Jump into the raw, the nude with me. This is where I find true beauty.
It’s reality that scares us
Sharing myself with you.
What’s my story? What’s the truth?
My name is Ana Arciniega, but that doesn’t say too much about who I truly am. Words can’t grasp what defines me, but I can tell you what inspires me…
People.
The nude. The raw things in life. Simplicity and complexity. Details.
I love words because they create the universe around us. Words can mean so much. I love the stories the universe holds; the stories each person holds. You can’t quite grasp the stories all at once, but you can observe them everywhere, all the time.
I’m another story in a book that has no beginning and no end. I want to share details of my story and hear or see your story as well. Show me the nude, tell me what’s real. Let’s inspire each other.
Dwelling on Riverbank Dreams
I am sitting on the banks near the water, the early spring sun feels warmer than the summer sun on my skin. The rays are sparkling like glitter on top of the calm waves. I feel the newly grown, humid strands of grass caress my hands and legs, embracing me and welcoming me to the gentle touch of spring. I remember the soft, coldly white blanket that used to cover my current dwelling space. In the water, slushy ice floats on the edges of the river, reminding me of the deep winter freeze. I open my senses to every smell, view, sound, and touch. Glowing smiles are seen all around me, casting fly rods, breaking the still glittering water. There is a sense of communal longing for the endless warm-hearted embrace of the season to come that seems to end in the blink of an eye. Teeny warm days like these are what we long for during the long months of bitter cold. As if two hours of a warm embrace could cure our frozen bones. The honeyed chirping in the crisp air tells us otherwise as we lose our coating to fully embrace the light. The stillness of the water agrees with the stillness of my once fatigued mind, wishing the season to hurry into spring as I try to lengthen the passing hours.
I imagine chubby, sun kissed babes frolicking along the banks undressed, with stained pink hands from picking at the basketed fruit their mothers collected at the nearby market. The babe’s tiny soft and joyful feet are unaware of the touch from the warm dirt and golden floors, as the babe’s cherry cheeks smile, fully embracing the unnoticed change of seasons. They belong to the dirt they stand on, and the fuzzy spotty grass and delicate fragrant flowers welcome their cheer as the babes kneel to capture the flowers’ fragrance. In these early spring days, I cannot live in the moment, as the sun seems like a distant memory during the cold months. It feels like a dream as the warmth welcomes my dreaming thoughts. Looking around me, I am surrounded by snow-laden summits, their cool blankets melting with the passing of each new day.
In my dreams, I remember those who lived here seasons ago, collecting the reeds along the river to make bows. I look around the scenery to picture what plants could be weaved and crafted into hunting tools. Has this civilized pathway and riverbanks destroyed them? Could the reeds have suffered under the touch of white, rough working hands? Am I sitting on historical land or am I sitting in a civilized constructed ground? I’m sure years ago, those who dwelled here and spoke of every living thing around, could also see the same majesty of the mountains kneeling in reverence. The water, with its glittering stillness, welcomed their bows for sustenance. Singing along to the dweller’s souls’ tunes, birds whispered in high and low tones like a Vivaldi violin concert, chirping fearless of their surroundings. The land dwellers carried their own babes, frolicking along the water, in the same place that embraces me now.
A sense of loss and grief overcome me as I see the settlers’ work overtaking the land in the dark, dead pavement along the banks, tainting my nose with the memory of cold cement. Shrubs and manzanitas carelessly blossomed here before, touched only by intuitive hands and a gentle grazing munch. I imagine the first land dwellers’ own grief as they are pushed away from their home and livelihood. Just like the first snow-in of the season — swift and unexpected — they became an unwelcome stranger in the land they intimately tended for. Now, the harmonious birds’ concerts are shadowed by the deep quorking of plump ravens overfed with human greed. As I sit in the wintertime bitterness, the glacier-fed air breathes hope into me with its cocktail of fresh pine needle mixed with earthy-thawed waters. Nature struggles to strive along through the seasons, but spring seems to birth new longings every time. The glowing smiles around me bring some relief as the land still touches the hearts of those who tread its paths, no matter how corrupted the paths have become. This touching sentiment that overwhelms the spectators’ visit to the land is the first step towards awakening to the ancestral life that surrounds them. There is nowhere else I see the hope for the land like I see it in those unconcerned babes who root themselves with the welcoming warmth of the spring. Bringing the memories back, as I dwell in this mountain valley, reminds me I too can root myself in the embrace of the sun and all living things quietly watching over me as they whisper to be cared for again.
