|
SCRATCHING THE SURFACE: THE NEW YORK TIMES COVERAGE OF THE MOTHERS OF PLAZA DE
MAYO, 1977-1997 ABSTRACT Scholars have looked at the Mothers of Plaza de Mayo
from a historical, political, feminist and rhetorical perspective. But how have
the media presented the Mothers? Through textual analysis, this paper examines
The New York Times coverage of the Mothers of Plaza de Mayo from 1977 until
today exploring how the Mothers have been constructed in this major U.S.
newspaper. This construction is consistent with previous research in the area of
news coverage of women. It is superficial and tends to simplify and trivialize
the Mothers and the issues involved, presenting them as either victims or demons
while demeaning their importance as interlocutors of
reality. SCRATCHING THE SURFACE: THE NEW YORK TIMES COVERAGE OF
THE MOTHERS OF PLAZA DE MAYO, 1977-1997 Carolina Acosta-Alzuru Henry W. Grady
College of Journalism and Mass Communication University of Georgia Athens,
Georgia 30602 Phone/Fax: (706) 208-0252 E-mail:
[log in to unmask] SCRATCHING THE SURFACE: THE NEW YORK TIMES COVERAGE OF
THE MOTHERS OF PLAZA DE MAYO, 1977-1997 The desaparecidos can never be allowed
to be forgotten. What happened to our children must never be allowed to happen
to another generation of young people (Elisa de Landin as quoted in Fisher,
1989, p. 157). INTRODUCTION On April 30, 1977 fourteen women between the ages
of forty and sixty walked in a circle around the independence monument in the
Plaza de Mayo of Buenos Aires in defiance of one of the most repressive regimes
of this century. Although they came from different class and educational
backgrounds, they shared a horrible reality: their children had RdisappearedS as
casualties of the RDirty WarS that the Argentine military Junta was waging
against anyone suspected of being a subversive. By December of that same year,
there were 300 women marching and by 1983, the last year of the military regime,
thousands of Argentineans marched with these women in Plaza de Mayo (Bouvard,
1994; Simpson & Bennet, 1985). By then they were widely known in Argentina and
in the rest of the world as las Madres de la Plaza de Mayo, the Mothers of Plaza
de Mayo. Today, twenty years after that very first act of defiance and
desperation, they still march every Thursday at 3:30 pm. Most of their children
like most of the 30,000 desaparecidos{1}are still unaccounted for while most of
their torturers and murderers are free and have never paid for their crimes. In
these twenty years Argentina has changed and the Mothers have developed into one
of Latin America's most important women's movements, but the Mothers' essential
plea has not changed: "we continue to wait for justiceQwe continue to fight for
life and for freedom" (Agosin, 1990, p. 65). In Latin America the expression
women's movementQmovimiento de mujeresQ is preferred to the term feminism. The
latter is considered a loaded word which is usually (and erroneously) associated
only with women who oppose motherhood, marriage and traditional women's role
deeply entrenched in Latin American society. The development and life cycle of
these women's movements have been determined in large part by three main
factors: the political situation, the economic conditions, and the influence of
alternating views over the relative importance of class and gender. These
movements cannot be defined or explained by Western definitions of feminism.
Pornography, the relation between stereotypes and gender socialization, and the
interaction between gender, class and ideology are traditional feminist
interests in the First World (van Zoonen, 1994). Moreover, there is a whole
typology of feminisms which include liberal feminism, Marxist-socialist
feminism, radical feminism, psychoanalytic feminism and cultural feminism.
Cirksena and Cuklanz (1992) have described these feminisms in terms of the
dualisms with which they are concerned.{2} But these interests and typologies do
not apply well to Third World women's movements in general, and to Latin
America's movements in particular. In Latin America, there are three main
strands of women's movements: human rights groups, "classic" feminist groups,
and organizations of poor urban women (Jaquette, 1989). The Mothers of Plaza de
Mayo exemplify the first of these strands. The Mothers have been studied by
scholars from different perspectives and fields. Their story has been told
(Simpson & Bennet, 1985; Bousquet, 1983) and their voices have been heard
(Fisher, 1989; Agosin, 1990; Chelala, 1993). Human rights scholars have analyzed
the transformation of groups of mothers into human rights activists, exploring
the personal, political, and cultural basis for that transformation and the
effectiveness of these groups (Malin, 1994). Navarro (1989) argues that it is in
the nature of the military regime that we can find the origins of the Mother's
militancy and activism. She stresses that it is precisely their condition of
mothers which not only united them, but also protected them from a repressive
state that initially dismissed them because they were "only" mothers. Feminist
scholars have also studied the Mothers telling their story (Femenia, 1987) and
arguing over their success or lack of it. In her book Revolutionizing
Motherhood, Marguerite G. Bouvard (1994) underscores the Mothers' legacy for
women's resistance and human rights groups. For Bouvard the Mothers represent
one of the best examples of women fighting for practical gender interests. She
underscores that the Mothers are not interested in eliminating maternity as
gender identification, "but rather in creating a political role for the values
of love and the caring work associated with maternity" (p. 187). On the other
hand, other feminist commentators have chided the Mothers for holding on to
these maternal images which they see as supporting patriarchal authority. Maria
del Carmen Feij o (1989) criticizes the Mothers for their stand on maternity
which she feels only reinforces the conventional sexual division of labor. The
dispute about these two feminist analyses is yet another example of the
continuous debate between the feminine and the feminist. The former privileges
the struggle for practical gender interests and the latter focuses on the
importance of strategic gender interests.{3} The Mothers of Plaza de Mayo along
with similar women's human rights groups and the movements of poor urban women
in Latin America exemplify the feminine, the emphasis on practical gender
interests. Therefore, much of the feminist analysis done on these groups has
focused on using them to demonstrate whether the feminine is more important than
the feminist or viceversa. Like Bouvard, Rohini Hensman (1996), believes that
although these organizations started out with feminine concerns, their
experiences "inevitably politicised them" (p. 50). The involvement of women in
these (feminine) organizations leads them to feminist concerns and
strategies. Some communication scholars have also analyzed the Mothers. Susana
Kaiser (1996) looked at their communication strategies and Valeria Fabj (1993)
studied their rhetoric and how they have chosen to speak in the public sphere by
using voices from the private realm, namely the voices of motherhood which Fabj
argues have been shaped by the myth of marianismoQthe myth of the good
mother.{4} Regardless of their perspectiveQhistorical, political, feminist,
rhetoricalQ most scholars have looked at the life cycle of the Mothers of Plaza
de Mayo as an organization within the changing Argentine reality. But how have
the media presented the Mothers? People's perceptions of reality are heavily
dependent on the media. The media construct and define the events for their
audience assigning to these events different degrees of importance. News stories
are narratives that "acquire layers of meanings in the course of their use in
everyday life; some are authentic, others are contrived and all are constructed"
(Aulich, 1993, p. 3). Although the Mothers started marching in April of 1977,
it was not until the fourth anniversary march in 1981 that the Argentine press
turned out in strength to see them. Such was the repressive nature of the
military regime. What about the international media? International support
groups have been crucial for the Mothers (Fisher, 1989; Bouvard, 1994). Media
coverage is in turn essential for these groups to "know" about the Mothers and
their struggle. This paper examines The New York Times coverage of the Mothers
of Plaza de Mayo from 1977 until today exploring how the Mothers have been
constructed in this major U.S. newspaper. IDEOLOGY AND THE MEDIA Underlying
this paper are the challenge that cultural studies posits to traditional
positivist media research and its break with the dominant research model of
stimulus-response. The theoretical framework of this study emphasizes the
ideological role of the media which are viewed as a crucial cultural and
ideological force (Hall, 1982). Berger (1995) sees ideology as serving a
function: it serves the interest of ruling groups and stabilizes society, and it
deludes those groups that do not rule about their situation, their
possibilities, their real interests" (p. 59). For Althusser (1971) ideology is
more than a set of ideas, it is a praxis that is reproduced through society's
institutions and practices: education, religion, family, the media. Ideology is
reproduced in the media through the definition and representation of the
different groups of society. The media then, do not reflect reality, they define
it. This definition "implies the active work of selecting and presenting, of
structuring and shaping: not merely the transmitting of an already-existing
meaning, but the more active labour of making things mean" (Hall, 1982, p. 64).
