Entre Nosotras: Latin American women’s perspectives on leadership

by

Bixidu Lobo-Molnar

A thesis submitted in conformity with the requirements for the degree of Master of Arts, Graduate Department of Leadership, Higher and Adult Education, Institute for Studies in Education, University of

© Copyright by Bixidu Lobo-Molnar (2012)

Entre Nosotras: Latin American women’s perspectives on leadership

Bixidu Lobo-Molnar

Master of Arts

Department of Leadership, Higher and Adult Education University of Toronto

2012

Abstract

This thesis examines the significance of gaining an understanding of leadership that is both culturally appropriate and contextually relevant to its participants. In particular, this study takes up leadership as a process, experienced differently given one’s positionality. It also honors the work of Latin American (LA) women in and interviews members of a LA women’s organization, pseudo-named Nosotras in an effort to begin to unravel the complexities of leadership and leadership training programs for young women. Interviewees contribute to the research through their knowledge on three main questions: (1) What does leadership mean? (2) What are its challenges? (3) How have you come to know leadership?

My findings show that having a common vision of leadership is only the tip of the iceberg. A

Latina Feminista lens that queers el liderazgo creates spaces to understand nuances, silences, and power dynamics embedded in current leadership processes and models.

Key words: Latina Feminista, liderazgo, positionality theory, silence, challenges, and resistance.

ii

Acknowledgements

I began to write this paper at the crossroads of my personal experience and conversations with other Latina women who expressed concerns and shared similar experiences inside and outside a small agency. I would like to acknowledge the six Latina women who were interviewed and who were directly involved in this storytelling of leadership, process and learning. We all shared many commonalities, but also differed in ideas and world views.

I would also like to acknowledge my interactions with other women within the organization who are not directly represented in this research, but who played a key role in writing mi testimonio and in problematizing and challenging ideas of leadership within a structure and space that I held so closely for almost three years.

Finally, and with equally important acknowledgement, I am very grateful to my thesis

Committee. To Dr. Nancy Jackson, thank you for your time and insight. To my thesis supervisor- Dr. Christine Connelly, thank you for challenging me and for allowing me to express myself in both Spanish and English during this process. It was therapeutic. Tu apoyo, paciencia y tu dedicacion a mi trabajo- especialmente durante momentos dificiles en mi vida personal me mantuvieron escribiendo. Gracias. To my unsung superwomen- my sister

Ververith and my wife and friend Karla, GRACIAS por su ayuda. Lo hicimos!

iii

Table of Contents

Abstract...... ii

Acknowledgements ...... iii

Chapter 1: Introduction …...... 1 1.1. Socio-Political Contexts at a Glance ...... 6 1.2. How I Came To This Work...... 13 1.3. Thesis Statement ...... 19 1.4. The Organization of this Study ...... 20 1.5. Significance of Study...... 21

Chapter 2: Theoretical Framework, Research Method & Methodology...... 24 2.1. Theoretical Framework...... 24 2.2. Research Methods ...... 32 2.3. Research Recruitment Process ...... 33 2.4. Ethical Considerations ...... 33 2.5. Methodology ...... 35 2.6. Situating Myself in the Study ...... ……………………………………………38

Chapter 3: Analysis ...... 40 3.1. Challenges to Leadership...... 48 3.2. Reading through the Silences ...... 54 3.3. Resistance and Points of Tension ...... 60

Chapter 4: Conclusion...... 67

Reference List ...... 75

Appendices ...... 84 Appendix I: Sample Questions ...... 84 Appendix II: Initial E-mail ...... 85 Appendix III: Consent Letter and Form for Research Participants ...... 88 Appendix IV: Follow-up with Participant on Interviews Letter ...... 94

iv

Chapter 1: Introduction

The strong presence of peoples from living in Canada is relatively recent (dating back only forty years or so) and there are experiences, stories and achievements worth bringing to light and documenting as part of the rich .

Unfortunately, in recent years, immigrants (first, second, and third generation) from Latin

America have been depicted in ways that undermine the potential of this population. One example is the portrayal of Latin American people in the media, framing an entire peoples in monolothic and categorical ways. i.e. youth as gangsters, women as exotic and sexualized objects, following a specific phenotype- olive- to tanned skin, with a Hispanic accent with dark hair. Another example of skewed framing occurs within the immigration system where the subject is almost automatically seen as suspect, with intentions of ‘illegally’ entering and/or remaining in the country, abusing social ‘welfare’ system, and/or involved in gang activity. Indeed, at a systemic level, there exist internal and external division and discrimination to and among , including homophobia, transphobia, racism, classism, ableism, etc. Thus, it is useful to note the complexities of this diverse community within a Canadian context since it is those complexities and the lack of historical understanding (read colonization) that causes Latin Americans living on the margins to remain misrepresented at worst and under-represented at best. Thus, this is not the perspective from which I write my thesis. I write from both the inside and the borderlands of a “Latino imaginary” (Flores, 1997). This is key to note because as Juan Flores states,

“Distinguising between interior and exterior perspectives is... a necessary step, and given that in the case of Latinos the outside representation is the dominant one, any instance of cultural

1 2 expression by Latinos themselves may serve as a healthy corrective to the ceaseless barrage of stereotypes that go to define what is “Latino” in the public mind” (Flores, 1997, p. 185).

In his work on the “Latino Imaginary: Dimensions of community and identity”,

Flores (1997) writes about the imagined social construction of “Latino”, which must not be confused with Benedict Anderson’s comunidades imaginadas. Benedict Anderson (1983) first used the term imaginary communities as a way to explain the utility of the political project of State nationalism and as Marxism’s great historical failure (p.13). Anderson explains that, “they are imaginary because even the smallest nation will never know the majority of their compatriots, they will not see them or even hear about them, but nonetheless in the mind of each person, the image of their communion will still exist” (p.15). And finally,

Benedict uses the term comunidad or community because “independent of the inequality and the exploitation that can exist in any given case, the nation is always conceived as a profound horizontal camaraderie” (p.16). Benedict explains that in the last two centuries, “it is this fraternity that has permitted millions of people to kill and most importantly, be willing to die for these limited imaginaries” (p. 16). In comparison, Flores’ “Latino imagined community” initially draws a similar conclusion to that of Anderson as Flores (1997) agrees that “the foundational exercise in ‘imagining’ communities‘ has its own limits, as it becomes evident that there is as much blurring involved as clear and meaningful bounding [where] vexing questions like who is Latino and who is not, and what kind of Latinos/as we are talking about, quickly press in on any too facile dichotomy” (Flores, 1997, p. 185). Flores also adds that it is equally important to the community to create a “‘Latino historical imaginary’, which refers to home countries in Latin America, the landscape, lifeways, and social struggles familiar, if not from personal experience, at least to one’s family and people, [as this is]

3 indispensable to Latinos in situating themselves in U.S. [and Canadian] society” (Flores,

1997, p.188). In essence, I share in Flores’ distinction of the Latino imaginary and place my writing about “Latin American/women” and “Latino/community” within that larger contextual framework that goes beyond an act of classification, and moves as a process of social imagination. I recognize that “the search for Latino identity and community, the ongoing creation of a Latino imaginary, is also a search for a new map, a new ethos, a new

America” (Flores, 1997, p. 191). And the Latino identity can be imagined “not as the negation of the non-Latino, but as the affirmation of cultural and social realities and possibilities in [our] own human trajectory” (Flores, 1997, p. 190).

At this point, I would like to be clear that while I share in Flores’ conceptualization of the Latino imaginary, I also understand the complexities within that political project and in no way negate the very real and existing (not ‘imagined’) peoples whose origins are/have been from Latin America. I also acknowledge that even the geographical referential of “Latin

America” has its problems as a point of shared geo/political origin. In light and because of these complexities, it is crucial that we continue to find ways to reclaim our voices, as self- identified Latin American, Latino, Black, trans, Indigenous, mulatto, , Spanish- speaking, lesbian, English-speaking, woman, nationalist, immigrant, and/or Canadian among many other identities that intersect, living in Canada. These multiple intersecting and overlapping identities make up what is known as Latinidad. Latinidad is explained by

Rodriguez (2003) through a rhizomatic reading that suggests it is “the process through which contested constructions of identity work to constitute one another, emphasizing “and” over

“is” as a way to think about differences...Latinidad is about the “dimensions” or “the directions in motion” of history and culture and geography and language and self-named

4 identities” (p. 22). Rodriguez also adds that, “even if individual narratives used to chart these discourses contradict or exclude one another, the site of rupture will itself serve as a new site of knowledge production” (p. 22).

In an effort to connect abstract concepts to concrete examples, I draw on a study conducted by Jorge Ginieniewicz (2010a) where he looks at the political and civic involvement of a group of Latin American immigrants in the city of Toronto. Ginieniewicz remarks that certain factors, such as limited command of English, low socio-economic status and lack of knowledge of the dynamics of Canadian politics, reduce the opportunities for

Latin American immigrants to become more active within the political system. At the same time, Ginieniewicz (2010a) concludes that “[t]he capacity of the community to expand networks of solidarity is apparently growing and making the Latin American community stronger at the grass-roots level” (p. 512). The author adds that, “grass-roots politics might become a springboard to electoral politics” (p. 512). In another article by Ginieniewicz

(2010b) on the perception of Latin Americans in Toronto regarding political representation of immigrants, the author found that a third of the interviewees commented that there was a lack of leadership within la comunidad (read Latin American). The result of this supposed shortcoming as mentioned by several interviewees in the study is that it is the lack of leadership which prevents la comunidad from attaining unity (p. 270). The interviews conducted by Ginieniewicz are insightful and offer an opportunity for a wide range of discussion on both political engagement and leadership. On the other hand, further research drawing correlations between the responses of interviewees and their social locations as members forming “la comunidad” can serve to obtain other relevant information to better understand our social landscape- both within the Latino community and in Canadian society.

5

Furthermore, the social and historical contexts of Latin American migration to Canada should always be at the centre of these discussions as outlined by scholars such as Flores

(1997), Ginieniewicz (2010b), Goldring (2006), Garay (2000), and Mata (1985). Moreover, pivotal to a Latin American narrative on leadership and the ever diverse comunidad, is the integration of women’s (cis-gender) and trans people’s stories given that much of the existing leadership literature has been created by cis-gender men and studied by these men in leadership roles, with little to no mention of the role of feminist thought in discourse on gender equity, collaboration and social justice, not to mention scientific and popular interest in women leaders (Lau Chin, 2007). Indeed, there is a need for a more inclusive and comprehensive understanding of leadership that is both culturally appropriate and contextually relevant to Latin American women, particularly to young women participating in leadership programs.

It is in this vein, that as researcher, I want to create a space in Canadian academic literature to specifically introduce readers to seven Latina women (including myself), living in an urban city in Canada who can affirm the historic and present existence of leadership and community organizing in the Latin American community and in the larger Canadian landscape in specific ways that acknowledge both Latin American women’s voice and their perspectives on leadership. In this way, documentation of women’s perspective on leadership can contribute to transforming existing models of leadership to include gender and to draw on the diverse voices of Latina women. But what is ‘leadership’? And how have some of us come to understand it in the Latin American women’s movement in Canada- particularly in the context of organizing and institutional change. In this study I use a small Latin American

6 women’s organization pseudo named Nosotras as a site for leadership development among

Latina women.

Nosotras is one example of an organization with the potential to transform new ways of theorizing and doing ‘leadership’ based on the women who define it. This is not to say that changes have not already occurred in the organization. Indeed, in the three years I was there,

I was a part of the agency’s transformation. There were moments of tension and power dynamics that at times called into question whether the agency in fact always worked, “from an inclusive, feminist, anti-racist, anti-oppressive framework” as was claimed. Nevertheless,

Nosotras remained one of few places that offered a “Latin American/Latina” space for women in a society that is not always welcoming or representative of such diverse identity(ies). It is also one of the first places in Canada to offer a leadership training program exclusively to young Latina women.

1.1. Socio-Political Contexts at a Glance

Providing a historical context gives some understanding of the wide range of Latin

American women’s experiences with leadership, encompassing Latina women who left their countries of origin due to political persecution and violence and the over sixty young Latina women ‘trained’ in Nosotras’ leadership training programs on violence prevention. Indeed, even if only at a glance, it is important to explain the socio-political contexts of the Latin

American community in Canada, and where possible, the particular implication for women, in order to gain some insight into research participants’ situated sense-making of leadership.

Included in this section are: La Migracion (The migration waves of Latin American people

7 to Canada), El Encuentro (The 1995 1st Latin American Women’s Conference in Canada),

Nosotras and its creation, and the Leadership Training Program at Nosotras.

La Migracion

An important aspect of the historical context of Latin American people in Canada is our migratory experience to this country. Demographic figures provided by in 2001 census, show that 73 per cent of Latin American immigrants arrived in Canada between 1981 and 2001, and 40 per cent between 1991 and 2001. Furthermore, in existing literature, Latin American is typically explained in several waves:

Lead, Andean, Coup, Central American and Professional (Garay, 2000; Mata, 1985). The names of waves are differentiated by the reasons for migration, the socio-political context of the period and the places of origin of the immigrants (Ginieniewicz & Shugurensky, 2007).

For example, the first massive migration from Latin America to Canada began in the late

1950’s and early sixties. This wave is known as lead. Then came the Andean wave of the early seventies, the wave of coups d’etat in the Southern cone nations in the mid-seventies, the wave of armed conflict in Central America in the eighties, and the professional wave that began in the nineties. Essentially, while the lead and professional waves were labour related, aided by government policy favourable to attracting highly qualified immigrants to

Canada, the other three waves were due to a greater extent to political reasons in Latin

America (Garay, 2000; Ginieniewicz & Shugurensky, 2007; Mata, 1985).

Ginieniewicz explains that the nature of Latin American immigration has also been marked by experiences of marginalization- both political and economic -- in their countries of origin (Ginieniewicz, 2010a, p. 265). And while sadly our experiences of marginalization

8 have not and do not end upon our arrival to Canada, due to the growing and continuous immigration, it is apparent that the Latin American-Canadian community “is reaching a level of maturity, organization, cultural, social and political visibility without precedent in the history of this country” (Ginieniewicz & Shugurensky, 2007). It is precisely in a historical and current context of marginalization and willingness to participate politically (whether through grass-roots or electoral participation) that Latin American women’s sense of leadership as well as leadership process must be analyzed. One key historic example of women’s sense of leadership is El Encuentro.

El Encuentro-1995

In June of 1995, through the convictions of many Latina feminists who believed that women deserved their own spaces to heal, exchange knowledge and come together as women, Nosotras organized a conference in Toronto known as “El Encuentro” -- the

Encounter. The large-scale conference for Latin American women involved reaching out to women from all over Ontario and even Quebec (mainly ). In fact, their concerted effort to encourage women who were feeling emotionally isolated, as well geographically isolated to attend the conference meant renting buses, and driving to the more isolated areas of the province to pick up and drop off participants and facilitators. The conference was made up of a plethora of workshops from mental health to legal rights to sexual health, among many others. This conference marked the first time in Canadian history where women of Latin American origin were attending workshops and activist circles led by other Latin

American women whose diverse expertise and knowledge were accepted as valid and important. This was in stark contrast to the defacto rejection of their professional skills by

9

Canadian policy. In my interview with a research participant pseudonamed Julia, she remarks that “[this is probably] why the women encounter in 95 was so successful, because we managed to put Latin American women at the centre.” In El Encuentro women’s knowledge was welcomed - for the most part. The response to this large scale initiative was by every measure successful. Nonetheless, there was resistance along the way by some men and women, who insisted that to have forums to discuss how to create safer and more informed communities (both Latin American and Canadian) required a collective process that equally involved women and men. However, the women who organized the conference did not share in this belief and instead proceeded as un espacio solo para mujeres, a women-only space.

The other resistance experienced was at the conference, though perhaps at a smaller yet equally significant scale, in response to a particular group session/workshop at El

Encuentro offered by and for lesbian women. Women who were in disagreement with this kind of workshop noted that the purpose of the conference was not only to bring awareness about particular issues that affected women, but it was also an opportunity to collectivize and advocate as women. For the women who resisted “lesbian only” spaces, they saw other women’s different sexual orientation as a hindrance to the Latin American “sisterhood”.

Nevertheless, queer women took up their own space and at the end of the day, it was acknowledged by the majority at the conference that, ideas of sisterhood needed to be interrogated. Mohanty states that “[s]isterhood cannot be assumed on the basis of gender, it must be forged in concrete historical and political practice and analysis” (Mohanty, 1991, p.

8). Indeed, many of the women who identified as lesbian, bisexual, trans, etc. shared particular forms of histories that centered around women loving women as well as oppressions that resulted in homophobic violence and being closeted in their country of

10 origin andin Canada. These experiences differed from the experiences of heterosexual women and it was important for many of the queer women to make that distinction at the conference.

