a woman to the presidency the solution to destroying partriarchy? Or anything else to do with justice? I guess it was inspiring when Madeline Albright was Secretary of State. It was also disgusting when she suggested that 500,000 Iraqi children dead as a direct result of U.S./U.K.-enforced sanctions was “worth the price.”

The article is an insult. And while we’ve opened up the floor for pointing fingers, I ask you [Hirshman] to reread your own article and consider how well it bodes for feminism, how your observations have helped unify the movement, and how big a role YOU play in dividing the movement.

But than again, why look at yourself when you can blame those angry dark people? You speak of a more innocent time, when you first received Friedan’s book and knew she was speaking about you and to you. While you fought and protested and worked to strengthen a movement based on equality and reproductive rights, you never imagined that those “crazies” below you would actually want the same, even though they were fighting alongside you. Did you miss that in all your years of being a feminist? Or could you only see women of color as potential hired help in your kitchen (like a good liberal, you’d pay them a higher wage and pat them on the heads for a job well done)?  

Beyond your one-sided world view, there are individuals and groups fighting the original fight, with the understanding that women’s rights means something different for a white professional woman earning over 150k per year, a white single mother hovering at the poverty level, a black woman living in the inner city, and a Latina living in a prison for immigrants. You don’t risk anything focusing on the “last glass ceiling” and putting an elite, corporate white woman in office; try battling steel bars, immigration raids, and concrete jungles.

Finally, the article is poor journalism. I can guarantee that if BrownfemiPower or Sudy wrote an article critical of an entire movement and never bothered to contact anyone in that movement, it would be regarded as shoddy journalism lacking the sophisticated research skills necessary to be taken seriously. I wonder how often we’d see them in print again? What about an article bemoaning the divisions in the feminist movement and putting the blame squarely on white women? Think anyone would take it seriously?

In a way, I feel sorry for Hirshman and her lack of vision. She speaks of her work in the feminist movement yet degrades others for taking up the same fight - our crime is that we are vocal about people who don’t happen to look like Hirshman. How quickly we forget what the feminist movement (supposedly) stands for.

Hirshman notes that the “reform” movements within feminism - focused on issues like race and class - “would have been enough to weaken the movement. But it still could have been like many other reform movements, which manage to remain effective by using such traditional political tools as alliances and compromises. There’s an old-fashioned term for it — ‘log-rolling.’ Put crudely: First I vote for your issue, then you vote for mine.”

The problem with the notion of “first I vote for your issue, then you vote for mine,” Linda Hirshman, is that you never came around to vote for our issues.  We have always been expected to vote on your terms; your interests always come first, and we’re always left waiting.

I’m over waiting in line for the greater good of those who clearly already have. Tired of waiting, patient and subservient, for our turn, for our crumbs to trickle down. I’m out of that line, and getting in the one clearly marked “revolution.”  My hefty Latina bones can’t survive on white bread, so forget the ceiling - I’m kicking down the meat-locker and sharing the wealth with my community. Old, white, or male - you’re welcome to join, but know this: living well means rights, respect, equality, and access to the means of life for everyone, now. Freedom is not given, so I’m taking.

Here’s Brownfemipower’s response to this article.

Here’s Jill Filipovic’s (Feministe) response.

Stories in the news this morning: June 9, 2008

It’s 10am and I’m already seething with reports from mainstream media.

NY Times: States Take New Tack on Illegal Immigration

MILTON, Fla. — Three months after the local police inspected more than a dozen businesses searching for illegal immigrants using stolen Social Security numbers, this community in the Florida Panhandle has become more law-abiding, emptier and whiter.

[One business owner says,] “I don’t blame them [police],” Mr. Barragan added. “It’s just that it hurts.”

Yes, how painful it must be to have your business lose the much-needed dollars of those little brown people in your small community. It doesn’t hurt because the lives of good, hard-working people have been disrupted by deportation or jail; no, let’s not consider that. Let’s only focus on the hole this raid left in your business. Since a large portion of the latino community frequented his restaurant, he doesn’t have any answers for how to stay open. No protests, no help in rewriting policy, not even a call to the local police, just a plea of “it hurts.”