The implication for media studies is huge: the message must be analyzed in terms
of its "ideological structuration" (p. 64) not simply in terms of its manifest
content. The media are signifying agents and they produce meaning and
"knowledge" based on an implicit, unwritten grammar, a set of codes, an
ideology. Underlying this critical paradigm is a notion of power as a
hegemonic force with is used by an elite to shape reality. The social formation
presents us with a monopoly of power by these elites with the consent of many.
Hegemony refers to a condition in which a dominant group leads a society and the
subordinate groups seem to support and subscribe to the values and meanings set
by the dominant group. (Gramsci, 1971). These ideas, values and meanings
constitute a dominant ideology which is reproduced in the Althusserian sense
through the mass media. Also underlying this critical paradigm is the
acknowledgement that the function of language is more powerful and complex than
simply referential. Language organizes reality, constructs it, and ultimately
provides us with our only access to it. In consequence the media's signifying
role is crucial to the production of knowledge. Foucault's work (1979;1981)
demonstrates how power works through discourse, which is a way of defining and
organizing reality: "power produces knowledge...power and knowledge directly
imply one another...there is no power relation without the correlative
constitution of a field of knowledge, nor any knowledge that does not presuppose
and constitute at the same time power relations" (Foucault, 1979, p. 27).
IDEOLOGY AND INTERNATIONAL NEWS COVERAGE OF WOMEN Research indicates that
U.S. media coverage of women's issues and women newsmakers is scant and
inadequate. In 1992 a one-month study of the three major news magazinesQTime,
Newsweek and U.S. News & World ReportQshowed that references about women
averaged only 13 percent of total references ("Women still ignored," 1992).
Coverage of outstanding female leaders on key pages and in network newscasts is
minimal and females are portrayed negatively far more often than males ("1994
Page-One References," 1994). The problem is pervasive not only in U.S. media,
but in international media as well. The first-ever international study on the
representation and portrayal of women in the media, the Global Media Monitoring
Project, concluded that although there are more women journalists, women are
rarely used as news sources and they are often portrayed as victims
("Long-Awaited Global Media," 1995). In 1995, the year of the murder of Nicole
Brown Simpson, coverage of women in U.S. print and broadcast news dropped
dramatically nevertheless. Previous tendencies in the coverage of women such as:
(a) the demonization of female leaders, (b) the invisibility of women's
opinions, commentaries and activities in international news stories (Enloe,
1989), and (c) the proclivity to portray women as victims, especially Third
World women (Mohanty, 1991), continued to be present (Bridge, 1997). The main
products of these tendencies are the trivialization of women's news and the
portrayals of women who are either demons or victims and whose opinions are not
important. In turn, these products represent the covert tendency of society in
general and the media in particular to perpetuate an ideology that continuously
devalues and debases women. "Most existing news about women is trivialQrelated
to family status or appearance. Where important women's activities are covered,
they are often simultaneously undermined or demeaned. U.S. news, of course,
shows a similar pattern, including its coverage of international women's
activities" (Steeves, 1989). Maria Mies (1986) argues that "capitalism cannot
function without patriarchy" (p. 38). Patriarchy and capitalism pervade all
structures of society infiltrating them with their ideologies. The media
corporations are not exempted from this infiltration, they are actually crucial
for the maintenance of the capitalist/patriarchy status quo. Therefore, news
coverage of women reproduces the dominant male-based ideology that resents women
in power, disdains women wrongdoers and ignores for the most part women as
interlocutors of reality. METHOD Content analysis, probably the best known of
textual methodologies, is limited to the study of the manifest content of texts.
The focus is on classifying the text into categories, which are then quantified
in order to determine what the text says (Berelson, 1952). Content analysis does
not deal with the latent content of texts, which is essential to the study of
historical, cultural, and social processes. Textual analysis, on the other hand,
recognizes that texts are polysemic. That is, they do not have "a" meaning. Its
practitioners argue that meaning is a social production and that language "is
the means by which the role of the media is changed from that of conveyors of
reality to that of constructors of meaning" (Curtin, 1995, p. 3). Through
language, reality is constructed and a dominant reading of the text is produced
which positions the reader in relation to the text. Textual analysis is the
chosen methodology because it acknowledges that the text constructs reality. It
also recognizes that in the process of attempting to record history, the text
actually creates history (Lester, 1994). THE MOTHERS OF PLAZA DE MAYO IN THE
NEW YORK TIMES The Dirty War On March 24, 1976, General Jorge Rafael Videla
(army), Admiral Emilio Eduardo Massera (navy) and Brigadier Ram n Agosti (air
force) deposed Isabel Per n and instituted themselves as a ruling military
junta. They suspended Congress, appointed justices for the Supreme Court and
provincial high courts, dismissed most members of the judiciary, took control of
broadcast media, and established a censorship system for the printed media. They
told the population that they required complete control of the state in order to
rescue the country from chaos and anarchy. Under the banner of eradicating
subversion and stabilizing the economy, the Junta engaged in a "war against
subversion" which they called "holy war" or "dirty war." Their definition of
"subversive" included "guerrillas, Marxists of varying persuasion, liberals, and
reform-minded Catholics and Jews, as well as those suspected of actively,
remotely, or accidentally, willingly or unwillingly, aiding or abetting
terrorists" (Navarro, 1989, p. 244). These "subversives" were abducted in their
homes, in their workplaces, in their schools, or simply in the streets. The
abductions were part of the clandestine arm of the military government. Home
abductions typically took place in the middle of the night. Heavily armed men
dressed in civilian clothes and working in groups of five to ten would arrive in
unmarked vehicles, mistreat all the members of the family including women,
children and the elderly, loot their homes and take one, some, or even all the
members of the family with them. Those who were taken became desaparecidos.{5}
Most of them were never seen again. They were usually taken to one of the
hundreds of infamous detention centers where they were savagely tortured and
eventually murdered. Mothers of the Disappeared and the Military
Regime Relatives then started an endless and unsuccessful search for those
missing. They went to the police, the military, the ministries and received no
answer. "They found themselves in a Kafkaesque situation. They had to prove that
a son or a daughter had been kidnapped to authorities who denied that abductions
occurred in Argentina" (p. 247). Increasingly, these relatives were also
ostracized from their friends and other relatives who feared that any connection
to "subversives" would make them disappear too. It was during this frantic
search that some mothers started comparing their stories and decided to meet in
each other's homes (Fisher, 1989). On April 30, fourteen Mothers walked
around the obelisk that stands in Plaza de Mayo for the first time. It was a
Saturday at 11:30 am and the square was mostly empty. They decided on marching
again on Thursdays at 3:30 pm before the banks closed. Five months later, The
New York Times printed its first reference to them. The story, headlined
"Argentine women in weekly protest over abductions," is from Associated Press.