Minimalist Lifestyle: What is its Appeal in a Consumerist Society?
By: Ana L. Arciniega
The United States holds 3.1 percent of the world’s population of children, but Americans consume 40 percent of toys in the world (Armstrong, L. P 72). Capitalist societies encourage
exponential economic growth; economic growth is achieved through consuming goods and services. Capitalist societies then, encourage exponential consumerism. The encouragement for consumerism is all around us: ads displaying new products that promise satisfaction, celebrities
proudly showcasing their closets with 200 pairs of shoes on social media, frequently updated phones with new features every few months, and ’bigger’ and ‘better’ food combos at every turn. In a consumerist society, individuals are encouraged to consume everyday, and satisfaction is
fleeting when new products are displayed constantly. A feeling of dissatisfaction is frequent in an overly-consumerist society, and the environmental pollution and depletion of natural resources is inevitable (Meissner, M. 2018). Despite the strong encouragement from society to adopt an excessively consumerist lifestyle, some individuals have chosen not to adopt those ideals and follow a minimalist lifestyle. A minimalist lifestyle can present itself in many different ways, but the main objective of a minimalist lifestyle is living an uncluttered life without excess; only owning things you really need. Joshua Fields Millburn, Ryan Nicodemus (The Minimalists), and Stephanie Seferian (Mama Minimalist) are an examples of individuals following and promoting a minimalist lifestyle. Choosing a minimalist lifestyle requires elements of self-sacrifice, cleverness, and information seeking (Pollak, A. 2016). Although adopting a minimalist lifestyle requires effort, minimalists are convinced the results make it worth it.
The purpose is to find the main reasons
individuals adopt a minimalist lifestyle while living in a consumerist society – this will be achieved through the analysis of Joshua Fields Millburn’s, Ryan Nicodemus’, and Stephanie
Seferian’s published content.
Usually, a minimalist lifestyle is adopted in an attempt to declutter an individual’s life. According to Lisa Armstrong, an orderly house can make the people living in the house feel
orderly – calm and focused surroundings help individuals stay calm and focused (2018). In Lisa Armstrong’s article “How to Raise a Minimalist”, she explains the reasons kids grow up wanting to consume excessively; media all around them encourage kids to consume, promising satisfaction, without stating any of the consequences (p. 72). In the article “The Luxury of Minimalism” by Laura Newsome, the author discusses Dave Bruno’s story of choosing a minimalist lifestyle – minimalism provides a simpler, more balanced and vitalistic way of life (2011). Newsome explains that a minimalist lifestyle gives individuals the freedom to do the things they enjoy and are important to them – Bruno believes that by having less possessions, there are less things pulling you back from what really matters – such as spending time with your family or practicing personal skills (p. 14). Newsome also mentions other stories of individuals who adopted a minimalist lifestyle – she states that the driving reason for choosing a minimalist lifestyle is individuals realizing the dissatisfaction and destruction excessive consumerism inevitably concludes in. According to Newsome, when individuals adhere to a minimalist lifestyle, possessions and consumerism is not the driving force of their lives, instead, individuals choose to focus their lives on other types of wealth (p. 16).
Both authors, Armstrong and Newsome, state that a minimalist lifestyle provides individuals a more satisfying and balanced life. In the article “Against Accumulation” by Miriam Meissner the author states that a minimalist lifestyle is directly going against capitalist principles of accumulation and growth,
however, she states individuals choose minimalism for hedonistic reasons because popular culture promises that a minimalist lifestyle provides a more pleasurable life. (2019). The author believes the drive for consumerism is solely politically-based. Consumerism maintains capitalism alive; people’s constant drive for consuming excessively maintains the current political system alive, a system where its primary goal is not being sustainable and satisfying consumers, rather, its goal is exponential growth in consuming and profits. The author claims that the results of a minimalist lifestyle are positive because they go against excessive consumption, but she points out that individuals rarely choose minimalism for this reason alone – individuals, according to Meissner, choose minimalism because they believe it will make their lives better or more satisfying.
This is true for the previous articles discussed – the effects of a
minimalist lifestyle are increased sustainability, and overall decreased consumption, but the driving force for adopting minimalism is a more balanced and satisfying life. According to
Angela Pollak, individuals who adopt a minimalist lifestyle while living in a consumeristic society because they hope it will provide them with less complicated, and more personally
meaningful lives (2016). According to Jennifer E. Hausen, these allegations are correct – “materially simpler lifestyles such as minimalism, with a focus on intrinsic values, have been
suggested as contributing to happiness and fulfilment” (2018).