________________________________________________________________________________

NY Times: Where Whites Draw the Line

How black is too black?

Millions of African-Americans celebrated Barack Obama’s historic victory, seeing in it a reflection — sudden and shocking — of their own expanded horizons. But whether Mr. Obama captures the White House in November will depend on how he is seen by white Americans. Indeed, some people argue that one of the reasons Mr. Obama was able to defeat Senator Hillary Rodham Clinton was that a large number of white voters saw him as “postracial.”

I wonder if I wrote an article “How White is too White?” how quickly the NY Times would pick it up. If they did, if anyone did, how quickly would I be accused of reverse racism? I’d be attacked for trying to divide the country, rather than using my words productively to unify. I’d probably be put on a terrorist watch list. But “too black”? That’s perfectly reasonable for the paper of record.

________________________________________________________________________________

NY Times: Inside Gate, India’s Good Life; Outside, the Slums

Hamilton Court — complete with a private school within its gates, groomed lawns and security guards — is just one of the exclusive gated communities that have blossomed across India in recent years. At least for the newly moneyed upper middle class, they offer at high prices what the government cannot, at least not to the liking of their residents.

Thank goodness such class inequality would never happen in the civilized United States.

________________________________________________________________________________

Daily Kos: Iowa — Another Katrina?

Darrell in Iowa writes:

I am in Mason City.  Our levees broke Sunday morning.  Flood stage is 7 foot and waters are now at 19 feet.  Hundreds of homes and businesses are underwater.  The City’s water plant was flooded and the entire city of 30,000 is without potable water.  A couple of hours ago the main electric substation flooded and failed and much of the city is without power.  People remain in flooded homes.  Early tonight I saw people wandering the streets not knowing where to go.  There are entrie areas of the city with NO emergency personnel on hand.

NOBODY from the outside has come to help.  Our local first responders are exhausted and overwhelmed.  Small rural towns downstream tonight are being devasted.  Levees everywhere are failing.  Calls for help in these small towns have been unmet.  Portions of our local guard are in Iraq.

The homeland has been left unprotected and people are suffering horribly.

As if we needed another reminder of how our government fails its basic obligations. Like New Orleans, I wouldn’t be surprised if the Army Core of Engineers lied about the effectiveness of these levees, too. When we put people in charge of government who are convinced government can’t work, they will do everything to make sure it won’t work. Mason City, Iowa is drowning in Republican rule.

I realize this is an angry post (oh no - anger!) but every once in a while, a Latina needs to show her teeth! Besides, if you’re not angry, you’re not paying attention

Alice Walker on Obama

Lest We Forget: An open letter to my sisters who are brave.

I am a supporter of Obama because I believe he is the right person to lead the country at this time. He offers a rare opportunity for the country and the world to start over, and to do better.   It is a deep sadness to me that many of my feminist white women friends cannot see him.  Cannot see what he carries in his being.  Cannot hear the fresh choices toward Movement he offers. That they can believe that millions of Americans –black,  white, yellow, red and brown - choose Obama over Clinton only because he is a man, and black, feels tragic to me.

When I have supported white people, men and women, it was because I thought them the best possible people to do whatever the job required.  Nothing else would have occurred to me. If Obama were in any sense mediocre, he would be forgotten by now. He is, in fact, a remarkable human being, not perfect but humanly stunning, like King was and like Mandela is. We look at him, as we looked at them, and are glad to be of our species. He is the change America has been trying desperately and for centuries to hide, ignore, kill. The change America must have if we are to convince the rest of the world that we care about people other than our (white) selves…

 

WAM! Recap - finally!

 

By now you’ve probably read enough WAM! recaps in the past week, and might not be interested in another. But I want to write about it, so …

I heard about WAM! through the blogosphere. I was drawn to the conference, as I said in my interview with Jill Zimon, because of the diversity of presentations and workshops, and because a number of women I met last year at the Allied Media Conference were presenting.