It identified the group as "relatives of victims of hundreds of kidnapping by
armed squads" and described their weekly meetings ("Argentine women," 1977, p.
7). In November, U.S. Secretary of State Cyrus Vance visited Argentina for
negotiations related to nuclear weapons. A story bylined by special NYT
correspondent Juan de Onis chronicles the visit and mentions that in a ceremony
in Buenos Aires "about 100 women, relatives of missing persons, shouted 'Help
us!'" (de Onis, 1977, p. 3). A photograph of the pleading women wearing white
headscarves is included. However, this story does not relate these women with
the ones that are meeting weekly in Plaza de Mayo. On December after working on
a full-page ad to be printed in La Naci n, nine members of the group were
kidnapped including a French nun who was helping them. Two days later, Azucena
Villaflor de VicentiQthe Mothers leaderQand another French nun were abducted
from their homes. They were never seen again. The abductions were a huge blow to
the group. By then, however, the Mothers had developed a distinct style and
rhetoric that included wearing a white shawl embroidered with the name of their
desaparecido and the date of his or her abduction. They also carried
photographs of their missing relatives while circling the obelisk of Plaza de
Mayo. The abductions were reported on a January 29 story about the human rights
situation in Argentina and the U.S. position toward it. Although those kidnapped
are referred simply as "13 relatives of missing persons" (de Onis, 1978a, p.
12), the story mentioned how and where they were abducted. This and a follow-up
story printed on April 12 center on the two French nuns, the reference to the
"11 other women who were preparing a statement for publication" is only a
passing one (de Onis, 1978b, p. 5). For most of 1978, the Mothers played
cat-and-mouse with the Argentinean police in the Plaza.. The government started
a deliberate campaign to ridicule the women labeling them as Las Locas [mad
women] in order to isolate them and to discourage other opposing groups
(Bouvard, 1994). In June the World Cup was played in Argentina. The Mothers kept
marching spoiling the Junta's efforts to dispel increasing international rumors
about human rights violations. However, in the aftermath of the World Cup,
special correspondent de Onis wrote a thorough story about the general situation
in Argentina without mentioning the Mothers or any other resistance group.
Meanwhile, the Mothers of Plaza de Mayo decided to become a registered
organization. Almost at the same time, another group of women was formedQthe
Grandmothers of Plaza de MayoQtheir goal was to find their grandchildren who had
either disappeared with their parents or who had been born in captivity. The
Mothers became increasingly visible in the Plaza and the Junta responded by
banning public meetings such theirs. The Mothers responded by meeting illegally
in churches that would allow them{6} and by travelling abroad to the United
Stated and Italy to present their plea to the United Nations, other human rights
groups, and to governments that were willing to listen (Fisher, 1989; Bouvard,
1994). The Times never mentioned this trip nor did it mention the Mothers'
struggle to reclaim the Plaza de Mayo. The year of 1978 was marked by
international pressure to clarify the human rights situation in Argentina. As a
result, the Junta started destroying records of the Dirty War, freed journalist
Jacobo Timerman{7} and enacted two laws: "Presumption of Death because of
Disappearance"{8}, and the "Social Security Benefits in the Case of the Absence
of the Person"{9} (Schirmer, 1993). The Mothers strongly rejected both laws
which implied that the desaparecidos "were no more than unregistered deaths" (p.
38). The Times first mention to the Mothers as an organized group is found
buried in a story about how the Junta is preparing for a visit by the
Inter-American Human Rights Commission. The story gives the reader the Junta's
line from beginning to end especially in its reference to the Mothers as "a
group of mothers of missing people known as the 'Mad Ladies of Plaza de Mayo.'
The women got the name by demonstrating for information in the downtown plaza"
(de Onis, 1979, p. A12). The enactment of the "Presumption of Death because of
Disappearance" Law was reported in a Times story from Associated Press in
September. Although the Mothers were the strongest voice opposing this law, the
story does not mention them preferring to use the blanket reference "opponents
of the law" ("New law," 1979, p. 7). In 1980 more than 2,000 marching Mothers
reclaimed the Plaza the Mayo from the military and finally the first two direct
references to the Mothers of Plaza de Mayo surfaced in the Times. The first one,
by special correspondent Edward Schumacher, appeared in October in a story about
Nobel peace prize winner Adolfo P rez Esquivel who "has been working with the
so-called mothers of the Plaza de Mayo, who frequently gather before the
presidential palace here to carry on a lonely vigil for their missing children"
(Schumacher, 1980, sec. A, p. 1). The second reference is found in a story
datelined in Washington, DC regarding a meeting of the Organization for American
States. The presence of four Mothers is acknowledged in the story: "four mothers
of missing persons who belong to the socalled [sic] Mothers of Plaza de Mayo,
who meet every Thursday outside Argentina's presidential offices, awaiting some
official word" (de Onis, 1980, sec. A, p. 7). Both references although important
for being the first ones are inside stories that are not about the Mothers but
related to human rights. The fact that both references use the qualifier
"so-called" which means "popularly known as" diminishes slightly the legitimacy
of the name. Moreover, both references are extremely vague about the Mothers'
activities. Schumacher 's "frequently gather ... to carry on a lonely vigil for
their missing children" does not even acknowledge the extreme regularity of the
Mothers' protest, which the statement tones down to a "vigil." It also presents
the Mothers as being alone in their plea. The statement by de Onis is also
extremely vague and does not give the Mothers any agency presenting them as
"awaiting some official word," a very passive attitude which does not reflect
the Mothers' activism. In 1981 Ronald Reagan assumed the presidency of the
United States moving his foreign policy away from Jimmy Carter's stress on human
rights. Reagan managed to reverse the U.S. Congress' ban on aid for Argentina, a
country he perceived as friendly toward U.S. and important for its foreign
policy in Central America. Meanwhile, the Mothers activism and reputation had
grown enormously. On the fourth anniversary of their first march a large number
of foreign correspondents were present. It was the first time they were able to
march without police intervention (Go i, 1995). This march proved to be a
watershed regarding the Times coverage of the Mothers. There were three
important stories about them. The first two came in consecutive days, before and
after the march. "A reporter's notebook: Mothers' vigil in Argentina"
(Schumacher, 1981a, sec. A, p. 2) chronicles the Mothers' weekly demonstrations
to provide background for the second story "1,000 Argentines defy ban to march
in rights protest" (Schumacher, 1981b, sec. A, p. 5) which reports the fourth
anniversary march as the first successful demonstration of such magnitude since
the military took over. Through the third story "Argentine mothers won't let
hope die" (Schumacher, 1981c, sec. A, p. 15) the Mothers are finally given a
voice. The story is built around Sara Rumani de Goitea's testimony to
Schumacher. He identifies her as "one of a group of mothers who march every
Thursday in the Plaza de Mayo on behalf of their missing sons and daughters"
(sec. A, p. 15). The picture that Schumacher draws elicits pity for this woman.
