You know, I was surprised an apologist would have the nerve to even try supporting that crap on my site. I’m not a feminist blogger, but I know right from wrong.
I’ve made it clear mysogyny is not acceptable under any circumstances on P6. And I’m prepared to get a lot uglier with my insistance.
I recall that amongst certain White feminists on a board that no longer exists, it was quite the popular sport to try and end an argument in which a Black feminist was in danger of getting the upper hand by announcing, “Oh, you’re not even really Black, are you ?” Or, “You’re really a man, aren’t you ?” Because, I suppose, if you were uppity enough to question a White woman’s expertise on everything, including race, you were obviously a liar or a sock puppet.
I have a special affinity for this post, being a bisexual Feminist Witch. ( a Feminist Witch is a particular type of Wiccan called a Dianic Witch) The white feminists are embarassed by me, I’m not ethnic enough (somehow Native American doesn’t count) for some groups, and the men generally hate me because I don’t back down. Ever. I’ll admit being wrong if I am, but if you can’t back it up, don’t start.
The interfaith groups and the religious freedom groups - most of which are run by liberal Christians and Jews, don’t want to be associated with us for fear of that “Satanic” label. It never occurs to them that not standing up against that bigotry IS bigotry.
I also recently got chastised by a Pagan woman because I had a post about a Satanist, which I want nothing to do with on a personal level, but support their rights not to be victimized by hate crimes because Goddess forbid some fanatic think my pentacle means anything other than air, earth, water, fire and spirit.
How uncomfortable did reading this make you? What does that tell you about you?
Oops - I wanted to add that I’m not trying to take anything away from the focus Pseudo-Adrienne was making about Black political movements. I’m commiserating more than anything else. It’s amazing how backwards some Progressives can be.
All religion makes me uncomfortable. Still, you can learn quite a lot of interesting and useful things if you’re prepared to dispense with your “right to constant comfort.” That’s definitely been true for me vis-a-vis race issues.
What does that tell you about you?
That no religion at all is better for me than any religion at all. There are enough other things for me to argue with myself and others about, and there are only so many hours in the day.
In learning about these issues faced by black feminists (largely from the Sisters Talk blog… I love Genia!) in the past and present, I was of course appalled.
This is what has made it easier for me to understand, if not approve of, the African-American community turning its back on the nascent gay rights movement, claiming the situations of THIS group of marginalized, second-class Americans are somehow different from their own. As with the powerful African-American men who ignored the feminists of their day because they refused to follow tradition, many leaders in the Af-Am community have called outright for the imposition of legislation that hurts the gay community– because, they claim, the “tradition” is “one man and one woman.”
I suppose the expression “Plus ca change, plus c’est la meme chose” holds true as ever. The more things change…
A sad reminder of the ‘my rights, not yours’ mentality.
Morgaine: Not at all until the two questions at the end, at which point my hackles immediately raised.
As for what it tells me about myself, it tells me that I have no particular problem with wiccans/pagans, feminists, people who are native american, bisexuals, women or opinionated people. Until someone questions that, or I perceive them questioning that, upon no factual basis, at which point I become annoyed.
That’s odd, since those two questions weren’t posed as judgment statements. She asked how uncomfortable her comment made us, and what it told us about ourselves.
For me the answers were: not at all and I’m kinda indifferent to religion.
Sheelzebub: But I see them as judgement statements, because of previous experience I have had with such questions. So what it says about me is that I get defensive about having attitudes assigned to me by others, and am sensitive to their appearance.
They were genuine questions. I wanted to know how people would perceive the post. I’m not assuming that people would be uncomfortable, I am asking if they are and how they feel about their reaction, whatever it is. I’ve learned the hard way lately that you never assume that a “Progressive” is on your side. I also wanted to see if the anti-religion bias came out. I run into that a lot on the Left.
There are progressives that think hating all religions equally is not bias; there are progressives that are fine with Buddhists and Muslims but think Pagans are too weird; there are gays who think bisexuals are lying to themselves; there are feminists that are embarassed by Witches, others by lesbians; men and women that assume all Pagans are kooks; Pagans that are embarassed that I’m calling attention to the lack of respect we’re often given.
Not being taken seriously is a form of oppression. When anything that comes out of your mouth is automatically suspect because of who you are, you are already a step below everyone around you.
I’m not judging anyone. I did hope to provoke some conversation. I’d hoped maybe someone would say that they never thought about it that way, or that they didn’t think it bothered them but it did. I knew a lot of people would have no reaction at all. I was a little afraid of the negative reaction that I was challenging them, but I decided to leave the wording as it was and see what the response was, because no challenge was intended.
I’m just trying to get a better understanding of where we stand in the Progressive community, because in other venues I’m having trouble getting people to work together. No offense, just curiosity.
There are progressives that think hating all religions equally is not bias.
Morgaine, if you need me to accept some religion before you can take me seriously, I guess we can’t work together. If you want to consider my lack of use for any religion at all as a crippling bias to common political ground, feel free. I don’t know why it should be, but whatever.
I don’t know if I really “hate all religions equally” so much as I wearied of them and put them away. “Hate” implies a much stronger emotional state than I’m prepared to claim for myself. There’s not all that much I can do about what you want to pin on me, other than express a puzzlement that’s going to ripen soon into full-blown irritation if you keep up with this particular tack.
If you can’t work with an atheist, I’m pretty sure that I can find other progressives who aren’t so picky about the spiritual life (or lack of same) of the woman holding the other end of the anti-war banner. Either that, or I can forsake the label of “progressive,” as there are days when I find it every bit as meaningless in dialouge as I personally find god (or gods) meaningless.
I wasn’t talking specifically about you. Why are you taking it personally? I don’t care if you accept “some religion” but I do care if the mention of religion automatically makes you stop listening.
I don’t care what you worship, whether you worship, whatever. I care if you look down on me for worshipping. Big difference there. I’ve been a supporter of rights for atheists/Brights just as consistently as I am for any minority religion. (Yeah, I know , it’s lack of religion, but it still defines some people as a group.)
Why would you say I couldn’t work with you? I never said any such thing.
Well Morgaine I guess the confusion for me comes in your expecting any reaction at all. Around here, being a bi-poly-pagan feminist is at least as common as being a coffee-drinking feminist or a pet-owning feminist. I know it’s common in other locales, also. Goddess religions are part of the approved feminist “lifestyle package” that has been latched onto for marketing purposes as well. So I don’t get what the big deal is supposed to be.
I do think it’s telling that this sidetracking is coming up in a discussion about black feminism, however. My observation has been that a woman of color can scarcely speak three words in a feminist space without a white woman jumping in to say “hey I am oppressed too because I’m a pagan/one two hundredth Native American on my dad’s side/bisexual/into anime!” It’s *most* telling.
Lilith: I am not black, nor have I lived in a predominately black community since I was ten, and so have little personal experience to bring to the table on that matter. What I know about it is academic and covered perfectly well above in the main post.
Morgaine’s posts are a perfectly relevant example of how so called progressives discriminate against those their movement should cover. Noone seems to be arguing about the main post, and Morgaine posed a direct question.
I find it interesting how you belittle Morgaine’s experience of discrimination because it is from her being native american, wiccan, etc, instead of her being a black feminist. You seem to be making her point for her, not to mention the point of the original post.
Kerlyssa: “I find it interesting how you belittle Morgaine’s experience of discrimination because it is from her being native american, wiccan, etc, instead of her being a black feminist. You seem to be making her point for her, not to mention the point of the original post.”
I don’t think that Lilith’s attention. (Lilith, if I’m wrong feel free to correct me.) I believe that her point- that conversations about the experience of black feminists tend to get derailed- is completely accurate. While I completely respect Morgaine’s first post, I also find it interesting how this thread has become a reaction to Morgaine’s post and only indirectly, P-A’s. I do NOT think Morgaine is intentionally doing this, but I cannot tell you how many conversations I have been in with other feminists where when the struggles of black feminists are brought up, people say, “well I have issues because I’m (insert your race/ethnicity/religion). Not that discussing the struggles other minority groups face is a bad thing, but when the conversation is about black feminism, it can get really annoying.
Now whether P-A meant for her original thread to be only about some of the issues black feminists face, is up for individual interpretation. I believe that it was and that Morgaine offered her experiences to generate discussion. However, I do wish, that more commenters had decided to respond to the issues black feminists face which P-A brought up as well as Morgaine’s post.
alsis39: “I recall that amongst certain White feminists on a board that no longer exists, it was quite the popular sport to try and end an argument in which a Black feminist was in danger of getting the upper hand by announcing, “Oh, you’re not even really Black, are you ?” Or, “You’re really a man, aren’t you ?” Because, I suppose, if you were uppity enough to question a White woman’s expertise on everything, including race, you were obviously a liar or a sock puppet.”
Blecch. >:
—————————————–
Oooh, yes, the good old days….oh, and remember if you challenged racism especially white privilage as exercised by white female feminists, then you are anti-feminist, and really a man. Women equalling white and race equaling male and all that…
***roll eyes smiley, where are you***
———————————–
Lilith: “I do think it’s telling that this sidetracking is coming up in a discussion about black feminism, however. My observation has been that a woman of color can scarcely speak three words in a feminist space without a white woman jumping in to say “hey I am oppressed too because I’m a pagan/one two hundredth Native American on my dad’s side/bisexual/into anime!” It’s *most* telling. ”
———————————————-
Indeed it is. Which also goes back to what alsis wrote in her original post.
One of the major problems with feminism is that when White women are confronted with racial privilage that they enjoy at the expense of women of color during any discussion of issues that do not pertain directly to their own oppression, they pull out the oppression card as a defense mechanism and close their ears.
I thought the site was a joke at first, but apparently it’s not. I thought within it, some good issues were raised that would make good discussion but it was hard to see them through all the blatent misogyny on that site.
I’m an atheist and highly involved in a local atheist student activisim group called SOMA, the Society of Open-Minded Atheists/Agnostics. We spend a lot of our time fighting for the rights and privileges of people of all faiths and creeds — including the Wiccan/Pagan groups. My own twin sister is a pagan, while my parents are fundamentalist Christians. I take both their religions equally seriously (that is, not at all) while fighting vehemently for the laws to reflect an equal ability for them to practice whatever silly rituals they feel get them in touch with the universe. Great. And you’re right, there is often a great deal of resistance and even fear regarding the Pagan/Wiccan communities, which must be addressed and fought against — but don’t you dare suggest that we’re against you because of your faith.
When you asked the questions you did, I thought “it doesn’t bother me at all.” That fact tells me only a tiny bit about myself. Now the issue has come up of you trying to sound magnanimous while effectively accusing anyone who won’t call you goddess of being a bigot. Now, after years of standing up for people of your faith, recognizing them as fellow minorities, I have become angry. I highly ***HIGHLY*** recommend that you apologize for your tone here and try to come down on the level of your fellow human beings, and then you can try again to ask us to treat you as an equal.
“I’m just trying to get a better understanding of where we stand in the Progressive community, because in other venues I’m having trouble getting people to work together. No offense, just curiosity.”
Might I suggest that it’s because you sound like you’re talking down your nose at us, while meanwhile insisting that you’re being absolutely respectful… which is more insulting. I’m hardly surprised that Alsis reacted to you in that way. I had the same thought but kept it to myself until now. Your questions were valid and even wise to add to this discussion– but you have REALLY got to work on learning how to deal with others, online. I’ve remained fairly quiet on this up to this point… but I’ll go ahead and take the lumps as the “jerk” so this can be moved along.
This blog entry makes an excellent point about how the groups don’t work together and often betray other sub-groups in order to make gains for the majority within their minority (forgetting the entire purpose of having a minority-rights group). We should be discussing that, not worrying about whether we’re taking ourselves seriously enough.
The above is more a general observation, and one that seems to be unfortunately universal on the internet and IRL. You can take it to the bank that a discussion of Black feminism will get sidetracked.
Makes me embarassed to call myself a feminist some times, how the heiarchy of feminism so closely matches that of patriarchy, yet we’re willing to (rightfully) slam patriarchy for it, but not criticize ourselves.
As far as religion, to each his or her own, imo. Respect people’s right to practice the religion of their choice. Respect people’s right to abstain from it. And don’t promote your religion as the one true religion. Feminists often do that to each other, even though considering how long and how often, we’ve had the religious right try to force its religious beliefs about gender roles on us, this should come easier to us than it does. And as for needing religion to discuss feminism or progressive activisim or politics, that’s not true either.
Makes me ashamed to be called a progressive some times. But like alsis, I think that term is getting awfully diluted in meaning.
Hold up—I don’t think within the context of this particular discussion that considering how Pagans and Witches are demonized by “progressives” as well as the public at large is necessarily a sidetrack. If you hold your nose and wade through the incredible amount of misogyny at that site, you’ll see that the author of the site keeps on pounding on that one note “lesbian-feminist-witchcraft” theme. There’s a reason he uses it. Not every visitor to the site who might be a potential “regular” is all that worked up about white folks in general, so simple bigotry isn’t going to draw them in. Nor is every visitor going to be all bent-out-of-shape about women, either. But throw in those three magic words, “lesbian”, “feminist” and “witch”, and you’ll grab they’re attention. Disliking and disregarding, if not outright hating those particular groups, is more universally condoned or tolerated.
