Indigenous Feminism and Women in the Zapatista Movement

Anna Carter

The Zapatista uprising of 1994 brought the world’s attention to the plight of indigenous

people in Southern Mexico, highlighting the marginalization and suffering indigenous

 1
populations have endured under the Mexican government and global capitalism. The central

roles of women in the Zapatista movement resulted in the development of indigenous feminism

within the Mexican state, demonstrating the ability of non state actors and grassroots groups to

affect social change in the face of an oppressive government and neoliberal economic pressures.

While the Zapatista movement has not secured their goal of indigenous autonomy, and

indigenous women and peoples still face state sanctioned violence, the consciousness raising and

continued resistance of this movement illuminates a path forward for other women in the Global

South. This paper will explore the history of the Zapatista movement, beginning with definitions

of key terminology, demographics of the indigenous population in Chiapas at the start of the

uprising, and the motivations of the movement. After contextualizing the movement, the

involvement of women will be analyzed, exploring how the Zapatista political and military

leadership and village support is largely composed of women. The attitudinal shifts toward

gender relations in indigenous families will be examined, along with women’s new roles in their

communities. Finally, this paper will discuss the development of indigenous feminism within

Mexico as a result of the Zapatista movement, looking specifically at the encuentros held by

indigenous women and the development of women’s rights non-governmental organizations.

This paper will conclude with a discussion of the impacts of the Zapatista movement on the state

of indigenous women in Mexico today, and look to what is left to be accomplished.

There are several important indigenous/Spanish words and concepts that relate to the

Zapatista movement. The following definitions provide some context. The EZLN translates to

the Zapatista Army of National Liberation. They are a military and political group working to

establish indigenous autonomy in Mexico. A compañero/a is a member of the Zapatista

movement, both directly involved with the EZLN or a civilian supporter (Klein 2015, 302).
 2
There is no direct translation to English, the closest comparison being comrade. Ultimately this

word indicates solidarity and the shared vision of indigenous people of a life free of violence and

poverty. An ejido is communal land guaranteed to indigenous people by the Mexican

constitution. Ejidos were part of indigenous rights prior to the implementation of the North

American Free Trade Agreement, though this communal land did little to relieve the poverty of

indigenous communities, as it was often of poor quality and indigenous people had little access

to resources to cultivate it (Klein 2015, 13, Khokhar 2013, 42). A finca or hacienda is a large

ranch owned by a member of the elite, with indigenous people working on the land, usually

through a system of debt peonage (Klein 2015, 77). In Chiapas there are several rich families

who own fincas and much of the arable land, keeping indigenous people as laborers.

The following demographics demonstrate the myriad of challenges indigenous people

face, particularly women, reflecting a cycle of generational poverty that began with Spanish

colonization. In 1995 in the state of Chiapas, the home of the EZLN, there was a maternal

mortality rate of 117/1000,00 (Weires 2012, 1), the highest in the nation. Women had an average

of 7 children, and little access to obstetric care, birth control, and other reproductive health

services (Loewenberg 2010, 1680). 67% of the population was malnourished with 33%

extremely so. 60% of women were illiterate, with 40% being monolingual, meaning they knew

only their indigenous language and not Spanish, amplifying their social and economic isolation

(Weires 2012, 1). Indigenous women and peoples had little access to health care and education,

and lived in extremely impoverished conditions (Grant). Women were often isolated from public

life due to gender norms, illiteracy, and a lack of Spanish language skills.

The marginalization of indigenous people in the New World began with the arrival of

Columbus, kicking off the colonial project of the Spanish crown to exploit the natural and human
 3
resources of the Americas. Cortes was the military leader that brought down the Aztec empire,

placing the remainder of the indigenous population that had managed to survive the epidemic of

disease brought by Europeans under Spanish control. Indigenous people were enslaved and made

to work on encomiendas, a system of forced labor comparable to the United States’ plantations