 

When I arrived, I felt somewhat alienated and alone, which I chalked up to my not knowing many of the attendees. Yet the first invitation I received was a text message from Nadia of No Snow Here, hoping I’d arrived and inviting me to join them (WOC) at the conference. Although I don’t know them as well as they know each other, nor for as long, they welcomed me instantly and warmly. 

 

I assumed, or hoped, that the rest of the attendees at the conference would welcome everyone in the same spirit. That same day, however, I was proven wrong. At a conference as large as this, I didn’t expect everyone would take the time to introduce themselves and make themselves available to everyone else - the conference was only so long, after all - but I sensed a clear distinction between women of color and white feminists in their interaction with others. As the conference moved from the networking event to the reception and keynote speaker Helen Thomas, the divide grew more stark, with WOC sitting together in a sea of white feminists. That was unfortunately a mark of how the rest of the weekend evolved.

 

I attended several workshops, including “Here We Go Again: Bad Stories About Women that Never Die,” “Raising Women’s Voices/Building Women’s Power: Collaborative Approaches to Strategic Communications for Social Justice,” and the film “Silent Choices” on reproductive rights. While these were informative, two presentations stuck with me more than others: “Immigration in the U.S.: The Women’s Rights Crisis Feminists Aren’t Talking About” and “We B(e)lo(n)g: Womyn of Color and Online Feminism.” The panel on immigration was exceptional because finally someone was talking about the New Bedford Raids in MA, where police apprehended 361 people, mostly immigrant women who suffered physical and emotional abuse at the hands of their captors. The presentation highlighted the cruelty of immigration enforcement directed towards human beings regarded as defenseless and invisible; it focused on an inhumanity that is rarely discussed, and the need for action. At one point during the film clip about the raid I became so distraught at watching these women suffer - women who could be my mother, my grandmother, or my sister - I had to leave the room so I could break down in private. I knew my tears were a poor excuse for action, but I was simply overcome with emotion.

 

The panel “”We B(e)lo(n)g: Womyn of Color and Online Feminism” was by far the high point of the conference. It began with introductions, a short film clip by Sudy on WOC in the blogosphere, and then each panelist read a “wish” poem she’d written. Rather than sit at the tables in the front, they instead came to the side of the room with the attendees, and asked each of us to give our wish. They did not talk at us, but with us; it created a safe, loving space for everyone. My wish was that there would be a space like this wherever I went.  

 

The panel on immigration was a mixed group, although I wondered if the title had contained the phrase “women of color” and all the panelists were WOC would the participation have been as diverse - especially since “We B(e)lo(n)g” was almost completely WOC. A lot of white feminists seemed to regard presentations or workshops about women of color as exclusive to women of color, and wanted to “respect” that space. They might have considered taking part, but apparently didn’t want to intrude. This assumption has now become the escape route for white feminists to not participate, to not open themselves up to be in a new and potentially uncomfortable space. Not one person did what any normal human being would do, ask “May I participate, or is this only for women of color?” Therein lies the real problem. My roommate (Metha) at the conference, and Black Amazon’s Wifey, both white women, joined us everywhere we went, including the Queer Women of Color and Friends reception/party. They didn’t assume they couldn’t take part; they just came along. If you don’t make it a big deal, then it isn’t!

 

Metha says she trying to envision ways in which WAM!, or other conferences, could better create spaces for dialogue with people from different backgrounds. Along with a panel on women of color, for example, have a panel of women from a wide range of backgrounds to discuss and debate the same issue, but from a variety of perspectives.

 

The rest of the conference felt like us trying to hold onto the love we created in the “We B(e)lo(n)g” workshop, instead of being able to share it with everyone outside. The divide was still there. I got the distinct impression that we had been given permission to participate in a small way, but not as equals, not as leaders of the same movement.

 

I’m not the first person to say this, and since the conference there has been an outpouring of reaction as a result. Some have dismissed our reactions as negative or angry; suggesting if we aren’t part of the solution (as they define it) then we’re part of the problem. Sounds like Bush: “Yer either with us or agin’ us!”