From his admission that at least once a week one of the Mothers knocks on his
door "hoping to find someone who will help or at least listen," to his comment
"[t]here was no way of knowing how true her story was. More than 6,000 people
are said to have disappeared at the hands of state security forces hunting
terrorists after the military took power in a coup five years ago. Some,
perhaps most, were terrorists" (sec. A, p. 15), the reader is lead to see this
woman's immense suffering but is also lead to doubt her statement that her
desaparecido "was such a good son" (sec. A, p. 15). It is not that Schumacher
conveys that he does not believe in her, but that he believes she does not know
any better. Her "ignorance" makes her a victim too. In spite of this picture,
the story is important because it gives the Mothers (at least one of them) a
voice, even if the reporter qualifies that voice. It is also the first time that
the group is acknowledged as a registered organization "of about 2,500 members
founded four years ago by 14 women who came to know each other for their almost
daily inquiries at the Interior Ministry for their missing children" (sec. A,
p. 15). The Beginning of the End The Falklands/Malvinas War dominated
Argentinean reality in 1982. The invasion that prompted the war came after the
Mothers were joined by the unions, human rights groups and the political parties
in a huge demonstration of more than 15,000 people against the military regime
in March. With the invasion of the Malvinas the Junta attempted and succeeded in
calming down the different sectors. The war elicited a sense of nationalism and
pride in the otherwise weary population. While the country feverishly rallied
around the flag, the Mothers kept marching with very little support since they
were perceived as traitors to the country. The New York Times covered thoroughly
the Falklands/Malvinas War. On April 30 the United States government officially
sided with Great Britain in the conflict. A month later a story by special
correspondent Richard J. Meislin analyzed the Mothers' continuous plight amid
Argentina's nationalistic fever: "In the Plaza de Mayo, the scene in recent
weeks of several huge demonstrations of patriotic fervor over the Falklands,
relatives of the 'desaparecidos,' or 'the disappeared,' continued their somber
weekly marches" (Meislin, 1982, sec. A, p. 5). The story emphasizes the
peaceful, silent marches of these women wearing "white kerchiefs on their heads"
and carrying photographs of their desaparecidos (sec. A, p. 5). Soon the war
was over and with it Argentina finally saw the light at the end of the tunnel.
Members of the Junta were substituted by other military officers who decided to
prepare the country for its transition to democracy. After the end of the war,
the Times coverage dwindled. Only the March of Resistance organized by the
Mothers to mark Human Rights Day was covered in a very short story from UPI
which succinctly explained how the march had been blocked by the Argentine
police ("300 policemen," 1982). In 1983, the last year of the military regime,
Argentina finally paid homage to the Mothers of Plaza de Mayo acknowledging them
as the conscience of the nation. Meanwhile the military prepared their exit by
destroying evidence of the "Dirty War" and by enacting in September the "Law of
National Pacification," a legal attempt to pardon themselves. On December 9, the
day before president elect Ra l Alfons n took office, the Mothers marched for
the last time against the military regime carrying with them 30,000 silhouettes
representing the 30,000 desaparecidos. Still, a Times story presented the
desaparecidos as probable subversives: "It is unlikely any of the disappeared
are alive, and many were surely terrorists" (Schumacher, 1983a, sec. A, p. 1).
The relatives are portrayed now as an important political force{10} because of
"their obsession to obtain investigations and, often, vengeance" (sec.A, p. 1).
The "Law of National Pacification" was passed on September 3, the Times
reported it on September 24 emphasizing the vigorous reaction of human rights
groups and quoting Hebe de Bonafini, president of the Mothers, as a
representative opinion (Schumacher, 1983b). By the end of the year, Ra l
Alfons n had assumed the presidency, appointed CONADEP{11}, repealed the
amnesty, and ordered the court-martialing of nine former junta members. The
differences between the Mothers and the Alfons n government were evidenced in a
December 17 story: About the only complaints have come from human rights
leaders who demand that the Government prosecutions be broadened. 'The assassin
himself is guilty, too' Hebe de Bonafini, head of the Mothers of the Plaza de
Mayo, which represents relatives of those who disappeared, said in an interview.
Mr. Alfons n, urging that vengeance be avoided, has said that the Government
will not initiate prosecutions of servicemen who just followed orders
(Shumacher, 1983c, sec. 1, p. 1). It was the second time in the same year that
the word "vengeance" was associated with the Mothers. Democracy: No Relief The
discovery of the horrors of the Dirty War pervaded Argentina during 1984.
President Alfons n organized a National Commission on the Disappeared People
(CONADEP) for the investigation of the fate of the desaparecidos. CONADEP (1984)
issued a report which later was published under the name Nunca Mas [Never
Again]. The Commission gathered fifty thousand pages of evidence from the
victims and their families. No evidence was gathered regarding the victims'
abductors, torturers and murderers (CONADEP, 1984).{12} The country was
horrified by these findings. Horror stories filled the media and after some
time, the people could not assimilate them any more. They started wanting to
forget. But forgetting was precisely what the Mothers opposed. They wanted the
country to focus on the perpetrators of the horrors, not on the victims. The
country wanted to bury the victims, the Mothers wanted to keep them alive. The
Mothers, who had been glorified as the conscience of Argentina, started to
realize that the country was resisting having a conscience at all. At the same
time, the Alfons n government subjected all relatives of desaparecidos to
intense pressure to accept the exhumation and identification of the thousands of
bodies found in unmarked graves throughout the country. The Mothers refused to
accept these exhumations rejecting again the government's focus on the victims
and not on the perpetrators. They also started using their most controversial
slogan: Aparici n con vida [Reappearance with life].{13} As the horror of
discovering the truth behind the desaparecidos spread in Argentina, the Times
coverage focused on the consequences of such horror for the political and
economic situation of Argentina. News stories tackled delicate topics such as
the extent of the responsibility of those who committed crimes while following
orders (Schumacher, 1984a), the psychological damage done to the children of the
disappeared (Schumacher, 1984j), the feelings of guilt of certain Argentine
sectors (Timerman, 1984; Simons, 1984; Resnizky 1984), the fragility of
Argentina's new democracy (Schumacher, 1984b), and the report by CONADEP
(Chavez, 1984). The New York Times quoted the Mothers in these stories treating
them as an "authority" in human rights. However, the Mothers were also described
as "particularly militant" (Schumacher, 1984b, sec. 4, p. 3). In a long analysis
of the first six months of the presidency of Alfons n, Schumacher explained how
the president "has complained that his former colleagues in the rights movement
are seeking vengeance, not justice" (Schumacher, 1984b, sec. 6, p. 26). The
Mothers position toward the military is described as "hatred," reducing to that
single word all the complexity behind the Mothers stance in relation to the
sector responsible for the fate of the desaparecidos. By 1985, 59 percent of
Argentines did not approve of the Mothers' activities (FEDEFAM, 1987). The
Argentine media started avoiding the Mothers and destroying their image. The
Mothers then started publishing their own newspaper. Meanwhile members of the
three juntas went on trial while a wave of bomb attacks hit Argentina. People
feared a coup attempt and President Alfons n declared a stage of siege. Two
members of the first junta were sentenced to life, the third member received
four and a half years. Two members of the second junta received eighteen and
eight years, while the third member and the three members of the third junta
were acquitted. The Mothers felt betrayed and increasingly alienated.{14} The
Times reported the trial and underscored the sharply different reactions to the
sentences. Human rights groups "were angered by the acquittals" (Chavez, 1985,
sec. A, p. 12), while most political leaders accepted the decision. Hebe de
Bonafini's sudden departure from the courtroom is explained as a product of her
anger at the acquittals. No reference is made to the fact that the court had
forbidden her and the other Mothers to wear their headscarves inside the
courtroom. For the first time, a story quotes leaders of several human rights
groups and does not quote any of the Mothers (Chavez, 1985). The trial of the
junta members and its result turned the Mothers into radicals. (Bouvard, 1994).