(Acuña 1981, 23). Conditions during the colonial period were especially harsh, as indigenous

people’s freedom was taken, their culture and way of life was stripped as well. Spanish

colonizers brought Christianity, alcohol, and machismo, three things that negatively impacted

indigenous communities. Forced conversion to Catholicism stripped indigenous people of their

religion and spirituality, generations losing their customs and belief systems. Alcohol flooded

communities, a vice used to relieve some of the pain of cultural domination but led to increased

violence against women and health problems. Machismo, a concept that came from Spanish

gender roles, describes the expected gendered behavior of men (Acuña 1981, 24). Marianismo is

the corresponding role for women. Men are meant to be strong, virile, and aggressive, women

quiet, modest, and virtuous. These new gender roles socially enforced by the Spanish subsumed

indigenous communities, resulting in changes in women’s roles. Prior to colonization,

indigenous people had complementary gender roles, where women and men had separate social

functions. The roles for women and men were different based on sex, but the work of women

was not placed on a hierarchy as inferior to men’s work, instead considered a vital part of

keeping the community functioning as they performed the reproductive labor of

childbirth/rearing and agriculture (Acuña 1981, 27, Castillo 2002, 40).

Following the colonial period, Mexican Independence did little to improve the conditions

of indigenous people. While indigenous people formally received Mexican citizenship, this did

not indicate substantive participation and inclusion in Mexican society. The need to construct a
 4
homogenous, masculine, and mestizo national identity during this period of nation building

overruled any concern for the preservation of what little was left of indigenous societies, even

resulting in the genocide of indigenous groups that refused to modernize or assimilate, such as

the Yaqui (Guidotti-Hernandez 2011, 182). Furthermore, the system of fincas continued as

private land ownership was a tenet of modernization. Rural and landless indigenous peoples

continued to be subjected to laboring under the land owning class, trapped in cycles of debt that

prevented many indigenous people from escaping economic exploitation (Klein 2015, 81).

The Zapatista movement began because attempts at peaceful organizing had been

ineffective for indigenous people. The Zapatista’s main goal is autonomy for indigenous

communities, with access to their traditional lands and ways of life free of violence and poverty.

As a result of the Mexican Revolution which reformed land ownership, Article 27 of the

Mexican constitution promised indigenous people ejidos, access to communal and traditional

lands (Khokhar 2013, 42, Cunninghame and Corona 1998, 15). However, this clause had been

nullified in 1992 under the rule of President Carlos Salinas, in order to further modernize and

privatize land ownership. The nullification of Article 27 made way for the passage of NAFTA,

which deregulated markets, destroyed the tradition of communal land rights, and encouraged

transnational corporations to buy up land previously owned and cultivated by campesinos and

indigenous people. Land in resource rich Chiapas was especially desirable, as it holds one of the

world’s largest untapped oil fields, contains 30% of Mexico’s water resources, and is home to

the biodiverse Lacandona Jungle, which is ripe for exploitation for biogenetic products from

pharmaceutical companies (Cunninghame and Corona 1998, 18, Klein 2015, 32). The

privatization of ejidos was a strategic move by the Mexican government meant to make Mexico

a player in the global capitalist market, ceding to demands from the ‘First World’ to implement
 5
neoliberal policies of fair trade and deregulation regardless of the impact on already

marginalized indigenous communities.

On the day NAFTA went into effect, January 1st, 1994, the EZLN captured San Cristóbal

de las Casas and four other major towns in Chiapas for 48 hours, long enough to make their

intent and demands known, before leaving to avoid confrontations with the Mexican military

(Cunninghame and Corona 1998, 13). During those 48 hours, Zapatistas burned land ownership

records and looted town halls, demonstrating the illegitimacy of the Mexican regime for

indigenous people. Some areas and villages of Chiapas were kept under Zapatista control, where

they began the process of setting up their own government and means of survival. The laws

developed by the Zapatistas demanded food, housing, healthcare, education, independence,

democracy, justice, freedom, access to information, and peace (Klein 2015, 104). A Women’s

Revolutionary Law was implemented early in the movement as well, making explicit the

gendered needs of women (Castillo 2002, 40). The Women’s Revolutionary Law will be

discussed more later.