I should clarify at this point that my retelling of El Encuentro is not because I experienced it, it is a passing down of knowledge from other women in the Latin American community that were involved at different levels. I recognize that each woman I have talked to may have experienced El Encuentro somewhat differently. However, if nothing else, the above information shared with me demonstrates that the documentation on the experiences of women is critical to literature on leadership because there are both collective experiences within a patriarchal system and an individual way of retelling the story. Each retelling of a shared story will inevitably be different from every other, but simultaneously relational, depending on each one’s social position within the patriarchal system and historical context.

Grewal & Kaplan state “each [woman] has their own complex articulation within a specific patriarchy and a particular historical context that includes race, nation, gender, class, and other social factors” (p. 12).

Nevertheless, this is very different than writing merely to recognize the diversity that exists within a community. Zavella (1994) explains that “simply recognizing the richness of diversity can lead to an atheoretical pluralism where diversity seems overwhelming and it is difficult to discern the bases of commonality and difference among women” (p. 199).

Nosotras

In order to understand Nosotras’ Leadership Training Program (LTP) for young

Latina women, we must understand how Nosotras was created. Nosotras -- the Latin

11

American women’s organization - indeed has a history of its own, rarely shared in great depth in the LTPs. While Nosotras was officially established as a non-profit organization for women in 2003, its roots come from an anti-violence coalition of men and women in the early 1990s. This coalition was created in response to the socio-political climate of the time, which ignored the concerns of the Latin American community with respect to violence, and neglected the needs of women and children in particular in issues around domestic abuse. In this coalition both women and men participated and thus exemplified a leadership that was a collective process “that include[d] the mutually important and reinforcing dynamic between both women’s and men’s roles” (Delgado Bernal, 1998, p. 123). The social context of that time gave rise to a particular activism and collectivism of Latin American people that exemplified leadership- though it may have never been described as that, but rather as “what you have to do” as marginalized women (Simms, 2000, p. 638).

Nevertheless, there is a connection since some of the women who participated in the collectives of the 90s remained connected to Nosotras. These women commented over coffee and after meetings, that the coalitions of the past did not occur without struggle and challenges inside the collectives in which they worked. Many collective members had different approaches and understandings of their role and the process that needed to occur in order to create change. These differences, situated within the particular socio-political contexts of the mid-1990s, (including economic decline and government cutbacks to social services) caused ruptures in the collectives and eventually disintegration. Nevertheless, the initiative to provide an established space for women to come together, exchange information and most importantly to become advocates in their comunidad was a shared goal. However,

12 the vision and process on how that goal would be achieved varied greatly among community members at that time.

The Leadership Training Program (LTP)

In February 2005, Nosotras initiated its first Leadership Training Program (LTP) on building relationships that are healthy and equal as a response to the increasing intimate relationship violence experienced by Latina youth and due to the lack of mentorship for young Latina women in society. This recruitment process for this program involved an application submission that included a statement of why each candidate wanted to enrol in the program, what they already knew about feminism, and whether they were particularly vulnerable and would find it difficult to discuss the topic of violence against women. Young women applying to the program were categorized in different ways in order to facilitate the selection process. At Nosotras, the selection process for the ‘right participant’ was an important component to a ‘successful’ leadership training program. The hope as written in the funding proposal was to obtain Latina women who not only met the required age of 17 to

25, and identified as low income and living within a so called inner city area, but also needed self-identified “Latina” or “Latin American origin”. Furthermore, the candidates were looked upon favourably if they understood Spanish (at least at a basic level), and/or could speak

Spanish and English, had some knowledge of feminism/women’s studies and violence; and if the candidate was experiencing or had experienced violence, they were coping or had coped with this issue in healthy and progressive ways. The latter requirement was actually not advertised on the flyer, but explained in the interview process as necessary in order to mitigate any triggers that might be set off when discussing the topic of violence while enrolled in the program. Once a candidate’s application was approved, she was contacted for

13 an interview with the Executive Director and a Board Member. Upon a successful interview, the candidate would be invited to participate in the leadership training program (LTP).

The other aspect of the program was the workshop component and the peer training phase. That is, upon successful completion of the LTP, the young Latin American women

(i.e.´trainees´) were required to do educational awareness on the issue of violence against women in public and Catholic primary and secondary so-called “high risk” schools. Trainees became facilitators in classrooms as they discussed the different forms of violence against women through interactive exercises. In this way, according to Nosotras, young Latinas were learning to become leaders in their communities as they were encouraged to speak out against violence through popular education methods.

1.2. How I Came To This Work

My experience in Nosotras is only one of many at that agency. Nonetheless, it is my personal and shared experience that brings me to undertake this research endeavour.

Ultimately, for me, Nosotras served as a site of learning- contradictions and all. On one hand, it was a refuge and a place that recognized the importance of having a Latin American women’s space. Moreover, Nosotras was a place that encouraged leadership and advocacy for Latina women, especially around issues of violence against women. These beliefs compelled me to take on the role of Youth Coordinator within the organization. I had dedicated two years of volunteering with Nosotras and enjoyed being able to participate actively in discussions about the organization and about our own involvement as Latina women within the larger community. In an open house event that Nosotras held in 2008, I expressed the importance of Nosotras in my life through a speech:

14

While struggling to learn from the outsider within myself, I came to know the one sphere of

freedom available to me 1. In the midst of all the complexes and complexities of my class, my

culture, my skin colour, my gender, I developed a sense of consciousness, an understanding

that it is not me who is imperfect - at least not to the extent where marginalization and

discrimination could be justified... I came to know acts of resistance. Hence, my encounter

with Nosotras. Hence, my need to seek out a familiar ambiente. A space where I could feel at

once accepted and encouraged for who I am, without all the labels or preconceived notions of

what it means to be Latina or an immigrant or a woman. The Leadership Program

serendipitously brought young women together whose identities were as diverse as my own

and whose experiences many times resembled my lived-experiences of migration, of

education, of violence.

However, from the time of sharing that speech and onward, my perception of

Nosotras gradually became affected by other experiences. While working at the agency, I

began to notice an unspoken (silent) limiting conceptualization and approach to leadership

that at a structural level was maintained by a small and select group of people within the

organization. Along with the absence of defining el liderazgo, there also existed unspoken

beliefs about “Latin American” identity, what it means to be a “woman”, and the importance

of maintaining a particular image of Nosotras to the community.

On a personal note, by August 2009, I experienced a series of dangers in my

leadership role as Youth Coordinator at Nosotras. I want to highlight here the use of

‘dangers’ as Anzaldua (1981) does instead of ‘obstacles‘ or ‘challenges‘ because at the time,

I felt that these dangers could not be transcended, nor was I able to rise above them (p. 165).

I simply knew that I had to go through these dangers and hope I would never repeat the

1 An expression borrowed from an article written by Patricia Hill Collins (1986) entitled, “Learning from the Outsider Within: The Sociological Significance of Black Feminist Thought”.

15 performance (p. 165). In the end, I decided to resign from my position and my participation within the agency. Over time, I became increasingly disillusioned with the agency as I became aware that I was not the only one that had felt this way. I was not the only one that had realized that there are no safe places (Anzaldua, 2002).

The dominant and desired image of Nosotras by some became apparent in the last year of my participation at the organization when we began to do work in the area of homophobia in the Latin American community. One of our first steps towards achieving a more welcoming space of our own came after an anti-homophobia workshop offered to all volunteers, staff and former leadership training participants. It was agreed that a poster with the LGBTTIQQ2 triangle, including the stated commitment to human rights and acceptance of diverse people regardless of sexual preference and orientation, would be made visible to the public. As Youth Coordinator at the time, I took that initiative very seriously and proudly taped the statement to the front door of the organization. I was excited about the progress of not only our small organization, but also of each individual (including the Executive Director and Board members) that had attended the workshop and seemingly supported the importance of safe spaces for all. However, the sign did not last long at the front door. A day later, my employer at the time was startled to see such a sign. She questioned its 8” by 11” size and ‘asked’ that the poster be shown somewhere else that was less visible. She expressed in a somewhat flustered tone that she did not want community members (particularly older

Latin American women) who were already hesitant about entering a women’s organization, to be scared away by thinking that the organization was a lesbian women’s space.

Essentially, through this decision, the message to the public was that Nosotras did not want an anti-homophobia poster on the front door of the organization. Thus, the decision-

2 Lesbian, Gay, Bisexual, Trans, Two-Spirited, Intersex, Questioning, Queer

16 making of one person affected the image of the organization. And on a personal level, at that time, as a queer young woman gradually coming out to my family and friends, Nosotras suddenly became an unsafe place for me and yet a place in which I remained an active member.

This is where I begin to illustrate the contradictions and complexity of my involvement at Nosotras- at the crossroads of misrepresentation and the desire to belong to a space. A space that heralded leadership and voice to Latin American women in the community and simultaneously defined the organization’s image and representation of what it means to be a “Latin American woman” and a “leader” in arguably narrow ways. The result was that the representation of young Latin American women’s experiences in the construction of identity and social participation was overdetermined by imposed frames from particular people of power (Klau et al., 2006, p. 32) -- whether adults, first generation Latin

American immigrants (as opposed to 1.5 generation or second generation), Canadian citizens, educated, heterosexual cis-gender women, and the multiple intersections of the aforementioned and in opposition to ‘la otra’ (the other). It is in this kind of context of intersecting power and oppression that identified young leaders were guided within the organization. Notably, it is through taking up leadership roles within the organization, that some women experienced the most resistance from others with more power in the agency.

This allowed Nosotras to remain intact through an interlocking system that produced symbiotic and hierarchical relationships between some women within the organization

(Razack, 1998, p. 13) and caused the exclusion of those who refused to participate in that kind of relationship.

17

Interestingly however, within spaces of exclusion, young women who had shared similar negative experiences at Nosotras came together and eventually demonstrated resistance against the leadership of the Board and the Executive Director. This resistance was arguably part and parcel of the young women’s own leadership process that extended beyond the leadership training program, and that simultaneously and inconclusively may have been at least in part, the result of participating in such a program. Important to note is that in an evaluation undertaken about the leadership training program, it was found that generally, participants were appreciative of being in a group with other young women since for many of them it was the first time they gained a space to build relationships and exchange knowledge between other Latina women.

“Entre Nosotras” as a thesis title touches on the tensions and contradictions between the discourse in the interviews, particularly around individual and collective leadership and illustrates in its own way the borderland that Gloria Anzaldua describes in La conciencia de la mestiza: Towards a new consciousness (1990), where tolerance for ambiguity and contradiction is demanded. Anzaldua writes, “La mestiza constantly has to shift out of habitual formations; from convergent thinking, analytical reasoning that tends to use rationality to move toward a single goal (a Western mode), to divergent thinking, characterized by movement away from set patterns and goals and towards a more whole perspective, one that includes rather than excludes” (Anzaldua, 1990, p. 379). The words

“entre nosotras” (between us in English), notably in Spanish and making up half of the title for this research study strongly advocates for the use of different varieties of Spanish to increase the inclusion of all women. The disruption of using Spanish words in what would otherwise be an academic paper written completely in English is also a way to create spaces

18 of resistance to the hegemonic English literature that exists in academia. It connotes a rejection of “pure” standards of both Spanish and English and the linguistic positionality brought about through (dis)placement (Rodriguez, 2003, p. 19). It also creates spaces of resistance to patriarchy by centering the research project around women, and having the women interviewed not only define leadership, but also recognize themselves and each other as leaders. Thus, Entre Nosotras advocates for the inclusion of women’s voices “Between us

(read women)”.

Moreover, “Entre Nosotras” acknowledges that while the participants in this study share some identifiers, they also have different ways of knowing in light of their personal experiences, journeys and social location. In essence, it was important for me to show leadership as a process that happens among women, that is at once shared and personalized because while one takes part in a collective movement and demonstrates individual leadership on women’s rights issues for example, each comes with her own experience and knowledge. And through their collective experience and leadership, each person takes away other experiences and ways of knowing that may be different or particular to each one involved.

At another level, Entre nosotras alludes to the need for organizations to work through a process of leadership that is somewhere “Entre las nosotras y el yo”. That is, somewhere between the “us” - i.e. “the collective”, “the sisterhood”, “the women”, and the “I”- i.e. “the autonomy”, “the individual”, “the woman”. Indeed, this seemed to be a challenge and a point of tension in the small Latin American women’s organization.

19

1.3. Thesis Statement

First, this thesis subscribes to the view that “leadership is a process not the possession of individuals in positions of authority” (Kezar, 2009, p. 6). Second, leadership is a highly complex and ambiguous process shaped by interpersonal interactions and the cultural and social norms of particular contexts” (Kezar, 2009, p. 6). Based on these premises, I argue that in the conceptualization and practice of leadership training programs and models, there is a need to create spaces by Latin American people that collectively transform leadership processes through the engagement of diverse perspectives - fostering continued development of people’s intrinsic differences (Bensimon & Neumann, 1993, p. 18) given their positionality and critical pedagogy. Key to this pedagogy within formal and informal organizing, is language: in particular, narratives from Latina women on leadership and the language they use since it “provides the self-definition upon which people act, negotiate various subject positions and undertake a process of naming, and renaming the relationship between themselves, others and the world” (Giroux & McLaren, 1997, p. 17). In this research study, seven participants provide important insight on how Latin American women’s perspective on leadership might relate to their sense of identity and positionality within a greater societal (read: Canadian) context, as situated in the historical and organizational context of leadership initiatives and in the context of women’s lived experiences.

As a focal point, this work will examine how the idea of leadership is conceptualized and practiced as well as how these women navigate through their everyday realities while working toward social change, highlighting both the challenges to leadership and possibilities of struggle. Moreover, with reference to one particular community organization- Nosotras, the research study takes up how ‘leadership’ has been defined by those who design

20 leadership programs oriented towards young Latina women. At each step of this work, it is my intention to look for ways that we as la comunidad could cultivate leadership in Latin

American women and at the same time create a transformative shared vision of liderazgo that empowers young women and that creates a space for diverse perspectives and points of discussion within a Latina Feminista framework.

1.4. The Organization of this Study

In the following sections of this thesis, I explain the significance of this study to existing academic literature and to new ways of thinking about leadership. Then, I explain my theoretical framework for this research, which includes Feminism, Critical Race Theory, and Positionality Theory as a way to gain insight on the seven Latin American women’s perspective on leadership. After establishing the framework to this study, I explain the methods used and the methodology. In the analysis section of this thesis, first, I attempt to move beyond a posture of criticism to one of substantive vision (McLaren and Giroux, 1997).

I discuss what the moral referents might be for defending particular social and cultural practices, while beginning to construct a clearer sense of what values need to be defended in the interest of an emancipatory vision of learning on leadership (Giroux & McLaren, 1997, p.

19). Second, I discuss how I came to interpret the silences in the interviews - in their different forms, and how these silences could be seen at times as a form of resistance.

Resistance was most notable from some of the young women at Nosotras, particularly those who had occupied the position of Youth Coordinator. Resistance is discussed in each of the interviews and in certain cases, it is described as affecting the leadership process. Third, I put forward some suggestions on designing leadership training models, especially for young

21

Latin American women, pulling from the diverse experiences within Nosotras and from my research findings. I close with final thoughts on the evolution of the thesis and the possibility for further research.

1.5. Significance of Study

In my research I not only provide some historical context,as seen above, but I also create a space to learn about the perspective of the seven participants of this study and to document their voices in an effort to offer insight into current-day ‘leadership training models’ and to move forward by beginning an interchange of experiences and knowledge. As

Belenky, Clinchy, Golderberger, and Tarule (1986) state “such interchanges lead to ways of knowing that enable individuals to enter into the social and intellectual life of their community. Without them, individuals remain isolated from others and without tools for representing their experiences, people also remain isolated from the self” (p. 26).

Thus, the significance of this study is two-fold. First, while leadership has been defined by many academics and through the work of some policy theorists who do not situate themselves as subjects or whose writing attempts to make leadership ‘neutral’ and subjectivity as irrelevant, the perspectives of Latina women -- in particular young Latina women, who hold multiple identities and live in Canada -- have been overlooked and insufficiently elaborated, especially in terms of designing leadership programs. For this reason, the knowledge shared by Latinas about what is living, breathing feminista leadership can be considered subjugated knowledge as Foucault refers to it. The re-emergence of these

“unqualified” or directly disqualified knowledges that are both incapable of unanimity and which owe their force to the harshness with which they are opposed by everything

22 surrounding them comes to form an entry point in which criticism of the dominant knowledge can occur (Foucault, 1980, p. 80).

Ideally, in creating feminista leadership, the provision of a space where life experiences are acknowledged and valued is the first step. Subsequent to this (or perhaps simultaneously), an important question needs to be raised. In the words of David Takacs,

“How does who you are and where you stand in relation to others shape what you know about the world?” (Takacs, 2002, p. 168). Offering a vignette of what leadership means to each participant and situating it in relation to each other contributes to creating a shared concept of leadership where no one perspective is privileged (Takacs, 2002, p. 176).