I used The Minimalists and Mama Minimalist for my research question because they possess a big following of people who adhere to minimalist lifestyles. These two websites represent minimalistic ideologies, and explain why individuals adhere to a minimalist lifestyle in a consumerist society. Joshua Fields Millburn, Ryan Nicodemus, and Stephanie Seferian are currently living in the United States, a capitalist country know for high levels of consumerism. Millburn, Nicodemus, and Seferian, however, have adopted and promoted a minimalist lifestyle. In The Minimalists’ online “essays,” Nicodemus and Millburn share their minimalist ideologies and helpful tips for adopting a minimalist lifestyle. They both have chosen to follow a minimalist lifestyle for similar reasons: they believe minimalism provides them with a meaningful life that
leaves space for the important things in life. “We focus on making room for more: more time, more passion, more creativity, more experiences, more contribution, more contentment, more freedom. Clearing the clutter from life’s path helps make that room” (Nicodemus, R. & Millburn,
J. n.d.). For The Minimalists, it all started with discontent; their consumer-driven lives had not brought them any satisfaction despite believing that having a six-figure income, luxury cars,
oversized houses, and unending “stuff” would bring satisfaction – “It only brought more debt, stress, anxiety, fear, loneliness, guilt, overwhelm, depression” (Nicodemus, R. & Millburn, J. n.d.).
After realizing that the consumer-driven lives which many Americans adhere to did not bring them any satisfaction, but rather discontent, The Minimalists decided to ‘take back control’ of their lives by using the principles of minimalism. According to The Minimalists, a minimalist lifestyle adds value to individuals’ lives; it makes room for what they consider to be the truly important things in life: health, relationships, passion, growth, and contribution (Nicodemus, R. & Millburn, J. n.d.). The Minimalists state in their blogs that they used to live a life chasing the ‘American Dream’, it gave them no time to pursue their true aspiration as they were constantly clouded by “stress and anxiety and discontent.” When they adopted a minimalist lifestyle, they had more time to be productive and focus on their health and relationships (Nicodemus, R. & Millburn, J. n.d.). According to The Minimalists, living a minimalist lifestyle means refusing to “be a slave to cultural expectations, ensnared by the trappings of money and power and perceived success” (Nicodemus, R. & Millburn, J. n.d.). Just like Miriam Meissner states that a minimalist lifestyle is directly going against capitalist principles of accumulation and growth,
Nicodemus and Millburn are going against capitalist principles of accumulation and growth, however, as Meissner states, their driving force is hedonistic ideals; they want a more fulfilled
life, and rarely make any comment against consumerism or capitalism. Although they do criticize the ‘American Dream’ – “You can keep your American Dream: give us back our time, our freedom, and our lives” – which is supported by capitalism, they adopt a minimalist lifestyle in order to have a more fulfilling life rather than for political reasons.
Stephanie Seferian proposes similar ideas in why she adopted a minimalist lifestyle. Through the analysis of her blog content, I was able to find recurring themes. Her content is divided in three categories: Minimize, Simplify, and Sustain. Her movement is all about: decluttering home, head, and heart. Finding peace in simplicity instead of ‘stuff,’ cutting clutter
in order to enjoy life’s moments, and committing to conscious consumerism and sustainable living. The biggest similarity between The Minimalists and Mama Minimalist is the promise that a minimalist lifestyle provides individuals with more time to do the things they truly care about such as spending time with family and focusing on life goals. Seferian says that a minimalist lifestyle gives individuals more free time – “when you own fewer items, you have fewer items to maintain, clean, organize, and worry about. This means you have more time for the people and experiences that matter” (Seferian, S. 2019). Mama Minimalist states that a minimalist lifestyle will contribute to a life with less mental clutter (2019). These examples represent the same ideas The Minimalists stand for: a minimalist lifestyle provides individuals with more time to do the things they truly care about. The blogs in Mama Minimalist state another reason for adopting a minimalist lifestyle: the sustainability aspect of it. Stephanie Seferian is concerned with the effects excessive consumerism has on the environment – “buying stuff you don’t need wastes Earth’s valuable resources. In many cases the resources it takes to manufacture the item you’ve been eyeing […] is huge” (Seferian, S. 2019). Mama Minimalist’s blog have a whole section dedicated to sustainability; for her it is an important aspect of being a minimalist. She does not only care about the fulfilling life minimalism provides her, but she also deeply cares about the
positive impact a minimalist lifestyle can have on the environment.