The radicalization of the Mothers compounded with the increasing disapproval of
them by Argentina's public opinion lead to a split in the organization in 1986.
Twelve Mothers departed choosing the name L nea Fundadora [Founding Line] of the
Mothers of Plaza de Mayo. These Mothers disagreed with the organization's stance
regarding the exhumations and wanted to work with the political system as a
human rights interest group, not as a radical opposition group (Bouvard, 1994).
It is important to note that class distinctions seem to underlie the split of
the organization. The Founding Line is composed of women from the upper and
middle classes who strongly resented the Mothers' president Hebe de Bonafini for
her radical and combative style. Bonafini and the majority of the Mothers who
did not depart are from the working class.{15} The split is reported in
February of 1987. It is the first story fully dedicated to the Mothers since
1981 and describes their weekly march as a "scene [that] has the atmosphere of a
reunion of aging cousins or old friends...photographers recording the event are
as likely to be tourists as journalists" (Christians, 1987, sec. 1, p. 4).
Differences and similarities between the two groups are explained through the
voices of the leaders of the two factions: Hebe de Bonafini and Maria Adela de
Antokoletz. The story, accompanied by a photo of demonstrators in Buenos Aires,
ends on a note of unity: "despite their differences, Mrs. Antokoletz said she
and those who share her views continued to march in the plaza every week" (sec.
1, p. 4). In December of 1986, Alfons n signed the law of punto final [full
stop] which set a time limit on new prosecutions of military officers. Congress
then sanctioned the law of obediencia debida [due obedience] which in turn
limited responsibility to the top generals only. Charges against 300 officers
were dropped and the Supreme Court even overruled the sentences of some officers
already convicted (Fisher, 1989). The worst fears of the Mothers became a
reality: nobody would pay for the crimes committed against their
children. Despite the importance of these events, the Times coverage of
Argentina and the Mothers is reduced to four stories in 1986. One of them
reviews a documentary (Goodman, 1986), another reviews a book (Chelala, 1986),
the third one is a piece about doing tourism in Buenos Aires: In front of the
Casa Rosada (which serves as the office of President Ra l Alfons n), is the
Plaza de Mayo, which gained international fame as the site of protest marches by
a group of women called the Mothers of Plaza de Mayo; the women have been
protesting the disappearance of more than 9,000 people in the anti-subversion
campaign conducted by the military regimes that ruled form 1976 to 1983. Guided
tour operators are often asked about the women when buses drive by the Plaza de
Mayo. The women still march symbolically, every Thursday from 3:30 P.M. to 4
P.M., to draw attention to what they consider the slow pace of trials of those
accused in the disappearances (Christian, 1986a, sec. 10, p. 10). In the
ultimate simplification, the MothersQalong with their plight for human
rightsQare reduced to a Buenos Aires tourist attraction. The fourth story of
1986 deals with the Punto Final [Full Stop] Law (Christian, 1986b). It
acknowledges that the law was drafted under pressure from the military leaders
and that 50,000 people protested against its enactment. The story tells us that
while congress was debating the law, "several women from the group known as the
Mothers of the Plaza de Mayo were expelled from the galleries after they tossed
leaflets and shouted "traitor" at a leading Radical senator" (Christian, 1986b,
sec. D, p. 15). The reporter does not interview the Mothers in order to get an
explanation for their attitude. In consequence, their behavior is presented as
irrational. In sharp contrast with this depiction, the story ends by quoting a
Catholic Cardinal as saying that what the country needs is a "spirit of general
reconciliation" and not "public confessions" (sec. D, p. 15). Words that sound
well but that obscure the horrifying fact that those responsible for the
disappearance of 30,000 human beings will be free thanks to a "spirit of general
reconciliation." The years of 1987 and 1988 were characterized by continuous
threats of coup attempts and by increasing ties between the government and the
military in order to avoid a real coup d'etat. In January 1989 an attack by a
left-wing splinter group in La Tablada was followed by a wave of repression from
the government. The Mothers voiced their discontent and their belief that the
repressive apparatus was still in place. While the Mothers dealt with a country
shaken by repeated coup attempts and with a president continuously negotiating
with the military in order to maintain democracy, The New York Times only
mentioned them again in a story about tourism in Buenos Aires. "To experience
some of its [Buenos Aires] history, sit in the Plaza de Mayo in front of the
presidential palace at 3:30 P.M. on Thursday. That's when the Mothers of the
Plaza de Mayo still march to remind the nation of an estimated 9,000 people who
disappeared in the counterinsurgency campaign of the 1976-1983 military
government" (Christian, 1988, sec. 5, p. 10). This time the prospective tourist
is instructed to sit down while the Mothers march in order "to experience some
history." In this way, the Mothers are simplified, objectified and reduced.
The reader and the tourist are not encouraged to analyze just to "take" this
simplified, romanticized version of the Mothers as one more attraction, one more
curiosity in this foreign country. Carlos Menem versus the Mothers Submerged
in a deep economic crisis, Argentina elected Carlos Menem as its new president
in 1989. He applied strong economic measures imposed by the International
Monetary Fund and granted a blanket pardon to all involved in the Dirty War. A
year later he pardoned Videla, Viola and Massera provoking the wrath of the
Mothers who campaigned against these pardons. The Times coverage concentrated
on his handling of government-military relations. In a passing reference to an
attempt against the life of Hebe de Bonafini, special correspondent James Brooke
defines the Mothers as a group "composed of mothers of Argentines who
disappeared during the military's war against leftists" (Brooke, 1989, sec. 1,
part 1, p, 1). After six years of democratic government, the desaparecidos, are
once again branded as "leftists" delegitimizing, in consequence, the Mothers'
plight for justice. Menem's blanket pardon is reported and Renee Epelbaum (from
the Founding Line) is incorrectly identified as "a leader of the Mothers of the
Plaza de Mayo" and quoted as the opposing voice of Menem's action ("200
military," 1989, sec. 1, part 1, p. 12). The relationship between President
Menem and the Mothers has been extremely confrontational. Menem does not hide
his personal disapproval of the Mothers and in 1991, amid a series of threats,
the offices of the organization were ransacked three times. For her part, Hebe
de Bonafini referred to Menem as basura [garbage] on a television program in
Spain. Menem sued her on charges of contempt for authority and labeled her
"national traitor" (Bouvard, 1994). During his government, the Mothers have seen
a steady decrease in membership and an increase in the public's incomprehension
for their cause. From 1990 to 1994, years characterized by the growing
confrontation between the Mothers and Carlos Menem, the Times did not print a
single story mentioning the Mothers and their increasingly difficult situation
in Argentina. However, in 1995 the country received a wake-up call with the
declarations of Adolfo Francisco Scilingo a former military officer who
acknowledged that the military regime had disposed of hundreds of desaparecidos
by throwing them unconscious but alive into the ocean from military planes.