The Mexican government responded to the EZLN’s liberation of villages in Chiapas with

violence, sending the Mexican military to occupy villages supportive of the Zapatistas, taking

political prisoners, harassing indigenous people, and initiating an aerial bombing campaign

(Cunninghame and Corona 1998, 12, Klein 2015, 117). However, the Zapatistas used the internet

to call international attention to their fight, a burgeoning new technology in 1994 that continues

to be a method of organization and support for social change movements (Rincón 2014, 55).

International outcry over the government’s aggression to the Zapatista movement limited some,

though not nearly enough of the violence. The Zapatista army was not successful in liberating all

of Chiapas, and nor did they expect to be. Their ability to draw attention to the plight of
 6
indigenous people, a group that was essentially ignored by most of the world, demonstrates the

power of grassroots movement in the digital age, where local negotiations for rights can become

internationally recognized.

The political branch of the EZLN attempted to negotiate a peace with the Mexican

government. These negotiations produced the San Andres Accords, which guaranteed many

collective and autonomous rights for indigenous people (Khokhar 2013, 44). However, the

Mexican government refused to accept or implement the Accords due to the conflicts communal

land rights for indigenous people would create with NAFTA and the limiting of Mexican

sovereignty that would result from indigenous autonomy. Another law for indigenous rights was

drafted by the Mexican government, which the Zapatistas did not support as it did not meet the

majority of their demands nor address their claims to autonomy. After the failure of the San

Andres Accords and the passage of an indigenous rights bill the Zapatistas opposed, peace talks

halted (Klein 2015, 107). As of 2019, the EZLN still holds several liberated villages in Chiapas.

They have developed their own communities autonomous of Mexican authority, with their own

system of governance, hospitals, schools and collectives. There remains a military presence in

Chiapan villages, where state sanctioned violence still occurs (Taylor 2012, 395, Klein 2019).

The Mexican government is responsible for the death and rape of indigenous people due to their

constant military presence in this region. Though their grip is small, the EZLN represents a

revolutionary force of locally organized people resisting the commodification of their land and

way of life.

One of the most striking features of the Zapatista movement is the direct involvement of

women. Of the EZLN, one third of the combatants are women. Several well known, high ranking

officers are women, such as Comandante Ramona or Major Ana Maria, who led the capture of
 7
San Cristóbal de las Casas (Weires 2012, 1). Half of the supporters from indigenous villages are

women (Weires 2012, 1). Women are substantially involved and lead the Zapatista movement,

taking political, military, and civil society roles. The EZLN provided opportunities to women

that were rarely available to them at home, such as an education, Spanish language skills, access

to healthcare, and protection from domestic violence (Weires 2012, 1, Castillo 2002, 41). The

EZLN represents a successful example of gender mainstreaming in political organizations (True

2014, 227). This is especially notable considering the failure of wealthy institutions established

by ‘First World’ nations to implement gender mainstreaming in their practices. Despite access to

numerous resources along with the political and economic stability in many of its member states,

the UN has been unable to reach a level of gender mainstreaming demonstrated by the Zapatistas

(True 2014, 230). This is a trend reflected in many other international governmental

organizations and state governments, wherein policies of gender mainstreaming and inclusion

fall short of their goals, as rhetoric takes precedence over substantial action. In contrast, women

are included in all levels of the Zapatista movement, meaningfully involved in the decision

making process, and women’s rights to full participation in society are made explicit with the

Women’s Revolutionary Law (Klein 2015, 139).

The Women’s Revolutionary Law asserts women’s rights to political and military

participation, rights to reproductive freedom, education, healthcare, work, and to be free from

violence and assault (Taylor 2012, 394). It makes explicit the specific challenges faced by

indigenous women, in their own communities and from the national government. The Zapatista’s

commitment to gender equality reflects the nature of their claims to autonomy, with no

exceptions due to sex, color, or creed. By incorporating women into all of their ranks and taking

their concerns as a serious threat to the well being of indigenous communities as a whole, the
 8
Zapatistas were able to change the culture in their own communities, demonstrating a true

commitment to liberation on all levels, without exclusion.

Zapatista women speak to the new found respect exhibited for them as women, leaders,

and members of the community, both in their personal lives and within the liberation movement.