Takacs states that,

By respecting the unique life experiences that each student brings into the classroom- by

asserting that the broadest possible set of experiences is crucial to helping each of us

understand the topic at hand as completely as possible, we empower all students as

knowledge makers. We allow each student to assert individualized knowledge that

contributes to a collective understanding (p. 170).

It is from such an understanding that we have a standpoint from which to challenge power and ultimately change ourselves (Maher & Tetreault, 2001, p. 164).

What does this mean in an organizational context? Particularly if we know that organizations are not neutral bodies nor is leadership framed as a values-neutral phenomenon, especially within leadership development programs that operate from a top- down, and context-free leadership paradigm (Kezar, 2009, p. 7).

Pulling from existing literature on leadership, particularly women’s leadership, I highlight how leadership can be a transformative process which requires (re)naming and restructuring. Indeed, understanding how positionality biases epistemology and how those

23 with certain kinds of positions routinely appropriate power can be part of an educational agenda aimed toward promoting greater social justice (Takacs, 2002, p. 177). It is equally important to note that the potential outcome of the (re)appearance of these disqualified knowledges, the documentation of the voices and experiences of Latin American women

/Latinas, is a non-static, on-going working model of Latina leadership. This thesis argues that this kind of contextual understanding is key to the development of the Latin American community and Canadian society in general.

Chapter 2: Theoretical Framework, Research Method, and Methodology

2.1. Theoretical Framework

In my research, I have placed the social construction of Latina women at the centre of my

inquiry. I ask: what are Latina women’s perceptions of leadership and how are those

perceptions informed by their experiences and/or how they move in the world?

According to McLaren and Giroux (1997), “[l]anguage and subjectivity inform our

practical consciousness in which the “I” is always dependent upon a “we” and always

contingent upon historical and social localization and the ensemble of social relations

constituent of the larger social totality” (p. 25). Knowing this, we can begin to unravel the

complexities of Latina women’s perspective on leadership as well as the ways that their

individual perspective is and is not represented in the context of the leadership training

program at Nosotras, within the Latin American women’s movement and within a larger

Canadian context. By doing so, language becomes important since it is through language

that we both name experience and act as a result of how we interpret that experience (Giroux

& McLaren 1997, p. 26).

In light of the aforementioned, it is important to explain the need to categorically

refer to the subjects in this study (including myself) as “Latina women”, rather than to refer

to them as individual gendered subjectivities. I write in this way as a strategic essentialist

which is defined by Emma Perez as “one who exercises political representation, or identity

politics, within hegemonic structures”. Perez (1998) further explains that “[t]he strategy

asserts countersites within dominant society” and that “[a]s a dynamic process, this tactic

gives voices to each new marginalized social or political group, bonded temporarily at

specific historical moments” (pp. 87-88).

24 25

Thus, it is not my intention to create a generalization of women’s experience or perspectives on leadership under the umbrella of “(young) Latina women”, (re)producing the conceptualization of the racialized/gendered subject. Instead, I subscribe to Lena

Gunnarsson’s position that “not only do symbolic categories structure our perception of human beings; also the real grouping of women and men act back upon our systems of meaning so that these categories are necessary if we are to make sense of- and effectively change- the world” (p. 30). For this reason, we must be cautious about how we construct the categories of ‘men’ and ‘women’, paying particular attention not to privilege heteronormativity/heterosexuality as neutral to the point that it becomes an invisible, unmarked category that renders other ways of being (lesbian, gay, bisexual, trans, or even celibate) seemingly deviant or not quite normal (Weedon, 1999, p. 45). In this same vein, we can consider taking up leadership through the intersectionality of race and gendered sexualities or sexual difference in order to queer spaces and processes (such as leadership) in ways that not only challenge heteronormativity and ways of knowing, but that also validate the experience and knowledge of a or any lesbian or “woman identified woman who commits herself to women not only as an alternative to oppressive male/female relationships but primarily because she loves women” (Weedon, 1999, p. 61). By “queering spaces”, I mean to bring forward a queer perspective, described by Chris Weedon (1999) as one that sees

“nothing is natural, nothing is normal. Everything is social and cultural construct and gender identities are acquired at least in part, through performance” (Weedon, 1999, p. 73). In other words, Rodriguez (2003) insists that “Queer” is not simply an umbrella term that encompasses lesbians, bisexuals, gay men, two-spirited people, and transsexuals; it is a challenge to constructions of heteronormativity” (p. 24). Rodrigues adds that “it need not

26 subsume the particularities of these other definitions of identity instead it creates an opportunity to call into question the systems of categorization that have served to define sexuality” (Rodriguez, 2003, p. 24).

As women we must acknowledge the very real collective construct that exists, albeit complex and an ever changing reality. Nevertheless, Sayer (1992) makes the crucial distinction that “stating that women share a common position as women is not the same as maintaining that women are the same” (p. 123). And therefore, “women’s commonality has to be thought of as very “thin” and cannot be transferred to the empirical level in any direct sense [...]. This commonality implies neither a common experience nor unified struggle, but it entails a common basis for experience and thus a common basis for struggle” (Jonasdottir

1994, p. 41). Indeed, the Latina women in this research, who in some way have been involved with Nosotras, have conceded to having a common basis for struggle (at least to some extent) and have more specifically a common basis for vision. That is, at some point and to differing levels, all the women who became involved in Nosotras, shared in the agency’s vision for the integral and equal participation of Latin American women in all levels of society.

In placing Latina women at the centre of this research, I am guided by Linda Alcoff explains that “if we combine the concept of identity politics with a conception of the subject as positionality, we can conceive of the subject as non-essentialized [and] emergent from a historical experience and yet retain our political ability to take gender as an important point of departure” (Alcoff, 1988, p. 433). Alcoff constructs a new position that is both fluid and relational, stating that, “being a ‘woman’ is to take up a position within a moving historical context and to be able to choose what we make of this position

27 and how we alter this context... [so that] women can themselves articulate a set of interests and ground a feminist politics” (Alcoff, 1988, p. 435). Gaining insight into a moving historical context in which communities continue developing is crucial to understanding how we come to identify ‘leadership’.

Moreover, by placing Latina women at the centre, documenting their individual perspectives and experiences, we acknowledge not only their agency, but the immense range of the complexities in identity and power relations given that “our experiences are never individualized moments of our singular being but arise from economic, political, and social constructs that have a history and that work in concert- moments both of constraint and possibility -- that have both material and psychological emotional consequences” (Lewis

1993, p. 44). For this reason, the importance of a Latina Feminism in our leadership process is critical. And central to the leadership process is the passing on of knowledge about Latin

American women’s experiences. It is important to examine what has been learned about and from Latina female leaders, and their leadership stories to bring new perspective into the discourse of leadership, gender, and ethnicity (Mendez-Morse, 2000, pp. 594-595).

Furthermore, proposing new ways of redefining and reclaiming our identities means that as

Latin American women we are also involved in the construction of knowledge. As a result, we move away from being objects to become subjects who can then begin to establish our own hogar3 (Flores, 1996, p. 149). Moreover, becoming aware of the different ways in which women use the resources available to them to construct their identity, contributes to building feminist theory that opens spaces and provides voice for women (Flores, 1996, p. 152), allowing the possibility of the construction of complex and multiple identities.

3 Translated from Spanish to mean ‘home’.

28

In essence, Latina feminist research challenges preconceived notions (read: stereotypes) of who is the Latino/a subject. This is important since Sandoval-Sanchez and

Sternback (2001) explain that Latino identity, also referred as Latinidad, in some academic literature, is oftentimes constructed based on “the use of the body itself as the marker and, hence, the prop, a utilization that occurs at the moment when our horizon of expectations is confirmed by what we visually see- usually a racialized and ethnic body- (which becomes) the only determinant for a Latino/a identity” (p. 35). The result of this is that those bodies which take on the properties of a sign, the racial, ethnic, class and gender markers of

Latinidad are represented in a way that “the mestizo/a becomes the racialized ethnic body par excellence and is now enlisted utopically to represent all Latinos/as (p. 35). For example,

Latin American women are often portrayed as victims -- poor, abused, uneducated, inferior, etc, causing Latina women to be exotified and disempowered in the media, on the street, and even in some proposals for social program funding. Pratto and Espinoza (2001) suggest that intersectional ethnic/gender stereotypes may be how mental images are organized, and emphasize the importance of studying the intersection of ethnicity and gender (Vasquez &

Comas-Diaz, 2007, p. 272). Stereotypes negatively affect the sense of capability, motivations and leadership goals of Latinas and other women of colour because as Mamphela Ramphele

(1990) writes, “the victim image is ultimately disempowering... it denies human agency in history which is inherent in the very essence of our humanity...projecting people as hapless victims patronizes and paralyses them [as it] promotes the image of the oppressor as

“invincible” in relation to their own “powerlessness” (James, 1993, p. 14).

Latina Feminism challenges the victim image and other self-imposed images of

Latinidad that denigrate the Latina woman and la comunidad, and allows for spaces in which

29 the self determination of Latin American women’s own identity can occur. In this research, this is particularly important - especially for the young Latin American women. Arguably,

Nosotras’ representations of young Latin American women’s experiences in the construction of identity and social participation were at times overdetermined by imposed frames from an outsider, adult perspective which was at times deprecatory (Lau Chin et al., 2006, p. 32). But identity within the context of a Latin American women’s organization, did not only represent the confluence of gender and age, it also represented other factors such as race, sexual orientation, nationality, class, ability, ideology and profession. For this reason, it was important to include Critical Race Theory (CRT) within my feminist analytic lens. A feminist lens puts women’s lived experience at the centre of the discussion on what is leadership. It also acknowledges that diverse feminist groups differ in their leadership styles, since the issues they face as leaders are influenced by and made more complex when considering race, gender, class, etc. (Lau Chin, 2006, p. 11). However, CRT recognizes that, “the components of an individual identity constantly shift, some becoming more prominent in certain settings than others” (Delgado & Stefancic, 2002, p. 322). Furthermore, I use Critical Race Theory

(CRT) to highlight the importance of also putting race and racism as well as experiential knowledge at the centre of the study (Solorazano, 2002, p. 47). Haney Lopez (2000) states that “[r]ace should be used as a lens through which to view Latinos/as in order to focus our attention on the experiences of racial oppression” (p. 192). However, Lopez adds that “Race” should also direct our attention to racial oppression’s long-term effects on the day-to-day conditions encountered and endured by Latino/a communities” (p. 375). CRT challenges dominant ideology by allowing participants to reflect on their lived experiences and by

“interrogating the interlocking nature of power relations. Power relations can and do

30 permeate society in part through the force of law”, referred to as interconnectivity -- “a consciousness and strategy designed to awaken awareness of the linkages between intersecting structures and systems of domination and subdomination (Valdes, 2002, p. 338).

Thus, “interconnectivity represents, and insists upon, an expansive and multidimensional approach to social...transformation” (p. 338).

In the case of Nosotras, it is important to provide a brief context about its existence and how the leadership training program was created and maintained, because it tells a story about resistance and commitment to social justice on two levels. At a macro level, I discuss the creation of Nosotras in resistance to the paternalistic and hegemonic socio-political context of the 1990s that privileged some women (read: white Canadian-born women) over others (read: immigrant women of colour). At a micro level, I utilize the voices of the seven women interviewed to share our perspective on leadership in the context of our involvement in Nosotras, at times illustrating interlocking systems of power, similar to the macro level.

With particular emphasis on the interviews, a CRT lens provides insight on the interlocking systems of power that exist and that need and secure one another creating positions that exist symbiotically and hierarchically (Razack, 1998, p. 13). If we acknowledge that power relations can change, how do they relate to a subject’s interpretation of leadership, especially when examining how gender and other social markers impact the way an individual views the world (Kezar, 2007, p. 723)? To examine this question, I utilize another theoretical lens called positionality theory.

Robert McRuer (1997) states that “[p]ositionality theory enables a situated reading of leadership to examine how particular locations of power frame individual sense-making (p.

34). This is important since it allows an understanding of multiple perspectives to

31 constructing the political conditions, practices of representation and identities made possible within the political project associated with our leadership [process] as a Latin American women’s organization (Kezar, 2007, p. 726). Thus, while CRT provides a framework that encompasses interlocking systems of oppression and that has at its center the intersectionality of race and racism as well as the interdisciplinary perspectives that allow the participant to reflect on her lived experience (Solorazano, 2002, p. 47), positionality theory offers a lens to examine how people make meaning from various aspects of their identity. At the same time, positionality theory states that these meanings, social positions, andpower relations can all change (Kezar, 2002, p. 96). In other words, if we concede that positionality is one’s social location, which is comprised of social categories (such as race, class, gender, etc.) and is thus fluid and dynamic; affected by historical and social changes, then we can conclude that reality is not fixed, but constructed (Kezar, 2002, p. 96), thus power relations are not fixed, but socially constructed, depending on our positionality and how subjects may choose in some sense their identity (McRuer, 1997, p. 35). This kind of lens honours agency in movement within social locations while simultaneously recognizing how those locations may be affected by power relations.

Insight on Latin American women’s sense-making of leadership and their active participation within it requires multiple lenses, including feminism, critical race theory and positionality theory. It is through these lenses that we can uncover diverse notions of what is el liderazgo, challenging monolithic ideas of the ‘Latina woman’, and creating an understanding of leadership as a process that is at once inclusive and fluid, while taking into consideration the existing historical and social contexts as well as power relations.

32

2.2. Research Methods

In general, the study involves two methods of collecting data. The first involves individual interviews with six Latin American cis-gender self-identified women from the ages of 22 and over. I have pseudo-named all the women. Here after they will be referred as:

Julia, Veronica, Esperanza, Adriana, Claudia and Marleni. It is important to note that there were no trans folks who belonged to Nosotras and women who identified as lesbian, bi- sexual, two-spirited, questioning, etc. were not ‘out’ at an agency level during the three years

I was there nor disclosed it directly in their interview. Similarly, disability and health conditions were not brought into the discussion by participants during the interview process.

Curiously, the topic of disability and ableism was also one that was never addressed directly and openly at an agency level during my time at Nosotras. My interviews did however involve a wide age range which was of particular interest to me because it allowed for a variety of perspectives, including intergenerational, on leadership and decision making processes. Some of the participants were members of the Board of Directors, and others were volunteers, facilitators and/or previous participants from the leadership training program.

The interviews were approximately one hour each and took place in a mutually convenient meeting place. Every woman was asked a series of open-ended questions around their perspectives of ‘leadership’ and themselves as ‘leaders’. For example, how do you define

‘leadership’? was a question that was asked in the interview (Appendix 1). I used semi structured, open interviews in order to allow research participants to communicate their personal understanding of leadership without the research imposing a particular model or definition of leadership onto the participants.

33

The research also maintained confidentiality regarding the identity of the research participants. For this reason, I use pseudonyms to tell the personal stories and perspectives of the participants throughout my thesis. In this way, women who preferred to maintain anonymity are given that respect, and in hopes that these women’s voices echo those of other women who share similar experiences and/or perspectives.

The second method of data collection involved personal reflections of the small Latin

American women’s organization and the different roles I occupied throughout my three year involvement. Thus, I was also a research participant in this study.

2.3. Research Recruitment Process

The women interviewed for this study were recruited by me (the researcher) from

Nosotras. First, I contacted the six participants by email (Appendix 2), inviting all of them to participate. I made every effort to approach prospective participants to participate in a way that they did not feel pressured by offering different opportunities and levels of participation.

For example, the participants could choose to: (1) have a formal interview, (2) talk to me informally while I would take written notes, (3) send me something written or (4) simply decline altogether. I also made it clear that even if they chose not to participate that they were welcome to access my research upon completion.

2.4. Ethical Considerations

The women who agreed to participate in the research were given a consent letter listing their options for participation in my study (Appendix 3). At the time of the study, as researcher, I reminded the participants that they had the right to end the interview at any time

34 and that I could provide referrals to them should they require any kind of support throughout and/or in light of the interview. In the consent letter, the right to withdraw at any time during the study is also explained. In addition, participants were reminded verbally of this option, especially during the interview had hesitation or discomfort arisen in answering a particular question. As the interviewer, I asked directly, “would you like to withdraw from the study?” I also reminded them that they had the right to change their level of participation as mentioned in the consent form. I also made my contact information accessible to all prospective participants, particularly for those who were interested in participating, but required more information.

As mentioned in an earlier section, I had been working with this participant population for 3 years and I had a good relationship with each participant. Nonetheless, to obtain informed consent from all participants, I asked them to read the informed consent letter. I provided each participant with an English and Spanish version to ensure their understanding of its contents. Then, I explained the consent letter to each participant verbally. It was important to me as the researcher to take the time and care necessary to ensure that each participant would understand all aspects of informed consent. I was cognizant that special attention needed to be given to those participants who might be unfamiliar with the interview process of an academic study (Appendix 4).

In reference to the textual analysis, the description of these texts ensured the anonymity and confidentiality of any individuals or organizations mentioned, unless explicit permission was granted by the individuals or organizations to be named publicly (Appendix

4). This meant that during the thesis writing process, I checked in with participants and was

35 prepared to be supportive in their input in an effort to seek feedback regarding changes and to ensure that the text best represented participants’ voices.