And black women have to face that sort of shit all the time; being accused of not having the “proper” loyalties. Years ago, I bought a book written by Victoria King, an IBEW sister out of New York’s Local 3 (who has since left the trade to become a civil rights attorney); in it she discussed the barriers black women face when entering the trade—not only from white males on the job, but from white females and from within the black community. She was a single mother determined to provide a good living for herself and her son, but she received a helluva lotta harsh judgement and accusations against her “femininity” and/or sexuality. Reading interviews of black tradeswomen over the years, I found that most talked about the alienation they experienced on becoming tradeswomen; being targeted from within the black community for transgressing the boundaries of who and what a “proper” black woman is. In my trade, there are very few women (one percent!), but even fewer black women. As an ally, it behooves me to pay attention to this, and be vocal about my support—’cuz too damn many people are vocal with their hostility. And silence might as well equal assent—it has the same effect.
Divide and conquer, all day long—that’s the name of the game. Portray feminism as “lesbian feminist witchcraft”, and guess what? You’ll have fewer women identifying as feminists. And this makes a difference politically. Morgaine didn’t derail the thread; witches were burned at the stake. So were queers. No small wonder that even some “progressives” don’t want to be allied with them (lavender menace, anyone?). The man who runs that twisted site is invoking the power of the stake when he uses those turns of phrase. The same stake his ancestors were tied to. It’s a stake that’ll be driven through all our hearts if we don’t start making crucial alliances, and not just as individuals, but as a MOVEMENT.
Unlike, of course, what’s going on at the AFL-CIO convention, but don’t get me started….
Yeah, I’ve heard the “divide and conquer” argument used by all different kinds of people in all different kinds of ways. I’m not surprised it has shown up here.
Syndey’s post, though earlier than mine, wasn’t up when I responded. I agree with what she wrote. It’s an observation that’s been made and explained by her and others. And the response has been, how progressives divide and conquer.
I got that the words, “lesbian” “feminist” “witch” were used on the Web site, and they’ve been thrown around a lot by antifeminists(Pat Robertson, anyone?), no doubt as has been said to attract people to the cause and away from feminism, which goes parallel with the site’s main argument that feminism is a White women’s movement that has stolen Black women away from fighting for civil rights. Ironic, because within feminism, Black women are often criticized unfairly by White women for not being 24/7 focused on women’s issues(as defined by White women, though)
Homophobia, anti-feminism and anti-paganism is a problem in all racial groups as well as in both genders, as well.
But, the thrust of the site seems to be sexist attitudes toward Black women and Black women and feminism(which is not given any recognition on this site separate from other types of feminism movements including those which are racist towards Black women).
That’s just my opinion. I think that it goes a lot towards what bell hooks and other feminists have said, as P-A made in her original post.
I’m not trying to invalidate Morgaine. I’m just expressing an opinion, which may be different from most here.
Rafdem: “But, the thrust of the site seems to be sexist attitudes toward Black women and Black women and feminism(which is not given any recognition on this site separate from other types of feminism movements including those which are racist towards Black women).”
Rafdem, I agree with your analysis. I came to the conclusion that P-A’s original thread was about black feminism in large part because of the nature of P6’s website. He wasn’t talking about lesbian feminists or pagan feminists. He was defending black women.
La Lubu: “Morgaine didn’t derail the thread; witches were burned at the stake. So were queers. No small wonder that even some “progressives” don’t want to be allied with them (lavender menace, anyone?). The man who runs that twisted site is invoking the power of the stake when he uses those turns of phrase.”
What you’re saying about witches and queers is completely true. However, the offensive website in question is talking about witches and queers in the context of black women. Blacktown’s main focus is on black women. And the comment thread about this article on P6 focuses on the misogynistic behavior being displayed toward black women. So while I’m not saying that Morgaine’s post is not accurate, I do feel that it was somewhat off topic.
Sydney, point taken. But look at the comment thread at P6’s joint. That’s another example of what I was thinking of when I said that dislike of those groups is more universally tolerated. If the dude at Blacktown had put up all those insults about black women sans references to feminism, lesbians, or witchcraft, he’d'a had a helluva lot fewer black men willing to give him the benefit of the doubt. I’ve seen similar, but more soft-pedaled crapola at “men’s rights” sites, and without fail they also reference the impact that the “feminist gay agenda” has had on black women.
Another damned-if-you, damned-if-you-don’t double dose for black women. And of course, a helluva lotta white men, and even women, can be counted on to try and “understand” this twisted mug’s “point of view”. I’ve seen it in the so-called “progressive” community—whitefolks who wouldn’t tolerate that level of misogyny toward white women tolerating it towards black women, as long as the invective came from a black man.
Thanks, U-A. The trouble with the internet is that sometimes you really can pick up on someone’s tone, and sometimes you can’t. :o
Anyway, closer to the original topic: The thing that puzzles me the most about Blacktown-net’s defenders is this mysterious link-up between a sort of women’s fashion glossy-materialism and this concept of “lesbian feminists.” I scarcely read any women’s magazines, Black or White, but I used to read a few back when I worked the “floater”/reception job at a law firm. The co-worker who did most of my training was Black, so she –like most of the White women– brought her mags in to read at the reception desk when things were slow. So I started reading some of them, too. I can recall one article that talked about the works of women like June Jordan and Alice Walker. But I don’t recall any of the relationship-oriented articles as even acknowledging the existence of lesbians in the Black community.
I’m completely clueless as to how the aesthetic espoused in fashion magazines got fixed in the site author’s eyes as a “lesbian” ideal. I know that there’s more than one ideal of beauty in White lesbian circles, so I’ll go out on a limb and guess that there’s more than one in Black lesbian circles as well.
Prometheus 6’s exchanges with the site’s defenders were interesting, but after reading them, I’m more confused than I was before about Blacktown. (I believe bean linked to it once, long ago, on another board we were both on.)
Sounds to me like its capitalism that the author is really angry at, or he would be if he weren’t so in love with his own misogyny.
To those of you who felt this was off-topic, I apologize. Also, if anyone misunderstood my “tone” I’m sorry. I don’t look down my nose at anyone, but people do sometimes not understand the way I write. My language tends to be a little formal and some people misinterpret that as snottiness, or something like that.
Now to this post:
Well Morgaine I guess the confusion for me comes in your expecting any reaction at all. Around here, being a bi-poly-pagan feminist is at least as common as being a coffee-drinking feminist or a pet-owning feminist. I know it’s common in other locales, also. Goddess religions are part of the approved feminist “lifestyle package” that has been latched onto for marketing purposes as well. So I don’t get what the big deal is supposed to be.
I do think it’s telling that this sidetracking is coming up in a discussion about black feminism, however. My observation has been that a woman of color can scarcely speak three words in a feminist space without a white woman jumping in to say “hey I am oppressed too because I’m a pagan/one two hundredth Native American on my dad’s side/bisexual/into anime!” It’s *most* telling.
1) I didn’t say it was a big deal; I asked if it was, because in many places, no matter how liberal, it is.
2)”Goddess religions are part of the approved feminist “lifestyle package” that has been latched onto for marketing purposes as well.”
No, it isn’t. It’s marginalized by mainstream feminists, and we are treated as an embarassment.
3) I’m Cherokee, not white, but thank you for making my point about progressives sometimes being bigots. I don’t know where the Anime crack adds in, but I’ll infer it’s part of your stereotype for Pagan women. Very enlightened. Glad it’s not a “big deal”.
4) I identify more with black women than white because I’ve been through similar, though not as intense, prejudice. When I worked for the government, I tended to get lumped in with other minorities, but had no protection through affirmative action because I was in the “other” category and there was an Asian woman in my agency within 2 grades of me, so that’s all they needed to promote. White women were given preference over Native Americans, Pacific Islanders, and Asians.
Again, if I distracted from the main point, I apologize for assuming that a lesbian feminist Witch was allowed to comment on a post including the words “lesbian feminist Witchcraft.” How silly of me.
Thanks very much to those of you who were supportive. It is most appreciated. Bright Blessings.
Whoo- I missed a lot when I left work. Well, let me try and jump back in this.
La Lubu: “If the dude at Blacktown had put up all those insults about black women sans references to feminism, lesbians, or witchcraft, he’d'a had a helluva lot fewer black men willing to give him the benefit of the doubt.”
You might be right about this. I’d like to believe that intelligent, respectful black males like P6 would step up and still say something, but not all black men would. Hell, not all men of any race would step up and defend misogynistic attitudes towards women of their same race/ethnicity. Hence women’s continual problem with patriarchy.
Morgaine:” Again, if I distracted from the main point, I apologize for assuming that a lesbian feminist Witch was allowed to comment on a post including the words “lesbian feminist Witchcraft.” How silly of me.”
No one is saying that you can’t comment on your experiences as a lesbian feminist Witch. I understand what you were trying to say. Comment #6 makes it clear that you weren’t trying to distract from black political issues, but rather express shared feelings. However your post didn’t really address the issues black feminists face, but rather the issues you’ve faced. In that sense, your post was a distraction. This doesn’t mean it wasn’t a valuable distraction, but it was a distraction nonetheless. That’s all I’m trying to say.
Morgaine - Are you kidding? If I was Cherokee I’d be furious. You have every right to feel that you have been intentionally smashed by the establishment– from the Daws Act to the Trail of Tears, we know that it was absolutely brutal for your people. I happen to agree that we owe all the remaining native peoples of this continent an apology (verbal, legal/property, and financial) big enough that it is almost inconceivable in size, to me. And I will do everything in my power to support people who support the rights of every type of American… not just European Colonials.
But when you make statements that amount to “we are terribly under-supported” without first checking to see who your allies might be (many more of us might be present than you suspect), you potentially alienate those very people who would most back you up. Thanks for recognizing that it’s hard to communicate tone online, and not expecting others to see speech exactly as it was intended.
Syd - I definitely agree that males (and females!) of all races should speak out against misogyny among all races. There is never a time or an excuse for it. Only by standing up and supporting those who speak out will more be encouraged to do so. Many guys are misogynistic largely because they see that as part of being a ’successful’ male, aka “guy who gets the honeys”, and they imitate that way of thinking/communicating. Reward the guys who stand up next you, with the attention, and it will allow the *real* nice guys blogged about recently to fight for the fairnesses and equalities that benefit everyone.
Hell, not all men of any race would step up and defend misogynistic attitudes towards women of their same race/ethnicity. Hence women’s continual problem with patriarchy.
Damn straight! And this is part and parcel of the cultural script we’re all indoctrinated into at an early age; that women are the moral gatekeepers of society. That if society is taking a fall in any arena, that somehow, someway, a woman can be blamed for it. We are alternately depicted as being “more moral” and “less moral” than men, depending on the issue and direction the speaker wants it. The end goal is always “putting us in our place”.
That book I mentioned, “Manhandled: Black Females” by Victoria King really delved into the double-standards black women face from all corners. It was originally written to be an answer book (you know, like an answer song?) to Shahrazad Ali’s “The Blackman’s Guide to Understanding the Blackwoman”; but as she wrote it she just kept going from there, diving into her experiences as a single mother, as a tradeswoman, as a black woman. I constantly refer anyone interested in the subject of women in the trades to it; even though it’s a decade and a half old, it’s still right on point. And it’s very telling to me that it has never been mentioned in the IBEW journal, nor has it ever been mentioned at any of the IBEW Women’s Conferences that I’m aware of. Another bright and shining example of insuring the invisibility of black women, and making sure that any time that issues affecting black women diverge from those of white women, that critical silencing takes place.
La Lubu: I haven’t read the book you mention, but I’m writing it down as a book to buy. I agree with you: women of all races are expected by society to act as beacons of morality. For some reason, our society has accepted the idea that women are somehow more capable of burdening moral responsibility than men- except when it come to issues concerning personal autonomy and ownership of course. At that point, men just simply know better (i.e. abortion, female sexuality). But besides this, women should be pure beacons of light and chastity- just like the virgin Mary.
So after re-reading parts of blacktown as well as the comment thread at P6, I just want to highlight some interesting comments and give my observations:
Via the P6 comment thread:
“…..I’m finding myself hard pressed to consider this either psychotic or truly vicious considering the really hardcore misogyny surfacing with increasing frequency from across the autistic spectrum. I mean, really dough, who is it - demographically - that’s labelling boys ADD/ADHD or “oppositional defiant” and channelling them respectively toward ritalin and the criminal justice system?”
Umm, who does he think, demographically, is labeling boys- black women? Not that the above comment makes much sense, but it shows how quickly male misogyny is being justified by blacktown’s readers. Based on the above statement, the commenter is attributing misogynistic behavior to women because ADD/ADHD (may) over-diagnosed? Then it appears he is blaming the over-diagnosis on women (surprise). And he is saying that black women are channeling these boys into the criminal justice system. So because of all this, any misogyny women face is okay?
Honestly, I don’t even know wtf the commenter is trying to say.
Then there is the blacktown intro page. The page states “blacktown.net- its time for a men’s movement. What ever happened to the black power movement”. And it goes on to list what I can only guess are goals/accomplishments. 3 of the 5 reasons directly target black women and feminism by labeling them as reasons why black men have failed or ‘need to wake up’. My favorite is “Exposing how black feminists have failed to lead the black race anyplace”. What he meant was “black men, not black race”. Leaving aside the veracity of such a statement, the author of Blacktown appears to be trying to blame the “failure” of the black power movement on black feminists. Because when black women engage in feminist activities- demanding that they be acknowledged & heard, not be referred to as bitch or a ho, have full control over their sexuality and body choices, and be able to live independently from a man- they are destroying the black community. The primary goal of black feminists should’ve been to empower men.