A group of women living in a Zapatista village explained the new relations between genders,

stating that they “joined the struggle and that’s when things started to change... thanks to the

organization, we have found compañerismo and unity. We have also found respect between men

and women. Our struggle is our liberation” (Klein 2015, 4). Women no longer must suffer the

abuse of husbands and men, as they have a support system through the movement that enforces

their laws and takes violence against women as the crime that it is. Women who previously had

no access to education can now attend schools created by the Zapatistas, learn the Spanish

language, and gain literacy skills. Women actively involved in the military branch of the

Zapatistas, the EZLN, benefitted from these changes the most, as they often left home and family

to act as a revolutionary (Weires 2012, 1, Klein 2015, 144). Though not all attitudes and

practices around gender can be changed overnight, and indigenous women still face

extraordinary challenges of poverty and patriarchy, the Zapatista movement began the process of

changing gender relations in indigenous society, even seeking to restore the complementary roles

of pre-Columbian indigenous peoples.

Women in liberated Zapatista villages have developed collectives for their communities,

improving their standard of living and re-establishing women’s role as a valuable community

member. Collectives include bakeries, weaving, pottery and other essential goods central to

indigenous life (Khokhar 2013, 43). These collectives serve not just as economic spaces, but a

place where women can organize, express themselves, and hold discussions on their experiences
 9
as indigenous women. In the words of Zapatista women from central Mexico, “organizing in the

cooperatives is where women first began to understand that we have rights. Working together

collectively is a way for us to support each other, and to help the community” (Klein 2015, 146).

Women’s collectives provide them a productive, public role in the community where the usual

work of women previously confined to the household and private sphere is turned into a

community good. As Zapatista villages accept no government aid as part of their commitment to

maintaining an autonomous status, these collectives are vital to the survival of indigenous

communities. Zapatista villages depend on all members of their community to keep their society

running, self sufficient, and improving the lives of indigenous people.

Furthermore, liberated Zapatista villages have banned alcohol (Castillo 2002, 41, Klein

2015, 61). This developed due to the demands of women to be free from violence, especially in

their own homes and families. Alcoholism and other forms of addiction are health problems that

plague many indigenous communities globally, a reflection of the generational trauma and

continued oppression that impacts indigenous people to this day. In the colonial period, alcohol

was often used as a form of payment for indigenous laborers, deliberately implanting addictive

substances in indigenous communities to keep them subjugated (Klein 2015, 61). Alcohol was

often the trigger that prompted abusive behavior toward indigenous women. Prior to the

Zapatista movement, domestic violence was considered a norm, with women expected to suffer

in silence and expect this treatment because of their inferior status. The Revolutionary Women’s

Law explicated the right of women to be free from violence and assault. With alcohol facilitating

this sort of violence, women in the movement fought and won to have alcohol banned, a decisive

action demonstrating the movement’s commitment to women’s rights. Zapatista women

described the resistance from men they experienced when an alcohol ban was proposed, but
 10
because “so many women in so many villages didn’t want men to be drinking... the law was

approved” (Klein 2015, 63). The Zapatista movement did not speak and stand for revolution,

then fail to implement that revolution for women as well, but rather took substantial action where

needed, as identified by women themselves.

The Zapatista vision for women’s rights did not stop at the borders of Chiapas;

indigenous women all over Mexico were beginning to recognize the unique injustices their social

location created for them. The Zapatista call for respect and resources for indigenous women

acted as a consciousness raising tool, birthing a movement of indigenous feminism. One of the

best examples of this strain of feminism is the encuentros (meetings) indigenous women

organized. In May of 1994, 50 indigenous women gathered in San Cristóbal de las Casas to

discuss the customs in their societies that harmed them (Damián 2015, 81). This was the first of

many encuentros of indigenous women. While men also attended these meetings they were

barred from speaking, and it was women who were the active participants (Klein 2015, 97). In

1997, over 700 indigenous women from 20 different ethnic groups gathered in Oaxaca for the

first national encuentro for indigenous women (Castillo 2002, 43). The National Coordination of

Indigenous Women was born from this meeting, a political group that focuses on national and

international legislation that impacts indigenous women (Castillo 2002, 43).

