In Amy Sara Carroll’s extensive writing “Accidental Allegories” Meet “The Performative Documentary” explores the idea of a deconstructed Mexican/American border that is irrelevant due to globalization and how that has allowed for the atrocities of Juarez to prevail. Carroll address how due to border towns that perpetuate the “persistence of radicalized and sexualized working Women” which then leads to the idea that a woman’s body is disposable. Carroll addresses her concerns by reviewing a handful of “performative documentaries” as well as Boystown, a catalog of indecently gathered photographs that illustrate how the Border has been constructed beyond tangible supplies. Carroll’s concern when reviewing these works is how women are “accidentally” turned into allegories, documentaries losing the idea that these are real women experiencing real harm and are to be sensationalized for a viewers expense or intrigue. I appreciated Carroll’s commentary concerning Boystown perpetuation of early Orientalism and how Western civilization has long fetishized this idea of “exotic women” that are ready to service the “despot.” It was interesting how she tied both together under the idea of the “reduction of women” that both institutions utilize a similar formula and perpetuate “the privileged representative of (neo)colonial difference.” Although Carroll highlights the of the “transaction” aspect of the brothel and furthermore this highlights the transactions that the border itself receives. Although she settles at the end of the essay that the performative documentary Senorita Extraviada achieves a resemblance of appropriate explanation regarding the story of women in Juarez, Carroll still seems dissatisfied which the representations of women in art that attempts to educate about the murders of Juarez. Although she praises Senorita Extraviada for clarifying “the incoherence of overarching conspiracy theories” that plague Juarez, she still insists there is a risk of “the accident of allegory” which she believes removes women from the context of reality. So, is it even possible to tell the story of Juarez without accidental allegory?
Amy Sara Carroll’s states in her article, “ I grapple with the Border/border as that which maintains the material (notably, economic and sexual) and symbolic (ef)feminization of mexico within transnational formulations of the North American continent as a simultaneously broken and continuous imagery.” (Carroll, 4). Carrolls stylistic use of juxtaposition and capitalization emphasizes the dichotomy of the Border, capital B as the reality, the physical Border, while the “border” references the allegorical delineation. She refers to two projects, one called Boystown, a series of photographs depicted the seedy world of illegal sex workers and the men who solicit their “business” and a documentary film entitled “Senorita Extraviada” to illustrate that a shift has occurred, one which affects gender. When Carroll begins to discuss Wittliff’s Boystown project she says “A powerful shadow text defining the whole of Mexico as a passive whore to be fucked over” which generates a “border=brothel equation” Boystown suggest that this equation operates as a conjunctive paradigm that situates the brothel and the prostitute as indispensable in (re)establishing border shots.” There is something utterly disturbing about how the border has been reference to the female anatomy. These quotes reminded me of something I once read about the history of La Malinche. La Malinche, during the time of the conquest, was a translator to Cortez, and has been framed in history as being a traitor to the Mexican people. Famous Mexican poet, Octavio Paz once wrote in The Labyrinth of Solitude that women exist as “chingadas” or to put it nicely “screwed over” by default. He also goes on to say that mestizos are “hijos de la chingada.” I couldn't help but tie Carrolls border=brothel equation to the history of mexico and the conquest.
Often times we lead pretty perfunctory lives, we go about our business without searching for a deeper meaning as to where we are exactly. Yet, I was drawn to the part of Amy Sara Caroll’s article where she highlighted Biemann’s documentary “Performing the Boarder.” Biemann states, “He is attracted by the border of his country precisely because it signifies the boundary of a larger entity of belonging—the nation” (p 378). Also, alluding to the borders that separate a serial killer’s “selfs.” It also goes on to mention various “metaphors” the border represents, whether acts of sexual violence, economic violence, violence against women. It seems like a melting pot of acts of violence. I think what is even more disheartening is the fact that Juarez has been dubbed this border town of violence--it’s expected to happen here.
Furthermore, I had a conversation with a customer that eats regularly at the restaurant that I work at; he asked me what I was working on and I told him the subject of the reading this week for this class--we got into a discussion about it. He was a college student during the Vietnam war, and he and his friends were active performance artists that conceived of various ways to relay their political and social beliefs at the time. They used reverse psychology. I couldn’t help but relate that to “Boystown” and the subject of “glamorizing” the ugly/wrong. By displaying these compiled pictures of sex-workers and their employer it sends a message. Some may assume they are condoning it, but it may just be a way to instill the fact that they are wrong. That the problems we face, and which should be understood such as, defamation of women, violence against women and transgendered people exists. And, maybe even to a higher decree in these border cities--and nothings done. Just like celebrities coining the term any publicity is good publicity may be applicable to the on-goings in these border towns, even Juarez. But again, I struggle to find the line that we tread on constantly about art, and what the limit is. If we do place these limits does that mean we are censoring artists’ creative license? I guess, what I’m trying to piece together is, how far is too far?
