Thank you for your earnest letter regarding the Supermodels for Oaxaca movement. As a worker, and a feminist, I appreciate having the opportunity to address some of your concerns.

After writing regarding your experiences as a student in Oaxaca, in the seventh paragraph of your letter you state that the APMO is “an alternate version of the beauty contest that Donald Trump and NBC want to host”. You also repeatedly reference women’s power and women’s movements in Oaxaca, as well as women’s involvement in the Popular Assembly of the Peoples of Oaxaca (APPO) movement. It seems to me that you are confused about the nature of the APMO, and since I am concerned that we be understood, I will try to clarify things.

Although APMO includes many women within our ranks, and is in solidarity with the feminists and women of Oaxaca and around the world, we are a workers movement that includes models of all genders. We “already existing” models, whom you refer to in your seventh paragraph, are workers, just as people in other professions are workers. Just like other workers, we want a job with dignity, and to us that means not being used as political pawns for brutal dictators such as Ulises Ruiz.

The statement that the APMO is some kind of an alternative beauty pageant to Miss Universe is simply not true, and it misses the point. As APMO, we don’t have a problem with women who get jobs at the Miss Universe Organization. What we have a problem with is knowingly or unknowingly supporting a dictator by holding part of the Miss Universe contest in Oaxaca. That said, the APMO is not a beauty pageant- we are a workers movement using our skills, including beauty, sex appeal, intelligence, and solidarity, to stand up to Ulises Ruiz and those that prop him up, even if they are forces as powerful as Donald Trump and NBC.

Although we are inclusive of models who have participated in pageants in the course of their jobs, as the APMO we have never once claimed to be a “beauty contest.” In fact, as it states in our initial communiqué on Narco News,

“Following the APMO strike against Donald Trump and NBC, on a date to be announced, we will present the first ever APPY award to the creator of the most effective action to liberate Oaxaca from the dictatorship.”

In other words, the APPY does not reward beauty, nor is it even necessarily going to a model. It could go to anyone, from any country, who creates the most effective action to end the dictatorship in Oaxaca.

Regarding your charge of elitism, as an independent movement, we reserve the right to organize the APMO as we see fit, including holding auditions. We are hardly the first union to reserve the right to confer or deny membership, and we are in no way stopping others from organizing as they see fit to take down the dictatorship in Oaxaca or defend their dignity as workers.

I’m glad we agree on the importance of international solidarity with regard social movements, democracy, and human rights. However, regarding the APMO statement of inclusiveness, you write in the eighth paragraph of your letter,

“[Y]ou demean women as an effective political force through strength, intelligence, and self-empowerment when you say ‘APMO is interested in international solidarity with poise, talent and sex appeal. READ: If you’re ugly, apply for a press pass and get over it.’”

I fail to understand where the APMO demeans the political force of anyone, regardless of gender, or how we fail to allow for a politics of “strength, intelligence, and self-empowerment.” As a member of a workers union of models, I feel pretty self-empowered to defend myself and my fellow workers from being used by a dictator for purposes that run completely contrary to peace, justice, and democracy. The stereotype that you appear to subscribe to, of models as dumb pawns for “capitalist decadence” or the beauty industry, is exactly what allows dictators like Ulises to think that they can use us for the purpose of intimidating and brutalizing Oaxacan social movements.

As APMO, we are not trying to defend the people of Oaxaca- they have done a pretty good job of defending themselves. We are defending ourselves, with our strength, our intelligence, and yes, our poise and sex appeal, against being used as pawns, and in support of our dignity as workers. We reserve the right to use whatever tactics we have in our arsenal, including lipstick. And we are in solidarity with the APPO, a separate movement, whose interests in justice and human rights converge with ours, and whose goals and struggle we support.

In the same paragraph, you go on to write,

“How can this be what independent media is about? How is this an alternative to the representation and discussion of women in the mainstream media?”

The APMO doesn’t represent women. We represent workers, some of whom are women, whose jobs are in modeling.

In the ninth paragraph, you write,

“I feel the APMO makes a farce out of a movement for which people have died, been tortured, been imprisoned, been separated from their families, been threatened.”

You may have noticed that one of the weapons that the APMO uses is humor. There are many people who have used humor as a tool for social protest, including Susie Bright, Emma Goldman, Abbie Hoffman, as well as John Lennon and Yoko Ono, who modeled naked against the Vietnam War. Are you saying that the humorous actions of these activists made a farce of the many radical social movements that they organized or stood in solidarity with? If so, we simply draw different conclusions as to what makes solidarity work effective.

You go on to state: “I think that the kind of Western ideal of beauty that you are adhering to is tantamount to cultural imperialism. “

“Cultural imperialism” implies that the APMO is imposing something on other people. We don’t even require anyone to read our communiqué. We certainly don’t require anyone to look like us – although if you think I look “ideal,” I’m certainly not going to object to the compliment.

In the same paragraph, you write: “How does putting mostly-nude photos of Cha-Cha Connor holding a "You're Fired" sign or an "APMO" sign demand that, or even invite, people to take the APPO movement, and those in it, especially the women, seriously?”

I repeat: the APMO is a workers movement of models. The APPO is the Popular Assembly of the Peoples of Oaxaca. The APMO can’t force anyone to take us seriously, although there are plenty of reasons to do so. But I don’t see why, for you, the actions of APMO in any way reflect on the APPO, which is a completely separate social movement, over which we exert no control whatsoever, nor do we wish to.

In the tenth paragraph of your letter, you accuse the APMO of “playing into a beauty industry that packages women and that is interested neither in strength, nor power.”

Actually, if I were going to play into plans of the Miss Universe beauty pageant for Monte Alban, I wouldn’t be involved in an international workers movement trying to stop it.

With regard to your stated disappointment in Narco News for publishing the communiqué by APMO, Narco News has consistently published the most authentic and truthful reports on social movements and events in Oaxaca at all stages of this conflict, including eye witness reports and communiqués from the APPO itself. Publishing the piece on APMO doesn’t take away from that- there’s plenty of bandwidth to go around. Narco News does not require anyone to read reports that they personally disapprove of.

You mention that you had trouble commenting on articles on Narco News in the Narcosphere. I have asked our press secretary Al Giordano to give you a Narcosphere account so that you have a public forum with which to voice any further concerns.

I certainly hope this clarifies where we stand as the APMO, and where I stand as the APMO Spokesmodel. If you have any further concerns, please feel free to send them to me at models@narconews.com.

Sincerely,

Cha-Cha Connor