Websites like Blacktown are dangerous because it makes misogynistic behaviors ‘okay’ by using racial conflict. What I mean is this- they encourage African-Americans to unite together under the guise of unity and social progress. Then when disturbing attitudes, such as misogyny are pointed out, the leaders (who often are male) tell you that “it’s part of black culture/tradition” or that “misogyny is a term whitefolks use”. So when people try to bring it up, they are ridiculed or looked at as y betraying black culture. As one woman told me after I reamed into the tendency of black young adult males to create and support negative images of black women- “why are you dogging black men? White people already do so much of that. We need to stick together”. Blacktown is essentially doing the same thing: brushing aside feminism and blaming the leadership of black women in the name of advancing the black community (i.e. black men).
Unapologetic atheist: “Many guys are misogynistic largely because they see that as part of being a ’successful’ male, aka “guy who gets the honeys”, and they imitate that way of thinking/communicating. Reward the guys who stand up next you, with the attention, and it will allow the *real* nice guys blogged about recently to fight for the fairnesses and equalities that benefit everyone.”
I agree with you as to why guys are misogynistic. But can we agree that using the term “reward” seems wrong? I mean, I will treat a truly un-misogynistic guy with respect and he may even become a friend. But I am not going to reward him for doing what he should do. I know that’s not what you meant, but I think that even using the word “reward” implies privilege to me. As if a man who isn’t showered with praise from women for NOT being a misogynistic prick has a right to say, “well this bites” and then be a misogynistic prick. I will treat a truly nice guy well, but I don’t feel that my attention should be what he is aiming for- it should be equality.
I’m sorry but I just made the mistake of going to the second page of blacktown.net and I had to post something. Apparently I missed the blacktown.net mission statement. For all of those who had more sense than I did and didn’t go to the next page, allow me to share:
Blacktown.net: Teaching the black man how to claim, tame, train, and dominate the black woman to make her his queen once again! …BECAUSE IT IS INDEED WOMEN’S PRIMORDIAL NATURE TO BE ATTRACTED TO AND REPRODUCE WITH STRONG MEN!!!
The page then goes on to list reasons for claiming, taming, training, and dominating black women. I really wish I didn’t click on the next page button. But since I did…….
Blacktown.net presents itself as an extreme site. I can read this off to my friends and they would be like “that’s crazy, I would never do that”. Yet the stereotypes and ideas that Blacktown uses to justify their existence are more pervasive than people realize. An issue I struggle against as a black feminist is (IMO) an antiquated sense of chivalry, a desire to protect and provide for women because if they can’t they aren’t “real men”. I do not exist to re-enforce your masculinity. If I want to provide for myself I will. And if we have an arrangement where I am at home and you are in the workplace, I’m not doing it because I know my place or because you’ve tamed me. I’m doing it because it’s our arrangement.
Another issue I find myself arguing about it actually on the Blacktown’s website: the notion that black women are supposed to help/heal black men by silently supporting them and being a steadfast rock no matter what stupid ass thing they may do. Blacktown takes it further and basically says a women’s place is in the kitchen, but I’m not even going to go there. Just because I’m a female and I support my male partner doesn’t mean that my support is unconditional. Black men are not children and should not be treated as such. If I think you’re making a stupid decision, I’m going to tell you. I’m certainly not going to say nothing, let you fuck up, and pat your back in a comforting fashion and tell you its just a boo-boo. If this makes me an uppity bitch, fine. But the idea that women have the god ordained “right” or “ability” to put up with intolerable amounts of bullshit is unacceptable.
There is just so much more I can say, but I need to take a timeout to breathe.
Sydney, I remember reading about the pressure put on black women to “not dog on black men” that existed in the seventies. The fact that it continues is more than a little depressing. Even more depressing that so many white feminists don’t seem to get the fact that they often behave in alienating and diminishing ways to black women. I’ve been involved in way too many feminist discussions about reproductive rights where I’ve mentioned Depo-Provera and all of the other white women in the room have looked at me like I’ve just sprouted a second head, then shrugged and said some variation of “let’s get back to the important stuff”. Other than calling other white feminists on their shit when they do stuff like that I’m not quite sure what to do about it. I admit that when I first started to get involved in feminist circles I was genuinely shocked by the amount of racism that exists and the way non-white women are marginalised (in the UK it’s often our Indian and Pakistani sisters who bear the brunt of this treatment).
Also. I second the desire not to use the word or even the concept “reward” when we talk about positively reinforcing non-misogynistic behaviour in men. This whole idea sounds to me too similar to the kind of pressure for women to “reward” male good behaviour with sexual favours that’s happened in every leftist movement in history (talk to any woman who was part of the hippy generation for some good examples).
Also, the whole “women need to uncritically support everything their man does” thing is a crock of shit no matter which race the person spouting it belongs to. My answer to this has always been - I’m your girlfriend, not your mommy.
Sydney - you actually made my point for me, thanks. One of the big reasons guys like that exist at blacktown.net is because they are so often “rewarded” with the attention of beautiful women (sorry, I can’t think of a better way to phrase that). I’ve not now nor have I ever suggested that men deserve to be rewarded just for not being jerks, but when the jerks are VISIBLY getting more attention from females while the more respectful guys are VISIBLY not… the paradigm being encouraged by blacktown.net there with that misogynisic bullsh… then the “guys in the middle” who are just trying to figure out how to not sit at home every Saturday night are going to emulate the jerks, and not the nicer guys. There are plenty of other threads discussing this particular issue, but look at the message being promoted to the young men in our sports-competition society that they must be “manlier” — then, if women who understand the problem are not actively seeking to help, then I don’t know how the problem is going to correct itself.
In other words, me telling another guy he shouldn’t use the same misogynistic slurs like the Neandertal with the gorgeous girlfriend just used isn’t all that effective when I haven’t been on a date in weeks that didn’t involve listening to someone else’s “gorgeous girlfriend” telling me about the latest abuse from her Neandertal, and assuring me that I’m a “really good friend.”
We *need* to address the misogynistic training being encouraged by groups like this… but I think that trying to develop a society that encourages mutual respect AS a sexual attraction factor instead of better-at-competition as the sexual attraction factor. To at least try to illustrate this… I’m in really good shape, work out all the time, and am fairly conversational in person — assuming an equal number of social interactions (parties), how many dates do you suppose I had last year, compared to a member of our school’s basketball team?
Based on the above statement, the commenter is attributing misogynistic behavior to women because ADD/ADHD (may) over-diagnosed? Then it appears he is blaming the over-diagnosis on women (surprise). And he is saying that black women are channeling these boys into the criminal justice system. So because of all this, any misogyny women face is okay?
My observation vis-a-vis the ADD/ADHD business is that the blacktown writer believes that the majority of Social Workers (perhaps teachers, too) looking after young Black men are Black women. Ergo, it’s the fault of Black women that the young men are getting diagnosed with these problems.
For the love of pete, please nobody think I’m saying men should be rewarded just for being nice. That’s retarded… we’re not babies, and I don’t realy appreciate the suggestion that we’re just looking for mommies. I’m saying that we need to find a way to stop rewarding men for NOT being nice, thereby effectively punishing men who are. We need to look for what the messages being pushed upon men are– feminists are so quick to talk about the negative messages being forced upon young, impressionable women on “how to be an appealing woman and get boys” but then sneer at men as “asking for a reward” when we try to point out that we’re deluged with “if you are a ‘bad boy’ you will get way more girls” message. If we cannot address the pressures on both groups equally then we cannot progress. That is what I am saying here.
UnApologetic Atheist, please back up a second and stop getting defensive. I did not mean that YOU were saying “I’m a nice guy, now give me a cookie”, I meant that that idea has indeed been promoted before by many leftist movements and women are sick to death of it.
As far as I can see the “if you’re a bad boy/frat boy/asshole you’ll get the girls” message is primarily coming from other men, not from women. Your argument is with the culture, not with me or Syd. And I think that most feminists are already very much in the business of not rewarding men for being assholes. If you read the contributions that Sydney and I have both made to many other threads on Alas that should be pretty clear. I avoid frat boys like they were carrying Ebola. Like I said, your anger is aimed at the wrong target.
“Also, the whole “women need to uncritically support everything their man does” thing is a crock of shit no matter which race the person spouting it belongs to. My answer to this has always been - I’m your girlfriend, not your mommy. ”
—————————————-
A bit of a rueful LOL here, b/c I’ve been here more than I can count.
Great posts. I’ve usually been cautious when discussing sexism involving Black men towards Black women with Black women, whether as friends, or women that I work with because it’s not the same as White women having that conversation with other White women, as it is having it as a White woman, with Black women, I’ve found. In the past, I think I’ve stepped over a line that I shouldn’t have in some discussions and learned from them. Not that I haven’t seen sexism by Black men towards women that I did recognize, I did when I was involved in local organizations here though there’s probably a lot I missed b/c my own experiences with sexism left me with a different manifest in which to recognize it.
In these organizations, like most political movements, it seems that men do the leading, speaking, women do the “support” work, keep in the background, but I think that’s a universal state of things among all men/women in progressive movements to a great extent and that’s one major reason why the different waves of feminism arose, especially the second wave.
I know several Black women who are preachers, one in evangelist, one in Seventh Day Adventist and both faced sexism among men and women in their congregations and other ministers to varying degrees. Especially, the Seventh Day Adventist minister(though I know a White female minister from the same religious discipline who also faced immense sexism) I have had interesting discussions on that sexism they faced in becoming religous leaders.
A lot of Christian sects as a whole have been slow to accept women into the ministry too. So in some ways, maybe a shared experience.
It’s not difficult for White women to put themselves in the position of criticizing Black men and bringing our race and our racism into it, and not just gender alone(the two gender and race are so intertwined, they’re difficult to separate)sometimes unintentionally but often intentionally, then often Black women will defend Black men which of course White women will be terribly offended by this “desertion”. But Black women’s histories and realities with them are different than White women’s histories and realities with White men and we all bring individual experiences into discussions as well. And we got to respect that, shut off our knee-jerk tendacies to try to define other women’s experiences, or else we’ve got nothing except body parts to unite us.
Often, Black women just bring in perspectives of being women(not even mentioning men directly) that are different than those of White women, and are unfairly accused of siding with Black men against White women.
Then White women get defensive b/c we think too often that the experiences faced by White women are identical to those faced by the entire gender of women and that it’s one group of women’s right to decide what every women’s experiences of sexism are
White women, FTMP, do not share an oppression with White men, like Black women and men do. We share racial privilage. So White women can be oppressed by White men, personally, individually and as a gender. Black men can oppress Black women, but the two also experience racism in similiar and different ways, from Whites. So I’m not sure that getting together with other White women and saying, how sexist White men are, is the same as talking with a Black woman or women and making comments about Black men. In my experience, it hasn’t been.
So I listen more or try to to what women say about their experiences with sexism within the same race, FTMP. If it comes up at work, i.e. domestic violence, I’ll ask questions from that standpoint. Among close friends, these discussions are more give and take(for want of better words)among each other, sometimes through experiences that we do share as women and then, sometimes separate experiences with sexism. But I’m still more of a listener.
brit feminist: depo prevara, yeah, had that discussion and other issues of choice(which for most if not all women, is really much larger than just abortion access). Also, issues with the criminal justice system, i.e. the Central Park rape at one unnamed location. Oooh-yeah!
You’re right, Brit, I should not have directed that at anyone specific… it’s just really frustrating to know a problem exists, and watch feminists discuss society’s harmful messages to women… and then dismiss or call men “immature/selfish” in some way when they try to say that they too may experience the same types of pressures to behave in a manner that is harmful to real gender equality. It certainly is a societal problem, and I’d try to figure out a solution to it… but right now, I have to stop blogging a second to pay more attention to the Enzyte commercial playing on my TV right now (seriously!) and learn about how “Bob has a big new swing of confidence!”
Note that the Enzyte commercial is essentially a conversation between men. The women are basically just props, as they usually are when men are in the business of enforcing masculine gender roles upon each other.
RadFem - my college feminism seminars got into some nasty arguments about reproductive rights between women of different races. I’ve never quite understood why it’s so difficult for so many white feminists to grasp the idea that some other women feel that they are being denied the right to have kids rather than having childbearing forced upon them. White privilege rears its ugly head.
I see, “look how much happier Bob’s wife is now that he’s got a huge, manly penis” and “oooooooh his friend’s wife looks very sad because he’s not manly enough.” Over and over and over. Of COURSE the women in the commercial are essentially props/caricatures, the commerical is not advertising to them. In a recent commercial for Orbitz I saw, the only men in the commercial were props/caricatures: one Australian athlete-stud who wanted to borrow her towels, and one obnoxious “ugly guy” from work who interrupted her to tell her about donuts in the breakroom. The commercial was clearly advertising to working women with money to spend on vacations, and so it targeted them as commercials are all designed to do.
To call the Enzyte commercial a “conversation among men, ignoring the women” is, to me, dangerously dismissive of the men involved. Just as you would ask me not to dismiss a woman under attack, I ask you not to do the same of us in return.
