Professor Tweed,

You gave me feedback on my library research that I have been mulling over ever since and I want to thank you.  Having given the consideration to our Twitter chat about how the EPA is tied to family-friendly work policies and appreciation for SAHM in combination with how I could “measure” how the EPA will affect Latinas, I wanted to see if this approach was perhaps more attainable.  This is more or less my thought process and, as we know research is back and forth, so I will no doubt have to rearrange/tweak some if not all of these categories.

Argument/Research: The enforcement of the EPA will have the most impact on the Latina culture in the US since the Civil Rights Movement - or - The enforcement of the EPA will have a dramatic impact of the Latina culture in the US.

Background - The enforcement of the EPA would bring due recognition to Latina head of the household (LHOH), even if there is another working adult in the house.  This is where I would provide some historical context about the idea of mariana and arreglada.  I would then discuss based on statistics (knowing that undocumented Latinas will be hard to cover since, by nature, they are “undocumented” so I will have to rely, if they are willing, on interviews; and going forward understand that “official” statistics change every year so information from even 4 years ago might not be as accurate as present day) the types of jobs that Latinas typically hold in comparison to the types of jobs Latinos typically hold; the best and worst states for employment (with best and worst being defined as the % of Latino/a population that have documented jobs and the pay they receive for stated jobs) and then breakdown that statistic by race and gender so I would be comparing the % that Latinas get paid and are employed in a particular field (for example, healthcare) compared other women as well as compared to men and then have the men compared by race to other men.  I believe a chart/graph would be the best way to display such information as it can get wordy and thus confusing.

I would then look at various statistics, each broken down by nation, state and county in FL, about Welfare/government spending (GS) on the Latina population: % of Latinas on Welfare/GS; % of Latinas working; % of working Latinas that are on Welfare/GS; % of Latinas that would NOT be on Welfare/GS if receiving equal pay; % of LSAHM; % of LSAHM that “opt-out”; % of LSAHM that are college-educated (any schooling beyond high school).  Again, this would most likely be displayed in chart/graph form.

Using that information, I would then present information about how the EPA would impact Latina Stay-At-Home-Moms (LSAHM), either by choice or circumstance, by establishing merit to their work.  Nothing makes my blood boil more than to have someone say SAHM, particularly LSAHM, are not “contributing” to society because they aren’t contributing to the Gross National Product.  This is where I know I will need a lot of help in checking my bias because I have a hard time believing the US can still operate under the same capitalist economy and enforce EPA, and in turn, acknowledge SAHM as added value to society.  One could say, well if LSAHM raise productive members of society then they are added value.  However, how do you judge if someone is a productive member of society?  Their level of education? Their career/job? Their philanthropic work? Their annual income?  Whatever the answer (if one should exist), I believe it cannot be measured by economic status alone.  In order for LSAHM to be able to stay SAHM and be seen as added value to society, there must be a baseline of merit for assessment.  But how can the government label moms “good” or “bad”?  (This argument can be opened to include men as well, which I do not deny, but I am not sure I need to mention them if my project is focused on Latinas)  I am not sure how to approach this one but I think it would provide a good foundation as for how much of an impact the EPA would have on Latina culture.  I would have to say it would impact any culture that operates under a mariana ideology or any culture that relies on gendered work.

My research would then turn to alternatives ways “women’s work” would be appreciated as added value to society once EPA is enforced.  I think finding statistics about how crime rates and poverty levels are intertwined.  Does having SAHM in the neighborhood reduce crime rates – break-ins, rapes, robbery, assault, sexual violence, etc?  I could make the argument that all those LSAHM that “opt-out” are not opting-out of society, but investing in the future of society.  Much like an oak tree does not grow overnight, children do not turn from 18 months to 18 years instantly (despite how it might feel at times!).  All that time spent at home by “educated” SAHM would help socialize children and prepare them to be independent adults.  SAHM could teach life skills that public schools do not have the funds to teach – how to cook food, how to clean, how to sew, how to make a budget, how to make a bed, how to negotiate wages, etc.  The children will replicate their SAHM at a young age, which would instill the idea that one must work for a living, an idea that would help promote further education.  Perhaps make note of the age of child workers other countries in comparison to the US.  Then compare those that work for need/survival to those who work out of want/added luxury.

Using feminist empirical theory, try to provide a correlation between working Latinas and a decline in health-related issues caused by certain stressors.  Perhaps look at studies (if they exist) that show the effects of how an improved sense of worth might help reduce certain health problems like diabetes, depression, hypertension, high blood pressure, etc. If women felt appreciated knowing she was finally receiving equal pay or in her choice to SAH  knowing it would provide a viable means for their family to survive (but more so thrive), perhaps eating habits would be different (no depression-based eating a pint of ice cream or drinking excessively, etc) or heart diseases might decline as women take care of themselves more in order to take care of the family, etc.

                All Latinas, in particular LSAHM, have the added benefit of raising an entire bilingual generation.  To fully understand the impact Latinas would have on the upcoming generation of children, I would find statistics of % of Latinos/as* in US % of Latinos/as* by county in FL and % of Latinos/as* in CFL (*documented).  Through their exchange of language, public schools could (finally) keep the US competitive in a global market by ensuring future generations are able to communicate and compete in the ever-growing globalized world.  Bilingual children will be the key to strengthening relationships between countries as well as form new relationships.  I want the make the point that “English-only” signs will be a thing of the past, as much as separate water fountains or seats on buses.  People from those generations might still struggle with desegregation in much the same way monolingual people will still struggle with multilingual people (be it Spanish, French, Portuguese, Creole or any of the indigenous languages found in Latin America).

               

                Conclusion/Hypothesis: Latinas stand to benefit the most from the EPA’s enforcement as their gain strengthens the nation as a whole.  Perhaps end with a quick recap of how many Latina jobs are the backbone of society as they generally fall into one of these four main categories: service industry, healthcare, agrarian, and law. (I don’t know but I’m guess here.  I would put the correct information once I find it.)

Do you think I’m biting off more than I can chew here?  If so, what suggestions do you have about what I should weed out or replace?  I have re-read what I wrote several times and have come back to it, making corrections or changes bit by bit.  I have a feeling that my topic might seem focused too much on the middle class, but I think I want it to be.  I want to show how “average” the Latina experience truly is.  I don’t want to focus on those below the poverty line or in the top 2%, but the “middle class” chunk, the meat and potatoes so to speak.  I’m hoping my research will give me a median range that I can talk to, so people don’t think I’m purposely overlooking certain experiences.  Is there a way to narrow my research without being attacked by standpoint theorists for not providing the full story of the Latina experience?