Supermodels for Oaxaca (APMO) to Oppose the Miss Universe Pageant

I am a woman, and a student-- in fact, a senior in college writing my undergraduate thesis on the movement for a people's government in Oaxaca, Mexico, as a result of having studied abroad there last spring (at Unitierra, an organization Nancy Davies has alluded to or cited a few times in her reporting). It was friends from my program who were arrested with NarcoNews reporters following the May 1st protest.

I am student of social movements, and think that the APPO's movement is one of the most exciting and most hopeful happening right now because of the new approach to democracy, one that includes everybody, especially those who had traditionally been left out, like women (in Mexico, women represent only 16% of government officials, although they are 51% of the total population).

When I returned to Oaxaca this January to do interviews for my thesis, everyone kept repeating how important the role of women has been in this conflict, especially in terms of being a mouthpiece for the movement in the media, like through the takeover of Channel 9 and Dra. Bertha on Radio Universidad. I am inpsired by women like Patricia, a union organizer whom I interviewed about her role as a radio presenter and founder of COMO, the women's organizatorial arm of the APPO. She is a single mother who has had her life threatened, her car searched, and who has had to move in with friends and be separated from her children for their protection, because of her dedication and public support and work for the movemen.

I have been following the story of the movement on NarcoNews, which has come to be the best and my preferred source of information on the conflict. I believe I have read every single article Nancy Davies has written about it, and am impressed with her work and her courage as a journalist, as I am with the other journalists reporting from Oaxaca.

I was excited to find out that a mobilization was happening in NYC, organized by NarcoNews, to stand in solidarity with the people of Oaxaca.

However, having just read the article about the APMO, I must say that I am extremely disappointed with NarcoNews and with the nature of the article and the APMO organization itself (and also that I cannot seem to comment on the article in the NarcoSphere, not being an "official" NarcoNews reporter, just a reader). Although I strongly believe international solidarity is important, agree with your critique of hosting the Miss Universe 2007 "traditional costumes" competition at Monté Alban, and feel that it should be protested, I feel that the creation of the APMO organization does not send the right message.

What is so inspiring about the APPO is the desire of its members to create something new, and different, from the current norm, something that embraces and includes those who had previously been marginalized, exploited, and ignored. I feel a protest like the APMO--an alternate version of the beauty contest that Donald Trump and NBC want to host--plays too much into the already-existing model. You maintain the elitism of a contest ("choosing" the one true beauty, rather than allowing for everyone to be beautiful) that is basically an extension of capitalist decadence. Who has the money or time to invest in beauty contests? Not families that struggle to make enough to survive day-to-day, and here I am talking about the 70% of people in Oaxaca who live in poverty, who are the ones fighting for change.

Not only that, although you say "we welcome models of any age, gender, orientation, race, color, religion, creed, class, problem, whatever," you 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." 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?

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. I think that the kind of Western ideal of beauty that you are adhering to is tantamount to cultural imperialism. 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 am offended that you would choose to publish this article on International Women's Day, when the women of Oaxaca have put themselves and their families on the line to add to the strength of the movement and to fight to carve out their rightful place as members of Mexican society with rights that should be respected. Even within the APPO they have had to struggle to ensure that at least 30% of the seats go to represent them. Why not honor the women of the APPO by featuring their strength and power, rather than playing into a beauty industry that packages women and that is interested neither in strength, nor power?

I truly hope that you will consider re-framing the concept of this protest, as it seems that it could be really powerful in getting the attention of people in the U.S. With this power comes the responsibility of representing, and standing in solidarity with, the APPO in a way that reflects the seriousness and strength of that movement.

Thank you for considering my thoughts.

Katharina Kempf
Simon's Rock College

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

Prior to publishing Ms. Connor’s story, and agreeing to serve as her and APMO’s press secretary for their upcoming New York actions, I anticipated that the story would provoke debate over the kinds of subjects you raise.

