1

Michelle Tiffany Tan

Professor Cricket Keating

Collaborations in Feminism and Technology

November 3, 2019

GWSS 391 Thought Paper 2

Following my first thought paper regarding Mari Matsuda’s theory of coalition, having

read Aurora Morales’ Circle Unbroken has inputted my understanding further towards

coalitional work in technofeminism subject. Hereinafter, I will also link some of the

author’s writing with Mari Matsuda and Bernice Reagon’s ideas covering the world of

coalition in the age of technology advancement.

At the beginning of her essay, Morales critiques about unity across diversity that

depended on a single-axis issue, in which the work of an aggregation would eventually

scatter in a short period of time. Ending a domination system against women would not

be successful if we overlook some significant components of our lives. Every woman

has different kinds of belongings in terms of social categories, such as ethnicity, gender

identity, sexual orientation, country, working-class, and so on. And society seemed to

generalize/simplify those classifications as one single issue. She also stated her father’s

belief about conflicting progressivism that is caused by the individualism in its

movement because no one is substantially asking/imagining the solution that could

meet the needs of all. To fit these needs, Morales argues, it does not only take the effort
 2

of creating multiple social coalitions at the same time, nor by only including the people

whom we should mention in the speech.

Morales’ vision towards her critiques suggests a long-term inclusive feminism that

brings equal participation of women’s competency in the liberation movements against

authoritative systems, especially the patriarchal paradigm. Morales envisions that the

inclusion she imagines is a straightforward yet complex subject to work for; we should

delve deeper into the injustice particularity to figure out the big useful solution to meet

everyone’s needs. In her last two paragraphs, Morales writes her vision that refers to

Bernice Reagon’s statement about being in a coalition. “Being in coalition meant

working with people we didn’t much like, and we might need to vomit over it for a while,

but we had to do it anyway” (page 124). She emphasizes that her perception in

inclusion should move beyond comfort zones, taking responsibilities to relate on each

others problems and our own, upholding the belief of abandoning our egoism or

selflessness to join movements with people we cannot stand to look for “the necessary

links that will expand the visions of both their movements and ours until we find the

point of collaboration” (page 125), as well as being in solidarity, where we tolerate

others’ points of view to come up with a ‘big enough solution’. Some of Morales’

critiques above and her vision here can be seen quite obviously similar to Matsuda’s

thoughts about single-axis oppression issues and coalition.

 3

Yet, unlike Matsuda’s proposed strategy of intersectionality, Morales uses the theory of

a much more ‘organic interpenetration of institutional systems of power’ (page 122).

This theory, Morales believes, would help comprehend the relations between the

diverse aspects of lives, the struggles women put to gain their rights and merging all

classifications of a person. To be beneficial, this theory must deliver the way oppression

and privilege merge, that is also to be able to guide us in using the particular, framing

big, inclusive questions, bringing equity to solve for conflicting needs, and sacrificing no

one (page 123). One strategy of Morales that I am fond of is ‘mapping how our thinking

has been affected by oppression’ (page 124). Her suggestion is to share thoughts and

experiences without feeling shame. This can contribute to building empathy and respect

towards each other, expanding as well as exchanging knowledge about oppression.

Finally, to answer the question of how Morales might contribute to the building of a

movement for a more just world has something to do with Baumgardner & Richards,

and Virginia Eubanks’ strategies. We have to imagine a day without women’s

movements, work with the issues that are still left unsolved, share our own experiences,

listen to others too, and develop trust with each other. Make technology as a platform

for underprivileged peers to engage in political discussion and gain their awareness by

protecting, respecting, and rewarding them and our caregivers, which also relates to a

solution for the day before the feminism wave existed, that managing household being

undervalued by society and as Lisa Nakamura says in her interview of giving women

more credibility in raising future leaders.