President Menem replied by calling Scilingo a crook (Gray, 1995). Scilingo's
disclosure was reported in all major newspapers in the world including The New
York Times (Sims, 1995a). Like in old times, the Mothers were quoted as the
"expert" opinion in the topic. The reverberations of Scilingo's revelations were
felt in Argentina for a while. Human rights groups holding "raucous protests"
(Sims, 1995b, sec. 1, p. 4) pressed the government to release a new list with
1,000 additional names of desaparecidos, confirming the Mothers long-held
suspicion that the government was still concealing information about the Dirty
War. In contrast to these grim revelations, the only other reference to the
Mothers in 1995 is in yet another article about tourism in Buenos Aires.
ThereQamong information about hotels, restaurants and night lifeQit is
recommended to go to "the heart of the city" Qthe Plaza de MayoQwhich is "most
famous for the demonstrations of the Mothers of the Plaza de Mayo, whose
children disappeared in the military's "dirty war" on the leftist in the 1970s.
Their protests are held on Thursdays between 3:30 and 4 P.M" (Sims, 1995c, sec.
5, p. 10). It is paradoxical that in this article what is important is the
Plaza, not what the women are doing there, although the Plaza is "most famous"
precisely because of the women. Today Menem is serving a second term as
president of Argentina. The country is continuously struggling between
forgetting and remembering, between approving and disapproving of the Mothers.
Sometimes the group seems too radical for the average Argentinean. Sometimes,
the population is cruelly reminded that forgetting is not possible since it
seems that the repressive apparatus is still in place in a country where the
police is notoriously brutal. The Mothers resurfaced in The New York Times in
1996 thanks to the Argentine police behavior toward them. "It was a scene that
Argentina will not soon forget: blood oozing from the white headscarf of Hebe de
Bonafini" (Sims, 1996a, sec. 1, p. 4). The story goes on to describe Bonafini as
a controversial personality who is praised and despised at the same time.
Several opinions are quoted about her, most of them negative: "this is a woman
who needs a cause...she has a militant capacity and is fighting for anything
that will give her power. Her typical attitude is to question and fight against
any force" (sec. 1, p. 4). The article states that the Mothers "have adopted an
attitude of permanent confrontation with the democratic government of President
Carlos Saul Menem" and omits the threats, legal suits and looting that they have
endured during Menem's government. The reporter, special correspondent Calvin
Sims, explains why and how the movement has broadened the spectrum of its
protest, quoting several opinions about this change in the organization. In
June of 1996, Sims wrote a story about police abuse in Argentina. It made
passing reference to Bonafini's beating, but most importantly it suggested that
police brutality is endemic in Argentina (Sims, 1996b). The Times reported how
the police ejected the Mothers from Plaza de Mayo in August. Sims pointed out
that the Mothers are mostly elderly women now. He quoted one of the Mothers as
saying "it was a flashback to the dictatorship" (Sims, 1996c, sec. 1, p. 6).
Interestingly, the Mothers resurfaced in the pages of the Times when conditions
similar to the ones that made them famous also resurfaced in
Argentina. CONCLUSIONS For all the drama and for all the human rights issues
involved, the story of the Mothers of Plaza de Mayo as told by The New York
Times is superficial most of the time. When background information is given, it
is about Argentina, not about the Mothers. What identifies them as a group is
their "motherhood" and their human rights activism. Their "womanhood," the fact
that in a very repressive regime, women were the first ones who dared to openly
oppose the government, is never highlighted. The Mothers ideology or ideologies
are never explicit, except when they are related to the Left. Their opinions,
although far from invisible, are not presented constantly. The presence of their
opinions follows the ups and downs of Argentina's public approval of the
Mothers. In the post-heroic years of 1983 and 1984, their opinions were highly
regarded and constantly quoted. After 1985, their opinions and interpretations
became increasingly invisible. Therefore, the caliber of their authority is
established on the basis of Argentina's public opinion about them. This
precludes coverage of the main difference between the Mothers and the Argentine
people: the Mothers cannot and will not forget the Dirty War while Argentina
tries very hard to forget it. There is a tendency in the coverage to trivialize
the Mothers and their issues. Consequently, their plight is demeaned. Little
coverage is devoted to their confrontations with the different governments and
their struggle to be heard. The Times tendency to trivialize the Mothers is most
evident after 1985, when the only mentions to them are in the tourism section.
The description of the Mothers as a tourist attraction ultimately objectifies
them and also objectifies Argentina's traumatic past. The tourist is encouraged
to look at them as a museum piece, as one more monument in Buenos Aires, as a
surrogate way "to experience history." This places the Mothers in the past and
makes them look anachronic in the present. Victimization of the Mothers is also
present in the Times coverage. They are victims of the military regime. However,
when the Times labels the desaparecidos as "leftists," "terrorists," and
"subversives," the Mothers are also presented as victims of their deviant
children which in turn, delegitimizes their struggle. On the other hand,
sometimes they are portrayed as "vengeful" women. The leaderQHebe de
BonafiniQdoes not escape the news-coverage fate of most female leaders: she is
resented in Argentina and demonized in the Times coverage. In sum, during the
20 years of the group's existence, the Mothers of Plaza de Mayo were portrayed
in The New York Times (a) as a curious group of women who are "mad" and who
await word from the government about their missing relatives, (b) as the
conscience of Argentina: a heroic human rights groups, the expert opinion that
must be quoted in every human rights story, (c) as a vindictive group who
opposes the democratic government, and (d) as a tourist attraction. All of these
portrayals are consistent with the findings of previous research in the area of
news coverage of women, highlighting the patriarchal ideological work performed
by the news stories which simplifies women and their activities disdaining them
as legitimate interlocutors of reality. REFERENCES Agosin, M. (1990). The
Mothers of Plaza de Mayo (Linea Fundadora): The story of Ren e Epelbaum.
Trenton, NJ: Red Sea Press. Althusser, L. (1971). Lenin and Philosphy. New
York: Monthly Review Press. Aulich, J. (Ed.) (1992). Framing the Falklands War:
Nationhood, Culture and Identity. Philadelphia, PA: Open University
Press. Berelson, B. (1952). Content Analysis in Communication Research.
Glencoe: Free Press. Berger, A.A. (1995). Cultural Criticism: A Primer of Key
Concepts. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage. Bousquet, J.P. (1983). Las Locas de Plaza de
Mayo. Buenos Aires: El Cid. Bouvard, M. (1994). Revolutionizing Motherhood: The
Mothers of the Plaza de Mayo. Wilmington, DE: Scholarly Resources,
Inc. Bridge, M.J. (1997). Slipping from the Scene: News Coverage of Females
Drops. In S. Biagi and M. Kern-Foxworth (Eds.) Facing Difference: Race, Gender
and Mass Media. Thousand Oaks, CA: Pine Forge Press. Chelala, C. A. (1993).