As a secondary procedure, I followed up with the participant two to three days after the interview to thank them for their time and participation. At that time, I casually asked them how they felt about the interview they gave and reminded them that they could withdraw or change their level of participation at any time. In the end, the consent slips were only linked to raw data by a participant number. All documentation was kept confidential.

Also, in an effort to lower group vulnerability, all participants were older than 18 years, the participation was voluntary, and the right to withdraw from the study at any time without any negative consequences for participants was highlighted at all stages of the research.

2.5. Methodology

In my analysis of interviews, I used a Chicana/Latina feminist epistemology as a way to place Latina women’s voices and experiences at the centre of the research as valid foundations of knowledge. Dolores Delgado Bernal (1998) explains that “Chicana feminist epistemology arises out of a unique social and cultural history, and demonstrates that our experiences as [Latin American] women are legitimate, appropriate, and effective in designing, conducting, and analyzing educational framework” (p. 560). Further, “[a]dopting a [Latina] feminist epistemology [exposes] human relationships and experiences that are probably not visible from a traditional patriarchal position or a liberal feminist standpoint”

(p. 550).

Moreover, creating a space for Latina women’s voices and documenting them is in a sense a kind of resistance since Testimonio- sharing one’s stories with others raises the

36 individual’s/participants’ consciousness of common experiences and opens up the possibility for social action (Fernandez, 2002, p. 48, in Oesterreich, 2007, p 5). Most qualitative researchers have agreed that objectivity is not a tenable or useful principle in such work.

Who is to say what is objective? And how exactly is data “objective” (Fernandez, 2002, p.

48, in Oesterreich, 2007, p. 5).

Creating a strong understanding of leadership involves an exchange between people orally and in written form. In this case, listening to voices from the margins “offers the possibilities of radical perspectives from which to see and create, to imagine alternatives, new worlds” (hooks, 1990, p. 341). In my research, I attempt to capture the stories and voices of the research participants in ways that go beyond empirical data and that honour Latina knowledge. Ladson-Billings (2000) argues that a qualitative approach to research allows the research to “stand in new relationship to knowledge, the knower, and the known...that prompts social action and transformation” (p. 271). Moreover, McLaren and Giroux (1997) explain that “only when we can name our experiences, give voice to our own world and affirm ourselves as active social agents with a will and purpose can we begin to transform the meaning of those experiences by critically examining the assumptions upon which those experiences are built.

Secondly, by questioning the concept of ‘leadership’, its utility, vagueness and assumptions -- through a Latina feminist lens and by exploring a particular context in

Canada, the research offers new ways of defining ‘leadership’ and its level of fluidity and possibility for a frame extension within the organization. Frame extension is a social psychological process within movements. It occurs when a movement extends its boundaries

37 to include the interests of potential recruits. And while the interests may not be a part of the movement’s goals, they serve as a means of increasing support (Robnett, 1996, p. 1662).

The different and similar interpretations of leadership that occur in the interviews contain discourses. These discourses emerge from and are constitutive of particular configurations of power, which in turn are tied to an ideological position (McLaren &

Giroux, 1997, p. 25). It should be noted at this time that during most, if not all of the interviews, ideological positions around leadership shifted throughout our conversations in ways that were contradictory. I want to note that as researcher, this did not weaken how women made meaning of leadership, but illustrated the range and complexity of Latin

American women’s consciousness that “straddles cultures, races, languages, nations, sexualities and spiritualities- that is living with ambivalence while balancing opposing powers” (Delgado Bernal, 1998, p. 561). It was both in the uniqueness and collective perspectives of participants’ viewpoint that this research departs from existing literature on

Latin American women’s perspective on leadership and allows one to reassess how leadership building models are designed and executed.

Limitations as Researcher

As researcher, I am compelled to explain the limitations of my work in this study, particularly during the interview process. Upon some reflection on my own work, it seems that while I discuss the culture of silence that existed around power and privilege within

Nosotras and in most of my interviews (see section on “Reading Through the Silences”), as researcher I did not utilize that space and opportunity to try to raise these pertinent issues around power relations. Could I have perpetuated said culture of silence?

38

During the interviews I recognized my positionality as researcher and felt that it was not my place to impose my own frames on others about what leadership might mean to them and how participants would chose to discuss it. My intention during the interviews, much like in this thesis was to create a space for Latina women to speak about leadership in their own way, using their own words. In this way, I subscribe to McDowell’s (1992) view that ‘we’ as research worker and/or scholar ‘cannot nor should we aim to, empower our participants. That is a political task for them, or better one that we might share’ (p.143). It is in that vein that I respected self-definition and allowed for ambiguity rather than insisting on ‘disclosure’.

Moreover, while a research study plan was put into place before undergoing the interview process, much like the thesis, the meaning of ‘leadership’ evolved throughout the study. And while the thesis began by defining leadership within more conventional frames, its meaning shifted into spaces where gendering and queering leadership provided a possibility to address relations of power or positionality through leadership.

Finally, while the argument for perpetuating a culture of silence as researcher is possible, I believe there is value in both reflecting on our own research practices as researchers and in being humbled by those choices in retrospect, understanding that there is a continuous learning process in research and that as researcher we cannot predict our outcomes nor the responses of our participants, “we cannot know everything, nor can we survey power as if we can fully understand, control or redistribute it” (Rose, 1997, p. 131).

2.6. Situating Myself in the Study

While I have tried to respectfully and closely represent the voices of all women involved in the research in different forms, I am compelled to explain that I write through my eyes, my perceptions and my chosen interpretive tools. It is in an effort to create a cohesive

39

story of Nosotras and our presence in Canada as women, as Latin Americans/Latinas, as

leaders. I have used my research tools and mi facultad4 to integrate the words of the women

and my own within this research endeavour on leadership. As researcher, I acknowledge that

I am both insider and outsider to the particular community of research participants. Beyond

this dichotomy, I am not absolved from my positionality and where I stand in relation to

other research participants in this study. Equally important to note is that these positions

shift. Kirin Narayan (1993) succinctly explains that “the loci along which we are aligned

with or set apart from those whom we study are multiple and in flux. Factors such as

education, gender, sexual orientation, class, race, or sheer duration of contacts may at

different times outweigh the cultural identity we associate with insider or outsider status”

(pp. 671-672). Hence locating myself as a Latin American with Canadian citizenship, able-

body, out queer cis-gender young woman of colour with a high degree of North American

education and currently, middle-class status, informs and influences the writing of this

thesis, but at varying degrees and in relation to the research participants in this study.

4 “La facultad is the capacity to see in surface phenomena the meaning of deeper realities, to see the deep structure below the surface” (Anzaldua, 1999, p. 60).

Chapter 3: Analysis

Peggy Antrobus (2000) explains that “leadership is a process [because] it evolves as people become conscious of injustice and commit themselves to do something about it”

(p. 50). In this way, leadership can also be transformational since it “advances the cause of injustice for women, within economic globalization and fundamentalism” (p. 50). In the case of the women interviewed, transformational leadership happened generally in two ways. Some women in the study spoke about how they underwent leadership in large part through their lived experiences with unjust political processes in their Latin American country of origin. Other women also spoke about their daily struggles that challenged their leadership. Participants involved in the leadership training program further explained that the program gave them a particular lens- a feminist one- in order to understand oppression, privilege and our intersectionalities as women. This feminist lens contributed to an understanding of why it was often difficult for us to develop within society (e.g. at school, at work, etc.) as ‘leaders’.

In general, the language used by research participants varied and most were tentative when defining leadership. In particular, there seemed to be pause once I asked, “how did you come to know ‘leadership’?” In their personal definition of leadership, many participants tended to exclude themselves, or express involvement within the construction of that definition. The hesitation in defining leadership could be for several reasons. The question may have been deemed by some participants as complex and thus requiring precise articulation, others may have never thought about defining it before and it was a new exercise for them. Another plausible explanation is given by Takacs (2002): “[c]onnecting positionality to epistemology simultaneously empowers and disempowers individual

40 41 expertise [...]. Students are empowered because they recognize that they have unique claims to knowledge that others cannot deny. Only I have lived my life; only you have lived yours”

(p. 170). Takacs (2002) continues by remarking that “if this experience works well, through dialogue we are led into doubts about the certainty of the “correctness” of our own position, as we come to learn that our views may be constrained by the narrow range of experiences we have had” (p. 170). Finally, others may have felt that they were not in a position of authority to define this concept and doubted their own perspective vis à vis my presence as a master’s student doing my research on “Latina women and leadership”. There may have even been an unsaid assumption that I have a level of expertise on the topic that far exceeds theirs and thus, they were afraid of giving a “wrong” response. This latter possibility must be acknowledged in order to highlight that power relations exist anywhere, including in research.

At times the concept of leadership was described as a visionary and almost ideal process. For example, Julia states that “Leadership is the capacity to pull together resources for a good cause... [it] is a way of being for a community.... A leader develops the potential of a situation, of a person or of an issue.” Similarly, Adriana shares that, “I see it as a group of people that are leaders, that are making the way for some kind of change, or something to do with that. It’s more unified and a community unified of people and not just one person leading....” Often, the research participants’ description of leadership shifted from the importance of collective versus individual action and the importance of collaborative forms of decision-making, rather than authoritative ways. These shifts are consistent in terms of individual’s identities, which are also not fixed, but are located within shifting networks of

42 relationships, which can be analyzed and changed (Maher & Tetreault, 2001, p. 164). Thus, despite shifting locations, there remains a possibility for a cooperative leadership process.

Included in this cooperative process is the importance of a clear shared meaning of leadership among all, especially since Calas & Smirich (1996) explain that “leadership is socially constructed between people; thus, its meaning is negotiated among individuals or groups” (Calas & Smirich, 1996, in Kezar, 2000, p. 724). This understanding of leadership highlights the need to examine multiple and intersecting identities; how they play a role in power relations and how these relationships -- whether individual or social -- influence

Latina women’s interpretation of leadership. Collaborative leadership has recently emerged in the literature as an essential process for the “modern leader” (Cook, 2002, in Lau Chin,

2007, p. 10). Lau Chin introduces Raelin’s four Cs of “Leaderful Practice”, which include:

Concurrent, collective, collaborative and compassionate and highlights the need for gender to be essential to the process and for feminism to be among its principles (p. 10). In addition, I would argue for the need to include the political aspect of undergoing a leadership process that is both feminista and cooperative. Here, Dolores Delgado Bernal’s (1998) paradigm on cooperative leadership appears to have explanatory value as it recognizes the collective process necessary to go beyond a consciousness of injustice and an individual transformation of challenging those injustices. It makes the creation of something different or new potentially more attainable through collectivity and mutual support. Cooperative leadership examines how this process can attain the transformation it seeks through the mutually important and reinforcing dynamic between all people, communities, and subcommunities

(Delgado Bernal, 1998). Essentially, cooperative leadership sheds light on the interconnectivity of leadership and the creation of lideres.

43

Many of the women interviewed spoke about the different forms of leadership.

Sometimes this led to a moment of self-reflection on participants’ own experiences. In my interview with Esperanza, she describes leadership as a process of self-empowerment, self- discovery and ultimately a process that for Esperanza is emotional.

Pequenos pasos de descubrir quien soy yo, de descubrir que es lo que quiero, de descubrir

cuales son mis metas, de planifcar algo para un futuro, el de saber que me gusta estar aqui

porque puedo ayudar a otros. Entonces es una multiplicacion que es para mi muy emocional.

El proceso es muy emocional.

On being “Latina” and identidad

In illuminating the political project that has shaped discourses that link culture and power, Henry A. Giroux (1989) explains that the concept of culture has been intimately connected with the question of how social relations are structured within class, sexual, and age formations as well as gender, racial, and ethnic relations, which produce power relations of oppression and domination (pp. 125-126). Furthermore, culture is described by Giroux as a form of production that always involves asymmetrical relations of power and that most revealing, culture can be viewed “as a field of struggle and social difference in which the production, legitimation, and circulation of particular forms of meaning and experience are central areas of conflict and battle” (p. 126).

In my interview with Claudia, she attributes the different levels of participation and leadership among members at Nosotras to their cultural upbringing and spatial context.

Claudia states that :

No es lo mismo la [Maria], por ejemplo, que ella nacio en , vivio en la logica del

contexto de la America Latina. Es diferente su involucramiento con la organizacion a

Adrianna por ejemplo, que es mucho mas canadiense...Ella esta super formada con la logica

44

canadiense y es super diferente.... La [Maria] es mucho mas dura, es mucho mas como,

insistente, como gritona, no me refiero subir la voz, como insistente en que tu participes, que

te comprometas, haya no haya dinero... haya no haya recursos, insiste igual....[Creo] que es

diferente tener origen latinos pero vivir en norteamerica que nacer en latinoamerica y

formarte en Latino America....Diferente no significa ni malo ni bueno, significa diferente.

Claudia compares two members’ approach to mobilization and describes both as very different to each other in light of their upbringing in different places (one was brought up in

Nicaragua and the other one in Canada). Claudia believes that one is “a lot more Canadian” than the other, but that this is neither bad nor good, just different. Claudia’s understanding and thus naming of who is more Canadian and more Latin American were not uncommon in the agency. Juan Flores (1997) states that “[b]eyond the issue of names and labels, and even who is using them, there are differing levels or modes of meaning simultaneously at work in the very act of apprehending and conceptualizing the community in question” (p. 185).

Flores (1997) concludes that, “Latino” or “Hispanic” not only mean different things to different people; they also “mean” in different ways and refer to different dimensions of collective social experience” (p. 185). Claudia (a young women and newcomer to Canada) describes a particular Latino imaginary, as “tougher, more persistent...that you commit [to the cause] whether or not there is money or resources... [unlike the Canadian logic].”

Moreover, Claudia’s description of Latin American identity as such only makes sense outside of Latin American context. Rodriguez (2003) explains that “[i]t is the experience of having to define one’s sense of self in opposition to dominant culture that forces the creation of an ethnic/national identity that is then readable by the larger society” (p. 10).

45

Defining who is considered “Latin American” and who is considered “first generation and second generation” immigrant was an ongoing debate at Nosotras that not only included where one had been born and how long they had lived there, but also related to social experience and commitment to el feminismo. Often, those with “more” experience and who coincidentally were also older Latin American women, were responsible for describing la comunidad in project proposals and in distinguishing who was “really” Latin American.

Indeed, there was a particular dynamic between older and young women at the agency.

Audre Lorde (1997) argues that ageism interferes with women’s solidarity and that the

‘generation gap’ is an important social tool for any repressive society to create that divisiveness. Lorde (1997) states that “[i]f the younger members of a community view the older members as contemptible or suspect or excess, they will never be able to join hands and examine the living memories of the community” (p. 376). However, to only accept Lorde’s calling for a “passing down of knowledge” (read: top down) is arguably promoting an unidirectional learning where there is an assumption that only one group (elders) within the community has something to teach the other (young), rather than searching for ways that intergenerational relationships can involve symbiotic learning within collaborative leadership processes.

The latter approach would have been particularly helpful had young women learned about Latin American women’s histories in Latin America and in Canada, and had older women within the agency learned about the reconceptualization of identidad, through youth’s eyes. At the time of this study, “Latino identity” was the central theme of a conference held by Nosotras and yet, a large body of experiences and documentation about young Latina women grappling with la identidad would have been useful to consult, not only in the

46 conference, but within the agency. Sadly, such body of work did not exist. Facilitators were outsourced to deliver workshops at the conference to discuss this important and complex topic that meant different things to different young Latin American people within society.

But reconceptualizing identidad as it uniquely applies to youth only helps to represent one part of a greater picture about what it means to be Latin American/Latino/Latin American origin, etc., which is in itself complex and contradictory. According to Arriola, identity represents the confluence of an infinite number of factors, such as race, religion, sexual orientation, nationality, professional, age, among others (Arriola, 2002, p. 322). Rarely can a person’s identity be limited to a singular characteristic, though the components of an individual identity are constantly in shift, some becoming more prominent in certain settings than others (Arriola, 2002, p. 322).