I’m not sure I see your point. My point was that the whole penis size anxiety thing seems to be more about competition between men than about what women want in a man. When they start advertising to men based on their cunnilingus skills then I’ll buy the idea that it’s about pleasing or competing for women. My point was that it’s usually men who police the gender “appropriateness” of other men’s behaviour, persona etc. I’m not sure that there’s anything women can do to help stop men from attacking each other for not meeting some arbitary standard of manliness. The conversation/competition is designed in such a way as to exclude us. What is it that you think women can do about this?
You could notice that the Enzyte commercial is primarily victimizing men by putting them into a destructive competition with one another - instead of focusing on how women are being oppressed by the ad because they aren’t central to it.
Robert, I didn’t claim that women were being victimized by the ad. The ad is neutral as far as women are concerned - we’re not the intended audience. My point was that women are completely irrelevant in the context of the ad except as a sort of prize for winning the competition for who has the biggest penis. The competition is amongst the men.
UnApologetic Atheist, I wonder what that commercial would look like? Trying to do it in such a way as to get the point across without annoying the censors would be quite a challenge.
Damm, I missed a lot. I’m just going to go through and try to respond to each post.
BritGirlSF: “Sydney, I remember reading about the pressure put on black women to “not dog on black men” that existed in the seventies. The fact that it continues is more than a little depressing. Even more depressing that so many white feminists don’t seem to get the fact that they often behave in alienating and diminishing ways to black women.”
You know, sometimes I wonder if one reason why white feminists have a hard time seeing how they alienate black women (and other female racial minorities) is because they believe that as a minority themselves they are less vulnerable to certain behaviors. Meaning that they can’t act in sexist ways because they’re female. Do you think this is the case?
Unapologetic Atheist: “We *need* to address the misogynistic training being encouraged by groups like this… but I think that trying to develop a society that encourages mutual respect AS a sexual attraction factor instead of better-at-competition as the sexual attraction factor.”
I agree- this would be the best way of going about things. And I totally get this is what you were trying to say. I just wanted to point out how easy it is to fall into language of the patriarchy. But I firmly agree with Britgirl- your argument is with the culture that rewards asshole behavior. I definitely think that women do need to reject that behavior, and feminists already do. The problem is that men don’t do the same for their peers.
Alsis39: “My observation vis-a-vis the ADD/ADHD business is that the blacktown writer believes that the majority of Social Workers (perhaps teachers, too) looking after young Black men are Black women. Ergo, it’s the fault of Black women that the young men are getting diagnosed with these problems.”
If this is what the blacktown writer thought, it just further demonstrates that he has no clue. While I don’t know the exact stats, the logical part of me says this is probably just all wrong. Can social workers give official diagnoses of ADD/ADHD? And what is the causal link between being diagnosed with ADD/ADHD and the criminal justice system?
Rafdem: I love your analysis, I truly do. I think you’ve highlighted some of the major issues that occur when black women and white women talk about feminism and sexist behavior. At least you have in my experience. I think you make an important point when you say:
“It’s not difficult for White women to put themselves in the position of criticizing Black men and bringing our race and our racism into it, and not just gender alone(the two gender and race are so intertwined, they’re difficult to separate)sometimes unintentionally but often intentionally, then often Black women will defend Black men which of course White women will be terribly offended by this “desertion”.”
I personally have trouble with this because I get pissed off at the sexism that black men can display all the time. But when I hear a white female feminist criticize black men, I automatically start questioning their possible prejudices because its been my experience that most of the time when people bitch about the way black guys are, a significant lack of actual interaction with black men has actually taken place. When that’s the case, I have to wonder how much of what they’re saying is internalized racist beliefs and how much is genuine feminist concern. And if I call out the person in question, all of a sudden I’m “condoning” or “defending” black male misogyny when nothing could be further from the truth. So I think your observation is a particularly great one.
Brit - I think “the competition is amongst the men” is a bit weak, with all due respect. It’s not like guys ever have the idea that we can declare ourselves the victor amongst men, and declare unto the room, “I am the greatest man here, now whar’s mah wummun?!” The end message here is the same as my message above: “If you do ____ (in this case, use our product), women will choose you.” The competition is among the men– to be the womens’ choice. What I’m really trying to do here is emphasize that the social messages ARE what are destructive, and that I think it’s important to not forget the boys in this destruction while our Gender Studies classes busily examine the ways in which this culture is destructive to the girls. Last night, I quipped to one of my close friends, a Womens’ Studies major at KU, who was visiting and reading the conversation over my shoulder, “I so desperately want to be a feminist, but sometimes I feel like too much of an egalitarian.” She, of course, said that ideally, the two words mean the same thing.
As for the commercial, I never expect a commercial to really show respect for humans of any kind, regardless of what it’s peddling– the whole point of the media campaigns is to saturate us with messages that we’re not good enough, but WILL be if we buy the product. My favorite line from an AdBusters magazine I read once: “You are too fat. Your teeth are not white enough. Your eyeballs are not white enough.”
I thought it was a pretty funny joke, until later that day I saw a Visine commercial (Pfizer, Inc).
Wow, talk about thread drift. We’ve gone from misogyny directed at black women to the perennial “nice guy” (why can’t I get the hot chicks by tipping my feminist hat?) argument, and on to erections?
BritGirlSF and Radfem, I also find it maddening that too many white feminists can’t seem to get that reproductive rights has more aspects to it for women of color than just the right to have an abortion. And I think that dynamic boils down to a combination of racism and classism. I can’t really think of any modern-day mainstream, majority white feminist groups that aren’t also operating from a distinctly middle-class perspective. Working class women of any color find it hard to relate to these groups, if indeed we would ever have access to them to begin with.
And I think it’s also demonstrative of how whiteness functions. How whiteness as a state of mind (yes, state of mind; race is a biological fiction and a social fact) is reified and reinforced. White women seem to be especially discouraged from identifying with black women. Look at the reproductive rights issue; a lot of the white women who aren’t “getting it” had mothers or grandmothers who faced those issues that black/Latina/Native/Asian women are bringing up—like sterilization, access to health care for themselves and their children, etc. But whiteness washed over that history, y’know? I’ve seen too many white “progressives” over the years turn a blind eye to misogyny that is particularly directed at black women—including domestic violence. There’s this idea that “it’s a black thing; we wouldn’t understand”. No small wonder that black women who are already transgressing boundaries of femininity, identity or politics aren’t lining up at the door to ally with white feminist (or hell, other progressive) groups whose history is one of dismissal and abandonment. And I don’t just mean to “pick on” mainstream feminism, either…..it’s just that I grew up in the seventies, when a lot of shit was happening, and I expected so much more. I have that sense of betrayal, too.
I mean, shit. I have yet to see the disproportionate amount of union jobs lost by black women last year framed as a demonstration of a race issue, not just a labor issue, anywhere except in media operated specifically by and for people of color! Whatever happened to “an injury to one is an injury to all?!”
You know, sometimes I wonder if one reason why white feminists have a hard time seeing how they alienate black women (and other female racial minorities) is because they believe that as a minority themselves they are less vulnerable to certain behaviors. Meaning that they can’t act in sexist ways because they’re female. Do you think this is the case?
Boom! Yes, I think that’s the case. Internalized sexism is a problem; I also think that many white feminists expect a “pass” from black and other women of color on inadvertant racism, because hey—-”at least I’m on your side!” And it’s a classic white learned behavior to deal with inadvertant offense by ignoring it, instead of exposing it.
OK, starting to lose my patience with this.
“What I’m really trying to do here is emphasize that the social messages ARE what are destructive, and that I think it’s important to not forget the boys in this destruction while our Gender Studies classes busily examine the ways in which this culture is destructive to the girls. Last night, I quipped to one of my close friends, a Womens’ Studies major at KU, who was visiting and reading the conversation over my shoulder, “I so desperately want to be a feminist, but sometimes I feel like too much of an egalitarian.” She, of course, said that ideally, the two words mean the same thing.”
In the commercial you were talking about, theoretically the men are competing for the women. Fine. As I have already pointed out, it’s not feminists who’re imposing the “you must have a huge penis to be a desireable man” frame. Guys are imposing it on each other. Every women I know will tell you that there really is such a thing as TOO BIG. Yes, I get why the commercial sucks. What I don’t get is why you don’t grasp that in this particular case of gender role enforcement the people doing the enforcing are other men. It’s not like there’s some group of women sitting there with rulers saying “you must be this long to ride this ride”.
So blame the culture by all means. The culture sucks, for everyone. But why the refusal to admit that it isn’t women who’re putting on the pressure in this scenario?
Also, the last couple of sentences of your statement are veering dangerously close to exactly the kind of “I’m a man with a boo-boo, Mommy make it better” stuff we were talking about upthread. Can’t you find a way to make your point without little anti-feminist dig (ie feminists are just so un-egalitarian).
“You know, sometimes I wonder if one reason why white feminists have a hard time seeing how they alienate black women (and other female racial minorities) is because they believe that as a minority themselves they are less vulnerable to certain behaviors. Meaning that they can’t act in sexist ways because they’re female. Do you think this is the case?”
Syd, I don’t think it’s anything as conscious as that, I think it’s pretty much pure cluelessness and white privilege. It just never occurs to them that their experiences do not represent the sum total of reality for all women.
You know, sometimes I wonder if one reason why white feminists have a hard time seeing how they alienate black women (and other female racial minorities) is because they believe that as a minority themselves they are less vulnerable to certain behaviors. Meaning that they can’t act in sexist ways because they’re female. Do you think this is the case?
Syd, I don’t think it’s anything as conscious as that, I think it’s pretty much pure cluelessness and white privilege. It just never occurs to them that their experiences do not represent the sum total of reality for all women.
Actually, I think you are both right. I do think that because white women, as women, are an oppressed minority they don’t see how they could oppress others, particularly because they aren’t aware of their own privileges as whites. Although, I would preface that too by saying that some white feminists do consciously deny ANY oppressive behaviour because they think gender trumps all, which is beyond dumbarse.
I’ll also say that a lot of white feminists’ critiques of masculinity is emphatically bound up with racial perceptions.
I say this because white masculinity is a world that white feminists are daily emmersed in (as not only a ‘white’ community emmersion, but as a society default) that to a certain extent that masculinity becomes seen as a expression of general patriarchy. Hence, it is not seen as a racialised gender performance, but simply as a gendered performance.
Black masculinity, on the other hand, is approached by white feminists AS a racialised gender performance (or, a gendered racial performance, depending on how you are viewing these two intersections) . In that unconscious approach then as deracialising the white masculinity and racialising the black masculinity that they cannot see as white feminists, that is SO obvious to feminists of colour, that the ‘defenses’ of black men made by black feminists is characterised as ‘defending’ black male sexism.
I think a step white feminists MUST make in addressing this, is to see white masculinity as a racial gender performance, which I would argue more oftenn than not is not done.
July 22nd, 2005 at 5:16 pm
Have I mentioned lately that P6 rocks my world?
God, he just shreds these morons and their apologists in his comments section.
This comment was written by Sheelzebub.Report this comment to the moderators
July 22nd, 2005 at 5:17 pm
ddin’t you read the NY Times? Bisexuals don’t exist.
This comment was written by Josh Jasper.Report this comment to the moderators
July 22nd, 2005 at 6:25 pm
You know, I was surprised an apologist would have the nerve to even try supporting that crap on my site. I’m not a feminist blogger, but I know right from wrong.
I’ve made it clear mysogyny is not acceptable under any circumstances on P6. And I’m prepared to get a lot uglier with my insistance.
This comment was written by P6.Report this comment to the moderators
July 22nd, 2005 at 6:39 pm
I recall that amongst certain White feminists on a board that no longer exists, it was quite the popular sport to try and end an argument in which a Black feminist was in danger of getting the upper hand by announcing, “Oh, you’re not even really Black, are you ?” Or, “You’re really a man, aren’t you ?” Because, I suppose, if you were uppity enough to question a White woman’s expertise on everything, including race, you were obviously a liar or a sock puppet.
Blecch. >:
This comment was written by alsis39.Report this comment to the moderators
July 22nd, 2005 at 11:05 pm
I have a special affinity for this post, being a bisexual Feminist Witch. ( a Feminist Witch is a particular type of Wiccan called a Dianic Witch) The white feminists are embarassed by me, I’m not ethnic enough (somehow Native American doesn’t count) for some groups, and the men generally hate me because I don’t back down. Ever. I’ll admit being wrong if I am, but if you can’t back it up, don’t start.
The interfaith groups and the religious freedom groups - most of which are run by liberal Christians and Jews, don’t want to be associated with us for fear of that “Satanic” label. It never occurs to them that not standing up against that bigotry IS bigotry.
I also recently got chastised by a Pagan woman because I had a post about a Satanist, which I want nothing to do with on a personal level, but support their rights not to be victimized by hate crimes because Goddess forbid some fanatic think my pentacle means anything other than air, earth, water, fire and spirit.
How uncomfortable did reading this make you? What does that tell you about you?
This comment was written by Morgaine Swann.Report this comment to the moderators
July 22nd, 2005 at 11:09 pm
Oops - I wanted to add that I’m not trying to take anything away from the focus Pseudo-Adrienne was making about Black political movements. I’m commiserating more than anything else. It’s amazing how backwards some Progressives can be.
This comment was written by Morgaine Swann.Report this comment to the moderators
July 23rd, 2005 at 9:16 am
All religion makes me uncomfortable. Still, you can learn quite a lot of interesting and useful things if you’re prepared to dispense with your “right to constant comfort.” That’s definitely been true for me vis-a-vis race issues.
