Racism in the Feminist Movement Now And Historically

56 posts / 0 new
Last post
Rexdale_Punjabi Rexdale_Punjabi's picture
Racism in the Feminist Movement Now And Historically

what I wanted to bring up that rarely discussed and has to be is what the title says. Ppl still dont realize that most feminists period are white, most women of color who u know concious are more likely to be for example pro-blacc. And this oen thing that overlooked for example historically when it came to women's suffrage.

 

White men were generally the most active opponents while men of color wanted it because they guessed and correctly that unlike white women who tended to be more progressive and vote against white men on a lot of things and rightly so women of color voted for the same shit as men of color cuz we in same shit together.

 

And for example one thing I see is a lot of women of color looked down upon by white women for some of their choices that white women believe are not right. Like havin kids instead of an abortion, or staying at home and havin ur man work. I aint gonna comment on that personally cuz Idk personal tip about that cuz ima man but I seen shit n I talked to women n they say the same shit. Like how they'd sooner be in a community meeting concerning shit as a ppl then for a women only tip kind of.

 

And a lot of the early feminists were vocal racists and very open about it was were early leftists but that another topic. And the reason I started this thread is that this issue gets looked over almost always because ppl forget aint really none of us in the movement (dont mean literally there proly bare women in it just my ignorance but im talkin a general trend thing).

 

Wanna ask u know like where do u think are some places sexism and racism overlap, where do they not, which do you think affects you more (same or dont know is an answer), if you know how would you say for example the relationship and communicatio between men and women of color vs white men and women is different (I know examples but ima hold out). And u know generally anything like if u been to a feminist meeting as a african women and gotten fucced cuz it was all white ppl.

 

If u cant answer some of the questions dont still (yall know what I mean by that lol)

 

Peace

Catchfire Catchfire's picture

This problem has been discussed many times on babble, R_P, and it rarely goes smoothly. We should consider that in what bell hooks calls a 'White supremacist capitalist patriarchy' (a term she explains in this video), marginalized people (POCs, women, queer, the poor, etc.) are often pitted against each other, to their detriment and to the advantage of the white man. For example, during the suffragette movement, one of the arguments for giving women the vote was to offset the vote of black men, who were already enfranchised. The effect, of course, was that both voices were minimized (as less than the white male vote) and made a harmful conflict between to people with, actually, a lot of common ground.

With that in mind, it's usually a good idea in these starts of discussions to look at moments when consensus and common ground has been found, and utilized to increase understanding and solidarity. bell hooks is usually my go-to girl for this kind of thing, but it's hard to find a better speech that so effectively articulates the problem than Sojourner Truth, way back in 1851:

Quote:
Well, children, where there is so much racket there must be something out of kilter. I think that 'twixt the negroes of the South and the women at the North, all talking about rights, the white men will be in a fix pretty soon. But what's all this here talking about?

That man over there says that women need to be helped into carriages, and lifted over ditches, and to have the best place everywhere. Nobody ever helps me into carriages, or over mud-puddles, or gives me any best place! And ain't I a woman? Look at me! Look at my arm! I have ploughed and planted, and gathered into barns, and no man could head me! And ain't I a woman? I could work as much and eat as much as a man - when I could get it - and bear the lash as well! And ain't I a woman? I have borne thirteen children, and seen most all sold off to slavery, and when I cried out with my mother's grief, none but Jesus heard me! And ain't I a woman?

Then they talk about this thing in the head; what's this they call it? [member of audience whispers, "intellect"] That's it, honey. What's that got to do with women's rights or negroes' rights? If my cup won't hold but a pint, and yours holds a quart, wouldn't you be mean not to let me have my little half measure full?

Then that little man in black there, he says women can't have as much rights as men, 'cause Christ wasn't a woman! Where did your Christ come from? Where did your Christ come from? From God and a woman! Man had nothing to do with Him.

If the first woman God ever made was strong enough to turn the world upside down all alone, these women together ought to be able to turn it back , and get it right side up again! And now they is asking to do it, the men better let them.