Minimalists, then, are mostly driven by two main reasons: hedonistic ideals – because they believe a minimalist lifestyle will provide them with a more fulfilling life – and
environmental ideals. The subjects of study were drawn towards a minimalist lifestyle because they were dissatisfied with the results of a consumer-driven lifestyle. By adopting a minimalist lifestyle, they were able to find a more fulfilling life. By owning less things, and therefore worrying about less things, they were able to find fulfillment in things they consider to be more important such as spending time with their families and practicing their skills. The idea for adopting a minimalist lifestyle while living in a consumerist society is that minimalism will give you more time to focus on the things that really matter, which are not physical ‘things’ instead of being worried with chasing the ‘American Dream’ and constantly seeking to own more things. The answer to my question was the expected answer. I have personally been driven to a minimalist lifestyle because of the negative environmental factors excessive consumerism has, and the idea of having less things brings less stress. The research I did on minimalism also
prepared me for what the results of this project would be; the literature agrees with a lot of the themes raised by The Minimalists and Mama Minimalist.
I would also like to see more research done on the factual benefits of adopting a minimalist lifestyle; scientific data. If a minimalist lifestyle does result in a more orderly, stress-free, and sustainable life, it is crucial for it to be known amongst consumerist societies.
Incorporating Indigenous Knowledge to Environmentalism in Canada
By: Ana L. Arciniega
There is a problem of inclusivity within the environmentalist community and government policies in Canada. In particular, Indigenous people and their cultural teachings are underrepresented and completely sidelined in environmental NGOs and organizations as well as in the building of national policies regarding the land. Indigenous peoples in Canada have a long-standing culture and thousands of years of connection to their land and have developed their own sustainable land management practices. These Indigenous teachings have been widely ignored and underrepresented in the mainstream environmental movement in Canada where the main focus lies on Westernized, settler concepts of the environment and its preservation. The main focus of solving the climate crisis has been shaped by policies and conservation efforts that are founded on a colonialist, European perspective of how the environment is viewed and engaged with. By separating the human from the land and viewing the land as something that needs to be dominated and exploited for its resources, the environment and its peoples have suffered loss, destruction, and a lacking sense of identity. For environmental efforts to be effective, mainstream environmentalism and public policies need to adopt a holistic approach to viewing the environment, so change can be made effectively.
Traditional Ecological Knowledge has various meanings and encompasses the collective Indigenous knowledge of all the people from specific tribal areas (Glasier-Lawson, M., 2013). The Indigenous knowledge of the land has come through generations over thousands of years through storytelling and teachings taught in the land all around the globe. The documentary Traditional Ecological Knowledge (2013), describes TEK as elder knowledge and Indigenous tradition; the knowledge is all-encompassing, viewing the land as part of human beings’ skill set used for sustaining humanity and the environment as a whole. Indigenous ancestors tell the stories of the past to the future generations in order for them to understand how to sustain the land and its resources. TEK teaches that humans are a part of the land, and they cannot be without the land; where there needs to be a reciprocal relationship between the land and its inhabitants. TEK has taught that the way humans think of the land is the way they will treat the land, therefore, if the land is seen as a part of human beings and there is respect attached to the land, humans will treat it with respect and care. The Indigenous teachings of the environment places humans within the land, not above it; TEK is a relational approach to the land, where anything that affects the land, affects the very identity and wellbeing of its guests, making it the utmost priority for everyone to be good stewards of the land (Glasier-Lawson, M., 2013).
According to Kevin Hutchings (2020), author of Transatlantic Upper Canada, the way European settlers in Canada thought about the environment and the land came from the 19th century’s concept of “improvement” during the Enlightenment era. New technologies and scientific discoveries led Europeans to the notion that humans could “better their lives both materially and morally by transforming natural terrain […], rendering ‘wastelands’ productive and capable of meeting the enhanced needs of expanding and shifting human populations” while also “associating the promotion of domestic civility with related processes of social and geographic improvement” (Hutchings, 2020). For Europeans, forests were seen as an indefinite resource for commercial prosperity, where wood could be used for building, land for farming, and animals for nourishment and wealth. Improvement or progress to them could not be seen in the forests or in those who lived there outside of civilization since the forests and wilderness were considered unproductive places if they were not being exponentially exploited. Europeans separated themselves as “civilized” people and saw those outside of civilization as “savage” or uncivilized, which in turn, meant less-than or against improvement (Hutchings, 2020). When Europeans settled in North America then, the “Indians” were part of what they considered as uncivilized and savage, who refused to acknowledge the authority and superiority of European civilization. This in turn meant they were considered subhuman because they had no “productive” purpose for civilization which caused no moral concerns to be raised when European colonialists forced the Indigenous peoples to abandon their land or destroy their livelihood (Hutchings, 2020).
