Euskal gatazka osteko garaiotan ondorioak aztertzen eta, batzuetan, arazten ari dira eragile, erakunde eta abarrak. Baina badira oraindik ere astun sentitzen diren isiltasunak. Hutsunerik nabarmenena andreen bizipenena da. Ez daude ez kontakizun ofizialetan, ez hegemonikoetan eta kostata herrigintzatik sortutakoetan. Horren egiturazko arrazoia aztertuko dugu artikulu honetan. Eta ikusi zerk eragin dien gatazkan inplikatuta senide edo lagunak izan dituzten andreei isilik mantentzen. Batzuetan, instituzioek —erakunde zein epai bideek— behartuta mututu dira; beste batzuetan, gizarteak edota familiak hala aginduta. Baina euren burua eta ingurukoena babesteko ere isildu dira. Hau da, inposizioa bezainbat erresistentzia bide izan da isiltasuna, eta hori interpretatzeko, beste era batera entzutea besterik ez dago.
In these times of post-Basque conflict, agents, institutions, etc., are studying and sometimes debugging the consequences. But there are still silences that feel heavy. The most evident white space is that of women's experiences. They are not in official, hegemonic, or costly reports, nor coming from the construction of other popular movements. In this article we will analyze the structural reason for this.
And see what has influenced the maintenance of silence of women who have had family or friends involved in the conflict. Sometimes they have been mutated by institutions, others by social or family imperative.
But they have also kept quiet to protect themselves and others. In other words, both imposition and resistance have made silence possible, and to interpret it we only have to listen differently.
© 2001-2024 Fundación Dialnet · Todos los derechos reservados