This article goes over the Border-Brothel--Maquiladora Paradigm. It started off by defining the border as to signify sexual difference, continental division of labor, and twenty-first-centry liberalization of the Duboisan color line. Also, as raw material of post-NAFTA Turneian "social dramas." It is interesting how woman and Woman, with a global(ized) capital W was pointed out. AS Ursula Biemann says: "The border is a highly gendered region. Economic power relations along the lines of gender differnece are spelled out in sexual terms." I like the border-brothel paradigm: Orientalism and Latin Americanism. The Colonial Harem (1986) demonstrates how women, enclosed in the fantasy of the harem, become "the metaphorical equivalent of trophies, of war booty." Woman becomes the priviledged representative of (neo) colonial difference. However, I was really dissapointed in the Senorita Extraviada in that this film fell through the cracks in reading as a collection of accidential allegories. For example, it posits that woman is the equivalent of loose (change). In the conclusion it stated that perhaps it proves less urgent to chart out the specifications of the shift per se, of the brothel and maquiladora, as reflective of a turn-of-the-millennium borderlands (re)production of space and place in a performative, inter-American imaginary geography: the border-brothel--maquiladora paradigm.
The reading regards the upper case and lower case border as multifaceted and comprehensively expounds on conjecture as it relates to her estimations. For Carroll, the Border with a capital B denotes sexual difference, division of labor and color line literalization. This implication is deemed most evident in the Border/border’s conversely fixed position of the racialized and sexualized working Woman as the locus. The reoccurrence in visual cultureW oman from the Texas-Mexico border in visual culture is employed for assertions of the shifting relationship of Woman and Border. SHe contrasted prior configurations of Woman and work with current discourses concerning women's work in the region. Her main proposition is the congruencies of a brothel and the border which she deems a paradigm. Carroll argues there is a correspondence with Latin America and Orientalism. She references a photo catalogue and the free trade effect. The importance of the iamges and film being the border shots. She speaks of the reinvention of the oldest profession in the world and how women's role stands for the imbalance of power.The article expells upon specualtions from others as well as the topic of allegorical configurations. I understood the Border/borders are two separate entities, that she is a proponent of the brothel paradigm and that she acknowledges an economic component. I got the effeminization of Mexico. The take home message was that Mexico is being ultilized at a debased level like the sex workers. I have always felt that the status of women reflects society as a whole and that the abuse of women is coupled with partner exploitations. The chosen citation is "Boystown taps into a transnational image bank, cross-referencing the figure of Mexico as Woman—as sex worker, in particular—to illustrate how Woman acts as an important (recurring) coordinate on the cognitive map of transnational U.S.-Mexican relations" My question is the experience in a Mexican brothel different than the American way? Why would men cross a border to have something so readily available in the states? Have the Rico Sauve latin lover notion been glamorized in the selling or marketing of hispanic women? Is BOystown a place where they can mingle and fantasize out in the open so there a greater theatricality or community performance that adds caprice and reality to their experience?
In Amy Sara Carroll's article "Accidental Allegories" meet "Performative Documentary" the author brings to light the problematic phenomena of the anti-woman environment or "social dramas" along the US/Mexican border, she calls the collective factors the Border-Brothel-Maquiladora paradigm. She holds this region of the North American continent as having both Borders and borders, one being conceptual and the other geographic. This Border region of the US/Mexican nations she says is a key coordinate example of "racialed and sexualized working woman". The author explains how this region is experiencing the persistence of raicialized and sexualized women and the subtle shifting configurations of the Woman and Border. The Border being the concept of social practices and norms which deem the women dispensable in turn allowing for such acts as the continuous murderous violence inflicted on the Women of Juarez. Using "Boystown" "Senorita Extraviada" and many other works and essays she states that internationally this brothel and exotic cultural region has deemed Mexico as below the waistline (Mexico below, and the US above)and "whore to be fucked". This is a problem because this mentality or unchallenged view of the region further creates a haven for the objectification and abuse of women like in Juarez. Ultimately Carroll points to several reason's for this anti woman sentiment and phenomena south of the border. The shifting turn of the millennium (re)production of space and place in a performative, inter-American imaginary geography which she terms the border-brothel-maquiladora paradigm. Or in other words including social economic and political factors and the shift in gender views this border region in a way churns out women just like the maquiladora churns out goods except the women in a way are more dispensable and cheaper. What do you think the author meant by the idea of the border-brothel-maquiladora paradigm?