Women of Valor: An Interview with the Mothers of Plaza de Mayo. In M. Agosin
(Ed.) Surviving beyond Fear: Women, Children and Human Rights in Latin America.
(pp. 58-70). Fredonia, NY: White Pine Press. Cirksena, K. and Cuklanz, L.
(1992). Male is to Female as _____ is to _____: A Guided Tour of Five Feminist
Frameworks. In L. Rakow (Ed.) Women Making Meaning: New Feminist Directions in
Communication. (pp. 18-44). New York, NY: Routledge. CONADEP (1984). Nunca mas:
Informe de la Comisi n Nacional sobre la Desaparici n de Personas. Buenos
Aires: EUDEBA. Curtin, P.A. (1995, August). Textual Analysis in Mass
Communication Studies: Theory and Methodology. Paper presented to the
Qualitative Studies Division at the AEJMC National Convention. Washington,
DC. Enloe, C. (1989). Bananas, beaches and bases: Making feminist sense of
international politics. Berkely, CA: University of California Press. Fabj, V.
(1993). Motherhood as Political Voice: The Rhetoric of the Mothers of Plaza de
Mayo. Communication Studies, 44, 1-18. FEDEFAM (1987). Annual Report,
82. Feij o, M. (1989). The Challenge of Constructing Civilian Peace: Women and
Democracy in Argentina. In J. Jaquette (Ed.) The Women's Movement in Latin
America: Feminism and Transition to Democracy. (pp. 72-94). Boston: Unwin
Hyman. Femen a, N.A. (1987). Argentina's mothers of Plaza de Mayo: The Mourning
Process from Junta to Democracy. Feminist Studies, 13(1), 9-18. Fisher, J.
(1989). Mothers of the Disappeared. Boston, MA: South End Press. Foucault, M.
(1979). Discipline and Punish. Harmondsworth: Penguin. Foucault, M. (1981).
History of Sexuality. Harmondsworth: Penguin. Go i, U. (1995). Mothers of Plaza
de Mayo: First Peaceful March.
http://ukinet.com/first/english/peaceful.htm Gramsci, A. (1971). The Prison
Notebooks: Selections. New York, NY: International Publishers. Gray, P. (1995,
March 27). Argentina: Waves from the Past. Time, 45 (13). Hall, S. (1975).
Introduction. In A.C.H. Smith (Ed.) Paper Voices: The Popular Press and Social
Change, 1935-1965. (pp. 11-24). London: Chatto & Windus. Hall, S. (1982). The
Rediscovery of 'Ideology': Return of the Repressed in Media Studies. In M.
Gurevitch, T. Bennet, J. Curran, and J. Woollacott (Eds.) Culture, Society and
the Media. (pp. 56-90). London: Methuen. Hensman, R. (1996). The Role of Women
in the Resistance to Political Authoritarianism in Latin America and South
Asia. In H. Afshar (Ed.) Women and Politics in the Third World. London:
Routledge. Jaquette, J.S. (Ed.) (1989). The Women's Movement in Latin America:
Feminism and the Transition to Democracy. Boston, MA: Unwin Hyman. Kaiser, S.
(1996). Communications and Human Rights. (Master Thesis)
http://www.polsci.binghamton.edu/hr.htm Lester, E. (1994). The "I" of the
Storm: A Textual Analysis of U.S. Reporting on Democratic Kampuchea. Journal
of Communication Inquiry, 18(1), 5-26. Long-Awaited Global Media Monitoring
Study Released at NGO Forum (1995, Fall). Media Report to Women, 23(4),
4-5. Malin, A. (1994). Mothers Who Won't Disappear. Human Rights Quarterly. 15,
187-213. Mies, M. (1986). Patriarchy and accumulation on a world scale: Women
in the international division of labor. London: Zed Books. Mohanty, C. (1991).
Under Western eyes: Feminist scholarship and colonial discourses. In C.
Mohanty, A. Russo, and L. Torres (Eds.) Third World Women and the Politics of
Feminism. Bloomington, IN: Indiana University Press. Molyneaux, M. (1985).
Mobilisation without Emancipation: Women's Interests, State and Revolution in
Nicaragua. Feminist Studies, 11(2), 227-254. Navarro, M. (1989). The Personal
is Political: Las Madres de Plaza de Mayo. In S. Eckstein (Ed.) Power and
Popular Protest: Latin Amerian Social Movements. (pp. 241-258). Berkely, CA:
University of California Press. Schirmer, J.G. (1993). Those who Die for Life
Cannot be Called Dead: Women and Human Rights Protest in Latin America. In M.
Agosin (Ed.) Surviving beyond Fear: Women, Children and Human Rights in Latin
America. (pp. 31-57). Fredonia, NY: White Pine Press. Steeves, H.L. (1989).
Gender and Mass Communication in a Global Context. In P. Creedon (Ed.) Women in
Mass Communication: Challenging Gender Values. Newbury Park, CA: Sage. Stevens,
E.P (1973). Marianismo: The Other Face of Machismo in Latin America. In A.
Pescatello (Ed.) Female and Male in Latin America. (pp. 90-101). Pittsburgh,
PA: University of Pittsburgh Press. Simpson, J. and Bennett, J. (1985). The
Disappeared and the Mothers of the Plaza. New York: St. MartinUs
Press. Timerman, J. (1981). Prisoner without a Name, Cell without a Number. New
York: Knopf. van Zoonen, L. (1994). Feminist Media Studies. London:
Sage. Women still ignored in news magazines (1992). WIN News, 18(4), 45. 1994
Page-One References to Women Double those of First WMM Study. (1994, Spring).
Media Report to Women, 22(2), 5-6. APPENDIX: The New York Times articles
analyzed (in chronological order) Argentine women in weekly protest over
abductions. (1977, September 12). The New York Times, p. 7. de Onis, J.
(1977, November 22). Vance wins Argentine pledge on nuclear arms. The New York
Times,p. 3. de Onis, J. (1978a, January 29). U.S. presses Argentina on rights.
The New York Times, p. 12. de Onis, J. (1978b, April 12). Key Argentine aide is
slain, and leftists claim responsibility. The New York Times, p. 5. de Onis,
J. (1979, March 30). Argentine army eases iron rule. The New York Times, p.
1. Schumacher, E. (1980, October 14). Man in the news: A tireless friend of the
dispossessed. The New York Times, sec. A, p. 1). de Onis, J. (1980, November
24). Carter is assailed on rights by O.A.S. The New York Times, sec. A,
p.7. Schumacher, E. (1981a, April 30). A reporter's notebook: Mother's vigil in
Argentina. The New York Times, sec.A, p. 2. Schumacher, E. (1981b, May 1).
1,000 Argentines defy ban to march in rights protest. The New York Times,
sec.A, p. 2. Schumacher, E. (1981c, October 15).Argentine mothers wont' let
hope die. The New York Times, sec.A, p. 15. Meislin, R. J. (1982, May 31).