It seems that every time a political campaign moves out of the tired routines associated with traditional “activism” and into more effective, humorous and entertaining ways to agitate for change, there is a corresponding shock and gnashing of teeth. And, of course, if the action involves certain classes of workers – in this case models – that are frowned upon by the “educated” classes, the fire generally comes from academia and those privileged enough to be part of it.

I welcome that fire. I believe that North Americans, in particular, have to be shocked out of their complacency and boredom.

But first, I have a confession to make.

I am ugly.

Not just by the standards of what you call “the western ideal of beauty,” but I am totally ugly by anyone’s standards.

I’m so ugly that we only find a usable photo of me (one that doesn’t make little children cry) every five years or so. My last “publicity shot” – taken six years ago – has me posing next to a monkey (so that I look at least somewhat human by comparison)!

And if the Supermodels for Oaxaca movement were to, in the name of gringo academia’s definition of “inclusion,” invite me, or anyone as ugly as me, to walk the runway of its upcoming picket line in New York, the action would fail, just as most US political movements fail. It would end up looking just like every other pathetic protest by poorly dressed and unbathed college-educated “activists” that impose their own kind of “western ideal of activism” on all protests: Kids in Che Guevara tee shirts that can’t even tell me which of Che’s books are their favorite… because they’ve never read one. Mr. Trump and the media moguls at NBC – owners of the Miss Universe pageant careening toward Oaxaca - would look at a typical motley band of “solidarity activists” marching around with (crayon scrawled) placards, smirk, ignore it, and plow forward with imposing the Miss Universe pageant on Monte Alban, full speed ahead. And then a bloodbath would ensue - worse than any to date in Oaxaca City - as the forces of repression put down the protests against it.

And if we were to follow your advice and cancel our coverage and support of this innovative and different kind of political action, we would become complicit in that bloodbath, for ignoring a real news story: a professional organization of models suddenly has the Miss Universe corporations wondering if it is such a good idea to lend their “brand” to prop up Ulises Ruiz. If you are asking us to censor that movement, sorry, but we’re not going to do it.

You write describing yourself as a “student of social movements” that finds that of APPO “one of the most exciting and most hopeful happening right now because of the new approach to democracy, one that includes everybody.”

And then you ask me, essentially, to exclude an entire sector of workers – models – from our coverage.

You say I should especially exclude an organization led by a woman on International Women’s Day because you feel “offended” by it. Excuse me. What the hell are they teaching in colleges these days? It reminds me of a joke:

Q. How many academics does it take to screw in a light bulb?

A. “That’s not funny!”

In the name of “the women of Oaxaca” and “International Women’s Day” you ask me to censor a woman. I’m really scratching my head over that one. I would respectfully suggest you study the social movement that is APMO with more intellectual rigor, and apply the standard that “includes everybody” – including the hundreds of thousands of workers across the world that labor as models.

I thank you for noting that Narco News is “the best” and your “most preferred sources of information on the conflict” in Oaxaca. Day after day we have reported and translated the news from Oaxaca that the corporate media doesn’t report. We often feel like the working class of the “alternative media” because we were doing this work long before Oaxaca was the “gringo activist cause of the month” and we kept doing it after the radical chic action-hoppers went home. It’s not just the quantity of articles we produce, but also the labor and care put into them, that makes our coverage so preferred by so many.

We get the story right – from Oaxaca and elsewhere - more than others for one reason: we listen.

Here are some clues about listening: If we covered a movement (APMO, in this case) that invited models of any “gender” and “orientation” to participate (as it explicitly does in its casting call) as long as they (women and men, transgender inclusive) had “sex appeal” and certain other skills (ability to walk a runway, etc.) and then reported that to be something that “demeans women” we would have to, in order to be ethical journalists, publish a correction. And if you wish to be ethical, you ought to review the true facts and then do the same.

In other words, you could offer an opinion that such a movement demeans men and women, and that would be your (errant) opinion, apparently based on the idea that the act of modeling itself is somehow demeaning. If that’s what you think, well, you have the right to be wrongheaded and prejudiced against an entire group of workers.