Obliged to you for hearing me, and now old Sojourner ain't got nothing more to say.

 

martin dufresne

And u know generally anything like if u been to a feminist meeting as a african women and gotten fucced cuz it was all white ppl.

 

RP, try reversing the situation, exchanging race and gender cards here - how would you feel if I, a white, were to ask white women to badmouth an anti-racist meeting as sexist because they found mostly men there?  Wouldn't you think I was being manipulative to cover my race privileges? What about if I was a boss, appealing to workers to volunteer tales of misrepresentation by their union? Or a Christian egging "my" Muslims to take a stand against more vocal members of their community? Or an abled person appealing to reasonable crips to stand up to an inconvenient lobby deemed unrepresentative?

It seems to me one has to keep in mind the privileged groups one belongs to in order to avoid seeing a honest exploration of issues naturally turn into a weell-oiled process of divide-and-conquer.

Rexdale_Punjabi Rexdale_Punjabi's picture

martin dufresne wrote:

And u know generally anything like if u been to a feminist meeting as a african women and gotten fucced cuz it was all white ppl.

 

RP, try reversing the situation, exchanging race and gender cards here - how would you feel if I, a white, were to ask white women to badmouth an anti-racist meeting as sexist because they found mostly men there?  Wouldn't you think I was being manipulative to cover my race privileges? What about if I was a boss, appealing to workers to volunteer tales of misrepresentation by their union? Or a Christian egging "my" Muslims to take a stand against more vocal members of their community? Or an abled person appealing to reasonable crips to stand up to an inconvenient lobby deemed unrepresentative?

It seems to me one has to keep in mind the privileged groups one belongs to in order to avoid seeing a honest exploration of issues naturally turn into a weell-oiled process of divide-and-conquer.

had to read it 2x but I c u readin my own post agen like that line I see what u mean but the difference being that im not asking a african women to badmouth a feminist meeting im asking if they felt that. N it aint a race and gender card it a issue. Like I said I c what ur sayin too but at the same time the examples u gave and the what I said have key differences but I c u.

 

edit- dont even reply yet im thinkin cuz

 

edit- aii yea im gonna put what Im thinkin in short. I aint tryna do divide and conquer because im not promoting hate, or frustration or w.e just asking a question I c what u mean, itz kinda like sometimes u gotta stay out like the anti-racist meeting sometimes if it a community thing n u dont live there we wouldnt want a bunch of white ppl there cuz some of the issues are for us to deal wit n us to see. Aii take what bacc I said on top I guess u can see where im coming from but u cud also take what I said n see it as a divide and conquer tip cuz thatz what it looks like.

Rexdale_Punjabi Rexdale_Punjabi's picture

Catchfire wrote:

This problem has been discussed many times on babble, R_P, and it rarely goes smoothly. We should consider that in what bell hooks calls a 'White supremacist capitalist patriarchy' (a term she explains in this video), marginalized people (POCs, women, queer, the poor, etc.) are often pitted against each other, to their detriment and to the advantage of the white man. For example, during the suffragette movement, one of the arguments for giving women the vote was to offset the vote of black men, who were already enfranchised. The effect, of course, was that both voices were minimized (as less than the white male vote) and made a harmful conflict between to people with, actually, a lot of common ground.

With that in mind, it's usually a good idea in these starts of discussions to look at moments when consensus and common ground has been found, and utilized to increase understanding and solidarity. bell hooks is usually my go-to girl for this kind of thing, but it's hard to find a better speech that so effectively articulates the problem than Sojourner Truth, way back in 1851:

Quote:
Well, children, where there is so much racket there must be something out of kilter. I think that 'twixt the negroes of the South and the women at the North, all talking about rights, the white men will be in a fix pretty soon. But what's all this here talking about?

