chicana feminism

To begin with the issues I did understand pertaining to Ann Nietogomez’s article, I can say that she has a sincere concern about her community and her stance on feminism to co-exist. However, I have always known that the term [Chicana] refers to a Mexican-American woman. After looking up a clearer definition (because hers was unclear to ME) I realized that I was correct. What I do not understand is why did she believe or others believe that being Chicana and a feminist were contradictions when it’s just an adjective (in this sense) to describe what a noun is: a feminist that is Chicana? Or is it just over my head and not that deep? I also did not understand why she felt that the remark “if you’re a feminist you have been influenced by Anglos” a sexist remark and not a “stereotypical-racial” remark? Anyway, her article along with Mitsuye Yamada’s article Asian Pacific American Women and Feminism both demonstrate their desire for women of color, particular women of their ethnicity to be heard in regards to feminist issues instead of being blending in or being put on the backburner when it comes to their Anglo-sisters issues/views. Nietogomez urges the Chicano community to force their voices to be heard about issues pertaining specifically to them which involve race, welfare rights, forced sterilization and correct their stance on the double standard about make and female workers. She also holds the entire community accountable and responsible for the upraising of children and not just individuals. This entails that along with the women, men are urged to help rear not only their own but everyone else’s in the community.
I believe her views on culture collectivism are positive and might be exactly what the world is in need of at this moment.