What are you trying to say: “Blondes are stupid”? Do you realize that you come off sounding prejudiced against someone because of her body type or hair color? But to say it demeans “women” in particular means only that you drew inaccurate conclusions. (You also defined “families that struggle to make enough to survive day-to-day… 70% of people in Oaxaca who live in poverty” as people “who don’t have the money or time to invest in beauty contests.” I don’t know if Zuleka Rivera, of Puerto Rico, the current Miss Universe, fits that description or not. But a simple bit of research – viewing her photo, for example - would suggest that, uh, she’s not even… blonde.)

Your attempt to speak for “70% of people in Oaxaca” is the real “cultural imperialism” of this exchange. I think of all the times I have attended velas (traditional feasts) in Juchitán, Oaxaca, where the mu’xes doll up just as much as Ms. Connor did for her (self-directed) APMO photo shoots. (See our March 2006 story from Oaxaca: Other Loves in the Other Campaign for some clues.) I also think of the coast of Oaxaca (I once lived there), where so many women and men – local and visiting – dress in the same manner – on a daily basis - that you define somewhat prudishly as “mostly nude.” Your presumption that Oaxacans frown upon Ms. Connor’s choice of wardrobe and appearance is pure projection. (One of our colleagues advising us on this venture, in fact, is a former “Miss Oaxaca,” now a respected environmental activist.)

Although I am ugly I do hope I have the “inner beauty” to recognize that the work these models do is just as valuable as that which I or anyone else does. I don’t let my envy cripple my vista on that. If they wish to self-organize among only those “who know how to walk a runway with elegance and poise” that’s fine by me. I think of it as a musician. If I were to, in the name of “inclusion,” invite people without musical talent to perform in my band at a political action, the protest would fail. I think that, too often, in the name of “inclusion” we workers have let college-educated activists impose their aesthetics on social protests in ways that served to alienate the entire movement from the majority of working class and poor folks out here.

And so I’m really happy that APMO has come along and insisted that we respect its autonomy (models, too, have usos y costumbres), just as the APPO, or the Zapatistas, or any of the other movements we report on do. I think it’s brilliant, and the Trumps and NBCs up above are much more likely today to wave the white flag of surrender to these models and cancel the Oaxaca part of the pageant– something they would be unlikely to even consider if this were a typical North American protest in New York. But, of course, that’s another ethic that separates me from so many activists and academics: I actually care about winning the battle. To me, that’s the point altogether. If you think it’s a sin to win, well, APMO is not the movement for you. But that doesn’t mean it should not exist.

Finally, you imply that Ms. Connor was somehow put up to this, that I (or other men) made the decisions on which photos to publish and on what date. Isn’t that a bit… sexist? It’s also pretty funny, since I am basically Ms. Connor’s unpaid servant in this venture. As the director of her own autonomous project, Ms. Connor holds the copyright to her photos (that’s noted on the page), picked the photographer of her choice, chose her wardrobe, her poses, wrote the casting call and authored her own captions. She even directed our staff on the layout of the page.

Now she’s asked me to give you a Narcosphere account (which, in error, you seem to think is only for “official” Narco News reporters). Here’s another correction: The Narcosphere is for all readers and colleagues (not just “reporters”) that have invested their labor or resources into the project. That means anyone that has published his or her words on Narco News (with this letter, you now qualify), or volunteered in one of our projects, or donated even one dollar to The Fund for Authentic Journalism, can have a Narcosphere account. Your password is already in your email box. Enjoy.

We started the Narcosphere in three years ago as a way of keeping each other more honest. Welcome aboard, and I hope you’ll take my corrections to your misstatements of fact in that spirit, and study the APMO movement with the same vigor that a student of social movements owes it.

Sincerely,

Al Giordano

I'm in full support of the APMO action, but given the harmful sexism of most media Ms. Kempf's concerns with perpatuating that with this action shouldn't be glossed over.  But then I'm also too ugly to walk the runway.

Actually I think this collective action by models of all sexes, led by women, asserting power in solidarity with a larger social movement, has more potential to subvert individualistic, advertising-oriented beauty pageant and establisment media culture than a protest aimed directly at them.