That man over there says that women need to be helped into carriages, and lifted over ditches, and to have the best place everywhere. Nobody ever helps me into carriages, or over mud-puddles, or gives me any best place! And ain't I a woman? Look at me! Look at my arm! I have ploughed and planted, and gathered into barns, and no man could head me! And ain't I a woman? I could work as much and eat as much as a man - when I could get it - and bear the lash as well! And ain't I a woman? I have borne thirteen children, and seen most all sold off to slavery, and when I cried out with my mother's grief, none but Jesus heard me! And ain't I a woman?

Then they talk about this thing in the head; what's this they call it? [member of audience whispers, "intellect"] That's it, honey. What's that got to do with women's rights or negroes' rights? If my cup won't hold but a pint, and yours holds a quart, wouldn't you be mean not to let me have my little half measure full?

Then that little man in black there, he says women can't have as much rights as men, 'cause Christ wasn't a woman! Where did your Christ come from? Where did your Christ come from? From God and a woman! Man had nothing to do with Him.

If the first woman God ever made was strong enough to turn the world upside down all alone, these women together ought to be able to turn it back , and get it right side up again! And now they is asking to do it, the men better let them.

Obliged to you for hearing me, and now old Sojourner ain't got nothing more to say.

 

 

peace to that sista

Slumberjack

From what I've gathered and learned from others about white feminist movements of the past, it didn't necessarily involve solidarity with groups of racialized women, and certainly not the men.  They were seeking equality with the dominant society, which is comprised of white males.  If they were seeking equality with racialized people, their status would have had to regress even below what it was, instead of progress forward, in order to achieve the same level within the structure.

martin dufresne

Thanks for Sojourner Truth's famous speech!

I notice that she was already on to the fact that it was white and black men that tried to discredit Black women.

Scout

Quote:
And for example one thing I see is a lot of women of color looked down upon by white women for some of their choices

that white women believe are not right. Like havin kids instead of an abortion, or staying at home and havin ur man work.

 

Wow! Never been accused of that before.

 

What women, and I would bet this cross the lines of colour, would like is to have less men telling us what we do, what we have done,

what we think and who we look down on.

 

And I am might tired of men thinking they know what choice looks like.

 

 

 

 

Rexdale_Punjabi Rexdale_Punjabi's picture

martin dufresne wrote:

Thanks for Sojourner Truth's famous speech!

I notice that she was already on to the fact that it was white and black men that tried to discredit Black women.

I dont see it talking about blacc men and as for us being enfranchised? lol even today almost every state with a significant blacc population in AmeriKKKa for example has enacted laws that make it so 1 felony conviction n u lose ur vote for life. nationally 1/3rd of blacc men cant vote. bacc then there were other ways to get blacc ppl and poor white ppl to not be able to vote. 

edit- and slumberjacc that was my point too they sort of ignored it u know I said this earlier that generally if u look at race, and gender lines across the board race putz it into dif floor u could say and gender seperates men and women within a group. and shit acts like that too the feminist movement has been mostly white period.

And martin blacc men were never against women getting the vote esp blacc women.

martin dufresne

My mistake, RP, you are right: I misread Soujourner Truth's reference to "that little man in black there". She was apparently referring to a (white) Christian priest. Still makes my point that she was on to men, not women, providing the ideological ammunition to oppose Black women's progress.

Rexdale_Punjabi Rexdale_Punjabi's picture

Scout wrote:

Quote:
And for example one thing I see is a lot of women of color looked down upon by white women for some of their choices

that white women believe are not right. Like havin kids instead of an abortion, or staying at home and havin ur man work.

 

Wow! Never been accused of that before.

 

What women, and I would bet this cross the lines of colour, would like is to have less men telling us what we do, what we have done,

what we think and who we look down on.

 

And I am might tired of men thinking they know what choice looks like.

 

 

 

 

k seen ur post aii I aint tellin no sistas what to do. did I accuse u of that? I aint tellin u shit either im stating my observation and what I been told. shit personally I heard women talkin about others. Like aii let me give u an example. White women talking about how spanish n blacc women are loose running around with all those kids. how they whores cuz nuff aint afriad to express their sexuality and say they love men and like to get down.

 

and while many of the u could call it battle between the sexes is the same across racial lines a lot of it is different remember that I aint gonna explain it on here still.