Amy Sara Carroll’s article takes a peculiar look at the deconstruction of the Mexican/U.S. border in relation to gender and sexuality. Carroll states, “the border-brothel paradigm structures the establishment and maintenance of the Boystown images as an archive just as it enables the parallel repeat performance of Mexico as an effeminate, penetrable Other” (367). Like many of the victims of Juarez, Carroll brings to focus the ghastly idea of women being treated as indispensable objects for sport. It’s also interesting to note how Carroll refers to women “as a moving target” in these photographs and how as a collection they operate as “a model of penetration” (365).
Carroll says, Referring to the brothel and the maquiladora, “That both now exist simultaneously tightens the noose of economic readings of Woman and Border’s allegorical intimacy in a transnational imaginary, suggesting an ongoing paradigm shift that increases the allegorical exchange value of Woman and Border as icons” (374). It is no coincidence the maquiladora has been erected close to the United States border. This Capitalist influence has evolved the brothel into a well oiled and, while on the surface, legitimate factory of women. The economic value of the woman is decreased while the allegorical value is increased to “(re)articulate the border as a free trade zone” (367). Can this be entirely the United States fault though? Or did modernization only intensify these forms of patriarchy?
In Amy Sara Carroll's article entitled "Accidental Allegories" Meet "The Performative Documentary" she extensively discusses the issues in Juarez and in other border towns in Mexico. Carroll compares the sociopolitical and and economic violence happening in these towns to the fragile woman in Juarez, and prostitutes in other border towns. She states: "Woman and the Border as codependent allegorical figurations, where allegory as a genre and practice becomes both the prime suspect and eyewitness of symbolic enabling violations in turn-of-the-millennium remappings of the continen" (Carroll, 20). She addresses the sensitive issues of the woman in Juarez and their so-called promiscuity being the blame for many of the issues in the town. The ides of a woman being indispensable is not only happening in Juarez, but it comes to light in the photos of "Boystown" were we see American men over the border in Mexican brothels. There's this continued idea of what the right approach of exposing these issue are. Who's fault is it really... I feel there are a combination of issues here, but most importantly the issues of women being sexualized within these issues is problematic.
**Found my file! Here is my response to the reading! Sorry for the late post :(
In Amy Sara Carroll’s “ ‘Accidental Allegories’ Meet ‘The Performative Documentary: ‘Boystown,’ ‘Señorita Extraviada,’ and the Border-Brothel → Maquiladora Paradigm”, the author compares two artistic works and their relations to the city of Juarez. According to Carroll, “Boystown” is the “ ‘accidental allegories’ of an archive of photographs of sex workers and their patrons” (Carroll 359). If the city of Juarez was known more for its feminicides, what does the sex workers of the brothels have in relation towards the victims of Juarez? Based off on last week’s readings, many girls and women of Juarez disappeared and were found murdered on the outskirts of the city; the reason for these happenings may have been due to the politics involved within Juarez along with its political statement towards the female population. However, “Boystown” does not go into depth in regards to the feminicides within Juarez but depicts the “accidental allegories” of the sex workers as objects and not as human beings. Bill Wittliff purchased the negatives of the photographs after convincing workers with a sum of money and donated the images to the Texas State University. After selecting certain images, the university held an exhibition in 2000 “which generated a firestorm of criticism” (362). Although it is understandable that the intentions of Wittliff may have been for the purpose of academics, but the photographs themselves tend to exploit the women in terms of not having their permission to publicly display the images.
On the other hand, “Señorita Extraviada” provides a visual documentation of those who have been directly affected by the feminicides of Juarez: “ ‘Señorita Extraviada’ achieves a synesthetic, collage-like quality, splicing the details of the women’s deaths, photographs of the missing and the deceased, and information about the ongoing investigations into family members’ testimonies” (384). It is possible that the documentary may have not provided the best impact of the devastation occurring in Juarez, yet in comparison to “Boystown”, the film provides a better connection to the women of Juarez along with its victims.