For young Latina women like myself, acknowledging the diversity and shifting of identity reinforces the importance of mobilizing intergenerationally on the margins of race politics and the importance of speaking out against White heteropatriarchal violence in a unified voice. Mobilizing intergenerationally allows for personal experiences to be shaped by collective experience forming community memory. That is, through the experiences of ancestors and elders, younger members of the collective can carry knowledge of conquest, loss of land, school and social segregation, labour market stratification, assimilation and resistance (Delgado Bernal, 1998, p. 564). It is equally important to note that as most cases, in the case of Nosotras, intergenerational communication did not arise in a neutral context, but rather in a context of asymmetrical power relations, where the framings of certain older

Latina women were seen as more valid than youth’s. Preconceived ideas about which knowledge was better or pertinent to the work on violence against women, were at times

47 played out in covert ways and through subtle remarks that were rarely challenged by the younger women. Lakes (1996) suggests that “[n]ot only does one group (adults) have the power to construct the definition of another group (youth), but they also have the power to act on those definitions, to create structures that reinforce and reconfirm the very beliefs they have constructed” (in MacNeill, 2006, pp. 32-33). Further, Chechoway and Richards-

Schuster (2001) also state that “any negative construction of the meaning of youth is a form of oppression, referred to as either ageism or ‘adultism’. Adultism can be a tremendous obstacle for youth leadership development (Chechoway & Richards-Schuster, 2001 in

MacNeill, 2006, p. 32). Indeed, the construct of youth needs to be examined. Giroux (1996) speaks to this limited (and limiting) construction of youth: “While ‘youth’ as a social construction has always been mediated, in part, as a social problem, many cultural critics believe that postmodern youth are uniquely ‘alien, ‘ ‘strange’ and disconnected from the real world.” (Klau, 2006, p. 32).

For us women (particularly young Latinas) who remained part of Nosotras and even became program coordinators or facilitators, we found other spaces within the organization to construct independent self-definitions that reflected the dialectical nature of oppression and activism (Collins, 2000, p. 95). Ultimately however, those of us young women who worked closely with members with decision-making power in the organization, such as

Board members and the Executive Director, became exhausted by the barriers and left the organization. In terms of leadership and resistance, these women who were to some extent

“pushed out” of the organization, also went on to create spaces that allowed their collectivizing to create institutional change that demanded that Nosotras revisit their

48

leadership role and accountability to young women in the community. This came at a great

risk of being seen as traidoras5 and being excluded from the organization in covert ways.

3.1. Challenges to Leadership

In an article written by Daniel Schugurensky and Jorge Ginieniwicz (2007), titled,

“The Latin American community in Canada: Some challenges ahead”, the authors describe

both the external and internal challenges to integration of the Latin American community and

reinforce the view that “the lack of renewal of Latin American-Canadian leaders has also

blocked opportunities to foster sustained community growth.” However, in order to begin to

have collective conversations about leadership and how we envision it in the Latin American

community, among and including women, across social spheres, etc. we must demystify and

deconstruct our ideas around leadership. Here lies possibly the biggest challenge with doing

leadership. The women in my study were able to recognize this need in a variety of ways. For

example, research participant, Julia, also spoke about the lack of community leadership

within the Latin American community in Canada. Julia stated that “[...] we can speak of

leadership as a way of being... not for an individual but for a community and I think we have

some individuals who could be leaders here, but as a community we don’t have leadership.

Not like other communities- other ethnic communities, we don’t have it.” Julia’s

understanding of leadership as a way of being within a community (vis à vis individualistic)

demystifies mainstream understanding of leadership as it begins to blur the distinction

between leader and follower. In Rottman’s article on leadership in the education system, i.e.

schools entitled, “Queering educational leadership from the inside out” the author clarifies

5 ‘Traitors’, in Spanish

49 that this blurring “should not be confused with a recommendation to assign equal responsibility for leadership to all those who people public school; rather we should consider that students, teachers, community members and educational administrators all have a capacity for leadership and a capacity to nurture and support the leadership of others”

(Rottman, 2006, p. 14).

At the same time, it is important to acknowledge the social position that Julia attributes to the Latin community (and herself within that) vis à vis other ethnic communities.

Julia compares the lack of leadership to other communities and sees her own community as

“less than”, placing Julia in a position of oppression. Nevertheless, Julia recounts an exceptional moment for Latin American women when they worked together to deliver the

Latin American Encounter in 1995. She describes this occasion as “collective leadership” because women gave their time, their knowledge, their experience. Julia concludes by saying,

“We had issues always, but it was a great opportunity.” Indeed, for Julia, collective movements go beyond, ‘being individualistic, gendered and sexualized, a stereotypical image of leadership that constructs a position that is almost impossible for a single human being to fill (Rottman, 2006, p. 13).

Most of my research participants identified that leadership was not a dichotomous or categorical process comprised of creating individual leaders and that the rest will follow.

However, their common understanding of leadership did not always translate in the same way on an organizational level, particularly when it came to the selection process of young women in the Leadership Training Program, where prospective candidates were interviewed and where there was a standardization of the ‘right‘ candidate. Coincidentally, many of the candidates in my program were older women, some living outside the ‘high needs’

50 neighbourhood and enrolled in postsecondary education. As young women who underwent the leadership training program, we entered marginalized communities and spoke about violence against women in controlled and supervised settings, like classrooms, arguably replacing the teacher-student dynamic with the “young Latina leader” - student dynamic.

Was this leadership? In Joy James’ article on radicalizing feminism, the author highlights

Ella Baker’s compelling assessment on leadership and the contradictions present during the black liberation and black power movements among elites advocating for civil rights distinguished between attempts to become ‘a part of the American scene’ and the more

‘radical struggle’ to transform society (James, 1999, pp. 15-16). Baker explains that

those who were trained were not trained to be part of the community, but to be leaders of the

community.....another false assumption that being a leader meant that you were separate and

apart from the masses, and to a large extent people were to look up to you, and that your

responsibility to the people was to represent them (Baker, 1998, in James, 1999, p. 16).

It is clear that the leadership training program does not compare to the black liberation movement, but nevertheless, to a certain extent elements of Ella Baker’s assessment can apply to Nosotras. And just as the leadership process in the black liberation movement had contradictions so too did this small Latin American women’s organization.

Notably, this included the young Latina ‘trainees’ whose positionality in doing workshops on violence against women in front of a classroom made them role models and empowered them as knowledgeable activists. However, in other spheres, (in and outside the agency) many of these young women, as well as the participants in this study experienced disempowerment as they were hindered within their leadership process.

51

“Being told NO”

Claudia: ‘No’ siempre es una respuesta ante cualquier cosa y hay muchos que se quedan en esa respuesta y hay otros que tratamos de salir de eso. Aunque también, nuestras barreras lo ponemos nosotros mismos y terminas convenciéndose que no van a resultar.

“Si... pero NO”, says Esperanza when I ask her about the challenges or barriers in undergoing leadership processes. Esperanza explains that in her experience at the board level at Nosotras, she found that sometimes being told “Yes...but NO” to ideas or initiatives that come from youth was limiting and discouraging for some youth. She also recalled that there was a time of high turnover rates in terms of youth coordinators at Nosotras, which she did not understand, but suspected it had something to do with being turned down when new ideas were proposed at the board level or management level. Interestingly, Esperanza was not the only person in this study to express their experience with hearing, “no you can’t do it” or “no you won’t be able to” as powerful words that women hear throughout their lifetime. In fact, four of us identified the impact of “no” in our leadership process in different ways. For

Veronica, her biggest challenge was not knowing how to confront people who are not in agreement with ideas or point of view. In the case of Marleni- a women who has been involved in grassroots mobilizing since she arrived in Canada with her family- recalls becoming engaged in a political party where the majority of members were men. As a young woman at the time, she would not have been included except that the political party was particularly interested in recruiting youth and encouraged youth to take up leadership roles within the party. Marleni recalls, “I was very lucky...had it been another party, it would have

52 been very, very different. I would have been delegated to do the ‘women’s work.’6” By

‘women’s work’, Marleni refers to the cooking and emotional support -- roles that many of the women involved in political parties were often delegated to do at that time (i.e. 25 years ago).

Marleni also attributes her ability to be a community leader/mobilizer to never being told “no”. She remembers never feeling like she could not do something because she was never told that she could not do it. In regards to whether Marleni faces barriers to taking up community leadership roles, she responds that, “no because I happen to be in a very privileged situation, financially... My work, my job allows me.” While Marleni and myself recognized our privilege and position within society that allowed us to move in the world and create spaces for our leadership process, most of the research subjects did not specifically articulate their own privilege - whether it was race, socio-economic, citizenship, language, etc.

Instead, the recurring theme in barriers to leadership was the belief that there is always someone -- a family member, a friend, or society -- telling women that whatever goal they have is unattainable. When asked to clarify “who decides what goals are ‘attainable’ and

‘unattainable’, Claudia responds that it is the “Latino culture.” She contrasts the Latino

Culture with “North American culture,” which as she says, encourages leadership, and that each person “can attain their goal”. The participant explains this ‘cultural difference‘ by stating that, “I think that other cultures, like the North American one, don’t feel this way because of their position of privilege, of believing that everything is possible because they

6 Research participant #5

53 have been able to achieve and because they have not had another North America step on them.7”

Claudia in particular, articulates that on an international level, Latin America has a history of being denied leadership roles that dates back to colonization. She explains that there is a lack of global leadership from Latin America in light of historical happenings, namely colonization. She believes that if ‘we’, as in colonized peoples, had not been “ under the colonizer’s foot” for hundreds of years, that “we” would be more likely to believe that we are leaders and that as such, we are able to achieve anything.8 For this reason, Claudia believes that we have not seen the same progress in our home countries as those in the West.

While there could be debate on the “West” being seen as leader and the “rest” as followers or oppressed, there is a danger in such a dichotomous perspective since

“constructing monolithic notions of “Western” and “non-Western” subjects in binary opposition cannot always account for the complex, hybrid, and often contradictory subject positions that mark the era of postmodernity” (Grewal & Kaplan, 1996, p. 4). And while a colonial legacy remains in terms of a country’s capacity to thrive and be a leader within a world economic market for example, there are dangers in this kind of “us” and “them” dualistic thinking. The reasons for this kind of perspective can be many. As Elenes (2006) suggests, “it may have to do with the fact that sometimes we do not have or cannot find another language with which to express our feelings and thoughts; other times, it may be because we work on preconceived perceptions of who we are according to social position”(p.

249). In the case of Claudia, a postcolonial discourse is used to explain her ideas as to why a

“No poderas” discourse- i.e. “You will not be able to do it” as an obstacle in leading an

7 Research Participant # 2 - translated. 8 Research participant #2

54 initiative, implies that Western history is the only model of progress. In Mary John’s book,

“Discrepant Dislocations: Feminism, Theory and Postcolonial Histories”, Ashis Nandy

(1989) is quoted as “The West is now everywhere, within the West and outside: in structures and in mind” (Nandy, 1989, in John, 1996, p. 8). John (1996) also speaks to the idea that power/knowledge is perpetuated through this kind of discourse as it spreads Westernization and the idea that the “West is the Best”.

In regards to the question of what challenges each participant had experienced on a personal level, in life and/or the agency, only a couple of women touched on systemic challenges that women might face. Only a couple of women expressed their social location as playing a significant role in a successful leadership process. In my experience at the agency and throughout the interviews, there was as much that could be derived from what was said as what was not being said.

3.2. Reading through the Silences

My first priority when embarking on this research was to provide a space and an opportunity to re(construct) ideas of leadership through the perspectives of seven diverse

Latin American women. But it was not until I began to analyze the data that I realized that it was imperative to hear both what these women were saying about their understanding of leadership as well as what they were not saying. i.e. the silence. Magda Gere Lewis states that “ [w]e need, as well, to hear both the voices and the silence through which women engage our social world; to make meaning not only out of what woman say, but also out of what women refuse to say and to understand why we might refuse to speak” (Lewis, 1993, p.

43).

55

In the case of the responses of the women that were interviewed, it was particularly important for me to begin to understand why five out of the seven that were interviewed had not at any point in the interview self-identified as a woman, a Latina, queer, etc. much less spoken about the possibility of those identities to be assets and/or as making one more likely to face challenges in the leadership process or in becoming a leader. Were the women deliberately refusing to speak about their experience as women? I was cognizant of the possibility that some young women may feel less likely to be open about their perspectives on leadership and on Nosotras. McLean Taylor, Gilligan and Sullivan explain that “girls who by virtue of their class position, their cultural status, or their educational privilege have been led to believe that people are interested in who they are and what they have to say, worry about jeopardizing these relationships by revealing what seem like unacceptable parts of themselves” (McLean Taylor et al., 1995, p. 3).

Nor did the women interviewed talk about other women in their lives that may have influenced their sense of leadership. More interview questions that directly ask about participants’ experience forging relationships with other (young) women would be very useful to this research, especially in terms of girl-women relationships. McLean Taylor et al. illustrate such a study when writing about the development of relationships between women and girls and highlighting the advantages of women-girl relationships (that are not mother- daughter). Beyond “a mentorship”, the authors explain that in interviews with their subjects they learned that the women “acted as advocates [for the young girls], served to validate the girls and their experience, and fostered girls’ sense of self respect and confidence (McLean

Taylor et al., 1995, p. 128). At the same time, in McLean Taylor et al.’s study, women also

56 expressed that the young girls were instrumental in their lives as well, though many young women did not see it that way (McLean Taylor et al., 1995, p. 127).

In terms of shared meaning of leadership, in the case of Nosotras, “leadership” was never clearly defined or discussed as a concept among ‘trainees’, organization staff and board members. Presumably, the lack of discussion on what is “leadership” at Nosotras created a universally understood meaning of the term and assumed that it is shared. By examining the work of John Toews on the Autonomy of Meaning and the Irreducibility of

Experience”, Joan W. Scott notes that Toews also does not define “Experience” at any point in his work. Consequently, Scott explains that this allows for the work to take on many resonances, but it also allows it to function as a universally understood and shared category- the undefined word creates a sense of consensus by attributing to it an assumed, stable, and shared meaning” (Scott, 1992, p. 32). The danger in such an unspoken agreement on what is leadership is that if we are to assume the very definition of it, then there is a risk that existing relations of authority will prevail and leadership will be defined by those who have more power within the organization. This can therefore affect the fostering of leadership and voice of those who have less power, i.e. young potential leaders. Some of the research participants shed light on their experience with authority and leadership and their efforts to resist abuse of power.

At the same time, the experience of the collective advocacy work of the 1990s tells another story. Julia speaks about immigrant women coming to Canada who were “very much aware of the things that were happening so that was kind of the non-spoken guide... and principles that were underneath the work. So there was no need to talk about what we were doing, it was kind of a clear thing, an injustice...here [in Canada] in the sense of having

57 women who were experiencing difficulties and needed help or give guidance.” The sense of solidarity that Julia remembers from her involvement in advocacy work and women’s rights is not uncommon in activism as discussed earlier regarding the Latin American Women’s

Collective of the 1980s in Toronto. Both San Martin and Julia explain that as more and more women came together and organized, ruptures also occurred within these groups. Ideological differences on feminism became more apparent and caused divisions- so too were ideas around membership. Julia describes the idea of membership as a selective process, where members were carefully considered and invited to be part of grand events, such as the Latin

American Women’s Encounter in the 1990s.

Julia’s understanding of the collaborative leadership process the Latin American community, particularly of the 1990s is worth noting for two reasons: First, she draws on an

“understood” collective process that interestingly parallels the way that Nosotras’ leadership program with Latina youth ran. Similarly, in the leadership program that I participated, there seemed to be an ‘understood’ definition of leadership that was never verbally communicated to the participants. Second, the selection process of who was welcomed into the group and why, were also similar components to the selection process that Latina youth had to undergo when applying to be part of the program. While a volunteer in the organization (and after completing the leadership program), I asked the Executive Director (E.D.) the reasoning behind selecting participants through such a process that mirrored applying for a job or applying to a specialized academic program, the E.D. explained that this program was in high demand and that the program itself was highly demanding and required a certain level of commitment and that for these reasons, “particular candidates” could only be selected. She also added that it was important to get to know each candidate due to the sensitivity of the

58 topic. At that time, the leadership program revolved around advocacy/awareness on the issue of violence against women.

Nevertheless, not discussing the very principles that these diverse women shared and some in which they differed, in particular with regards to leadership, resulted in unclear definitions and understanding about what is required to undergo a process of leadership. In my interview with Esperanza, she felt that the basis for strong leadership was el espacio (the space). Esperanza stresses key aspects of el lugar (the place):

Esperanza: [Reconociendo] que yo tengo lugar en el espacio...y ese espacio es un espacio

que yo puedo aportar...tengo un espacio para crear...Es muy importante para mi el contexto

emocional, de confianza, de seguridad, de auto estima...[T]engo mi experiencia de mi pais,

mi experiencia en mi familia, mi experiencia yo como estudiante. Mi experiencia yo como ser

humano en relacion a otros. Y eso es lo que al descubrir todas esas pequenas cositas que me

da la facultad y la capacidad de poder amplear eso y poder multiplicarlo [es el liderazgo].

Esperanza describes the need for a safe space in which women can feel a sense of belonging and an ease to create and provide input into discussions. She explains that leadership happens in un espacio that allows a person to grow and develop their abilities and their self- esteem; un espacio where potential leaders feel that their experiences from their country, within their family, at school and their experiences as human beings are validated. In this way, Esperanza makes clear what un espacio seguro- a safe space means to her in order to create leaders. Furthermore, for Esperanza, the present espacio of Nosotras is a positive change compared to what existed during the creation of the organization. According to

Esperanza, “there’s a totally different energy that is being created [at Nosotras] where there

59 is no dispute here and no dispute there...instead there is a sense of, ‘I’m here because I like

Nosotras’...and for me that has been a positive change in the organizational process”9.