The formation of an indigenous feminist movement was partly fomented by the

Zapatistas, especially their Revolutionary Women’s Law. However, this feminism did not appear

solely from the Zapatistas. Feminism in Mexico had been bubbling up from disenchanted women

for years. Historical feminism began in the 1960s, the product of middle class, college educated,

mestiza women. Their focus on legal equality, sexual freedom and reproductive rights was

representative of their concerns as economically and racially privileged women (Damián 2015,
 11
75). Following the historical wave was popular feminism, which grew out of the labor movement

of the 1970s. This movement celebrated the traditional roles of women, but demanded respect

and value for those roles. The concerns of poor urban, rural, and working women were central to

this movement (Damián 2015, 77). This included some involvement of indigenous women,

though issues of ethnicity or colonial legacies were not often made explicit in popular feminism.

The slow process of women becoming aware of their own oppression, and the unique ways it

materializes in their lives through intersecting identities was another piece in the puzzle that led

to the development of indigenous feminism.

With increasing awareness and knowledge of the suffering and indignities indigenous

women and people endured, especially in the states of Guerrero, Oaxaca, and Chiapas, some of

the poorest states in Mexico with the highest percentages of indigenous populations, there was a

boom in the creation of NGOs (Khohar 2013, 44, Loewenberg 2010, 1680). One study found that

of 12 women’s rights NGOs operating out of the southern states of Mexico, the majority of them

had clear influences from the Zapatista movement (Weires 2012, 1). As a result, even women not

involved with the Zapatista movement have benefitted from the aid and programs that have

emerged in response to the needs of indigenous women.

Latin American studies scholar Sonia Alvarez’s (2009, 175) critique of NGOs as

collusion between feminist aims and neoliberal agendas stands as a curious contradiction in the

case of the Zapatistas. Their struggle against the power of neoliberal economics and

commodification of indigenous land and resources is what inspired the formation of so many

feminist NGOs in the region, and what ultimately improved conditions for all indigenous women

in the region, regardless of Zapatista affiliation. However, the relationship between Zapatistas

and NGOs is complex, as most NGOs did not express outward support for the EZLN due to their
 12
need to remain apolitical, despite the obvious influence of the Zapatista movement on their work

(Weires 2012, 1). NGOs in this region attempt to make up for services the Mexican government

is either unwilling or unable to provide for indigenous women, due to their refusal to implement

the San Andres Accords and feeble indigenous rights bills passed in place of the Accords

(Castillo 2002, 42, Khokhar 2013, 44). NGOs fill that void and provide much needed medical,

legal, and financial services for women. However, this ultimately removes the responsibility

from the rightful agent, which is the Mexican government. NGOs have also been criticized for

acting as neoliberal agents, conveying institutional support for only one form of feminist

organizing and presenting alternative practices of social change as illegitimate (Alvarez 2009,

176). This is especially important to consider in the case of the Zapatistas, who are non-state

actors categorized by the Mexican government as insurgents undermining national sovereignty.

By distancing themselves from the Zapatista movement and engaging in reform efforts that are

more liberal than radical, one must ask if NGOs are implicitly supporting the Mexican

government’s propaganda that the Zapatista movement is illegitimate, that their autonomous

communities are nonexistent, and that their claims to autonomy are unfounded. This is not to

discredit the very tangible and beneficial work NGOs do for indigenous women in this region,

but to deeply examine the shortcomings of the institutionalization of social change efforts. The

complexities of aid organizations in this region demonstrate the difficulties of addressing the

needs of historically and systematically marginalized people through the systems that enforced

their marginalization.

The development of the Zapatista movement and indigenous feminism represents a

compelling example of “Third World” feminism, and the importance of transnational feminist

solidarity (Sampaio 2004, 183, Mohanty 1988, 61). When the Zapatista’s gained the world’s
 13
attention with their dramatic capture of San Cristóbal de las Casas, people from all nations were

made aware of the struggles of indigenous people and women. Following this wave of

international support, Zapatista leaders spoke to the “Cinderella syndrome” that emerged from

this awareness, as people from “First World” nations sent anything and everything to assist

indigenous peoples; often these objects were useless, unthoughtful charity given by out of touch

people (Rincón 2014, 55). The Zapatistas encouraged foreign supporters to recognize the ills of

neoliberal policies and globalization in their own communities, shifting the focus from only

Chiapas to a global scale and problem (Rincón 2014, 56, Klein 2015, 258, Wilson 2011, 100).