Many current environmentalist philosophies are rooted in the same colonialist perspective of the land and its attachment to the concept of “improvement” and domination, where technology and scientific discovery are seen as the superior way of approaching both the environment and those who abide in it. This system of thinking is, in many ways, in opposition to the holistic way that Indigenous peoples have approached the environment and themselves. The same colonialist perspective of the environment is what has led to the destruction of natural resources and Indigenous peoples’ livelihood, so I pose the idea that the system that has corrupted the environment cannot be the same system that solves the environmental crisis; there needs to be a reconciliation of both Western, colonialist systems of thinking and the traditional Indigenous systems of thinking. I propose that the environmental movement and the government makers in Canada should make space for Indigenous peoples to incorporate their traditional knowledge, gathered over thousands of years of experience, into environmental efforts to fight the environmental and ecological crisis in Canada and to take the forefront of the movement. The documentary Traditional Ecological Knowledge (2013), states that the way TEK approaches the teachings of environmentalism to non-Native people, is through relationship and partnership. Because TEK focuses on all aspects of environmentalism, which are mainly relational approaches, Indigenous environmentalists seek to build relationships with people within agencies. In the documentary, they mention that the way to tackle the environmental crisis is by changing people’s relationship towards the land; by changing the way we think of the land as an economic asset into a holistic, respectful, and relational approach to the land, the way we act towards the land will change to fit those values (2013). According to TEK, through relationship and the sharing of knowledge and perspective is the only way to truly change the harmful Western, colonialist ideology embedded in Canadian society (2013). The only way to change the harmful actions towards the environment is done by an internal change in perspective which will lead to a change in actions. Environmental groups and communicators then, need to share Indigenous perspectives and create a space where Indigenous environmentalists can relationally approach the public with a new perspective that can influence individuals into a different way of thinking of the environment and the environmental crisis. Partnership between Indigenous and non-Indigenous peoples is important in the action against the environmental crisis in Canada which is in accordance with TEK’s teachings.
Deterioration of Democracy
The polarization of publics in Western society has been described as an apparent breakup of people into competing tribes based on ethno-cultural identities on the left, and the rise of an emboldened fascist movement on the right. What does this mean for the concepts of public and democracy? Can democracy exist without a coherent public?
Opinion piece by Ana Arciniega
Democracy in Western society has been greatly undermined. Who/what is to blame? There is not a single factor that can explain its deterioration. There has been an increased polarization within society, and someone needs to accept responsibility for the chaos and make a demand for intervention. In the age of social media, no one is willing to listen to the other side and there is no room for discourse; individuals are not able to see outside of their own personal, like-minded groups. The blame, however, cannot only be placed on individuals that partake in this tribal mentality, we have to look at the mediums that allow, and encourage this to happen. Immoral, profit-driven media such as Facebook and Twitter are not concerned with the chaos their platforms are enabling and encouraging; they cast themselves as neutral parties that do not control the content that is shared in their mediums. This needs to be readdressed and these giant companies need to accept some of the blame in the undermining of our democracy. With no one accepting the blame, the deterioration continues, untouched. It is time to stop deflecting problems, claiming to be neutral, and being so opposed to self-criticism within like-minded groups.
The polarization in Western society can be clearly seen in tribal-like groups from the left of the political spectrum to the very far right. The internet has provided a safe space for millions of people to come together with like-minded individuals and has enabled them to become vocal and gain attention from every corner of the world. This has helped many, but there is also a dark side to it; extremist groups, countercultural groups, etc. now have a platform to massively share their ideas with people who would have never been exposed to them had they not landed in their Facebook “recommended groups.” Where political discourse used to be open to everyone and vulnerable to criticism, on the internet, we find a culture that is intolerant of the opposing narrative. In these online tribes, people are shunned if they make comments when they don’t belong to a specific group of people. As seen in Kill All Normies by Angela Nagle, the left, particularly, can be completely closed to discourse if they don’t consider you to fit a certain profile of a minority group, race, gender, etc. A misuse of words or terms can be cause for complete shutdown of conversation. There is no space for improvement or change in this hostile environment. It is not an effective way of achieving any sort of true justice if there is no time for argumentation and mutual sharing of ideas. On the other side, this shutdown and cancelling culture becomes a great weapon for the far-right that can attack the left for imposing on their freedom of speech even when their ideas are clearly controversial. Instead of the left engaging in discourse about difficult topics, they completely shut down, leaving no room for any discourse that could lead to change or conclusions. Discourse is needed for discrediting radical ideas, but when there is no one willing to engage in this discourse, no real improvements can be made. Our society will continue to be as polarized as it is today, and our democracy undermined if everyone is constantly suspicious of the “other.”