That no religion at all is better for me than any religion at all. There are enough other things for me to argue with myself and others about, and there are only so many hours in the day.
This comment was written by alsis39.Report this comment to the moderators
July 23rd, 2005 at 1:19 pm
In learning about these issues faced by black feminists (largely from the Sisters Talk blog… I love Genia!) in the past and present, I was of course appalled.
This is what has made it easier for me to understand, if not approve of, the African-American community turning its back on the nascent gay rights movement, claiming the situations of THIS group of marginalized, second-class Americans are somehow different from their own. As with the powerful African-American men who ignored the feminists of their day because they refused to follow tradition, many leaders in the Af-Am community have called outright for the imposition of legislation that hurts the gay community– because, they claim, the “tradition” is “one man and one woman.”
I suppose the expression “Plus ca change, plus c’est la meme chose” holds true as ever. The more things change…
This comment was written by UnApologetic Atheist.Report this comment to the moderators
July 24th, 2005 at 5:01 am
A sad reminder of the ‘my rights, not yours’ mentality.
Morgaine: Not at all until the two questions at the end, at which point my hackles immediately raised.
As for what it tells me about myself, it tells me that I have no particular problem with wiccans/pagans, feminists, people who are native american, bisexuals, women or opinionated people. Until someone questions that, or I perceive them questioning that, upon no factual basis, at which point I become annoyed.
This comment was written by Kerlyssa.Report this comment to the moderators
July 24th, 2005 at 10:55 am
That’s odd, since those two questions weren’t posed as judgment statements. She asked how uncomfortable her comment made us, and what it told us about ourselves.
For me the answers were: not at all and I’m kinda indifferent to religion.
This comment was written by Sheelzebub.Report this comment to the moderators
July 24th, 2005 at 3:50 pm
Sheelzebub: But I see them as judgement statements, because of previous experience I have had with such questions. So what it says about me is that I get defensive about having attitudes assigned to me by others, and am sensitive to their appearance.
This comment was written by Kerlyssa.Report this comment to the moderators
July 24th, 2005 at 5:08 pm
Huh? I can’t figure out if those questions were addressed to someone specific, to “the room,” or were completely rhetorical.
This comment was written by Lilith.Report this comment to the moderators
July 24th, 2005 at 9:12 pm
They were genuine questions. I wanted to know how people would perceive the post. I’m not assuming that people would be uncomfortable, I am asking if they are and how they feel about their reaction, whatever it is. I’ve learned the hard way lately that you never assume that a “Progressive” is on your side. I also wanted to see if the anti-religion bias came out. I run into that a lot on the Left.
There are progressives that think hating all religions equally is not bias; there are progressives that are fine with Buddhists and Muslims but think Pagans are too weird; there are gays who think bisexuals are lying to themselves; there are feminists that are embarassed by Witches, others by lesbians; men and women that assume all Pagans are kooks; Pagans that are embarassed that I’m calling attention to the lack of respect we’re often given.
Not being taken seriously is a form of oppression. When anything that comes out of your mouth is automatically suspect because of who you are, you are already a step below everyone around you.
I’m not judging anyone. I did hope to provoke some conversation. I’d hoped maybe someone would say that they never thought about it that way, or that they didn’t think it bothered them but it did. I knew a lot of people would have no reaction at all. I was a little afraid of the negative reaction that I was challenging them, but I decided to leave the wording as it was and see what the response was, because no challenge was intended.
I’m just trying to get a better understanding of where we stand in the Progressive community, because in other venues I’m having trouble getting people to work together. No offense, just curiosity.
This comment was written by Morgaine Swann.Report this comment to the moderators
July 24th, 2005 at 9:45 pm
Morgaine, if you need me to accept some religion before you can take me seriously, I guess we can’t work together. If you want to consider my lack of use for any religion at all as a crippling bias to common political ground, feel free. I don’t know why it should be, but whatever.
I don’t know if I really “hate all religions equally” so much as I wearied of them and put them away. “Hate” implies a much stronger emotional state than I’m prepared to claim for myself. There’s not all that much I can do about what you want to pin on me, other than express a puzzlement that’s going to ripen soon into full-blown irritation if you keep up with this particular tack.
If you can’t work with an atheist, I’m pretty sure that I can find other progressives who aren’t so picky about the spiritual life (or lack of same) of the woman holding the other end of the anti-war banner. Either that, or I can forsake the label of “progressive,” as there are days when I find it every bit as meaningless in dialouge as I personally find god (or gods) meaningless.
This comment was written by alsis39.Report this comment to the moderators
July 24th, 2005 at 10:04 pm
I wasn’t talking specifically about you. Why are you taking it personally? I don’t care if you accept “some religion” but I do care if the mention of religion automatically makes you stop listening.
I don’t care what you worship, whether you worship, whatever. I care if you look down on me for worshipping. Big difference there. I’ve been a supporter of rights for atheists/Brights just as consistently as I am for any minority religion. (Yeah, I know , it’s lack of religion, but it still defines some people as a group.)
Why would you say I couldn’t work with you? I never said any such thing.
This comment was written by Morgaine Swann.Report this comment to the moderators
July 24th, 2005 at 10:51 pm
Well Morgaine I guess the confusion for me comes in your expecting any reaction at all. Around here, being a bi-poly-pagan feminist is at least as common as being a coffee-drinking feminist or a pet-owning feminist. I know it’s common in other locales, also. Goddess religions are part of the approved feminist “lifestyle package” that has been latched onto for marketing purposes as well. So I don’t get what the big deal is supposed to be.
I do think it’s telling that this sidetracking is coming up in a discussion about black feminism, however. My observation has been that a woman of color can scarcely speak three words in a feminist space without a white woman jumping in to say “hey I am oppressed too because I’m a pagan/one two hundredth Native American on my dad’s side/bisexual/into anime!” It’s *most* telling.
This comment was written by Lilith.Report this comment to the moderators
July 25th, 2005 at 10:07 am
Lilith: I am not black, nor have I lived in a predominately black community since I was ten, and so have little personal experience to bring to the table on that matter. What I know about it is academic and covered perfectly well above in the main post.
Morgaine’s posts are a perfectly relevant example of how so called progressives discriminate against those their movement should cover. Noone seems to be arguing about the main post, and Morgaine posed a direct question.
I find it interesting how you belittle Morgaine’s experience of discrimination because it is from her being native american, wiccan, etc, instead of her being a black feminist. You seem to be making her point for her, not to mention the point of the original post.
This comment was written by Kerlyssa.Report this comment to the moderators
July 25th, 2005 at 10:50 am
Kerlyssa: “I find it interesting how you belittle Morgaine’s experience of discrimination because it is from her being native american, wiccan, etc, instead of her being a black feminist. You seem to be making her point for her, not to mention the point of the original post.”
I don’t think that Lilith’s attention. (Lilith, if I’m wrong feel free to correct me.) I believe that her point- that conversations about the experience of black feminists tend to get derailed- is completely accurate. While I completely respect Morgaine’s first post, I also find it interesting how this thread has become a reaction to Morgaine’s post and only indirectly, P-A’s. I do NOT think Morgaine is intentionally doing this, but I cannot tell you how many conversations I have been in with other feminists where when the struggles of black feminists are brought up, people say, “well I have issues because I’m (insert your race/ethnicity/religion). Not that discussing the struggles other minority groups face is a bad thing, but when the conversation is about black feminism, it can get really annoying.
Now whether P-A meant for her original thread to be only about some of the issues black feminists face, is up for individual interpretation. I believe that it was and that Morgaine offered her experiences to generate discussion. However, I do wish, that more commenters had decided to respond to the issues black feminists face which P-A brought up as well as Morgaine’s post.
This comment was written by Sydney.Report this comment to the moderators
July 25th, 2005 at 10:51 am
dammit, that should read “lilith’s intention”, NOT attention.
This comment was written by Sydney.Report this comment to the moderators
July 25th, 2005 at 11:09 am
alsis39: “I recall that amongst certain White feminists on a board that no longer exists, it was quite the popular sport to try and end an argument in which a Black feminist was in danger of getting the upper hand by announcing, “Oh, you’re not even really Black, are you ?” Or, “You’re really a man, aren’t you ?” Because, I suppose, if you were uppity enough to question a White woman’s expertise on everything, including race, you were obviously a liar or a sock puppet.”
Blecch. >:
—————————————–
Oooh, yes, the good old days….oh, and remember if you challenged racism especially white privilage as exercised by white female feminists, then you are anti-feminist, and really a man. Women equalling white and race equaling male and all that…
***roll eyes smiley, where are you***
———————————–
Lilith: “I do think it’s telling that this sidetracking is coming up in a discussion about black feminism, however. My observation has been that a woman of color can scarcely speak three words in a feminist space without a white woman jumping in to say “hey I am oppressed too because I’m a pagan/one two hundredth Native American on my dad’s side/bisexual/into anime!” It’s *most* telling. ”
———————————————-
Indeed it is. Which also goes back to what alsis wrote in her original post.
One of the major problems with feminism is that when White women are confronted with racial privilage that they enjoy at the expense of women of color during any discussion of issues that do not pertain directly to their own oppression, they pull out the oppression card as a defense mechanism and close their ears.
I thought the site was a joke at first, but apparently it’s not. I thought within it, some good issues were raised that would make good discussion but it was hard to see them through all the blatent misogyny on that site.
This comment was written by Radfem.Report this comment to the moderators
July 25th, 2005 at 11:20 am
I’m an atheist and highly involved in a local atheist student activisim group called SOMA, the Society of Open-Minded Atheists/Agnostics. We spend a lot of our time fighting for the rights and privileges of people of all faiths and creeds — including the Wiccan/Pagan groups. My own twin sister is a pagan, while my parents are fundamentalist Christians. I take both their religions equally seriously (that is, not at all) while fighting vehemently for the laws to reflect an equal ability for them to practice whatever silly rituals they feel get them in touch with the universe. Great. And you’re right, there is often a great deal of resistance and even fear regarding the Pagan/Wiccan communities, which must be addressed and fought against — but don’t you dare suggest that we’re against you because of your faith.
When you asked the questions you did, I thought “it doesn’t bother me at all.” That fact tells me only a tiny bit about myself. Now the issue has come up of you trying to sound magnanimous while effectively accusing anyone who won’t call you goddess of being a bigot. Now, after years of standing up for people of your faith, recognizing them as fellow minorities, I have become angry. I highly ***HIGHLY*** recommend that you apologize for your tone here and try to come down on the level of your fellow human beings, and then you can try again to ask us to treat you as an equal.
“I’m just trying to get a better understanding of where we stand in the Progressive community, because in other venues I’m having trouble getting people to work together. No offense, just curiosity.”
Might I suggest that it’s because you sound like you’re talking down your nose at us, while meanwhile insisting that you’re being absolutely respectful… which is more insulting. I’m hardly surprised that Alsis reacted to you in that way. I had the same thought but kept it to myself until now. Your questions were valid and even wise to add to this discussion– but you have REALLY got to work on learning how to deal with others, online. I’ve remained fairly quiet on this up to this point… but I’ll go ahead and take the lumps as the “jerk” so this can be moved along.
This blog entry makes an excellent point about how the groups don’t work together and often betray other sub-groups in order to make gains for the majority within their minority (forgetting the entire purpose of having a minority-rights group). We should be discussing that, not worrying about whether we’re taking ourselves seriously enough.
This comment was written by UnapologeticAtheist.Report this comment to the moderators
July 25th, 2005 at 12:00 pm
The above is more a general observation, and one that seems to be unfortunately universal on the internet and IRL. You can take it to the bank that a discussion of Black feminism will get sidetracked.
Makes me embarassed to call myself a feminist some times, how the heiarchy of feminism so closely matches that of patriarchy, yet we’re willing to (rightfully) slam patriarchy for it, but not criticize ourselves.
As far as religion, to each his or her own, imo. Respect people’s right to practice the religion of their choice. Respect people’s right to abstain from it. And don’t promote your religion as the one true religion. Feminists often do that to each other, even though considering how long and how often, we’ve had the religious right try to force its religious beliefs about gender roles on us, this should come easier to us than it does. And as for needing religion to discuss feminism or progressive activisim or politics, that’s not true either.
Makes me ashamed to be called a progressive some times. But like alsis, I think that term is getting awfully diluted in meaning.
This comment was written by Radfem.Report this comment to the moderators
July 25th, 2005 at 12:52 pm
Hold up—I don’t think within the context of this particular discussion that considering how Pagans and Witches are demonized by “progressives” as well as the public at large is necessarily a sidetrack. If you hold your nose and wade through the incredible amount of misogyny at that site, you’ll see that the author of the site keeps on pounding on that one note “lesbian-feminist-witchcraft” theme. There’s a reason he uses it. Not every visitor to the site who might be a potential “regular” is all that worked up about white folks in general, so simple bigotry isn’t going to draw them in. Nor is every visitor going to be all bent-out-of-shape about women, either. But throw in those three magic words, “lesbian”, “feminist” and “witch”, and you’ll grab they’re attention. Disliking and disregarding, if not outright hating those particular groups, is more universally condoned or tolerated.