 

edit- Na but martin at the same time she was also on to the racial and class view of it. When the sista was talking about how ima women to even though I work and plough while she gets carried over ditches n shit like that. So na it more then that. n me I might be wrong might not be think that in the end thats why POC the genders we sticc together and the shit we have between men and women we have to deal with that but we also got bare common interests too. And a lot of the pro-blacc places for example are more progressive period but i still always wonder why for example besides rosa parks why no other women is mentioned in civil rights. Or that the biggest leaders in AmeriKKKa for the community are men usually christians pastros, ministers, etc. Is this part of our communityz shit or part of the general patriarchy and the white power structure not allowing a blacc man to fully voice his opinion let alone a women who considered worse. I think it both honestly because christianity reinforces the shit and if you look at what they teach in church to each sex. It like this. Men u already know like take shit do shit w.e Women they always sayin sacrifice and the other one was compassion. So according to them women are supposed to give up everything, be happy with it and not do shit. Fucc that

 

Only time my women standing behind me is during fighting even then if she can hold a gun she can hold a gun otherwise side by side. Well fighting aint the only time one in front or behind but... :)

 

edit- Scout u obviously seen when im wrong or have doubts I take w.e I said bacc rethink n restate after considering what other ppl said cuz thats me. but at the same time when im right I can see ur view of u know a man telling u what u think n shit n I cu on that but I aint aimin it at u individually n right here u know im showing u it right and it been proven. U know im not gonna bring women of color on here to debate u cuz that is divide and conquer but u know full well that it is what it is n this what they told me + what I seen aint 1 but both.

martin dufresne

Being carried across a ditch isn't in the same league as arguing against Black women being seen as women, as Sojourner Truth saw white men doing and laid blame on their laps.

Let's agree that there are all kinds of issues between women of various groups and classes - I have been an ally of the movement for decades and I have seen these problems AND extraordinary, sustained efforts by white and black women to identify and bridge them. But  when men try to use that, e.g. painting the women's movement as lily-white (conveniently ignoring Florynce Kennedy, Sunera Thobani, bell hooks, Audre Lorde, Rosemarie Brown, Alice Walker, Cherrie Moriaga and countless others on the front-lines - there are plenty here in Montreal I could name), it just becomes divide-and-conquer. Very convenient for us guys even though white men don't give black men the time of day but no one is on their backs about it.

Slumberjack

martin dufresne wrote:
 But  when men try to use that, e.g. painting the women's movement as lily-white (conveniently ignoring Florynce Kennedy, Sunera Thobani, bell hooks, Audre Lorde, Rosemarie Brown, Alice Walker, Cherrie Moriaga and countless others on the front-lines - there are plenty here in Montreal I could name), it just becomes divide-and-conquer. Very convenient for us guys even though white men don't give black men the time of day but no one is on their backs about it.

Martin, your counter-point isn't being advanced by referring to those individuals.  Does anyone want to tell Martin why?

edit:  actually, I momentarily forgot which forum this was.  If a mod could check with RP about possibly moving it to the AR forum, I don't know but to believe that it woudldn't be best discussed there.

Rexdale_Punjabi Rexdale_Punjabi's picture

martin dufresne wrote:

Being carried across a ditch isn't in the same league as arguing against Black women being seen as women, as Sojourner Truth saw white men doing and laid blame on their laps.

Let's agree that there are all kinds of issues between women of various groups and classes - I have been an ally of the movement for decades and I have seen these problems AND extraordinary, sustained efforts by white and black women to identify and bridge them. But  when men try to use that, e.g. painting the women's movement as lily-white (conveniently ignoring Florynce Kennedy, Sunera Thobani, bell hooks, Audre Lorde, Rosemarie Brown, Alice Walker, Cherrie Moriaga and countless others on the front-lines), it just becomes divide-and-conquer.