As mentioned before, the undermining of our democracy cannot be solely blamed on the individuals that partake in these tribal-like groups. It is important to look at who enables and encourages this type of tribal-like thinking. We have to take a look into the immoral, profit-driven mediums that are the main enablers of this kind of behaviour. Social media conglomerates like Facebook have provided the world something that has never been seen before. It is a platform that has enabled radicalization, polarization, manipulation, and weaponization of political discourse. It has been used by governments and groups to manipulate large amounts of people. By being able to track and address specific, like-minded groups, manipulation of ideas has become a powerful and available tool ready for use for political interference and personal gain. With deep fakes, misinformation, and blatant lies being so easily spreadable online to target groups, Facebook, Twitter, and many other social media platforms need to address this problem instead of deflecting it. They cannot claim to be neutral conveyors of information. These platforms are immersive and encourage strong emotions in their public to keep them engaged; they profit from the sharing of fear and anger across their platforms. They have been carefully crafted to exploit the weakness in people’s psychology to maintain them addicted and glued to their screens, no matter what is being shared and the chaos and destruction this can lead to. People are being manipulated by misinformation and appeal to emotional responses, data is being gathered on individuals for targeting and political interference, and these conglomerates are consciously choosing not to take any blame in the issue. It is time to accept the reality of the deterioration this is causing to our democracy. These companies are deliberately choosing the destruction of societies for economic gain. No one is taking the blame; not tribal-like groups, not social media giants, nor the government. This is an issue that needs to be addressed by every side of Western society. Government intervention and strong regulations of control on these social media platforms are the only way to allow for any real change in the ongoing deterioration and polarization of our society. Democracy is being undermined by problems that had never been seen before. The power and influence of companies like Facebook is unprecedented to anything we have seen in history; it is only logical that our laws and regulations should evolve along with our new reality. The effects of the lack of regulation is clear, and if nothing extreme is done, our democracy will continue to be undermined and society will continue to be as polarized and unwilling to argue with the “other” as it is to this day
Little people.
You are a distinct feeling. A song on my playlist, a quote, an image, a memory. I suddenly become flooded with the distinct feeling. It is a mixed feeling; a confused feeling, an indescribable feeling. You are the pressure in my chest that makes me feel everything all over again; like it never left. You are grief; a deep, all consuming memory. I can’t shake off the pain I felt; somehow I can’t feel happiness without feeling sorrow when I think of you. I can’t see you, speak to you, or think about you without feeling pain. After so long, the same songs make me feel like no time has passed; I feel everything again and I think I can never escape it. Like something permanently broke. It feels like I want you, but I don’t. The memories are so ingrained in me, it’s hard to let go. You left in the cold and it’s cold again. The feeling is so familiar it entices me to want it back. But the flowers in me died of thirst when I was with you.
Shades of pink.
why pink?
When I was in early elementary school it was very important to know the favorite color of the people you met. It was like your favorite color defined you. Pink was a popular color for girls, but I remember many were shamed for liking pink. It was too “girly”, and that was seen in a negative light. I remember many girls changing their favorite color to blue, purple, green, or something else in order to feel acceptable. Of course, no boys would ever dare to say they liked pink; they had to act like they were repulsed by it. This troubled me, so I went to my mom and told her all about it. I remember my mom told me that liking pink is not something to be ashamed of, and she also told me that being “girly” shouldn’t be taken as an insult at all. “There’s nothing wrong with being a girl or liking pink”, she said to me. After that conversation with my mom which stays with me to this day, I felt empowered when I told new people my favorite color. I questioned the little boys and girls who thought it was a bad thing to be girly, and I tried my best to change their perspectives on the matter. Pink, for me, doesn’t define how girly someone is. Pink makes me feel empowered and the closest to myself.
Ana Arciniega 