And black women have to face that sort of shit all the time; being accused of not having the “proper” loyalties. Years ago, I bought a book written by Victoria King, an IBEW sister out of New York’s Local 3 (who has since left the trade to become a civil rights attorney); in it she discussed the barriers black women face when entering the trade—not only from white males on the job, but from white females and from within the black community. She was a single mother determined to provide a good living for herself and her son, but she received a helluva lotta harsh judgement and accusations against her “femininity” and/or sexuality. Reading interviews of black tradeswomen over the years, I found that most talked about the alienation they experienced on becoming tradeswomen; being targeted from within the black community for transgressing the boundaries of who and what a “proper” black woman is. In my trade, there are very few women (one percent!), but even fewer black women. As an ally, it behooves me to pay attention to this, and be vocal about my support—’cuz too damn many people are vocal with their hostility. And silence might as well equal assent—it has the same effect.
Divide and conquer, all day long—that’s the name of the game. Portray feminism as “lesbian feminist witchcraft”, and guess what? You’ll have fewer women identifying as feminists. And this makes a difference politically. Morgaine didn’t derail the thread; witches were burned at the stake. So were queers. No small wonder that even some “progressives” don’t want to be allied with them (lavender menace, anyone?). The man who runs that twisted site is invoking the power of the stake when he uses those turns of phrase. The same stake his ancestors were tied to. It’s a stake that’ll be driven through all our hearts if we don’t start making crucial alliances, and not just as individuals, but as a MOVEMENT.
Unlike, of course, what’s going on at the AFL-CIO convention, but don’t get me started….
This comment was written by La Lubu.Report this comment to the moderators
July 25th, 2005 at 1:19 pm
Yeah, I’ve heard the “divide and conquer” argument used by all different kinds of people in all different kinds of ways. I’m not surprised it has shown up here.
Syndey’s post, though earlier than mine, wasn’t up when I responded. I agree with what she wrote. It’s an observation that’s been made and explained by her and others. And the response has been, how progressives divide and conquer.
I got that the words, “lesbian” “feminist” “witch” were used on the Web site, and they’ve been thrown around a lot by antifeminists(Pat Robertson, anyone?), no doubt as has been said to attract people to the cause and away from feminism, which goes parallel with the site’s main argument that feminism is a White women’s movement that has stolen Black women away from fighting for civil rights. Ironic, because within feminism, Black women are often criticized unfairly by White women for not being 24/7 focused on women’s issues(as defined by White women, though)
Homophobia, anti-feminism and anti-paganism is a problem in all racial groups as well as in both genders, as well.
But, the thrust of the site seems to be sexist attitudes toward Black women and Black women and feminism(which is not given any recognition on this site separate from other types of feminism movements including those which are racist towards Black women).
That’s just my opinion. I think that it goes a lot towards what bell hooks and other feminists have said, as P-A made in her original post.
I’m not trying to invalidate Morgaine. I’m just expressing an opinion, which may be different from most here.
This comment was written by Radfem.Report this comment to the moderators
July 25th, 2005 at 1:46 pm
Rafdem: “But, the thrust of the site seems to be sexist attitudes toward Black women and Black women and feminism(which is not given any recognition on this site separate from other types of feminism movements including those which are racist towards Black women).”
Rafdem, I agree with your analysis. I came to the conclusion that P-A’s original thread was about black feminism in large part because of the nature of P6’s website. He wasn’t talking about lesbian feminists or pagan feminists. He was defending black women.
La Lubu: “Morgaine didn’t derail the thread; witches were burned at the stake. So were queers. No small wonder that even some “progressives” don’t want to be allied with them (lavender menace, anyone?). The man who runs that twisted site is invoking the power of the stake when he uses those turns of phrase.”
What you’re saying about witches and queers is completely true. However, the offensive website in question is talking about witches and queers in the context of black women. Blacktown’s main focus is on black women. And the comment thread about this article on P6 focuses on the misogynistic behavior being displayed toward black women. So while I’m not saying that Morgaine’s post is not accurate, I do feel that it was somewhat off topic.
This comment was written by Sydney.Report this comment to the moderators
July 25th, 2005 at 2:45 pm
Sydney, point taken. But look at the comment thread at P6’s joint. That’s another example of what I was thinking of when I said that dislike of those groups is more universally tolerated. If the dude at Blacktown had put up all those insults about black women sans references to feminism, lesbians, or witchcraft, he’d'a had a helluva lot fewer black men willing to give him the benefit of the doubt. I’ve seen similar, but more soft-pedaled crapola at “men’s rights” sites, and without fail they also reference the impact that the “feminist gay agenda” has had on black women.
Another damned-if-you, damned-if-you-don’t double dose for black women. And of course, a helluva lotta white men, and even women, can be counted on to try and “understand” this twisted mug’s “point of view”. I’ve seen it in the so-called “progressive” community—whitefolks who wouldn’t tolerate that level of misogyny toward white women tolerating it towards black women, as long as the invective came from a black man.
This comment was written by La Lubu.Report this comment to the moderators
July 25th, 2005 at 6:38 pm
Thanks, U-A. The trouble with the internet is that sometimes you really can pick up on someone’s tone, and sometimes you can’t. :o
Anyway, closer to the original topic: The thing that puzzles me the most about Blacktown-net’s defenders is this mysterious link-up between a sort of women’s fashion glossy-materialism and this concept of “lesbian feminists.” I scarcely read any women’s magazines, Black or White, but I used to read a few back when I worked the “floater”/reception job at a law firm. The co-worker who did most of my training was Black, so she –like most of the White women– brought her mags in to read at the reception desk when things were slow. So I started reading some of them, too. I can recall one article that talked about the works of women like June Jordan and Alice Walker. But I don’t recall any of the relationship-oriented articles as even acknowledging the existence of lesbians in the Black community.
I’m completely clueless as to how the aesthetic espoused in fashion magazines got fixed in the site author’s eyes as a “lesbian” ideal. I know that there’s more than one ideal of beauty in White lesbian circles, so I’ll go out on a limb and guess that there’s more than one in Black lesbian circles as well.
Prometheus 6’s exchanges with the site’s defenders were interesting, but after reading them, I’m more confused than I was before about Blacktown. (I believe bean linked to it once, long ago, on another board we were both on.)
This comment was written by alsis39.Sounds to me like its capitalism that the author is really angry at, or he would be if he weren’t so in love with his own misogyny.
Report this comment to the moderators
July 26th, 2005 at 3:44 am
To those of you who felt this was off-topic, I apologize. Also, if anyone misunderstood my “tone” I’m sorry. I don’t look down my nose at anyone, but people do sometimes not understand the way I write. My language tends to be a little formal and some people misinterpret that as snottiness, or something like that.
Now to this post:
1) I didn’t say it was a big deal; I asked if it was, because in many places, no matter how liberal, it is.
2)”Goddess religions are part of the approved feminist “lifestyle package” that has been latched onto for marketing purposes as well.”
No, it isn’t. It’s marginalized by mainstream feminists, and we are treated as an embarassment.
3) I’m Cherokee, not white, but thank you for making my point about progressives sometimes being bigots. I don’t know where the Anime crack adds in, but I’ll infer it’s part of your stereotype for Pagan women. Very enlightened. Glad it’s not a “big deal”.
4) I identify more with black women than white because I’ve been through similar, though not as intense, prejudice. When I worked for the government, I tended to get lumped in with other minorities, but had no protection through affirmative action because I was in the “other” category and there was an Asian woman in my agency within 2 grades of me, so that’s all they needed to promote. White women were given preference over Native Americans, Pacific Islanders, and Asians.
Again, if I distracted from the main point, I apologize for assuming that a lesbian feminist Witch was allowed to comment on a post including the words “lesbian feminist Witchcraft.” How silly of me.
Thanks very much to those of you who were supportive. It is most appreciated. Bright Blessings.
This comment was written by Morgaine Swann.Report this comment to the moderators
July 26th, 2005 at 6:40 am
Whoo- I missed a lot when I left work. Well, let me try and jump back in this.
La Lubu: “If the dude at Blacktown had put up all those insults about black women sans references to feminism, lesbians, or witchcraft, he’d'a had a helluva lot fewer black men willing to give him the benefit of the doubt.”
You might be right about this. I’d like to believe that intelligent, respectful black males like P6 would step up and still say something, but not all black men would. Hell, not all men of any race would step up and defend misogynistic attitudes towards women of their same race/ethnicity. Hence women’s continual problem with patriarchy.
Morgaine:” Again, if I distracted from the main point, I apologize for assuming that a lesbian feminist Witch was allowed to comment on a post including the words “lesbian feminist Witchcraft.” How silly of me.”
No one is saying that you can’t comment on your experiences as a lesbian feminist Witch. I understand what you were trying to say. Comment #6 makes it clear that you weren’t trying to distract from black political issues, but rather express shared feelings. However your post didn’t really address the issues black feminists face, but rather the issues you’ve faced. In that sense, your post was a distraction. This doesn’t mean it wasn’t a valuable distraction, but it was a distraction nonetheless. That’s all I’m trying to say.
This comment was written by Sydney.Report this comment to the moderators
July 26th, 2005 at 7:37 am
Morgaine - Are you kidding? If I was Cherokee I’d be furious. You have every right to feel that you have been intentionally smashed by the establishment– from the Daws Act to the Trail of Tears, we know that it was absolutely brutal for your people. I happen to agree that we owe all the remaining native peoples of this continent an apology (verbal, legal/property, and financial) big enough that it is almost inconceivable in size, to me. And I will do everything in my power to support people who support the rights of every type of American… not just European Colonials.
But when you make statements that amount to “we are terribly under-supported” without first checking to see who your allies might be (many more of us might be present than you suspect), you potentially alienate those very people who would most back you up. Thanks for recognizing that it’s hard to communicate tone online, and not expecting others to see speech exactly as it was intended.
Syd - I definitely agree that males (and females!) of all races should speak out against misogyny among all races. There is never a time or an excuse for it. Only by standing up and supporting those who speak out will more be encouraged to do so. Many guys are misogynistic largely because they see that as part of being a ’successful’ male, aka “guy who gets the honeys”, and they imitate that way of thinking/communicating. Reward the guys who stand up next you, with the attention, and it will allow the *real* nice guys blogged about recently to fight for the fairnesses and equalities that benefit everyone.
This comment was written by UnapologeticAtheist.Report this comment to the moderators
July 26th, 2005 at 10:42 am
Hell, not all men of any race would step up and defend misogynistic attitudes towards women of their same race/ethnicity. Hence women’s continual problem with patriarchy.
Damn straight! And this is part and parcel of the cultural script we’re all indoctrinated into at an early age; that women are the moral gatekeepers of society. That if society is taking a fall in any arena, that somehow, someway, a woman can be blamed for it. We are alternately depicted as being “more moral” and “less moral” than men, depending on the issue and direction the speaker wants it. The end goal is always “putting us in our place”.
That book I mentioned, “Manhandled: Black Females” by Victoria King really delved into the double-standards black women face from all corners. It was originally written to be an answer book (you know, like an answer song?) to Shahrazad Ali’s “The Blackman’s Guide to Understanding the Blackwoman”; but as she wrote it she just kept going from there, diving into her experiences as a single mother, as a tradeswoman, as a black woman. I constantly refer anyone interested in the subject of women in the trades to it; even though it’s a decade and a half old, it’s still right on point. And it’s very telling to me that it has never been mentioned in the IBEW journal, nor has it ever been mentioned at any of the IBEW Women’s Conferences that I’m aware of. Another bright and shining example of insuring the invisibility of black women, and making sure that any time that issues affecting black women diverge from those of white women, that critical silencing takes place.
This comment was written by La Lubu.Report this comment to the moderators
July 26th, 2005 at 12:33 pm
La Lubu: I haven’t read the book you mention, but I’m writing it down as a book to buy. I agree with you: women of all races are expected by society to act as beacons of morality. For some reason, our society has accepted the idea that women are somehow more capable of burdening moral responsibility than men- except when it come to issues concerning personal autonomy and ownership of course. At that point, men just simply know better (i.e. abortion, female sexuality). But besides this, women should be pure beacons of light and chastity- just like the virgin Mary.
So after re-reading parts of blacktown as well as the comment thread at P6, I just want to highlight some interesting comments and give my observations:
Via the P6 comment thread:
“…..I’m finding myself hard pressed to consider this either psychotic or truly vicious considering the really hardcore misogyny surfacing with increasing frequency from across the autistic spectrum. I mean, really dough, who is it - demographically - that’s labelling boys ADD/ADHD or “oppositional defiant” and channelling them respectively toward ritalin and the criminal justice system?”
Umm, who does he think, demographically, is labeling boys- black women? Not that the above comment makes much sense, but it shows how quickly male misogyny is being justified by blacktown’s readers. Based on the above statement, the commenter is attributing misogynistic behavior to women because ADD/ADHD (may) over-diagnosed? Then it appears he is blaming the over-diagnosis on women (surprise). And he is saying that black women are channeling these boys into the criminal justice system. So because of all this, any misogyny women face is okay?
Honestly, I don’t even know wtf the commenter is trying to say.
Then there is the blacktown intro page. The page states “blacktown.net- its time for a men’s movement. What ever happened to the black power movement”. And it goes on to list what I can only guess are goals/accomplishments. 3 of the 5 reasons directly target black women and feminism by labeling them as reasons why black men have failed or ‘need to wake up’. My favorite is “Exposing how black feminists have failed to lead the black race anyplace”. What he meant was “black men, not black race”. Leaving aside the veracity of such a statement, the author of Blacktown appears to be trying to blame the “failure” of the black power movement on black feminists. Because when black women engage in feminist activities- demanding that they be acknowledged & heard, not be referred to as bitch or a ho, have full control over their sexuality and body choices, and be able to live independently from a man- they are destroying the black community. The primary goal of black feminists should’ve been to empower men.
