In the 1960s, the Mexican government launched various initiatives at both the local and national levels aimed at enhancing the economic well-being of indigenous populations. A significant concern addressed by these initiatives was the presence of indigenous women selling goods on the streets of Mexico City, a practice restricted to designated marketplaces. Moreover, these women often faced dangers, including abuse, and were afforded very little protection in these public spaces (Lazcano Arce, 2005).
During the 1970s, Guadalupe Rivera, daughter of renowned painter Diego Rivera and a senator at that time, took charge of the "Programación y Estudios Económicos del Departamento del Distrito Federal" (Department of the Federal District for Programming and Economic Studies, DDF). In her capacity, Rivera initiated a sociological investigation into the challenges faced by migrant populations. This research highlighted the necessity of providing alternative opportunities to street vending for women, leading to the establishment of the Mazahua-Otomí Indigenous Training Centers — which is where the first commercialized production of Mexican ragdolls started (Lazcano Arce, 2005).
Most Mazahua and Otomí women were already incredibly skilled in embroidery, which they demonstrated to Senator Rivera. Rivera’s main focus then became to use the Center as an initiative to help women capitalize on these skills, commercialize their products, and be remunerated financially, thus obviating the need for street vending (Lazcano Arce, 2005).
The Training Centers aimed to offer comprehensive support, including artisanal training, stable and profitable work opportunities, nutritional support for women and their children, literacy education, healthcare services, and urban integration training. Initially, the program accommodated between 300 to 485 indigenous women, with participation eventually increasing to 800 (Lazcano Arce, 2005).
However, the DDF program was not without its drawbacks. The artisans were not provided with employment contracts, which meant they lacked social benefits and services. They received meagre earnings and had no involvement in the sales or distribution of their products, preventing them from selling independently. Despite these challenges, the program did offer a safer alternative to the precarious conditions of street vending (Lazcano Arce, 2005).