While Esperanza sheds light on the importance of un espacio that is safe and accepting of different opinions and creativity as basis of leadership development, there is something to be said about relating “safe spaces” to the lack of conflict or “dispute”. In bell hooks’ book on “Teaching Critical Thinking”, she writes that, “[t]he pressure to maintain a non-combative atmosphere... one in which everyone can feel safe, can actually work to silence discussion and/or completely eradicate the possibility of dialectical exchange (hooks,

2010, p. 86).

Arguably, a sense of leadership can come from disagreement and constructive dialogue. During El Encuentro of 1995, research participants, Julia and Marleni, recall women organizers disagreeing on whether men would be invited to the conference, particularly in those spaces where there was discussion around violence against women.

Some people in the Latin American community felt that an issue like violence involved the entire community and thus deserved equal participation from men and women. However, other women strongly believed that given women’s negative experience with men in violent situations, that a ‘safe space’ for women would include the lack of male representation.

These kinds of politically charged debates caused many women to rift and to create collectives and community initiatives that reflected each group’s ideas regarding el feminismo as well as better representation of their identities as Latin American women. The rifts and disagreements that occurred throughout this process were important to move forward as women in leadership. Norma Alarcón discusses the importance of discourses on difference and identity because they create knowledge about subjects and subjects can speak

9 Translated into English

60 back to create new bodies of knowledge (in Rodriguez, 2003, p. 6). Alarcón states that,

“[t]the paradoxes and contradictions between subject positions move the subject to recognize, reorganize, reconstruct, and exploit difference through political resistance and cultural productions in order to reflect the subject-in-process” (in Rodriguez, 2003, p. 6).

Understanding those paradoxes and contradictions between subject positions are crucial particularly within the context of acknowledging inequality, unevenness as well as cultural biases in a room. Emma Perez (1998) critically analyzes such as concept within the context of “feminist coalitions Euro American women and women of color” and explains that we cannot assume the dynamic is good for the marginalized particularly when there are brought into a room of white majority women (p. 94). In the case of Nosotras, women’s positionality shifted constantly, and thus gender and race relations (to name a few social markers) needed to be subsumed in the larger context of disagreements, indifferences, and discrimination. And thus, an opportunity to come together and discuss our disagreements around leadership and integral participation of all women within the agency would have been ideal, but how we moved to do this would have consciously needed to avoid invasive politics reasserting under the guise of feminist discourse and under the guise of equal opportunity (Perez, 1998, p. 95) because this can cause [m]arginalized others to be silenced, “having no rights to spaces to construct creative rather than reactive discourses” (p. 95).

3.3. Resistance and Points of Tension

Julia: So within the Latin-American community we have this luggage we carry, that our

past relatives carried and passed it on to us of the unity of Latin America and it’s

very interesting because there is no other continent that sits on the belief of unity.

Like Bolivar- an ideal of America para los latinoamericanos that survives up until

61

today. And whatever is happening in , ...it is based on that belief.

That we are one.

Latina feminista leadership by its very conceptualization is a form of resistance. First, the term subscribes to the fluidity that is embedded in latinidad. Lao-Montes describes the cultural production of latinindad as consisting of fluid relations that resist simple categorization given its plurality of meanings and its multiple status as a marker of collective identity (Lao-Montes, 2001, p. 14). Second, similar to Black feminism, a Latina feminista approach resists exclusionary practices of women who dominate feminist discourse and who have in the past made it practically impossible for new and varied theories to emerge (hooks,

2000, p. 138). Similar to Black feminism, a Latina feminista approach takes up women who feel a need for a different strategy, a different foundation, but who often find themselves ostracized and silenced (hooks, 2000, p. 138). Strategic essentialism as defended by Emma

Perez and mentioned at the beginning of this research paper, is one strategy where its practice is a form of resistance against dominant ideologies that silence and/or model marginalized groups, and whereby third world spaces can be created on the group’s own terms (Perez,

1998).

Research participant Veronica illustrates this need on the basis of her sexual orientation - though she does not explicitly say it during her interview. Instead, Veronica describes her involvement in two organizations -- one being Nosotras and the other being a relatively new and more grassroots organization for queer Latin American (trans)women.

Veronica explains that she is more involved in the latter organization because “...they are more active in human rights issues for women with different sexual preferences.... They are more political”. Veronica feels the need to clarify that it is not that Nosotras is not political, but that they choose to do their political work through ‘capacity building’. At the end of the

62 interview, Veronica is unsure about where she fits -- not only as a leader, but within the groups in which she is involved. By my last year at Nosotras, in many ways, I shared

Veronica’s feeling and uncertainties about belonging. Moments of extreme heteronormativity, like holding “an emergency board meeting” during the day of the Dyke

March, were both problematic for me yet not particularly surprising. Torn between my alliances to Nosotras and to Pride, I remained complacent and closeted as the queer board member. Moraga & Anzaldua (1983) express it best when they write: “[w]e are the queer groups, the people that don’t belong anywhere, not in the dominant world nor completely within our own respective cultures. Combined we cover so many oppressions. But the overwhelming oppression is the collective fact that we do not fit, and because we do not fit we are a threat” (p. 209). Indeed, the experiences of Veronica and myself highlight the need for women to continue to create and (re)frame decolonized sitios y lenguas10, thus moving forward and leading by example our lived experiences with leadership.

However, finding ‘our own space’ as lesbianas/mujeres queer/queer cannot be considered without acknowledging that even in settings of Latina lesbian collective where differences that set them apart from the dominant society, such as culture, colour, language, class, legal status, religion, and sexual practices, those differences remain operative within newly formed Chicana, Latina, and/or third world spaces (Perez, 1998). In these cases, Perez argues that “[t]he process is not permanent or fixed but instead somewhat dialectical, acknowledging irreducible differences within separate sitios y lenguas where the resolution of differences is neither desirable nor necessary” (Perez, 1998, p. 88). To this end, “strategic essentialism”, much like Latina, lesbiana and other imaginaries, becomes a site where

10 From Emma Perez’s work entitles, “Irigaray’s Female Symbolic in the Making of Chicana Lesbian Sitios y Lenguas (Sites and Discourses)

63 contestation, negotiation and ruptures occur within the inner workings of groups based on cultural and sexual identification (Rodriguez, 2003, p. 41).

Finally, much like the disruption of a Latin American identity through latinidad,

Latina feminista leadership as seen in this study welcomes opportunities to disrupt heteronormative leadership and educational norms by queering spaces and challenging our current inclination to place authority of problem solving on individual leaders who cannot possibly represent the socially diverse group and community members that make up the Latin

American community (Rottman, 2006, p. 14). Thus, Latina feminista leadership calls for a relational process that builds mutual capacity for leadership and support of others.

Klau et al. (2006) also see leadership as a relational process, but describe this process as combining ability (knowledge, skills, and talents) with authority (voice, influence, and decision-making power) to positively influence and impact diverse individuals, organizations, and communities” (pp. 28-29). While the latter definition is useful in terms of connecting leadership to process and not to one specific act or end- result, it implies that particular power or authority is needed in order to undergo this process and to affect change. This raises the question of what role authority must play in leadership and who defines that role.

Community organizing that puts pressure on authority or decision-making power and shows leadership in doing so challenges Klau’s definition. The 1980’s Latin American

Women’s Collective (LAWC) in Toronto, for example, was formed with several objectives in mind. Among them, it worked “to support financially and politically the liberation processes of our struggling countries of origin” and to participate actively in the

Canadian women’s movement by insisting that the movement defend the interests of all

64 women, including Latin American (San Martin, 1998, p. 44). The experience of LAWC which Magaly San Martin writes about in her Master’s thesis, demonstrates that “leadership is a process that occurs within a social context that itself is gendered” (Yoder, 2001, p. 815).

In other words, the creation of LAWC and the need for Latin American women to take up leadership roles around advocacy has to do with the marginalization that these women were experiencing in Canada. At the same time, Latin American women’s advocacy stemmed from their awareness of the different forms of violence and injustices that people in their country of origin were suffering and their demand for Canada to play an active role in intervening in those injustices.

The lack of acknowledgment or conversation around power and privilege can impede a collective approach to leadership. In Nosotras, the organizational structure differed from

LAWC. It was institutionally hierarchical, where the Board of Directors was at the top of that structure as a major decision-making body and where volunteers were at the bottom. The

Executive Director (E.D.) was accountable to the Board and the youth coordinator and accountant were accountable to the E.D. However, because of the small number of people that actively participated in the organization, it was common that some members occupied multiple roles and responsibilities -- as board member, organizing fundraising events, and editing funding proposals. It was also common that the few women that would take on too much would become exhausted, feeling overworked and under-appreciated. This was particularly true for some of the young women who would initiate activities within the agency and take on leadership roles, but whose enthusiasm and energy depleted quickly and caused some young women to leave the organization since they did not see collective action, nor did they feel that they had decision-making power or a sense of belonging. Further. many

65 of the young women who left the organization, especially those who identified as lesbian or queer, did not only feel that they had limited decision-making power, but they also felt that those who did possess this power did not represent or speak for their positionality. This begs the question whether more diversity within the agency was needed for more inclusive leadership. Rottman (2006) states that “if differently positioned people gain access to decision making structures and the power and resources attached to these structures the resulting decisions will more likely resonate with multiply positioned educational stakeholders (p. 14).

Remarkably, the result of being pushed into categorical identities and ultimately margins was at best a “training ground” for women to learn to navigate through systems that may at once include and exclude them. At worst however, being pushed into categorical identities served to reproduce the oppression existing within the larger Canadian context against Latin American women. At times, the outcome of such tension was resistance that was exercised within Nosotras in light of the revictimization of some young women by other women in higher positions of power. In some instances, young women felt they were being unfairly treated because of their age, sexual orientation, education level, and/or race. As a result, some young women got together and wrote about their experiences, their individual testimonio within the agency. Sandoval writes: “[a]ny social order which is hierarchically organized into relations of domination and subordination creates particular subject positions within which the subordinated can legitimately function. These subject positions, once self- consciously recognized by their inhabitants, can become transformed into more effective sites of resistance to the current ordering of power relations” (Sandoval, 1991, p. 11).

66

Our collective documentation of our experiences served at once as resistance and an opportunity to develop meaningful relationships with one another throughout our leadership process that will forever connect us as Latin American women.

Our thought-provoking, sometimes humorous, sometimes disheartening and difficult long conversations about our experiences brought us closer together as a group. Bensimon and Newmann (1993) make a compelling argument about the transformation of a group that take up difficult conversations:

[t]eams and groups that think as they act, and that question critically as they think and act,

are likely to respond in meaningful ways to the messy and complex problems that always

accompany change. In brief, teams that dare to engage in “difficult dialogues,” both among

themselves and with the campus at large, are more likely to discern and to respond with

care and meaning to the changes around them than are teams who respond only

mechanically, and in a utilitarian spirit, to quirks that need fixing so that the system can run

just as it always has” (Bensimon & Newmann, 1993, pp. 137-138).

Indeed, our experience at Nosotras served us well in our leadership process and contributed to the ways that we engage around collectivity.

Chapter 4 : Conclusion

Esperanza: Y yo pienso que el liderazgo tiene que ver con un intercambio de crecimiento

mutuo.... no es uno sentarse en una aula y escuchar que Lenin dijo eso...para mi el

contacto humano es la forma mas efectiva de crear lideres cuando tu sabes que tu

vales y que tu puedes hacer cosas y que tienes un mundo abierto para lograr cosas.

Julia: Leadership is not always leading, it’s not always being the first, it’s not being the

only one, it’s just having the vision of working together.

My intention in undergoing this research study was to simultaneously reflect seven

Latin American women’s understanding of and relationship with leadership - both personal and structural- while also reflecting how Latinas occupy a myriad of social locations and how their positionality informs their very real and meaningful leadership process. More specifically, through this study, I sought to gain insight on how the leadership process might be affected by Latin American women’s sense making of their positionalities, including their sense of self, their sense of autonomy and collectivity, particularly in relation to other women within the small agency Nosotras and within the realm of women’s leadership. Thus, “How do you define leadership?” became a central and starting question in this study.

Creating a space for Latin American women in Canada to speak of their sense- making of leadership and their experiences provided rich insight into the ways we navigate our leadership process within hegemonic, patriarchal and heteronormative contexts. One way to explain this phenomenon is through Patricia Zavella’s (1994) belief that “women strategize [within contexts] to construct a sense of self, and they try to live their lives in opposition to these constraints” (p. 207). Furthermore, Zavella emphasizes that “there are

67 68

“locations” created by the intersection of class, race, gender sexuality, and culture that women sometimes cannot “cross” some “borders” that constrain their lives.” (p.207). Thus, what are the barriers or challenges that you face in assuming leadership roles in your daily life? In reconsidering the organization, Nosotras, this subsequently became a central question within this study, in terms of its social and historical context.

As a way to begin this research endeavour, I situated this small case study within a historical context, albeit very superficially, of Latin American peoples and women in

Canada. In doing so, Zavella (1994) writes that “we must begin our analysis with the historically specific structural conditions constraining women’s experiences. We can then link these conditions to the varieties of ways in which women respond to and construct subjective representations of their experiences (p. 200). Nosotras was initially formed almost

10 years ago and to many women -- particularly young women -- its leadership training program aimed to “strengthen the community response to the increasing violence in intimate relationship, experienced by teenagers and young adult women in the Latin American community” (Gajardo, 2008, p. 134). Aiming to “contribute to the decrease in violence in the lives of young Latinas” (p. 134) is its most notable and long standing project to date.

However, it is crucial to this documentation of Latin American women in Canada to note that Nosotras as an organization is part of a larger and older feminist political project that was formed from the need to represent and advance Latin American women in Canadian society in ways that would promote their development and integral participation. As part of the women’s movement of the 80‘s and 90‘s, there was a need to project “sameness” to outsiders within their translocal organizing, producing embedded layers of what Gayatri

Spivak (1989) has called strategic essentialism (Stephen, 2001, p. 65). Acting strategically,

69 meant that “demands must stem from a coherent social location understandable to those who are the audience for them—often institutions of the state” (Stephen, 2001, p. 54). However, taking a closer look into these movements, Lynn Stephen also adds that “the political necessity of projecting “sameness” does not...explain how a movement operates, what it means to those involved, or what it is able to accomplish. It is also not evidence of shared consciousness or identity (Stephen, 2001, pp. 54-55).

Using Nosotras as an example of an organism with the potential to support Latina leadership, I examine the role of positionality within the agency and with how seven Latina women (including myself) see our positionality within our discourse on liderazgo. It is within this context that I ask what might a pedagogical process of creating a shared definition of leadership look like among the Latin American women within the small agency known in this study as Nosotras? And how might women’s different social locations play a role during that process and meaning-making?

Throughout this thesis, it was important for me to illustrate Nosotras as an active organization that, by virtue of having a contextual existence, a history and committed subjects, was not by any means a neutral place. In an article written by Aruna Rao and

David Kelleher (2000) on feminist leadership, they state that “feminist researchers have argued that organizations are not rational neutral bodies, but living and breathing microcosms of the societies that house them and the people who inhabit them” (p. 75). In fact, Kezar (2009) emphasizes that values play an important role in shaping the actions and outcomes of leadership (p. 7). Thus Nosotras as an institutionalized, albeit small, organization was no exception.

70

In this study, all seven Latina women shared their perspectives on their leadership process, including challenges, definitions and vision for what leadership could be, especially when wanting to transform spaces and ultimately improve them. Ultimately, these women expressed how existing structures and systems need to change in order to allow leadership to occur as a way to advance social justice. I attempt to further this endeavour by expressing the need for groups, movements, small organizations etc. to re- examine how their positionality informs what they know and how they negotiate their leadership process.

Moving forward and (re)creando sitios11

By using the leadership training model for young Latina women, created and delivered by Nosotras I am compelled to celebrate its potential and to find ways that this structure can be transformed, fostering both personal and social empowerment for the young Latin American women, who are only beginning their own journey into social mobilizing (Manicom & Walters, 1996, pp. 2-3). This means drawing out the ways that research subjects have come to understand and/or define leadership in an effort to provide insight on commonalities and differences based on experiences, identity, and language. It also means acknowledging our shifting positionalities within the agency and within our role as decision-makers. In the case of the participants, during the interviews they explained the challenges or barriers that they faced as women when taking part in a leadership process, but they also gave ideas on what needed to change to create a space more conducive to

Latina leadership. While some ideas included leaving spaces altogether that did not share the same perspectives and thus creating new spaces, others suggested that there was a need

11 Translation, recreating spaces

71 to create new ways of working together to form a more unified vision of el liderazgo.