Argentine anguish lingers for thousands missing since 1970's. The New York
Times, sec. A, p. 5. 300 Policemen block Buenos Aires protest. (1982, December
10). The New York Times, sec. A, p. 5. Schumacher, E. (1983a, May 9). Missing
Argentines: Families' hopes betrayed. The New York Times, sec. A, p.
1. Schumacher, E. (1983b, September 24). Argentine army given amnesty for
'Dirty War'. The New York Times, sec. 1, p. 1. Schumacher, E. (1983c, December
17). Argentina sets up inquiry for 6,000 who disappeared. The New York Times,
sec. 1, p. 1. Schumacher, E. (1984a, February 19). Argentina's goal now is to
punish the underlings. The New York Times, sec. 4, p. 3. Timerman, J. (1984,
March 11). Return to Argentina. The New York Times, Sec. 6, p. 36. Simons, M.
(1984, April 8). Jews of Argentina debating their actions under military. The
New York Times, sec. 1, part 1, p. 14. Resnizky, N. (1984, April 22).
Responding to Timerman. The New York Times, sec. 6, p. 78. Schumacher, E.
(1984b, June 10). Defending Argentina's new democracy. The New York Times, sec.
6, p. 26. Chavez, L. (1984, September 21). Argentine report assails 'savage'
army. The New York Times, sec. A, p. 3. Chavez, L. (1985, December 11).
Argentines vary in their reaction. The New York Times, sec. A, p. 12. Goodman,
W. (1986, April 2). Screen: 'Las Madres' of Argentina. The New York Times, sec.
C, p. 18. Chelala, C. (1986, April 6). Promise and Betrayal. The New York
Times, Sec. 7, p. 18. Christian, S. (1986a, November 30). What's doing in
Buenos Aires. The New York Times, Sec. 10, p. 10. Christian, S. (1986b,
December 23). Law in Argentina ends prosecution. The New York Times, Sec. D, p.
15. Christian, S. (1987, February 21). Buenos Aires Journal: Mothers march, but
to 2 drummers. The New York Times, Sec. 1, p. 4. Christian, S. (1988, April
17).What's doing in Buenos Aires The New York Times, Sec.5, p.10. Brooke, J.
(1989, June 10). Argentina plans to hasten seating of new president. The New
York Times, Sec. 1, part 1, p. 1. 200 military officers are pardoned in
Argentina. (1989, October 8). The New York Times, sec. 1, part 1, p. 12. Sims,
C. (1995a, March 13). Argentine tells of dumping 'Dirty War' captives into the
sea. The New York Times, sec. A, p. 1. Sims, C. (1995b, March 25). Argentina
to issue new list of missing in 'Dirty War.' The New York Times, sec. 1, p.
4. Sims, C. (1995c, April 16). What's doing in Buenos Aires. The New York
Times, sec. 5, p. 10. Sims, C. (1996a, March 2). The rock, unyielding, of the
Plaza de Mayo. The New York Times, sec. 1, p. 4. Sims, C. (1996b, June 17).
Buenos Aires Journal: The police may need to be policed themselves. The New
York Times, sec. A, p. 4. Sims, C. (1996c, August 10). Argentine police break
up Mothers' protest. The New York Times, sec. 1, p.
6. FOOTNOTES******************************** {1} Bouvard (1994) explains
that 30,000 is a symbolic figure that may represent a much larger number of
cases due to the fact that many relatives of the disappeared were too scared to
come forward and that in the many instances where entire families disappeared,
there are no surviving relatives to come forward either. {2} Liberal feminism
as concerned with the dualism reason v. emotion; socialist feminism with the
public v. the private sphere; radical feminism with the debate between nature
and culture, psychoanalytic feminism with the relation subject:object as it
relates to gender, and cultural feminism with the dichotomy between mind and
body (Cirksena & Cuklanz, 1992). {3} Molyneaux (1985) defines practical gender
interests as derived from "the concrete conditions of women's positioning within
the gender division of labour...Practical interests are usually a response to
immediate perceived need, and they do not entail a strategic goal such as
women's emancipation or gender equality" (p. 233). On the other hand, women's
strategic gender interests are derived "from the analysis of their subordination
and from the formulation of an alternative, more satisfactory set of
arrangements from those which exist" (p. 232). {4} Evelyn Stevens (1973)
defines marianismo as "the cult of feminine spiritual superiority, which teaches
that women are semi-divine, morally superior to and spiritually stronger than
men" (p. 91). It originates both in the veneration of the Virgin Mary and in the
ancient myth of the mother goddess as the source of life. These origins are
deeply entrenched in Latin American culture. Women's "spiritual strength, moral
superiority, and capacity for self-sacrifice, especially in her roles as mother,
render her semi-divine" (Fabj, 1993, p. 5). Latin American women, therefore, are
expected to be good daughters and wives, but most importantly, they are expected
to be good mothers. They are identified primarily as mothers. {5} "Most of the
desaparecidos were young people between the ages of twenty and thirty. A
significant number were in their thirties, but there were also teenagers,
infants, children, and senior citizens in their seventies. Most were blue
collar workers, followed by students and white collar workers. A substantial
number were professionals, especially lawyers and teachers. There were also
housewives, journalists, priests, nuns, and conscripts" (Navarro, 1989, p.
243). {6} The relationship of the Mothers to the Argentinean Catholic Church
has been very rocky. While some priests and nuns helped the Mothers and other
relatives of the disappeared, the ecclesiastical hierarchy denied the families
of the victims of the repression any support while maintaining close ties with
the military regime (Fisher, 1989; Schirmer, 1993). {7} Jacobo Timerman, editor
of the Buenos Aires daily La Opini n was kidnapped, tortured, detained and
finally released. His book Prisoner without a name, cell without a number
(1981), is his personal account of these experiences. {8} which declared dead
those who had been reported missing during the previous five years (Law
22.068). {9} which gave relatives the right to claim social security benefits
upon presentation of evidence that a person had been absent for more than a year
(Law 22.062) . {10} The story concedes that 4,000 people are marching now with
the Mothers. {11} National Commission on the Disappeared People. {12} The
Mothers took serious issue with Nunca Mas because of its emphasis on mass
extermination and the disposal of corpses and because they felt it meant to show
that the disappeared were dead....They criticized the report for its omission of
the names of the torturers, for the fact that it contained information that had
been known for year, and, most important, for not stressing in its
categorization of the victims that the vast majority consisted of the political
opposition while only a very small number were actual terrorists (Bouvard, 1994,
p. 136). {13} "[T]he truth is we know they've killed them. Aparici n con vida
means that although the majority of them are dead, no one has taken
responsibility for their deaths, because no one has said who killed them, who
gave the order...We are fighting for all the disappeared and it's for this
reason we continue demanding aparici n con vida" (Carmen de Guede as quoted in
Fisher, 1984, p. 128). {14} "In the courtroom they always referred to the
accused as General someone, Admiral so and so, and the victims were always
called 'terrorists' and 'subversives'. When they went to court to hear their
sentences they were allowed to wear their military uniforms. We, as Madres de
Plaza de Mayo, weren't allowed to wear our headscarves" (Carmen de Guede as
quoted in Fisher, 1989, p. 141.) Hebe de Bonafini decided to leave the courtroom
when she was forced to choose between staying and wearing ther headscarf. {15}
Telephone interview with Marjorie Agosin, March 4, 1997.
|