Zapatistas practiced and advocated for the transnational feminist solidarity model of Mohanty

(1988, 87) by redirecting attention to the various ways the neoliberal economic and political

policies they were struggling against infected all nations, all women, and all people. The

Zapatistas recognized that their local situation required local solutions, yet the cause of their

problems were global and widespread; solidarity consists of recognizing the unique issues in

one’s own communities, working to address them at a local level, and recognizing the patterns of

subjugation that occur globally in order to cultivate a solidarity that is both intersectional and

transnational.

As the 25th anniversary of the Zapatista uprising and capture of Chiapan villages passed

in 2019, many journalists and activists asked where the Zapatistas stood today (Klein 2019,

Vidal 2018, Olsen 2018). In the liberated villages, they have their own autonomous

communities, developed to provide for the needs of all of its members through independent

schools, farms, collectives, hospitals, medical services, and more (Khokhar 2013, 43,

Gottesdiener 2014). These towns may be missing basic amenities like electricity, or running

water, but the Zapatistas have created communities and a government outside the control of the
 14
Mexican state. They are returning to traditional customs and ways of life, living off the land and

in their communities, without the need for profit, but simply for the sake of living a sustainable

and peaceful life of their choosing (Gottesdiener 2014, Vidal 2018).

In a capitalist global system that insists on acting for profit over people, insists that

development must occur under its means and modes of production, the Zapatistas have shown

that there are alternatives to that system (Gottesdiener 2014, Olsen 2018). There are still battles

to be had in the struggle against global neoliberal economics and capitalist systems, and the

Zapatista movement is only the beginning. Indigenous people and women in Chiapas still

struggle with extreme poverty, lack of access to education and healthcare, and economic

exploitation (Grant). One revolutionary movement is not enough to change the centuries of

oppression at the hands of colonial and mestizo rulers. Yet the Zapatistas communicate an

important lesson on persistence, small scale change, and the global solidarity that can emerge

through struggle. Many of the Zapatista’s goals are still unaccomplished. Much of Chiapas is still

occupied by paramilitaries, who terrorize and murder indigenous people, and weaponize rape

against female Zapatistas (Taylor 2012, 397, Olsen 2018). The Mexican government, despite

changes in political leadership, still refuses to negotiate with indigenous peoples for autonomy.

Yet the Zapatista movement has made strides in the public knowledge and awareness of

indigenous people’s struggles, especially women. Indigenous attitudes toward women have been

transformed in Chiapas, and a national and international conversation around indigenous

feminism was born. The Zapatista movement serves as a model for the integration of gender in

revolutionary movements, and the fight that must be had surrounding complex economic and

political conditions that leave the Global South subjugated under the thumb of neocolonial

practices, and its most vulnerable people exploited.

 15

Works Cited

Acuña, Rodolfo. (1972). Occupied America; the Chicano's Struggle Toward Liberation. San
Francisco: Canfield Press.

Alvarez, S. E. (2009) “Beyond Ngo Ization : Reflections from Latin America,” Development,
52(2), pp. 175–184. Retrieved from
https://search-proquest-com.echo.louisville.edu/docview/216914821?accountid=14665

Castillo, R. A. H. (2002). “Zapatismo and the Emergence of Indigenous Feminism,” NACLA

Report on the Americas, 35(6), pp. 39-43. Retrieved from
http://echo.louisville.edu/login?url=https://search.ebscohost.com/login.aspx?
direct=true&db=a9h&AN=6749848&site=ehost-live

Cunninghame, P., & Corona, C. B. (1998). “A Rainbow at Midnight: Zapatistas and Autonomy,”
Capital & Class, 21(66), pp. 12-22. Retrieved from
http://echo.louisville.edu/login?url=https://search.ebscohost.com/login.aspx?
direct=true&db=a9h&AN=1191462&site=ehost-live

