The purpose of this speech seems to be about activists encompassing their whole identities, like women of color, while working with others, like white women, within coalition work. Reagon points out that there is no such thing as just a woman. There are other defining parts of each person, whether it is their sexuality, race, economic status, etc., that they are also each fighting for along with being women. Another main purpose of the piece is to try and get people to realize they won’t necessarily see the outcome of all their work, but that what they are doing is necessary because humans today should care about making lives better for the humans in a hundred years. A good quote from the piece with this message is when Reagon says, “the thing that must survive you is not just the record of your practice, but the principles that are the basis of your practice” (pg.366). The principle of fighting for not just existence, but also ability to work, have housing, safety are all the principles that will continue the work being done and people will have succeeded if they cannot only acknowledge the history of the coalition activists, but also have what they believed in either come to fruition or still be a principle kicking out in the world for it’s permanent place.
This all being said I actually had a fair amount of trouble understanding this piece. I believe Reagon used a lot of these images and examples to get across her point, but I am still confused exactly what the point of the beginning half was. I think it was around the intersectionality of people and how that has been pushed out of activist movements in the past to focus on only one identity or issue. I also think it was referencing a lot about how white women were the main voices in the women’s movement/feminism. Many main women’s rights activist said there was no room for Black or lesbian women’s voices that weren’t only backing “women’s issues”, which in reality were just about white women’s issues. I am still unsure if what I said in this paragraph or the one above are even correct, but these are what I believe to be the purposes of Reagon’s words.