In Amy Sara Carroll’s extensive writing “Accidental Allegories” Meet “The Performative Documentary” explores the idea of a deconstructed Mexican/American border that is irrelevant due to globalization and how that has allowed for the atrocities of Juarez to prevail. Carroll address how due to border towns that perpetuate the “persistence of radicalized and sexualized working Women” which then leads to the idea that a woman’s body is disposable. Carroll addresses her concerns by reviewing a handful of “performative documentaries” as well as Boystown, a catalog of indecently gathered photographs that illustrate how the Border has been constructed beyond tangible supplies. Carroll’s concern when reviewing these works is how women are “accidentally” turned into allegories, documentaries losing the idea that these are real women experiencing real harm and are to be sensationalized for a viewers expense or intrigue.
ReplyDeleteI appreciated Carroll’s commentary concerning Boystown perpetuation of early Orientalism and how Western civilization has long fetishized this idea of “exotic women” that are ready to service the “despot.” It was interesting how she tied both together under the idea of the “reduction of women” that both institutions utilize a similar formula and perpetuate “the privileged representative of (neo)colonial difference.” Although Carroll highlights the of the “transaction” aspect of the brothel and furthermore this highlights the transactions that the border itself receives.
Although she settles at the end of the essay that the performative documentary Senorita Extraviada achieves a resemblance of appropriate explanation regarding the story of women in Juarez, Carroll still seems dissatisfied which the representations of women in art that attempts to educate about the murders of Juarez. Although she praises Senorita Extraviada for clarifying “the incoherence of overarching conspiracy theories” that plague Juarez, she still insists there is a risk of “the accident of allegory” which she believes removes women from the context of reality. So, is it even possible to tell the story of Juarez without accidental allegory?
Amy Sara Carroll’s states in her article, “ I grapple with the Border/border as that which maintains the material (notably, economic and sexual) and symbolic (ef)feminization of mexico within transnational formulations of the North American continent as a simultaneously broken and continuous imagery.” (Carroll, 4). Carrolls stylistic use of juxtaposition and capitalization emphasizes the dichotomy of the Border, capital B as the reality, the physical Border, while the “border” references the allegorical delineation. She refers to two projects, one called Boystown, a series of photographs depicted the seedy world of illegal sex workers and the men who solicit their “business” and a documentary film entitled “Senorita Extraviada” to illustrate that a shift has occurred, one which affects gender.
ReplyDeleteWhen Carroll begins to discuss Wittliff’s Boystown project she says “A powerful shadow text defining the whole of Mexico as a passive whore to be fucked over” which generates a “border=brothel equation” Boystown suggest that this equation operates as a conjunctive paradigm that situates the brothel and the prostitute as indispensable in (re)establishing border shots.” There is something utterly disturbing about how the border has been reference to the female anatomy. These quotes reminded me of something I once read about the history of La Malinche. La Malinche, during the time of the conquest, was a translator to Cortez, and has been framed in history as being a traitor to the Mexican people. Famous Mexican poet, Octavio Paz once wrote in The Labyrinth of Solitude that women exist as “chingadas” or to put it nicely “screwed over” by default. He also goes on to say that mestizos are “hijos de la chingada.” I couldn't help but tie Carrolls border=brothel equation to the history of mexico and the conquest.
Often times we lead pretty perfunctory lives, we go about our business without searching for a deeper meaning as to where we are exactly. Yet, I was drawn to the part of Amy Sara Caroll’s article where she highlighted Biemann’s documentary “Performing the Boarder.” Biemann states, “He is attracted by the border of his country precisely because it signifies the boundary of a larger entity of belonging—the nation” (p 378). Also, alluding to the borders that separate a serial killer’s “selfs.” It also goes on to mention various “metaphors” the border represents, whether acts of sexual violence, economic violence, violence against women. It seems like a melting pot of acts of violence. I think what is even more disheartening is the fact that Juarez has been dubbed this border town of violence--it’s expected to happen here.
ReplyDeleteFurthermore, I had a conversation with a customer that eats regularly at the restaurant that I work at; he asked me what I was working on and I told him the subject of the reading this week for this class--we got into a discussion about it. He was a college student during the Vietnam war, and he and his friends were active performance artists that conceived of various ways to relay their political and social beliefs at the time. They used reverse psychology. I couldn’t help but relate that to “Boystown” and the subject of “glamorizing” the ugly/wrong. By displaying these compiled pictures of sex-workers and their employer it sends a message. Some may assume they are condoning it, but it may just be a way to instill the fact that they are wrong. That the problems we face, and which should be understood such as, defamation of women, violence against women and transgendered people exists. And, maybe even to a higher decree in these border cities--and nothings done. Just like celebrities coining the term any publicity is good publicity may be applicable to the on-goings in these border towns, even Juarez. But again, I struggle to find the line that we tread on constantly about art, and what the limit is. If we do place these limits does that mean we are censoring artists’ creative license? I guess, what I’m trying to piece together is, how far is too far?
