In lieu of an abstract, here is a brief excerpt of the content:

S E V E N Activist Women and Women’s Activists: Possibilities for Networking with Feminist Groups We became “feminist” the moment that we were able to open a Casa de la Mujer. The fact alone that the house is called “Casa de la Mujer” already associates us with feminism. . . . But in the población we use the term “popular feminism” in that we struggle for the whole family. We have tried to work with bourgeois feminists, but we clashed with them. They are professionals, while in the población men and women are working class. . . . Feminism has a bad connotation [in the población] because of the class differences. —aida moreno reyes, president of casa de la mujer huamachuco, chile I consider myself a feminist in the fight for the good, the common struggle. A feminist fights for the wellbeing , the good, of the collective. I don’t think feminism is necessarily making specific programs for women. —sofia, founder of a women’s self-employment group, brazil As potential allies of grassroots women activists from the base communities, classic feminist groups differ from Protestant groups in many ways. Perhaps most important, classical feminist organizations, unlike Protestant churches, typically are not located in the women’s neighborhoods and do not share most aspects of their life conditions. Nonetheless, alliances with feminist groups are plausible on several grounds. First, feminist scholars argue that women’s activism of any sort leads to a broadening of the issues, including women’s issues, that engage them. If, as Lynn Stephen (1997) and others suggest, the distinction between “feminist” and “feminine” or “practical” and “strategic” gender interests does not hold, then alliances with feminist groups around at least some issues are possible (12). Second, the empirical flip side of this theoretical claim is the continued heavy participation of our women activists in explicitly women’s organizations or groups, whose main constituents and clientele are women, noted in Chapter 5. Only some of the groups they work in are “popular feminist” organizations, but women do participate in both “feminine” and “feminist” groups. Third, Latin American feminists who emerged during the military regimes (the so-called second wave) developed new, more encompassing, specifically Latin American definitions of feminism. Although largely white, middle class, and university educated themselves, second-wave feminists showed sensitivity to and consciousness of the class issues that divide Chilean and Brazilian women. Their awareness of diversity within the women’s movement led them to self- consciously espouse the notion of grassroots feminism (Lebon 1998, 180–81; Stephen 1997, 12; Valdés and Weinstein 1993, 186–92). Fourth, the discourse of grassroots feminism often had real, practical consequences in creating linkages between feminist and popular women’s organizations. A number of feminist scholars have recently argued that networks of grassroots women’s activists and feminist organizations have emerged and are being maintained in both Brazil and Chile.1 Despite their plausibility, alliances between popular women’s activists, such as those from the base communities, and more classic feminist groups can also be problematic and difficult to maintain. Many women from the popular classes throughout Latin America continue to resist adopting the label feminist (Lievesley 1999, 140). Those who do adopt it often give it a new meaning. As Sonia Alvarez (1988) has noted, the logical consequence of the “decentering” of Latin American feminism is its “resignification.” “On the one hand . . . feminist interventions in the larger women’s movement arguably have had important cultural-political effects; yet, on the other hand . . . feminism is being resignified as it is appropriated by women whose life experiences differ significantly from those of the founding mothers of Latin American feminism’s second wave” (302).2 Differing life circumstances —particularly social class and religiosity—can lead women to espouse a specific, “resignified” feminism that fits with those conditions. Continued resistance to the very term feminist, however, may come from some of the same sources as resignified popular feminism. Both resistance and resignification pose challenges for collaboration across class lines. Feminist ideas and discourse have made great strides in both countries. Most important and impressive, both women who agreed and those who disagreed with feminist ideas shared a discourse of gender equality and rights. Self-described feminist Emerenciana states, “We have to teach our sons so after they’re married they won’t be machistas. Men and women are equal.” Edna considers herself a feminist “of a different type.” She says, “I see feminism in another way. The feminist discourse is that...

Share