Websites like Blacktown are dangerous because it makes misogynistic behaviors ‘okay’ by using racial conflict. What I mean is this- they encourage African-Americans to unite together under the guise of unity and social progress. Then when disturbing attitudes, such as misogyny are pointed out, the leaders (who often are male) tell you that “it’s part of black culture/tradition” or that “misogyny is a term whitefolks use”. So when people try to bring it up, they are ridiculed or looked at as y betraying black culture. As one woman told me after I reamed into the tendency of black young adult males to create and support negative images of black women- “why are you dogging black men? White people already do so much of that. We need to stick together”. Blacktown is essentially doing the same thing: brushing aside feminism and blaming the leadership of black women in the name of advancing the black community (i.e. black men).
This comment was written by Sydney.Report this comment to the moderators
July 26th, 2005 at 12:42 pm
Unapologetic atheist: “Many guys are misogynistic largely because they see that as part of being a ’successful’ male, aka “guy who gets the honeys”, and they imitate that way of thinking/communicating. Reward the guys who stand up next you, with the attention, and it will allow the *real* nice guys blogged about recently to fight for the fairnesses and equalities that benefit everyone.”
I agree with you as to why guys are misogynistic. But can we agree that using the term “reward” seems wrong? I mean, I will treat a truly un-misogynistic guy with respect and he may even become a friend. But I am not going to reward him for doing what he should do. I know that’s not what you meant, but I think that even using the word “reward” implies privilege to me. As if a man who isn’t showered with praise from women for NOT being a misogynistic prick has a right to say, “well this bites” and then be a misogynistic prick. I will treat a truly nice guy well, but I don’t feel that my attention should be what he is aiming for- it should be equality.
This comment was written by Sydney.Report this comment to the moderators
July 26th, 2005 at 1:10 pm
I’m sorry but I just made the mistake of going to the second page of blacktown.net and I had to post something. Apparently I missed the blacktown.net mission statement. For all of those who had more sense than I did and didn’t go to the next page, allow me to share:
Blacktown.net: Teaching the black man how to claim, tame, train, and dominate the black woman to make her his queen once again! …BECAUSE IT IS INDEED WOMEN’S PRIMORDIAL NATURE TO BE ATTRACTED TO AND REPRODUCE WITH STRONG MEN!!!
The page then goes on to list reasons for claiming, taming, training, and dominating black women. I really wish I didn’t click on the next page button. But since I did…….
Blacktown.net presents itself as an extreme site. I can read this off to my friends and they would be like “that’s crazy, I would never do that”. Yet the stereotypes and ideas that Blacktown uses to justify their existence are more pervasive than people realize. An issue I struggle against as a black feminist is (IMO) an antiquated sense of chivalry, a desire to protect and provide for women because if they can’t they aren’t “real men”. I do not exist to re-enforce your masculinity. If I want to provide for myself I will. And if we have an arrangement where I am at home and you are in the workplace, I’m not doing it because I know my place or because you’ve tamed me. I’m doing it because it’s our arrangement.
Another issue I find myself arguing about it actually on the Blacktown’s website: the notion that black women are supposed to help/heal black men by silently supporting them and being a steadfast rock no matter what stupid ass thing they may do. Blacktown takes it further and basically says a women’s place is in the kitchen, but I’m not even going to go there. Just because I’m a female and I support my male partner doesn’t mean that my support is unconditional. Black men are not children and should not be treated as such. If I think you’re making a stupid decision, I’m going to tell you. I’m certainly not going to say nothing, let you fuck up, and pat your back in a comforting fashion and tell you its just a boo-boo. If this makes me an uppity bitch, fine. But the idea that women have the god ordained “right” or “ability” to put up with intolerable amounts of bullshit is unacceptable.
There is just so much more I can say, but I need to take a timeout to breathe.
This comment was written by Sydney.Report this comment to the moderators
July 26th, 2005 at 5:57 pm
Sydney, I remember reading about the pressure put on black women to “not dog on black men” that existed in the seventies. The fact that it continues is more than a little depressing. Even more depressing that so many white feminists don’t seem to get the fact that they often behave in alienating and diminishing ways to black women. I’ve been involved in way too many feminist discussions about reproductive rights where I’ve mentioned Depo-Provera and all of the other white women in the room have looked at me like I’ve just sprouted a second head, then shrugged and said some variation of “let’s get back to the important stuff”. Other than calling other white feminists on their shit when they do stuff like that I’m not quite sure what to do about it. I admit that when I first started to get involved in feminist circles I was genuinely shocked by the amount of racism that exists and the way non-white women are marginalised (in the UK it’s often our Indian and Pakistani sisters who bear the brunt of this treatment).
This comment was written by BritGirlSF.Also. I second the desire not to use the word or even the concept “reward” when we talk about positively reinforcing non-misogynistic behaviour in men. This whole idea sounds to me too similar to the kind of pressure for women to “reward” male good behaviour with sexual favours that’s happened in every leftist movement in history (talk to any woman who was part of the hippy generation for some good examples).
Also, the whole “women need to uncritically support everything their man does” thing is a crock of shit no matter which race the person spouting it belongs to. My answer to this has always been - I’m your girlfriend, not your mommy.
Report this comment to the moderators
July 26th, 2005 at 6:06 pm
Sydney - you actually made my point for me, thanks. One of the big reasons guys like that exist at blacktown.net is because they are so often “rewarded” with the attention of beautiful women (sorry, I can’t think of a better way to phrase that). I’ve not now nor have I ever suggested that men deserve to be rewarded just for not being jerks, but when the jerks are VISIBLY getting more attention from females while the more respectful guys are VISIBLY not… the paradigm being encouraged by blacktown.net there with that misogynisic bullsh… then the “guys in the middle” who are just trying to figure out how to not sit at home every Saturday night are going to emulate the jerks, and not the nicer guys. There are plenty of other threads discussing this particular issue, but look at the message being promoted to the young men in our sports-competition society that they must be “manlier” — then, if women who understand the problem are not actively seeking to help, then I don’t know how the problem is going to correct itself.
In other words, me telling another guy he shouldn’t use the same misogynistic slurs like the Neandertal with the gorgeous girlfriend just used isn’t all that effective when I haven’t been on a date in weeks that didn’t involve listening to someone else’s “gorgeous girlfriend” telling me about the latest abuse from her Neandertal, and assuring me that I’m a “really good friend.”
We *need* to address the misogynistic training being encouraged by groups like this… but I think that trying to develop a society that encourages mutual respect AS a sexual attraction factor instead of better-at-competition as the sexual attraction factor. To at least try to illustrate this… I’m in really good shape, work out all the time, and am fairly conversational in person — assuming an equal number of social interactions (parties), how many dates do you suppose I had last year, compared to a member of our school’s basketball team?
This comment was written by UnApologetic Atheist.Report this comment to the moderators
July 26th, 2005 at 6:06 pm
Sydney writes:
My observation vis-a-vis the ADD/ADHD business is that the blacktown writer believes that the majority of Social Workers (perhaps teachers, too) looking after young Black men are Black women. Ergo, it’s the fault of Black women that the young men are getting diagnosed with these problems.
This comment was written by alsis39.Report this comment to the moderators
July 26th, 2005 at 6:10 pm
For the love of pete, please nobody think I’m saying men should be rewarded just for being nice. That’s retarded… we’re not babies, and I don’t realy appreciate the suggestion that we’re just looking for mommies. I’m saying that we need to find a way to stop rewarding men for NOT being nice, thereby effectively punishing men who are. We need to look for what the messages being pushed upon men are– feminists are so quick to talk about the negative messages being forced upon young, impressionable women on “how to be an appealing woman and get boys” but then sneer at men as “asking for a reward” when we try to point out that we’re deluged with “if you are a ‘bad boy’ you will get way more girls” message. If we cannot address the pressures on both groups equally then we cannot progress. That is what I am saying here.
This comment was written by UnApologetic Atheist.Report this comment to the moderators
July 26th, 2005 at 6:19 pm
UnApologetic Atheist, please back up a second and stop getting defensive. I did not mean that YOU were saying “I’m a nice guy, now give me a cookie”, I meant that that idea has indeed been promoted before by many leftist movements and women are sick to death of it.
This comment was written by BritGirlSF.As far as I can see the “if you’re a bad boy/frat boy/asshole you’ll get the girls” message is primarily coming from other men, not from women. Your argument is with the culture, not with me or Syd. And I think that most feminists are already very much in the business of not rewarding men for being assholes. If you read the contributions that Sydney and I have both made to many other threads on Alas that should be pretty clear. I avoid frat boys like they were carrying Ebola. Like I said, your anger is aimed at the wrong target.
Report this comment to the moderators
July 26th, 2005 at 6:41 pm
“Also, the whole “women need to uncritically support everything their man does” thing is a crock of shit no matter which race the person spouting it belongs to. My answer to this has always been - I’m your girlfriend, not your mommy. ”
—————————————-
A bit of a rueful LOL here, b/c I’ve been here more than I can count.
Great posts. I’ve usually been cautious when discussing sexism involving Black men towards Black women with Black women, whether as friends, or women that I work with because it’s not the same as White women having that conversation with other White women, as it is having it as a White woman, with Black women, I’ve found. In the past, I think I’ve stepped over a line that I shouldn’t have in some discussions and learned from them. Not that I haven’t seen sexism by Black men towards women that I did recognize, I did when I was involved in local organizations here though there’s probably a lot I missed b/c my own experiences with sexism left me with a different manifest in which to recognize it.
In these organizations, like most political movements, it seems that men do the leading, speaking, women do the “support” work, keep in the background, but I think that’s a universal state of things among all men/women in progressive movements to a great extent and that’s one major reason why the different waves of feminism arose, especially the second wave.
I know several Black women who are preachers, one in evangelist, one in Seventh Day Adventist and both faced sexism among men and women in their congregations and other ministers to varying degrees. Especially, the Seventh Day Adventist minister(though I know a White female minister from the same religious discipline who also faced immense sexism) I have had interesting discussions on that sexism they faced in becoming religous leaders.
A lot of Christian sects as a whole have been slow to accept women into the ministry too. So in some ways, maybe a shared experience.
It’s not difficult for White women to put themselves in the position of criticizing Black men and bringing our race and our racism into it, and not just gender alone(the two gender and race are so intertwined, they’re difficult to separate)sometimes unintentionally but often intentionally, then often Black women will defend Black men which of course White women will be terribly offended by this “desertion”. But Black women’s histories and realities with them are different than White women’s histories and realities with White men and we all bring individual experiences into discussions as well. And we got to respect that, shut off our knee-jerk tendacies to try to define other women’s experiences, or else we’ve got nothing except body parts to unite us.
Often, Black women just bring in perspectives of being women(not even mentioning men directly) that are different than those of White women, and are unfairly accused of siding with Black men against White women.
Then White women get defensive b/c we think too often that the experiences faced by White women are identical to those faced by the entire gender of women and that it’s one group of women’s right to decide what every women’s experiences of sexism are
White women, FTMP, do not share an oppression with White men, like Black women and men do. We share racial privilage. So White women can be oppressed by White men, personally, individually and as a gender. Black men can oppress Black women, but the two also experience racism in similiar and different ways, from Whites. So I’m not sure that getting together with other White women and saying, how sexist White men are, is the same as talking with a Black woman or women and making comments about Black men. In my experience, it hasn’t been.
So I listen more or try to to what women say about their experiences with sexism within the same race, FTMP. If it comes up at work, i.e. domestic violence, I’ll ask questions from that standpoint. Among close friends, these discussions are more give and take(for want of better words)among each other, sometimes through experiences that we do share as women and then, sometimes separate experiences with sexism. But I’m still more of a listener.
brit feminist: depo prevara, yeah, had that discussion and other issues of choice(which for most if not all women, is really much larger than just abortion access). Also, issues with the criminal justice system, i.e. the Central Park rape at one unnamed location. Oooh-yeah!
This comment was written by Radfem.Report this comment to the moderators
July 26th, 2005 at 6:43 pm
You’re right, Brit, I should not have directed that at anyone specific… it’s just really frustrating to know a problem exists, and watch feminists discuss society’s harmful messages to women… and then dismiss or call men “immature/selfish” in some way when they try to say that they too may experience the same types of pressures to behave in a manner that is harmful to real gender equality. It certainly is a societal problem, and I’d try to figure out a solution to it… but right now, I have to stop blogging a second to pay more attention to the Enzyte commercial playing on my TV right now (seriously!) and learn about how “Bob has a big new swing of confidence!”
This comment was written by UnApologetic Atheist.Report this comment to the moderators
July 26th, 2005 at 6:56 pm
Note that the Enzyte commercial is essentially a conversation between men. The women are basically just props, as they usually are when men are in the business of enforcing masculine gender roles upon each other.
This comment was written by BritGirlSF.RadFem - my college feminism seminars got into some nasty arguments about reproductive rights between women of different races. I’ve never quite understood why it’s so difficult for so many white feminists to grasp the idea that some other women feel that they are being denied the right to have kids rather than having childbearing forced upon them. White privilege rears its ugly head.