But isn’t that what the feminist movement was supposed to be about? Standing up for your rights, for equality, using that anger as a force for change? If we are now only defining that as reactions of women of color, as abnormal or damaging, then the feminist movement has ceased to exist, or can no longer define itself in the terms it once could. If women of color (POC) are the only people willing to express our anger and act on it, then it’s with us that you will find real change!

 

For a much more profound and detailed critique on the feminist divide, read Jessica Hoffman’s OpEd: On Prisons, Borders, Safety, and Privilege: An Open Letter to White Feminists (AlterNet, April 4, 200  

*Correction: Jill from Feministe did make a point of asking if the We B(e)lo(n)g session was for WOC only.

Adele Nieves on Blog Talk Radio this weekend

Join us for Come Together: The official live discussion of the Women’s History Month blog carnival

 

Join Heart of Women’s Space and What Tami Said as we conclude our Women’s History Month blog carnival with an hour-long live discussion on Blog Talk Radio, 6 p.m. EDT, Saturday, March 29. We will review our favorite submissions to the blog carnival; discuss issues raised by the carnival, including race and feminism and their roles in the 2008 presidential election; discuss the state of feminism today; and talk about the most effective ways for women to work together towards equality.

We will be joined by panelists including:

Adele Nieves, a writer, journalist, and speaker, focusing on politics, women’s issues and race.

Shecodes, an entrepreneur and activist dedicated to the uplift of black women. Shecodes runs the blog Black Women Vote, described in its inaugural post as “a war cry to all Black women who are fed up, pissed off, and mad as heck about the present conditions of Black womanhood in America, and are ready to do something about it. Make no mistake… we’re about to change some stuff up in this piece! We have the social, economic, political tools to compel America to become more hospitable for ourselves, and for our daughters.”

We also want to hear from YOU. Tune in and call in! Listen live by clicking this link and let your voice be heard by calling (347) 205-9125 during the show.

Watch Women’s Space and What Tami Said for programming updates, including panelist additions.

 Read more at Blog Talk Radio.

Detroit Feminists Against the War!

 

Detroit feminist and former military soldier, Audrey Mantey speaks at the Wayne State University Students for a Democratic Society Peace Rally and March, February 2008.

Part I

 Part II

GET INVOLVED, JOIN THE CONVERSATION!

Upcoming moratorium, with guest speaker Audrey Mantey:

Friday, March 21, 2008, 7:30pm

First United Methodist Church, 320 W. 7th Street (corner of Washington and 7th), Royal Oak, MI

An open Letter and discriminatory attacks

An open Letter to All Feminists: Statement of Solidarity with Palestinian, Arab, and Muslim Women Facing War and Occupation…

By Piya Chatterjee and Sunaina Maira

_________________________________________________

Dear colleagues,  

I need to write to you about a set of very serious racist and discriminatory attacks against Professor Thomas Abowd in his dispute with the Wayne State University administration and right-wing Zionist elements on campus. These circumstances are but a few of several offensive, anti-Arab and anti-Muslim happenings on this campus over the last few years, coming both before and after the attacks against Law Professor Wadie Said who applied for a job at WSU. The specific attacks against Professor Abowd are particularly troubling because, in this case, a WSU official has used racist and offensive language against Professor Abowd in the course of an official university investigation. 

Included below is a short description of the line of questioning engaged in by officials of Wayne State University, particularly one Ms. Amy Stirling during her December 2007 investigation of Professor Thomas Abowd for several baseless and fabricated charges of “anti-semitism.” (charges eventually all dropped for lack of evidence). A Union representative was present during this meeting with Ms. Stirling, and witnessed the racist language directed at Abowd. The Union representative took notes during the more than 2 hour conversation. It is clear to many that Stirling’s line of questioning (as well as her generally hostile demeanor) was extremely inappropriate and had anti-Arab implications. 