Stuart Hall (1996) states that “[u]nity based on identity (gendered or otherwise) is not natural or inevitable but the result of the continual construction of artificial closure against the constant grain of difference” (p. 5). If cohesiveness within an agency or even an entire community is desired, what might that mean in terms of acknowledging shifting positionalities and negotiating spaces? How do we create meaningful change, i.e. transformation both outside and within cultural spheres like Nosotras? Rao and Kelleher

(2000) suggest that “[l]eadership for transformation means questioning existing ways of working, and considering how tasks might be done differently if the primary motivation is concern for equality and justice” (p. 76). In other words, leadership is also about

(re)creating/finding sitios y lenguas (Perez, 1998) to create our own spaces and address our issues around leadership entre nosotras.

Veronica for example, suggested the inclusion of men in that new vision. In support of this kind of leadership, Delgado Bernal (1998) states that this process “allows us to acknowledge and study a cooperative leadership in which members of a group are empowered to work together synergistically toward a common goal or vision that will create change, transform institutions, and thus improve the quality of life” (p. 123). An example of this exists in the collectives established in the 1980s, which played a pivotal role in not only demonstrating leadership through activism, but in achieving social change in the community in collaborative ways and in ways that involved both men and women. Veronica’s open ended suggestion to include men in political projects led by organizations, such as Nosotras leaves some questions about the kind of organizing she would want to see. Is she implying the abolition of ‘women only spaces’? Does she see ‘men’ and thus ‘women’ as fixed and

72 dichotomous identities or is queerness implicit in her desire for inclusion? There are certainly no simple answers to these questions. Nonetheless, they bring to light the need to focus on the contradictory aspects of identity and the process of identification as a way to “better get at the complexities and contradictions which emerge in the process of women’s collective action rather than resorting to binary categories of explanation” (Stephen, 2001, p. 55).

Lingering (not final) thoughts

The intent of this research was not to bring forward a conclusive definition of leadership or what it means to be a leader. Instead, I wanted to create a space for Latina women to define what leadership means while offering insight on what underlying challenges and strengths come from that process and from allowing such a space to exist within the literature. By engaging in a discussion on how Latina women embark on their own leadership processes and make sense of that process pedagogically contributes to research on the perception of women of colour, especially Latina youth who are categorized as “at risk”, and challenges denigrated images of surviving and thriving to battle oppression (Collins, 2000, in

Oesterreich, 2007, p. 15).

One of the challenges to leadership is the limited ways that we as a society and Latin

American community see leadership or envision leadership within Canadian society. I allude to the mainstream understanding of leadership and leadership roles that is deemed more valid than others. There is very limited discussion in the literature that exists on leadership about women’s perspectives and experiences -- on how we see and do leadership and what it means to us. To consider the contributions of these women in meaningful and integrative ways is the biggest challenges, and sadly, the most important.

73

In the interviews, five of the seven subjects, alluded to leadership development as

“intuitive”, “self-explanatory”, “obtained by living life.” The other two research participants described that they first came to ‘learn’ about leadership in school and the leadership training program. Curiously however, all seven Latina women spoke about their leadership process through concrete examples that often described lived experiences outside of Nosotras.

In this vein, the documentation of these examples of leadership allows us to examine what has been learned about and from [Latina] leaders, and their leadership stories to bring a new perspective into the discourse of leadership, gender, and ethnicity (Mendez-Morse,

2000, pp. 594-595). Mendez-Morse states that, “[l]earning more about trailblazing Latinas would inform researchers studying leadership and educational administration about the role of mentoring that is presently considered” (p. 2000).

In closing, it is important to understand that leadership processes and/or leadership models/programs do not occur in a vacuum or neutral environment- especially when we conceive these models/programs for particular marginalized communities, such as in the case of the Latin American women in Nosotras. Leadership programs that are designed by and for

Latina American women are for better or worse sites of struggle and possibility that must at once continue to be sites of strategic essentialism-i.e. sites of resistance and sites of constant consciousness of power and positionality, so that we may, as Emma Perez eloquently writes,

“construct creative, not reactive, countersites with multiple voices in mostly masculinist,

Eurocentric colonizing institutions [and societies]” (p. 95). And where we may find ways to join other social and political groups in an effort to find alternative strategies to how we do leadership.

74

Equally important is to document our experience, not only to mark our continued existence and rhizomatic thinking but also to show our collective writing of these perspectives as our resistance. Here, I would like to conclude with the work of Rita Sanchez

(originally published in 1977) who emphatically writes in her work entitled, “Chicana writer breaking out of the silence”:

Writing, breaking the silence, subjective as it may appear, becomes a monumental and

collective act because it signifies over coming, freeing oneself from the confines and

conditions of history. The collective act may not even be expressed in the words themselves,

but is manifest in the act of writing down these words. Writing is the tool which allows the

Chicana to implement action, critical thought, change. It signifies a voice, a dimension beyond

just a presence. It allows us a voice that reaches out to one another, spurring critical question

while creating empathy. By this process involving writer and reader, both participants are

breaking out of silence, no longer are they mere presences, but instruments for change,

visionaries awakening the people (Sanchez, 1997, p. 67).

References

Alcoff, L. (1988) Cultural feminism versus post-structuralism: The identity crisis in feminist

theory. Signs: Journal of Women in Culture and Society, 13: 405-436.

Anderson, B. (1983). Imagined communities: Reflections on the origin and spread of

nationalism. London: Verso.

Antrobus, P. (2000). Transformational leadership: Advancing the agenda for gender justice.

Gender and Development, 8(3), 50-56.

Anzaldua, G., & Keating, A. (Eds.) (2002). This bridge we call home: Radical visions for

transformation. New York, NY: Routledge.

Anzaldua, G. (1999). Borderlands/La Frontera: The New Mestiza. San Francisco, CA: Aunt

Lute Books.

Anzaldua, G. (Ed.) (1990). Making face, making soul = haciendo caras: creative and critical

perspectives by feminists of color. San Francisco, CA: Aunt Lute Books.

Anzaldua, G. (1983). La prieta. In G. Anzaldua & C. Moraga (Eds.), This bridge called my

back: Writing by radical women of color (pp. 198-209). New York, NY: Women of

Color Press.

Anzaldua, G., & Moraga, C. (Eds.) (1981). Speaking in tongues: A letter to third world

writers. In G. Anzaldua & C. Moraga (Eds.), This bridge called my back: Writing by

radical women of color (pp. 165-173). New York, NY: Women of Color Press.

Astin, H., & Leland, C. (1991). Women of influence, women of vision: A cross-generational

study of leaders and social change. San Francisco, CA: Jossey-Bass.

Belenky, M. F., Clinchy, B. M., Golderberger, N. R., & Tarule, J.M. (1986). Women’s ways

of knowing: the development of self, voice and mind. New York, NY: Basic Books.

75 76

Bensimon, E.M., & Newmann, A. (1995). Redesigning collegiate leadership: Teams and

teamwork in higher education. Baltimore, MD: John Hopkins University Press.

Boyd, S. Klau, M. & Luckow, L. (Eds.). (2006). Youth leadership: New direction for youth

development. San Francisco, CA: Jossey-Bass/Wiley.

Brooks, G., & Regan, H. (1995). Out of women’s experience: Creating relational leadership.

Thousand Oaks, CA: Corwin Press, Inc.

Caldwell, P. (2002). A hair piece: Perspectives on the intersection between race and gender.

In R. Delgado & J. Stefancic (Eds.), Critical Race Theory: The cutting edge. Second ed.

(pp. 275-285). Philidelphia, PA: Temple University Press.

Carducci, R., & Kezar, A. (2009). Revolutionizing leadership development: Lessons from

research and theory. In A. Kezar (Ed.), Rethinking leadership in a complex, multicultural

and global environment: New concepts and models for higher education (pp.1-38).

Sterling: Stylus Publishing, LLC.

Collins, P. (2000). The power of self-definition. In P. Hill Collins (Ed.), Black feminist

thought: Knowledge, consciousness and the politics of empowerment (pp. 91-113). New

York, NY: Routledge.

Collins, P. (1986). Learning from the outsider within: The sociological significance of black

feminist thought. Social Problems: 33(6), 14-32.

Comas-Diaz, L., & Vasquez, M. (2007). Feminist leadership among Latinas. In J. Lau Chin

et al. (Eds.), Women and leadership: Transforming visions and diverse voices (pp. 263-

279). Malden, MA: Blackwell Publishing.

77

Dei, G. J. S., Mazzuca, J., McIsaac, E., & Zine, J. (1997). Recontructing ‘dropout’: A critical

ethnography of the dynamics of Black students’ disengagement from school. Toronto:

University of Toronto.

Delgado Bernal, D. (1998). Grassroots leadership reconceptualized: Chicana oral histories

and the 1968 East Los Angeles school blowouts. Frontiers: A Journal of Women Studies

19 (2), 113-142.

Delgado, Bernal, D. (1998). Using a chicana feminist epistemology in educational research.

Harvard Educational Review: 69 (4), 555-582.

Delgado, R., & Stefancic, J. (2002). Critical Race Theory: The cutting edge. Second ed..

Philidelphia, PA: Temple University Press.

Delgado, R., & Stefancic, J. (2001). Critical race theory: An introduction. New York, NY:

New York University Press.

Elenes, C.A. (2006). Transformando fronteras: Chicana feminist transformative pedagogies.

In D. Delgado Bernal et al., (Eds.), Chicana/Latina education in everyday life: Feminista

perspectives on pedagogy and epistemology. Albany, NY: State University of New York

Press.

Fernandez, L. (2002). Telling stories about school: Using critical race and Latino critical

theories to document Latina/Latino education and resistance. Qualitative Inquiry, 8(1),

45-65.

Flores, J (1997). The Latino Imaginary: Dimensions of Community and Identity. In F. R.

Aparicio & S. Chavez-Silverman (Eds.), Tropicalizations: Transcultural representations

of latinidad (pp. 183- 193). Hanover: University Press of New England.

78

Flores, L.A. (1996). Creating discursive space through a rhetoric of difference: Chicana

feminists craft a homeland. Quarterly Journal of Speech, 82(2), 142-156.

Foucault, M. (1980). Two lectures. In C. Gordon (Ed.), Power/Knowledge: Selected

interviews and other writings, 1972-1977 (pp.78-108). Brighton: Harvester Press.

Garay, E. (2000). Social economic and demographic profile: Hispanic community. Toronto:

Hispanic Development Council.

Ginieniewicz, J. (2010a). Identity politics of Latin Americans in Toronto. Journal of

Immigrant & Refugee Studies, 8, 261-283.

Ginieniewicz, J. (2010b). Latin American rethink their political spaces: Grass-

roots or electoral participation? Political Studies Association, 58, 497-515

Giroux, H.A., & McLaren, P. (1997). Writing from the margins: Geographies of identity,

pedagogy, and power In P. McLaren (Ed.), Revolutionary multiculturalism: Pedagogies

of dissent for the new millenium (pp. 16- 41). Boulder, CO: Westview Press.

Goldring, L. (2006). Latin American transnationalism in Canada: Does it exist, what forms

does it take and where is it going? In V. Satzewich & L. Wong (Eds.), Transnational

identities and practices in Canada (pp. 180–201). , , Canada:

University of British Columbia.

Grewal, I. & Kaplan, C. (1996). Warrior marks: Global womanism’s neo-colonial discourse

in a multicultural context. Camera Obscura, 39, 4-33.

Hall, S. (1996). Introduction: Who needs ‘identity’?”. In S. Hall & P. du Gay (Eds.),

Questions of cultural identity (pp. 1-17). London: Sage.

79

Haney Lopez, I F. (2000). Race and erasure: The salience of race to Latino/as. In R. Delgado

& J. Stefancic (Eds.), Critical race theory: The cutting edge, second edition (pp. 369-

378). Philadelphia, PA: University Press. hooks, b. (2010). Teaching critical thinking: practical wisdom. New York, NY: Routledge. hooks, b. (2000). Black women: Shaping feminist theory. In J. James & T. Denean Sharpley-

Whiting (Eds.), The Black feminist reader (p. 131-145). Malden, MA: Blackwell

Publishers. hooks, b. (1994). Teaching to transgress: Education as the practice of freedom. New York,

NY: Routledge.

Hosking, D. (1988). Organizing, leadership and skillful process. Journal of Management

Studies. 25(2), 148-166.

Hoyt, M.A., & Kennedy, C. L. (2008). Leadership and adolescent girls: A qualitative study

of leadership development. American Journal Community Psychology, 42, 203-219.

Hurtado, A. (1998). Sitios y lenguas: Chicanas theorize feminisms. Hypatia, 13(2), 134-161.

James, J. (1999). Radicalising feminism. Race & class, 40 (4), 15-31.

James, S. M. (1993). Mothering: A possible Black feminist link to social transformation. In

S. M. James & A. P.A. Busia (Eds.), Theorizing black feminisms: The visionary

pragtiatism of black women (pp. 45-55). New York, NY: Routledge.

John, M.E. (1996). Discrepant dislocations: feminism, theory and postcolonial histories.

Berkeley, CA: University of California Press.

Kezar, A. (2007). Pluralistic leadership: Incorporating diverse voices. The Journal of Higher

Education, 71(6), 722-743.

80

Kezar, A. (2002). Reconstructing static images of leadership: An application of positionality

theory. Journal of Leadership and Organizational Studies. 8(3), 94-109.

Klau, M. (2006). Exploring youth leadership in theory and practice: An empirical study. In

S. Boyd, M. Klau, & L. Luckow (Eds.), Youth leadership: New direction for youth

development (pp. 57-89). San Francisco, CA: Jossey-Bass/Wiley.

Ladson-Billings, G. (2000). Racialized discourses and ethnic epistemlogies. In N.K. Denzin

and Y. S. Lincoln (Eds.), Handbook of Qualitative Research (pp.257-278). Thousand

Oaks, CA: Sage Publications.

Lao-Montes, A. (2001). Introduction: Mambo montage: The latinization of New York. In A.

Dávila & A. Lao-Montes (Eds.), Mambo montage: The latinization of New York (pp. 1-

53). New York, NY: Columbia University Press.

Lau Chin, J. et al. (Eds.) (2007). Women and leadership: Transforming visions and diverse

voices. Malden, MA: Blackwell Publishing.

Lewis, M. G. (1993). Without a word: Teaching beyond women’s silence. New York, NY:

Routledge.

Lorde, A. (1984). Sister.outsider: Essays and speeches. Trumansburg, NY: Crossing Press.

Lorde, A. (1997). Age, race, class and sex. In A. McClintock, A. Mufti, & E. Shohat (Eds.),

Dangerous liaisons: Gender, nation & postcolonial perspectives (pp. 374-380).

Minneapolis, MN: University of Minnesota Press.

Maher, F.A., & Thompson Tetreault, M.K. (1994). The feminist classroom: An inside look at

how professors and students are transforming higher education for a diverse society.

New York, NY: Basic Books.

81

Mata, F. (1985). Latin American immigration to Canada: Some reflections on the

immigration statistics. Canadian Journal of Latin American and Caribbean Studies,

10(20), 27–42.

McDowell, L. (1992). Doing gender: Feminists and research methods in human geography.

Transactions of the Institute of British Geographers, 17(4), 399-416.

McLaren, P., & Giroux, H.A. (1997). In P. McLaren (Ed.), Revolutionary multiculturalism:

Pedagogies of dissent for the new milliennium. Boulder, CO: Westview Press

McLean Taylor, J., Gilligan, C., & Sullivan, A. (Eds.). (1995). Between voice and silence:

Women and girls, race and relationship. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.

McRuer, R. (1997). The queer renaissance: Contemporary American literature and the

reinvention of lesbian and gay identities. New York, NY: New York University Press.

Mendez-Morse, S. (2000). Claiming forgotten leadership. Urban Education, 35(5), 584-596.

Mohanty, C.T. (1991). Under western eyes: Feminist scholarship and colonial discourse. In

C. T. Mohanty, A. Russo, & L. Torres (Eds.), Third world women and the politics of

feminism (pp. 51-80). Bloomington, IN: Indiana University Press.

Mohanty, C.T. (1991). Cartographies of struggle. In C. T. Mohanty, A. Russo & L. Torres

(Eds.), Third world women and the politics of feminism (pp. 1-47). Bloomington, IN:

Indiana University Press.

Narayan, K. (1993) How native is a ‘‘native’’ anthropologist? American Anthropologist, 95

(3), 671–686.

Oesterreich, H. (2007). From ‘crisis’ to ‘activist’: The everyday freedom legacy of Black

feminism. Race, Ethnicity and Education, 10(1), 1-20.

82

Perez, E. (1998). Irigaray’s female symbolic in the making of chicana lesbian sitios y lenguas

(sites and discourses). In. C. Trujillo (Ed.), Living chicana theory (pp.87-101). Berkeley,

CA: Third Woman Press.

Razack, S. (1998). Looking white people in the eye. Toronto: University of Toronto Press.

Robnett, B. (1996). Women in the civil rights movement 1954-1965: Gender leadership and

micromobilization. American Journal of Sociology, 101(6): 1661-1693.