Report this comment to the moderators
July 26th, 2005 at 7:16 pm
Hrm, that’s not how I see that commercial.
I see, “look how much happier Bob’s wife is now that he’s got a huge, manly penis” and “oooooooh his friend’s wife looks very sad because he’s not manly enough.” Over and over and over. Of COURSE the women in the commercial are essentially props/caricatures, the commerical is not advertising to them. In a recent commercial for Orbitz I saw, the only men in the commercial were props/caricatures: one Australian athlete-stud who wanted to borrow her towels, and one obnoxious “ugly guy” from work who interrupted her to tell her about donuts in the breakroom. The commercial was clearly advertising to working women with money to spend on vacations, and so it targeted them as commercials are all designed to do.
To call the Enzyte commercial a “conversation among men, ignoring the women” is, to me, dangerously dismissive of the men involved. Just as you would ask me not to dismiss a woman under attack, I ask you not to do the same of us in return.
This comment was written by UnApologetic Atheist.Report this comment to the moderators
July 26th, 2005 at 7:58 pm
I’m not sure I see your point. My point was that the whole penis size anxiety thing seems to be more about competition between men than about what women want in a man. When they start advertising to men based on their cunnilingus skills then I’ll buy the idea that it’s about pleasing or competing for women. My point was that it’s usually men who police the gender “appropriateness” of other men’s behaviour, persona etc. I’m not sure that there’s anything women can do to help stop men from attacking each other for not meeting some arbitary standard of manliness. The conversation/competition is designed in such a way as to exclude us. What is it that you think women can do about this?
This comment was written by BritGirlSF.Report this comment to the moderators
July 26th, 2005 at 8:24 pm
You could notice that the Enzyte commercial is primarily victimizing men by putting them into a destructive competition with one another - instead of focusing on how women are being oppressed by the ad because they aren’t central to it.
This comment was written by Robert.Report this comment to the moderators
July 26th, 2005 at 8:28 pm
Though, I have to admit, I’d kind of like to see a commercial based on skill at cunnilingus!
This comment was written by UnApologetic Atheist.Report this comment to the moderators
July 26th, 2005 at 9:28 pm
Robert, I didn’t claim that women were being victimized by the ad. The ad is neutral as far as women are concerned - we’re not the intended audience. My point was that women are completely irrelevant in the context of the ad except as a sort of prize for winning the competition for who has the biggest penis. The competition is amongst the men.
This comment was written by BritGirlSF.Report this comment to the moderators
July 26th, 2005 at 9:30 pm
UnApologetic Atheist, I wonder what that commercial would look like? Trying to do it in such a way as to get the point across without annoying the censors would be quite a challenge.
This comment was written by BritGirlSF.Report this comment to the moderators
July 27th, 2005 at 7:53 am
Damm, I missed a lot. I’m just going to go through and try to respond to each post.
BritGirlSF: “Sydney, I remember reading about the pressure put on black women to “not dog on black men” that existed in the seventies. The fact that it continues is more than a little depressing. Even more depressing that so many white feminists don’t seem to get the fact that they often behave in alienating and diminishing ways to black women.”
You know, sometimes I wonder if one reason why white feminists have a hard time seeing how they alienate black women (and other female racial minorities) is because they believe that as a minority themselves they are less vulnerable to certain behaviors. Meaning that they can’t act in sexist ways because they’re female. Do you think this is the case?
Unapologetic Atheist: “We *need* to address the misogynistic training being encouraged by groups like this… but I think that trying to develop a society that encourages mutual respect AS a sexual attraction factor instead of better-at-competition as the sexual attraction factor.”
I agree- this would be the best way of going about things. And I totally get this is what you were trying to say. I just wanted to point out how easy it is to fall into language of the patriarchy. But I firmly agree with Britgirl- your argument is with the culture that rewards asshole behavior. I definitely think that women do need to reject that behavior, and feminists already do. The problem is that men don’t do the same for their peers.
Alsis39: “My observation vis-a-vis the ADD/ADHD business is that the blacktown writer believes that the majority of Social Workers (perhaps teachers, too) looking after young Black men are Black women. Ergo, it’s the fault of Black women that the young men are getting diagnosed with these problems.”
If this is what the blacktown writer thought, it just further demonstrates that he has no clue. While I don’t know the exact stats, the logical part of me says this is probably just all wrong. Can social workers give official diagnoses of ADD/ADHD? And what is the causal link between being diagnosed with ADD/ADHD and the criminal justice system?
Rafdem: I love your analysis, I truly do. I think you’ve highlighted some of the major issues that occur when black women and white women talk about feminism and sexist behavior. At least you have in my experience. I think you make an important point when you say:
“It’s not difficult for White women to put themselves in the position of criticizing Black men and bringing our race and our racism into it, and not just gender alone(the two gender and race are so intertwined, they’re difficult to separate)sometimes unintentionally but often intentionally, then often Black women will defend Black men which of course White women will be terribly offended by this “desertion”.”
I personally have trouble with this because I get pissed off at the sexism that black men can display all the time. But when I hear a white female feminist criticize black men, I automatically start questioning their possible prejudices because its been my experience that most of the time when people bitch about the way black guys are, a significant lack of actual interaction with black men has actually taken place. When that’s the case, I have to wonder how much of what they’re saying is internalized racist beliefs and how much is genuine feminist concern. And if I call out the person in question, all of a sudden I’m “condoning” or “defending” black male misogyny when nothing could be further from the truth. So I think your observation is a particularly great one.
This comment was written by Sydney.Report this comment to the moderators
July 27th, 2005 at 7:56 am
Brit - I think “the competition is amongst the men” is a bit weak, with all due respect. It’s not like guys ever have the idea that we can declare ourselves the victor amongst men, and declare unto the room, “I am the greatest man here, now whar’s mah wummun?!” The end message here is the same as my message above: “If you do ____ (in this case, use our product), women will choose you.” The competition is among the men– to be the womens’ choice. What I’m really trying to do here is emphasize that the social messages ARE what are destructive, and that I think it’s important to not forget the boys in this destruction while our Gender Studies classes busily examine the ways in which this culture is destructive to the girls. Last night, I quipped to one of my close friends, a Womens’ Studies major at KU, who was visiting and reading the conversation over my shoulder, “I so desperately want to be a feminist, but sometimes I feel like too much of an egalitarian.” She, of course, said that ideally, the two words mean the same thing.
As for the commercial, I never expect a commercial to really show respect for humans of any kind, regardless of what it’s peddling– the whole point of the media campaigns is to saturate us with messages that we’re not good enough, but WILL be if we buy the product. My favorite line from an AdBusters magazine I read once: “You are too fat. Your teeth are not white enough. Your eyeballs are not white enough.”
I thought it was a pretty funny joke, until later that day I saw a Visine commercial (Pfizer, Inc).
This comment was written by UnapologeticAtheist.Report this comment to the moderators
July 27th, 2005 at 7:57 am
Shit, I messed up.
Britgirl, that should say “meaning they can’t see how they may exhibit racist behaviors” and NOT sexist.
My bad.
This comment was written by Sydney.Report this comment to the moderators
July 27th, 2005 at 8:00 am
Wow, talk about thread drift. We’ve gone from misogyny directed at black women to the perennial “nice guy” (why can’t I get the hot chicks by tipping my feminist hat?) argument, and on to erections?
BritGirlSF and Radfem, I also find it maddening that too many white feminists can’t seem to get that reproductive rights has more aspects to it for women of color than just the right to have an abortion. And I think that dynamic boils down to a combination of racism and classism. I can’t really think of any modern-day mainstream, majority white feminist groups that aren’t also operating from a distinctly middle-class perspective. Working class women of any color find it hard to relate to these groups, if indeed we would ever have access to them to begin with.
And I think it’s also demonstrative of how whiteness functions. How whiteness as a state of mind (yes, state of mind; race is a biological fiction and a social fact) is reified and reinforced. White women seem to be especially discouraged from identifying with black women. Look at the reproductive rights issue; a lot of the white women who aren’t “getting it” had mothers or grandmothers who faced those issues that black/Latina/Native/Asian women are bringing up—like sterilization, access to health care for themselves and their children, etc. But whiteness washed over that history, y’know? I’ve seen too many white “progressives” over the years turn a blind eye to misogyny that is particularly directed at black women—including domestic violence. There’s this idea that “it’s a black thing; we wouldn’t understand”. No small wonder that black women who are already transgressing boundaries of femininity, identity or politics aren’t lining up at the door to ally with white feminist (or hell, other progressive) groups whose history is one of dismissal and abandonment. And I don’t just mean to “pick on” mainstream feminism, either…..it’s just that I grew up in the seventies, when a lot of shit was happening, and I expected so much more. I have that sense of betrayal, too.
I mean, shit. I have yet to see the disproportionate amount of union jobs lost by black women last year framed as a demonstration of a race issue, not just a labor issue, anywhere except in media operated specifically by and for people of color! Whatever happened to “an injury to one is an injury to all?!”
This comment was written by La Lubu.Report this comment to the moderators
July 27th, 2005 at 8:16 am
You know, sometimes I wonder if one reason why white feminists have a hard time seeing how they alienate black women (and other female racial minorities) is because they believe that as a minority themselves they are less vulnerable to certain behaviors. Meaning that they can’t act in sexist ways because they’re female. Do you think this is the case?
Boom! Yes, I think that’s the case. Internalized sexism is a problem; I also think that many white feminists expect a “pass” from black and other women of color on inadvertant racism, because hey—-”at least I’m on your side!” And it’s a classic white learned behavior to deal with inadvertant offense by ignoring it, instead of exposing it.
This comment was written by La Lubu.Report this comment to the moderators
July 27th, 2005 at 8:18 am
OK, starting to lose my patience with this.
This comment was written by BritGirlSF.“What I’m really trying to do here is emphasize that the social messages ARE what are destructive, and that I think it’s important to not forget the boys in this destruction while our Gender Studies classes busily examine the ways in which this culture is destructive to the girls. Last night, I quipped to one of my close friends, a Womens’ Studies major at KU, who was visiting and reading the conversation over my shoulder, “I so desperately want to be a feminist, but sometimes I feel like too much of an egalitarian.” She, of course, said that ideally, the two words mean the same thing.”
In the commercial you were talking about, theoretically the men are competing for the women. Fine. As I have already pointed out, it’s not feminists who’re imposing the “you must have a huge penis to be a desireable man” frame. Guys are imposing it on each other. Every women I know will tell you that there really is such a thing as TOO BIG. Yes, I get why the commercial sucks. What I don’t get is why you don’t grasp that in this particular case of gender role enforcement the people doing the enforcing are other men. It’s not like there’s some group of women sitting there with rulers saying “you must be this long to ride this ride”.
So blame the culture by all means. The culture sucks, for everyone. But why the refusal to admit that it isn’t women who’re putting on the pressure in this scenario?
Also, the last couple of sentences of your statement are veering dangerously close to exactly the kind of “I’m a man with a boo-boo, Mommy make it better” stuff we were talking about upthread. Can’t you find a way to make your point without little anti-feminist dig (ie feminists are just so un-egalitarian).
Report this comment to the moderators
July 27th, 2005 at 8:22 am
“You know, sometimes I wonder if one reason why white feminists have a hard time seeing how they alienate black women (and other female racial minorities) is because they believe that as a minority themselves they are less vulnerable to certain behaviors. Meaning that they can’t act in sexist ways because they’re female. Do you think this is the case?”
This comment was written by BritGirlSF.Syd, I don’t think it’s anything as conscious as that, I think it’s pretty much pure cluelessness and white privilege. It just never occurs to them that their experiences do not represent the sum total of reality for all women.
Report this comment to the moderators
July 27th, 2005 at 8:23 am
Also, PA, why did the system eat Syd’s last comment? I’m seeing that she made one but I can’t read it.
This comment was written by BritGirlSF.Report this comment to the moderators
July 27th, 2005 at 8:31 am
Actually, I think you are both right. I do think that because white women, as women, are an oppressed minority they don’t see how they could oppress others, particularly because they aren’t aware of their own privileges as whites. Although, I would preface that too by saying that some white feminists do consciously deny ANY oppressive behaviour because they think gender trumps all, which is beyond dumbarse.
This comment was written by Sarah in Chicago.Report this comment to the moderators
July 27th, 2005 at 8:39 am
I’ll also say that a lot of white feminists’ critiques of masculinity is emphatically bound up with racial perceptions.
I say this because white masculinity is a world that white feminists are daily emmersed in (as not only a ‘white’ community emmersion, but as a society default) that to a certain extent that masculinity becomes seen as a expression of general patriarchy. Hence, it is not seen as a racialised gender performance, but simply as a gendered performance.
Black masculinity, on the other hand, is approached by white feminists AS a racialised gender performance (or, a gendered racial performance, depending on how you are viewing these two intersections) . In that unconscious approach then as deracialising the white masculinity and racialising the black masculinity that they cannot see as white feminists, that is SO obvious to feminists of colour, that the ‘defenses’ of black men made by black feminists is characterised as ‘defending’ black male sexism.
I think a step white feminists MUST make in addressing this, is to see white masculinity as a racial gender performance, which I would argue more oftenn than not is not done.
This comment was written by Sarah in Chicago.Report this comment to the moderators
July 27th, 2005 at 8:42 am
Sarah, personally I think that all gendered behavior is a kind of performance. In extreme cases it’s like gender Kabuki.
This comment was written by