Ms. Stirling began her questioning of Abowd in a ridiculous set of false accusations made against him by avowed supporters of the well-known anti-Arab and anit-Mulism racist, Daniel Pipes. Members of this organization have been following Abowd around to talks on this and other campuses for the last few years. Pipes was speaking at Wayne State in October, 2007 and Professor Abowd took part in a non-violent demonstration against the founder of “Campus Watch” one hour before his event. After this demonstration, two right-wing Pipes-apologists who had been video taping and taking pictures of Abowd and who later attended the Pipes lecture, accosted Thomas after his speech and demanded to know why he said “slaughter the Jews.” Such words were never uttered, by Abowd or anyone else at the demonstration. Abowd told these individuals that this claim was completely slanderous and to get away from him.  

Perhaps anticipating Abowd filing a complaint against them for harassment, the two individuals who accosted him then went and filed bogus charges of “anti-Semitism” against Professor Abowd with the Wayne State Office of Equal Opportunity. The University then decided to launch an investigation into these false accusations, without a shred of evidence that Thomas had engaged in any wrongdoing. The investigation, many on campus believe, was done as part of a disturbing pattern at Wayne State of silencing criticism of Israel and those who fight for Palestinian rights. The university official who investigated these charges (who many familiar with the case believe is anti-Palestinian) questioned Abowd for a few hours and eventually concluded, a few weeks later, that the charges made against Thomas were totally baseless and unsubstantiated. 

But, in the course of questioning him, the investigator, Amy Stirling, engaged in hostile and racist language toward Abowd, an Arab-American. Again, this was witnessed by a Union representative who Abowd insisted be present and who took notes during the entire conversation.

Most disturbing were her efforts to badger Professor Abowd to “discover” his ethnic/racial/religious identity and to inject race, ethnicity, and the subject of Islam into her investigation. Stirling repeatedly asked Abowd and demanded answers, on at least 5 occasions, to questions about Thomas’ race, ethnicity, and religion. Here are some of the more troubling exchanges during what was at times more a hostile interrogation than a professionally conducted interview. 

Stirling began her line of questioning by repeatedly and pointedly demanding an answer to the question: “What is your ethnic or racial identity.” This was, in fact, the first question she directed at him. Abowd objected to the query, citing its non-relevance and racist implications. Abowd told Stirling twice that he would not answer the question because it was wholly inappropriate but she persisted in an aggressive way, remarking that the question was relevant, that she did have a right to ask it, that she wanted an answer to it, and then proceeded to ask him the same question two more times. He still refused to answer and told her to move on. 

About 45 minutes later, in the course of her questioning, Stirling asked Abowd, very directly 2 or 3 times and in an antagonistic manner:  “Are you a Muslim?” Once again, she was told that this was completely inappropriate, as offensive as it was irrelevant to the discussion. Professor Abowd mentioned that he was not only disgusted by this line of questioning but that he considered it a violation of his privacy and the principle of non-discrimination. He and many others familiar with the case believe that this line of questioning was part of an effort to build the case that Abowd was more likely to harass the Jewish individuals in question because he might be a Muslim or Arab: a truly bigoted idea. 

In trying to explain why he and the Union representative thought this was an inappropriate set of questions, Abowd began by stating that “If I were white and the person who I was accused of making race-based comments to was white…” Stirling interrupted him and forcefully stated: “You are white.” Abowd then responded that she did not have the right to tell him what he was or declare his ethnic or racial assignment, which she could not possibly know and which was none of her business.  

Stirling’s line of questioning was clearly troubling for a number of reasons. If a member of another community, say a Jew or an African-American, were asked such a question in this context it would, quite rightly, be regarded as being totally inappropriate.  How, after all, could anyone make a determination about whether anyone did or did not engage in intimidation based on whether she/he was Arab or Muslim or Jewish or atheist? One can only imagine if the tables were turned, what the response would be if an administrator repeatedly demanded an answer to the question “Are you a Jew? Are you a Jew?” Even after an individual had made clear that she/he would not answer such a question. 