Rodriguez, J M. (2003). Queer latinidad: Identity practices, discursive spaces. New York,

NY: New York University Press.

Rottmann, C. (2006). Queering educational leadership from the inside out. International

Journal of Leadership in Education, 9 (1), 1-20.

Rose, G. (1997). Situating knowledges: Positionality, reflexivities and other tactics. Progress

in Human Geography, 21(3), 305-320.

Ryan, J. (2006). Inclusive leadership. San Francisco, CA: Jossey-Bass

Sanchez, R. (1997). Chicana writer breaking out of the silence. In A.M. Garcia (Ed.),

Chicana feminist thought: The basic historical writings (pp. 66-68). New York, NY:

Routledge.

Schugurensky, D., & Ginieniwicz, J. (2007). The Latin American community in Canada:

Some challenges ahead. Dialogos, 3. Accessed online on September 10, 2012 at

http://dialogos.ca/magazine/number3/article2.htm

Scott, J. (1992). Experience. In J. Butler & J. W. Scott (Eds.), Feminists theorize the political

(pp. 22-40). New York, NY: Routledge.

Simms, M. (2000). Impressions of leadership through a native woman’s eyes. Urban

Education, 25(5), 637-644.

83

Spivak, G. C. (1989). In a word: An interview. Difference, 1, 124-156.

Stephen, L. (2001). Gender, citizenship, and the politics of identity. Latin American

Perspectives, 28(6), 54-67.

Takacs, D. (2002). Positionality, epistemology, and social justice in the classroom. Social

Justice, 29(4), 168-181.

Walters, S., & Manicom, L. (Eds.). (1996). Gender in popular education: Methods for

empowerment. London: Zed Books.

Yoder, J.D. (2001). Making leadership work more effectively for women. Journal of Social

Issues, 57, 815-828.

Zavella, P. (1994). Reflections on diversity among Chicanas. In S. Gregory & R. Sanjek

(Eds.). Race (pp. 199- 212). , NJ: Rutgers University Press.

Appendices

APPENDIX I - Sample Questions

English version

1. How/why did you become involved with LACEV/MUJER?

2. How do you define “leadership”?

3. How did you learn about leadership?

4. What are the barriers or challenges that you face in assuming leadership roles in your daily life? In the organization?

5. What is your sense of activism in the Latina context in Canada?

6. How do you relate to this ‘activism’? (Possible follow-up question or clarification- Are you involved in this ‘activism’? 6b) Would you like to be more/differently involved? How?

Versión en Espanol

1. ¿Cómo o porque decidió involucrarse en LACEV/MUJER?

2. ¿Cómo define usted ‘el liderazgo’?

3. ¿Cómo aprendió sobre el liderazgo?

4. ¿Cuáles son las barreras o los desafíos que ha tenido que enfrentar cuando asumiendo un rol de liderazgo en su vida cuotidiana? ¿En la organización?

5. ¿Cuál es su concepto sobre la participación de latinas en el contexto canadiense?

6. ¿Cómo participa en ese contexto? 6b) ¿Quisiera involucrarse más o de forma diferente? ¿Y de que manera?

84 85

APPENDIX II- Initial E-mail

English Version

Hello ______(name of participant).

As you may know, I’m currently in my second year of the Master’s of Arts program in Adult Education and Community Development and Women’s Studies at the Ontario Institute for Studies in Education (OISE) at the University of Toronto. Right now, I’m working on my thesis (research study) as part of my degree requirement.

Having worked with MUJER in a number of capacities- as leader in training, Board member and currently as Youth Coordinator, I have come to appreciate the history of the organization and the women who have shaped and who continue to shape it. Thus, when it came to writing my thesis, I knew that I wanted to document that history, concentrating in particular on MUJER’s diverse experiences with leadership.

My thesis will illustrate the transformation of women’s leadership in the Latin American community in Toronto and some of your achievements and challenges over the last twenty years. In this way, with your support and guidance, I would like to capture the ways that women of different ages have come together. In this work, I would like to bring to light your shared as well as different experiences, particularly around your perspective on what leadership means to each of you.

The main way that I hope to collect the above information is through one-on-one interview with each of you that will take approximately one hour at a time and place convenient for you. I am hoping to obtain eight to ten participants. I will ask each of you open-ended questions and will record each interview by taking notes and by audiotape. The level of your participation throughout this process will be 100 percent voluntary, which means you can be selective in the way you respond to questions or you can change your level of participation or you can withdraw altogether from the study at any time with no negative consequences. If

86 you do not wish to be interviewed, but would like to contribute to my study, you can participate in other ways. Should you be interested in participating, I will be more than happy to provide more information about the different ways you can participate and on your rights as the research participant.

Please let me know if you are interested in being a part of this documentation of the women of LACEV/MUJER by Friday May 1st, 2009. Should you wish to contact me by phone, you can call me at XXX-XXX-XXXX.

Thank you for your time and consideration in this exciting project!

Bixi

Versión en Espanol

Hola ______(nombre de participante)

Como algunas saben, actualmente estoy en mi segundo ano de maestría en artes en el programa de Educación para Adultos y Desarrollo Comunitario y Estudios de Mujeres y Género en el Instituto de Ontario para los Estudios de Educación (OISE) en la Universidad de Toronto. En este momento estoy trabajando sobre mi tesis (estudio de investigación) como requisito para obtener mi maestría.

Desde que trabajo con MUJER en diferentes campos- como participante del entrenamiento de liderazgo, como miembro de la junta directiva y actualmente como coordinadora de la juventud, aprecio la historia de la organización y las mujeres que han contribuido a ella y aquellas que continúan haciéndolo. Por eso, cuando me toco escribir mi tesis, sabía que quería documentar esa historia, concentrándome en las experiencias diversas dentro de MUJER con respecto al liderazgo.

87

Mi tesis ilustrará la transformación del liderazgo de mujer en la comunidad Latinoamericana en Toronto, sus logros y desafíos en el transcurso de los últimos veinte anos. Para esto, pido su apoyo y orientación ya que quisiera captar y plasmar como mujeres de diferentes edades se han reunido para trabajar juntas. En este trabajo quisiera dar a conocer las similitudes y las diferencias en sus experiencias, en particular en términos de sus perspectivas sobre lo que el liderazgo significa para cada una de ustedes.

La forma principal que quisiera recopilar la información mencionada arriba es a través de una entrevista con cada una de ustedes. La entrevista durará aproximadamente una hora y se realizará en un tiempo y lugar conveniente para usted. Espero obtener la participación de ocho a diez mujeres. Haré preguntas abiertas, grabaré la entrevista y tomaré notas. El nivel de su participación durante este proceso será 100 por ciento voluntario, que significa que puede contestar como más se sienta cómoda o cambiar el nivel de participación o retirarse del estudio en cualquier tiempo sin ninguna consecuencia negativa. Si no quisiera ser entrevistada pero quisiera contribuir a mi estudio, lo puede hacer de otras maneras. Si está interesada en participar, sería un placer proporcionarle mayor información sobre las diferentes maneras que puede participar y sus derechos como participante de investigación.

Por favor déjeme saber si está interesada en ser parte de la documentación de las mujeres de LACEV/MUJER antes del viernes, 1 de mayo del 2009. Si quisiera comunicarse conmigo por teléfono, me puede llamar al número telefónico XXX-XXX-XXXX. ¡Gracias por su tiempo y colaboración en este interesante proyecto!

Bixi

88

APPENDIX III: Consent letter and form for research participants

date

Dear ______

As you may already know, I am an M.A. student at the Ontario Institute for Studies in Education at the University of Toronto (OISE/UT), working under the supervision of Dr. Christine Connelly. I have worked at MUJER for almost three years, and, being involved in their leadership training programs (as a participant and coordinator), I am very interested in the area of the transformation of ‘leadership’ within the organization since its origin as LACEV. For my master’s thesis, I am conducting a study focusing on the experiences of some of the women from LACEV/MUJER, particularly around leadership.

While there is growing research on the Latin American community in Toronto, I feel that much of the research focuses on the negative aspects of the community, particularly around youth issues, such as gang violence, teenage pregnancy, low success rates in education, etc. However, there is little information about Latin American women’s successes and leadership in the community. I believe much can be learned and gained from understanding how you, as a woman, define leadership and what your experiences of it are. Furthermore, I want to contribute to the existing literature by putting forth an intergenerational perspective on the transformation of leadership in Toronto and the negotiations that happen within an organization like MUJER when women have different perspectives on ‘leadership’. This will provide an opportunity for those interested in gaining a better understanding of the achievements and challenges in working together.

For my research, I will mainly rely on individual interviews. This interview will be approximately one hour and it will involve open-ended questions based on your own experiences. If you choose to participate, you will be one of up to ten women interviewed. The interview will be conducted at a time and location convenient to you. If you do not wish to be interviewed or would like to withdraw from the interview, there are other ways of participating. You may choose to: (1) Have a formal interview; (2) Talk to me informally, or (3) Send me something written. Of course, you may also choose to simply decline all together.

89

Your personal information will be kept anonymous during the research process. I will replace participants’ actual names with a code known only to me. At any time during the interview process, you may request to change or withdraw the information given to me. If for any reason, you wish to withdraw from participating in the study, you can do so at any time with no negative consequences and all of your data would be destroyed and would not be used in the thesis. I will be the only person who will have access to the data collected as it will be secured in my house and/or in my thesis supervisor’s office. I will destroy all raw data collected in this study within five years after completion of my thesis.

If you are interested in participating in this study, please read and sign the consent form below. We will both keep a signed copy for our records. If you would like to receive a summary of the research results, please let me know and I will be more than happy to provide them.

Sincerely,

Bixi Lobo-Molnar

MA Candidate, Collaborative Program in Adult Education & Community Development and Women’s Studies

Ontario Institute for Studies in Education/University of Toronto

90

I understand what this study involves and agree to participate in one of the following ways:

o I agree to participate in a formal audiotape interview

o I agree to participate in an informal conversation

o I agree to submit a written response to a set of open-ended research questions

OR

o I decline to participate

If I have any additional comments, I have included them here:

______

I have been given a copy of this consent form.

______

Participant’s Printed Name Participant’s Signature Date

I wish to obtain a copy of the research results at the following email address: ______

If you have any questions or concerns about this study, please feel free to contact me. Please see contact info listed below. Please contact the Research Ethics Office if you have any questions about your rights as a participant.

Researcher: Bixi Lobo-Molnar Thesis Supervisor: Dr. Christine Connelly

Tel: XXX-XXX-XXXX Tel: 416-978-1989

Email: [email protected] Email: [email protected]

Research Ethics Office

Email: [email protected] Tel: 416-946-3273

91

Versión en espanol

Querida ______

Como ya probablemente sabe, soy una estudiante hacienda mi maestría en el Instituto de Ontario para los Estudios de Educación en la Universidad de Toronto (OISE/UT, trabajando bajo la supervisión de Dra. Christine Connelly. Debido a mi trabajo con MUJER por casi tres anos e involucrada en los programas de liderazgo (como participante y coordinadora), estoy muy interesada en el área de transformación de ‘liderazgo’ dentro de la organización desde su inicio como LACEV. Para mi tesis de maestría, estoy haciendo un estudio centrado en las experiencias de algunas de las mujeres de LACEV/MUJER, particularmente con respecto al liderazgo.

Mientras que hay un crecimiento de investigaciones sobre la comunidad latinoamericana en Toronto, pienso que la gran parte de esos estudios se enfocan en aspectos negativos de la comunidad, especialmente alrededor de los temas como pandilla juveniles, embarazo de jóvenes, el índice bajo de los logros en educación, etc. Sin embargo, hay poca información sobre los logros y el liderazgo de las mujeres latinoamericanas en la comunidad. Yo creo que mucho puede ser aprendido y ganado aprendiendo como usted, como mujer define el liderazgo y sus experiencias al respecto. Además, quisiera contribuir a la literatura existente plasmando una perspectiva intergeneracional sobre la transformación de liderazgo en Toronto y las negociaciones que ocurren dentro de una organización como MUJER, especialmente cuando mujeres tienen diferentes perspectivas sobre “el liderazgo”. Esto creará una oportunidad para cualquiera que se interese en tener un mejor entendimiento de los logros y desafíos trabajando juntas.

Mi estudio depende principalmente de las entrevistas individuales. Esta entrevista será una hora y consiste en preguntas abiertas y basadas en sus propias vivencias. La entrevista durará aproximadamente una hora. Si decide participar, será una de diez mujeres entrevistadas. La entrevista tomará lugar a la hora y en el sitio conveniente para usted. Si no quisiera ser entrevistada o quisiera retirarse de la entrevista, existen otras maneras de participar. Puede elegir: (1) Hablar conmigo informalmente mientras que tomo notas escritas o (2) Mandarme algo escrito de su parte. Por supuesto también puede elegir sencillamente retirarse por completo.

92

Sus datos personales se mantendrán en reserva durante el proceso de investigación. Yo remplazaré sus nombres verdaderos con un código solo conocido por mí. Cualquier tiempo durante el proceso de entrevistas puede pedir cambiar o retirar los datos que me hayan dado. Si por cualquier razón, desea retirarse del estudio, lo puede hacer sin ninguna consecuencia negativa. Yo seré la única persona quien tendrá acceso a la información recopilada ya que será guardado en una parte segura de mi casa y/o en la oficina de mi supervisora de tesis. Solo mi supervisora de tesis y yo tendremos acceso a la información original. Destruiré toda información original recopilada en este estudio después de cinco anos de terminar mi tesis.

Si esta interesada en participar en este estudio, por favor firme el formulario de consentimiento abajo. Las dos guardaremos una copia firmada para nuestro record. Si quisiera recibir un resumen de los resultados de la investigación, por favor hagamelo saber y será un placer proporcionarlos.

Sinceramente

Bixi Lobo-Molnar

Candidata de Maestría, Collaborative Program in Adult Education & Community Development and Women’s Studies

Ontario Institute for Studies in Education/University of Toronto

93

Entiendo lo que involucra este estudio y acepto participar en ello en una de las siguientes maneras:

o Participar en una entrevista formal y grabada

o Participar en una conversación informal

o Entregar una respuesta escrita según unas preguntas abiertas dadas por la investigadora

O

o No deseo participar en el estudio

Si tengo algún comentario lo he incluido aquí:

______

He recibido una copia de este formulario de consentimiento.

______

Nombre de participante escrito Firma de participante Fecha

Deseo obtener una copia de los resultados de la investigación a este correo electrónico:

______

Si tiene cualquier pregunta o duda sobre este estudio, usted puede contactarse conmigo por email o por teléfono (ver abajo). Por favor contáctese con la oficina de Research Ethics Office si tiene preguntas sobre sus derechos como participante.

Investigadora: Bixi Lobo-Molnar Supervisora de tesis: Dr. Christine Connelly

Tel: XXX-XXX-XXXX Tel: 416-978-1989

Email: [email protected] Email: [email protected]

Research Ethics Office

Email: [email protected]

Tel: 416-946-3273

94

APPENDIX IV: Follow-up with Participant on Interviews Letter

Hi ______(participant’s name),

I’m writing to you after a long time because I have recently begun again my thesis endeavour. I will admit that this process has been difficult for me because I have also been working full time.

In any case, please do not think that I have forgotten you or the promise I made at the time of your interview that you had the right to read what you said at your interview and to provide input on what you wish to change, omit, or remain in what you said. For this reason, I am sending you your transcribed interview so that you can read it and make any suggestions before I move into the analysis of our shared words. If there is anything that you are unsure about or you have questions on what you read in the document, please let me know and I will do my best to provide an answer.

I do request that your input be made in writing via email by Tuesday April 6th at 5 p.m. After this time, I will proceed with my analysis and contact you once I have completed my first draft of my thesis upon request.

Thank you very much!

Bixi

Contact info

Versión en español

Hola ______(nombre de participante)

Te estoy escribiendo después de mucho tiempo porque recién he empezado a trabajar en mi tesis de nuevo. Te confeso que el proceso de escribir mi tesis ha sido difícil para mí porque he empezado a trabajar a tiempo completo.

95

De todos modos, por favor no pienses que me he olvidado de la promesa que te hice en el momento de entrevistarte. Es decir, que tienes el derecho de leer lo que dijistes en la entrevista y de aportar cualquier comentario y de incluso cambiar tu respuesta, omitir algo o aceptar que tu respuesta se quede como está. Por esta razón te estoy mandando la entrevista que tuvimos transcrita para que lo leas y hagas sugerencias antes que yo siga con mi análisis de las palabras que compartimos. Si hay algo que no estás segura o si tienes alguna pregunta sobre lo que leas en el documento, por favor házmelo saber y hare lo posible para proporcionarte una respuesta.

También pido que por favor proporciones tus comentarios en escrito por email antes de martes 6 de abril a las 5 p.m. Después de este tiempo, seguiré con mi análisis y te contactare una vez que haya terminado mi primer borrador de mi tesis - si expresas algún interés en leerlo.

Muchísimas gracias,

Bixi