Thank you for writing this. It's the same bullshit that Black/Afro Latina women hear, over and over, as cruelty and indignity is meted out to us: "Oh, Black women are so strong." It reduces Black women to nothing but mules- after all, mules are so very strong, and can be whipped over and over again while carrying burdens.
We are not mules, nor particularly strong or yes, resilient. We are human, and survive despite a structural meant very honestly to extract our labor and then kill us.
As always, you've made me think! I completely get your point but hadn't connected use of the word "resilience" with the work that ends up placed on individuals and communities for self help. My daughter has been talking about a similar phenomenon in Cape Town since the big fire there last week, and I've seen this with regard to response to food insecurity particularly during COVID (and, of course, in many other ways). What I'm sitting with, is that "resilience" is often used in food system context to mean something more like advocating for local and federal government spending up front for systemic supports so that the local/regional food systems can withstand disasters like hurricanes, pandemics, etc. without needing to resort to mutual aid as often. It might be things like supporting small farmers with grants (helping Black and Indigenous and other farmers of color acquire land, helping farmers expand their farms and purchase equipment and or technology or use regenerative growing methods etc), investing in regional distribution and copacking hubs, permitting urban farms, etc., essentially insuring that everyone isn't reliant on one region of the country for all our food, when weather, pandemic, etc. can disrupt. I'm now going to do a dive into some of your resources to see if use of "resilience" in this context could be misinterpreted given the use you describe, and I'm wondering your thoughts!
Will point to this from Bonilla: "We certainly want our buildings and bridges to be resilient, but do we really want our communities to become well-adapted to structural (and infrastructural) violence?" I grounded the argument in Puerto Rico with the purpose of shedding light on the specific issue of colonialism and how U.S. empire is thus expressed here. When people speak of "resilience," it isn't in the context of quantifiable measures that you point to; it's about the people taking care of themselves without resources.
Thanks! So I'm wondering if the use of the word in the context I mentioned would be better served with a different word? When there is explanation, I think people can immediately see the difference between the two usages. Often, though, we might say that "we support a more resilient and equitable food system" with no further context. You raise such an important point, and now I'm wondering if those of us who use this word need to understand it's other usages.
Right, I think it works really well in that context, because it's referring to quantifiable measures and ecological infrastructure. I think it's this specific reference to peoples and their actions post-disaster that is problematic.
Thank you for writing this. It's the same bullshit that Black/Afro Latina women hear, over and over, as cruelty and indignity is meted out to us: "Oh, Black women are so strong." It reduces Black women to nothing but mules- after all, mules are so very strong, and can be whipped over and over again while carrying burdens.
We are not mules, nor particularly strong or yes, resilient. We are human, and survive despite a structural meant very honestly to extract our labor and then kill us.
yes yes yes!!!
As always, you've made me think! I completely get your point but hadn't connected use of the word "resilience" with the work that ends up placed on individuals and communities for self help. My daughter has been talking about a similar phenomenon in Cape Town since the big fire there last week, and I've seen this with regard to response to food insecurity particularly during COVID (and, of course, in many other ways). What I'm sitting with, is that "resilience" is often used in food system context to mean something more like advocating for local and federal government spending up front for systemic supports so that the local/regional food systems can withstand disasters like hurricanes, pandemics, etc. without needing to resort to mutual aid as often. It might be things like supporting small farmers with grants (helping Black and Indigenous and other farmers of color acquire land, helping farmers expand their farms and purchase equipment and or technology or use regenerative growing methods etc), investing in regional distribution and copacking hubs, permitting urban farms, etc., essentially insuring that everyone isn't reliant on one region of the country for all our food, when weather, pandemic, etc. can disrupt. I'm now going to do a dive into some of your resources to see if use of "resilience" in this context could be misinterpreted given the use you describe, and I'm wondering your thoughts!
Will point to this from Bonilla: "We certainly want our buildings and bridges to be resilient, but do we really want our communities to become well-adapted to structural (and infrastructural) violence?" I grounded the argument in Puerto Rico with the purpose of shedding light on the specific issue of colonialism and how U.S. empire is thus expressed here. When people speak of "resilience," it isn't in the context of quantifiable measures that you point to; it's about the people taking care of themselves without resources.
Thanks! So I'm wondering if the use of the word in the context I mentioned would be better served with a different word? When there is explanation, I think people can immediately see the difference between the two usages. Often, though, we might say that "we support a more resilient and equitable food system" with no further context. You raise such an important point, and now I'm wondering if those of us who use this word need to understand it's other usages.
Right, I think it works really well in that context, because it's referring to quantifiable measures and ecological infrastructure. I think it's this specific reference to peoples and their actions post-disaster that is problematic.
Thanks for your thoughts--that helps!
and to make clear the distinction that Bonilla does!
Now you're talking... you kinda lost me on the peanut butter crisis... now it's right on Alicia.