This article goes over the Border-Brothel--Maquiladora Paradigm. It started off by defining the border as to signify sexual difference, continental division of labor, and twenty-first-centry liberalization of the Duboisan color line. Also, as raw material of post-NAFTA Turneian "social dramas." It is interesting how woman and Woman, with a global(ized) capital W was pointed out. AS Ursula Biemann says: "The border is a highly gendered region. Economic power relations along the lines of gender differnece are spelled out in sexual terms." I like the border-brothel paradigm: Orientalism and Latin Americanism. The Colonial Harem (1986) demonstrates how women, enclosed in the fantasy of the harem, become "the metaphorical equivalent of trophies, of war booty." Woman becomes the priviledged representative of (neo) colonial difference. However, I was really dissapointed in the Senorita Extraviada in that this film fell through the cracks in reading as a collection of accidential allegories. For example, it posits that woman is the equivalent of loose (change). In the conclusion it stated that perhaps it proves less urgent to chart out the specifications of the shift per se, of the brothel and maquiladora, as reflective of a turn-of-the-millennium borderlands (re)production of space and place in a performative, inter-American imaginary geography: the border-brothel--maquiladora paradigm.
ReplyDeleteWho is the "Other?" Is it the Women?
The reading regards the upper case and lower case border as multifaceted and comprehensively expounds on conjecture as it relates to her estimations. For Carroll, the Border with a capital B denotes sexual difference, division of labor and color line literalization. This implication is deemed most evident in the Border/border’s conversely fixed position of the racialized and sexualized working Woman as the locus. The reoccurrence in visual cultureW oman from the Texas-Mexico border in visual culture is employed for assertions of the shifting relationship of Woman and Border. SHe contrasted prior configurations of Woman and work with current discourses concerning women's work in the region. Her main proposition is the congruencies of a brothel and the border which she deems a paradigm. Carroll argues there is a correspondence with Latin America and Orientalism. She references a photo catalogue and the free trade effect. The importance of the iamges and film being the border shots. She speaks of the reinvention of the oldest profession in the world and how women's role stands for the imbalance of power.The article expells upon specualtions from others as well as the topic of allegorical configurations.
ReplyDeleteI understood the Border/borders are two separate entities, that she is a proponent of the brothel paradigm and that she acknowledges an economic component. I got the effeminization of Mexico. The take home message was that Mexico is being ultilized at a debased level like the sex workers. I have always felt that the status of women reflects society as a whole and that the abuse of women is coupled with partner exploitations.
The chosen citation is "Boystown taps into a transnational image bank, cross-referencing
the figure of Mexico as Woman—as sex worker, in particular—to
illustrate how Woman acts as an important (recurring) coordinate on the
cognitive map of transnational U.S.-Mexican relations"
My question is the experience in a Mexican brothel different than the American way? Why would men cross a border to have something so readily available in the states? Have the Rico Sauve latin lover notion been glamorized in the selling or marketing of hispanic women? Is BOystown a place where they can mingle and fantasize out in the open so there a greater theatricality or community performance that adds caprice and reality to their experience?
In Amy Sara Carroll's article "Accidental Allegories" meet "Performative Documentary" the author brings to light the problematic phenomena of the anti-woman environment or "social dramas" along the US/Mexican border, she calls the collective factors the Border-Brothel-Maquiladora paradigm. She holds this region of the North American continent as having both Borders and borders, one being conceptual and the other geographic. This Border region of the US/Mexican nations she says is a key coordinate example of "racialed and sexualized working woman".
ReplyDeleteThe author explains how this region is experiencing the persistence of raicialized and sexualized women and the subtle shifting configurations of the Woman and Border. The Border being the concept of social practices and norms which deem the women dispensable in turn allowing for such acts as the continuous murderous violence inflicted on the Women of Juarez. Using "Boystown" "Senorita Extraviada" and many other works and essays she states that internationally this brothel and exotic cultural region has deemed Mexico as below the waistline (Mexico below, and the US above)and "whore to be fucked". This is a problem because this mentality or unchallenged view of the region further creates a haven for the objectification and abuse of women like in Juarez.