As with the problems made for law professor Wadie Said during his job search at Wayne State in 2006 and other Arab faculty and would-be faculty and students on campus by the administration in recent years, Abowd’s case is connected to a disturbing sentiment among the Wayne State administration that has become deeply hostile to criticisms of Israeli human rights abuses and military occupation among faculty and students. There are several administrators and Board of Governors on WSU’s campus that are avowed apologists for Israeli military occupation and human rights abuses. When you combine these realities with the fact that Wayne State (where 15-20% of the student body is Arab) has done a horrible job of hiring and retaining Arab faculty, one sees a troubling pattern in the abuse leveled at Professor Abowd, an Arab-American, an award-winning teacher, and one of the few Arab/Arab-American faculty in WSU’s College of Liberal Arts and Sciences. 

In addition to these acts of racism directed at Abowd, Wayne State University has also violated Thomas’ constitutional and contractual rights on several occasions during his four years at the university, most recently around this latest incident of racism. In the case of this investigation, he was told three times in writing by Amy Stirling that he was not permitted to have a Union witness present at the investigation, in direct violation of the law and Supreme Court rulings (in fact, a judge ruled in Abowd and the Union’s favor several weeks ago stating clearly that WSU could not deny union members representation in such a context). Despite their violations of the law and the union contract, the University has reprimanded Abowd, as well, without due process. Abowd has also had his lecture on Jimmy Carter’s recent book, Palestine: Peace Not Apartheid that he was to give to the WSU Alumni Association, cancelled for unexplained reasons and not rescheduled. This decision also came directly from the administration. 

Please send emails, letters, and phone calls immediately to the following persons responsible for this campaign against award-winning teacher and community activist, Professor Thomas Abowd. Many of his colleagues and fellow activists are concerned that Wayne State University may try to terminate him for political reasons! 
 

Ms. Amy Stirling, Acting Director of Wayne State University’s Office of Equal Opportunity

Email: ak6239@wayne.edu

Phone Number: (313) 577-2280

Address:  Attn. Ms. Amy Sirling  Office of Equal Opportunity, 5700 Cass Ave, Suite 3660 AA Bldg., Detroit, Michigan 48202   
 

Robert Thomas, Dean of College of Liberal Arts and Sciences

Email: robert_thomas@wayne.edu

Phone Number: (313) 577-2519

Address:  Attn: Dean Robert Thomas
COLLEGE OF LIBERAL ARTS AND SCIENCES
Wayne State University 4841 Cass Ave., 2155 Old Main, Detroit, MI 48201 
 

Nancy Barrett, Provost

Email: nancy.barrett@wayne.edu

Phone Number: (313) 577-2200/ 313-577-2433(Diane)

Address: 656 W. Kirby Room #4092, Wayne State University, Detroit, MI 48202 
 

Andrea Dickson, Executive Vice President

Email: bb4792@wayne.edu

Phone Number: (313) 577-2389

Address: 656 W. Kirby, Room #4165 FAB Bldg, Wayne State University, Detroit, MI 48202

Professor Andrea Sankar, Chair of the Anthropology Department,

Email: asankar@wayne.edu

Phone Number: (313) 577-6961

Address: 147 Manoogian Hall 906 W. Warren Detroit, MI  48202 
 

Detroit Feminist Women’s Circle - Part II

 DETROIT FEMINSTS EVENT

When

Sunday, March 16, 2008 at 3:00 PM

 Location

Grosse Pointe Park, MI (We picked a central location for this meet-up, one of the organizers will contact those who rsvp’d with the address)

 Details

At our last meet-up we discussed, “How we envision a world were women are truly free?”At the next meet-up we’ll review our ideas, discuss new idea’s, and develop strategies for insighting change. 

These circles will continue growing and extending into greater parts, it’s a process worth sustaining. Please join us in our actions for better world.

 Items to bring

Please bring a dish to share

RSVP

If you are interested in advertising this women’s circle by passing out flyers, please go to our files section, left column of the Detroit Feminist meetup web page.

A small group of thoughtful people could change the world. Indeed, it’s the only thing that ever has. —-Margaret Mead

Andrea & Adele

Conquest: Dimensions of Domination

 

Watch the powerful Critique of Modern Culture, edited by Detroit Feminist, Audrey Mantey and Stan Goff.