Damián, G. E. (2015). “The Fruitful and Conflictive Relationship between Feminist Movements
and the Mexican Left,” Social Justice, 42(3/4), pp. 74–88. Retrieved from
http://echo.louisville.edu/login?url=https://search.ebscohost.com/login.aspx?
direct=true&db=a9h&AN=116184087&site=ehost-live

Gottesdiener, L. (2014). “A Glimpse Into the Zapatista Movement, Two Decades Later,” The
Nation. Retrieved from https://www.thenation.com/article/glimpse-zapatista-movement-
two-decades-later/

Grant, M. “Case Study: Indigenous Women in Mexico,” Minority Rights. Retrieved from
http://stories.minorityrights.org/lifeatthemargins/chapter/36/
 16

Khokhar, T. (2013). “Zapatista Development: Local Empowerment and the Curse of Top-Down
Economics in Chiapas, Mexico,” Harvard Kennedy School Review, 13, pp. 41–45.
Retrieved from
http://echo.louisville.edu/login?url=https://search.ebscohost.com/login.aspx?
direct=true&db=a9h&AN=91817164&site=ehost-live

Klein, Hilary. (2019). “A Spark of Hope: The Ongoing Lessons of the Zapatista Revolution 25
Years On,” NACLA. Retrieved from
https://nacla.org/news/2019/01/18/spark-hope-ongoing-lessons-zapatista-revolution-25-
years

Klein, Hilary. (2015). Compañeras, Zapatista Women’s Stories. New York: Seven Stories Press.

Linn Rincón, B. (2014). “Estas Son Mis Armas”: Lorna Dee Cervantes’s Poetics of Feminist
Solidarity in the Era of Neoliberal Militarism. Women’s Studies Quarterly, 42(3/4), pp.
55–73. https://doi-org.echo.louisville.edu/10.1353/wsq.2014.0048

Loewenberg, S. (2010). “The plight of Mexico’s Indigenous women,” World Report 375 (9727),
pp. 1680-1682. Retrieved https://www.thelancet.com/journals/lancet/article/PIIS0140-
6736(10)60721-0/fulltext

Mohanty, C. (1988) “Under Western Eyes: Feminist Scholarship and Colonial Discourses,”
Feminist Review, 30(1), pp. 61–88. doi: 10.1057/fr.1988.42.

Olsen, Jared. (2018). “The Zapatistas: A Small, Very Small, Ever So Small Rebellion,”
Pulitzer Center. Retrieved from https://pulitzercenter.org/reporting/zapatistas-
small-very-small-ever-so-small-rebellion

Sampaio, A. (2004). “Transnational Feminisms in a New Global Matrix,” International Feminist

Journal of Politics, 6(2), pp. 181–206.
https://doi-org.echo.louisville.edu/10.1080/1461674042000211290

Taylor, C. (2012). “The Struggle for Women’s Rights,” DePaul Journal for Social Justice, 5(2),
pp. 392–401. Retrieved from
http://echo.louisville.edu/login?url=https://search.ebscohost.com/login.aspx?
direct=true&db=a9h&AN=85514768&site=ehost-live

True, J. (2014). “Mainstreaming gender in international institutions.” In L. Shepherd ed. Gender

 17
Matters in Global Politics, 2nd ed. New York: Routledge, pp. 227-240.

Vidal, J. (2018). “Mexico’s Zapatista Rebels, 24 years on and defiant in mountain strongholds,”
The Guardian. Retrieved from
https://www.theguardian.com/global-development/2018/feb/17/mexico-zapatistas-rebels-
24-years-mountain-strongholds

Weires, G. (2012). "The Impact of the Zapatista Movement on Women's Rights in Chiapas,
Mexico," Clocks and Clouds, 1(1) pp. 1. Retrieved from
http://www.inquiriesjournal.com/a?id=1621

Wilson, K. (2011). “From missionaries to microcredit? ‘Race’, gender and agency in neoliberal
development.” In: N. Visvanathan et al. ed. The Women, Gender and Development
Reader, 2nd ed. Halifax: Fernwood Publishing, pp. 99-101.