Ultimately Carroll points to several reason's for this anti woman sentiment and phenomena south of the border. The shifting turn of the millennium (re)production of space and place in a performative, inter-American imaginary geography which she terms the border-brothel-maquiladora paradigm. Or in other words including social economic and political factors and the shift in gender views this border region in a way churns out women just like the maquiladora churns out goods except the women in a way are more dispensable and cheaper.
What do you think the author meant by the idea of the border-brothel-maquiladora paradigm?
Amy Sara Carroll’s article takes a peculiar look at the deconstruction of the Mexican/U.S. border in relation to gender and sexuality. Carroll states, “the border-brothel paradigm structures the establishment and maintenance of the Boystown images as an archive just as it enables the parallel repeat performance of Mexico as an effeminate, penetrable Other” (367). Like many of the victims of Juarez, Carroll brings to focus the ghastly idea of women being treated as indispensable objects for sport. It’s also interesting to note how Carroll refers to women “as a moving target” in these photographs and how as a collection they operate as “a model of penetration” (365).
ReplyDeleteCarroll says, Referring to the brothel and the maquiladora, “That both now exist simultaneously tightens the noose of economic readings of Woman and Border’s allegorical intimacy in a transnational imaginary, suggesting an ongoing paradigm shift that increases the allegorical exchange value of Woman and Border as icons” (374). It is no coincidence the maquiladora has been erected close to the United States border. This Capitalist influence has evolved the brothel into a well oiled and, while on the surface, legitimate factory of women. The economic value of the woman is decreased while the allegorical value is increased to “(re)articulate the border as a free trade zone” (367). Can this be entirely the United States fault though? Or did modernization only intensify these forms of patriarchy?
In Amy Sara Carroll's article entitled "Accidental Allegories" Meet "The Performative Documentary" she extensively discusses the issues in Juarez and in other border towns in Mexico. Carroll compares the sociopolitical and and economic violence happening in these towns to the fragile woman in Juarez, and prostitutes in other border towns. She states: "Woman and the Border as codependent allegorical figurations, where allegory as a genre and practice becomes both the prime suspect and eyewitness of symbolic enabling violations in turn-of-the-millennium remappings of the continen" (Carroll, 20). She addresses the sensitive issues of the woman in Juarez and their so-called promiscuity being the blame for many of the issues in the town. The ides of a woman being indispensable is not only happening in Juarez, but it comes to light in the photos of "Boystown" were we see American men over the border in Mexican brothels.
ReplyDeleteThere's this continued idea of what the right approach of exposing these issue are. Who's fault is it really... I feel there are a combination of issues here, but most importantly the issues of women being sexualized within these issues is problematic.
**Found my file! Here is my response to the reading! Sorry for the late post :(
ReplyDeleteIn Amy Sara Carroll’s “ ‘Accidental Allegories’ Meet ‘The Performative Documentary: ‘Boystown,’ ‘Señorita Extraviada,’ and the Border-Brothel → Maquiladora Paradigm”, the author compares two artistic works and their relations to the city of Juarez. According to Carroll, “Boystown” is the “ ‘accidental allegories’ of an archive of photographs of sex workers and their patrons” (Carroll 359). If the city of Juarez was known more for its feminicides, what does the sex workers of the brothels have in relation towards the victims of Juarez? Based off on last week’s readings, many girls and women of Juarez disappeared and were found murdered on the outskirts of the city; the reason for these happenings may have been due to the politics involved within Juarez along with its political statement towards the female population. However, “Boystown” does not go into depth in regards to the feminicides within Juarez but depicts the “accidental allegories” of the sex workers as objects and not as human beings. Bill Wittliff purchased the negatives of the photographs after convincing workers with a sum of money and donated the images to the Texas State University. After selecting certain images, the university held an exhibition in 2000 “which generated a firestorm of criticism” (362). Although it is understandable that the intentions of Wittliff may have been for the purpose of academics, but the photographs themselves tend to exploit the women in terms of not having their permission to publicly display the images.
On the other hand, “Señorita Extraviada” provides a visual documentation of those who have been directly affected by the feminicides of Juarez: “ ‘Señorita Extraviada’ achieves a synesthetic, collage-like quality, splicing the details of the women’s deaths, photographs of the missing and the deceased, and information about the ongoing investigations into family members’ testimonies” (384). It is possible that the documentary may have not provided the best impact of the devastation occurring in Juarez, yet in comparison to “Boystown”, the film provides a better connection to the women of Juarez along with its victims.