 

I c u na I know thats what I meant she was saying that that's their perception of what a women is but she a women too u know so we on the same page. Yea I agree white men had the blame on them but some of the women in the movement werent too nice to niggas either u know slumberjacc put it the same I would have. A lot of the early movement was white no? wasnt it not until after de-seg that stuff started to happen but even today I mean compare rallyz for groups vs the feminist marches. ur gonna see more women of color at the group thing. I c u tho in the end the reason all these divisions exist is because its profitable and we all know what economic system that is and what the solution is.

 

edit- and as to those ppl a lot of them criticies the feminist movement for having only white female middle class views and values. Audre lorde for example a lot of those women were blacc 1st. and on top of that a couple individuals doesnt change the general shit of something.

 

Lorde criticised feminists of the 1960s, from the National Organization for Women to Betty Friedan's The Feminine Mystique, for focusing on the particular experiences and values of white middle-class women. Her writings are based on the "theory of difference", the idea that the binary opposition between men and women is overly simplistic: although feminists have found it necessary to present the illusion of a solid, unified whole, the category of women itself is full of subdivisions.

Lorde identified issues of class, race, age, gender and even health - this last was added as she battled cancer in her later years - as being fundamental to the female experience. She argued that, although the gender difference has received all the focus, these other differences are also essential and must be recognised and addressed. "Lorde," it is written, "puts her emphasis on the authenticity of experience. She wants her difference acknowledged but not judged; she does not want to be subsumed into the one general category of 'woman'".[4] In a period during which the women's movement was associated with white middle-class women, Lorde campaigned for a feminist movement conscious of both race and class.

While acknowledging that the differences between women are wide and varied, most of Lorde's works are concerned with two subsets which concerned her primarily - race and sexuality. She observes that black women's experiences are different from those of white women, and that, because the experience of the white woman is considered normative, the black woman's experiences are marginalised; similarly, the experiences of the lesbian (and, in particular, the black lesbian) are considered aberrational, not in keeping with the true heart of the feminist movement. Although they are not considered normative, Lorde argues that these experiences are nevertheless valid and feminine.

Lorde stunned white feminists with her claim that racism, sexism and homophobia were linked, all coming from the failure to recognise or inability to tolerate difference. To allow these differences to continue to function as dividers, she believed, would be to replicate the oppression of women: as long as society continues to function in binaries, with a mandatory greater and lesser, Normative and Other, women will never be free.

 

I said I wouldnt bring sistas but sistas got my bacc cuz :)

 

edit- here anotha one of the sistas u named

 

http://auto_sol.tao.ca/node/3013

New terms and new political concepts are always needed as social conditions change - they're always necessary and it's very important that we continue to develop them because the social order is never static. That said, I have thus far refused to give up the term "feminism." I don't think we can give it over to white feminists. I keep using the category "feminism" and I keep talking about "feminist movements." I don't think there is one single feminism, and I don't think we can accept feminism as it has been defined by white-centered women. Women of colour and anti-racist feminists have invented new terms - like womanist - and new political concepts throughout history. These concepts highlight the intersectional nature of social relations, so we certainly need them - and perhaps now more than ever, since so much political discourse has fallen in line with the perspective of the war on terror. New terms and new understandings of old political concepts are certainly needed. But I refuse, at least for the time being, to give up "feminism."

 

seen n the one below she stated what I had too that a lot of women esp of color are involved in bare shit but not in the name of feminism but other stuff not to say it dont come 1st but the expieriences of white women and women of color are dif cuz. And read the quote too so Scout esp u if a nigga then a nigga right.

 

edit- Real talk tho ty for introducing me to these women would have never known but this is interesting too and highlights more of what ive said about women of color being criticized for their choices based on a white middle class value and belief system ones I mentioned and mroe this one relating to muslim women (mostly arab). So u know 1st it was just R_P then slumberjacc now it sistas and while martin was right on some stuff and wrong on others. Scout u gotta give it up.

 

You've written about the racialized category of terrorism
in the context of immigration, security, and citizenship. How has the current climate impacted feminist organizing?

I think the current climate has had a very negative impact on women's organizing. The category "terrorism" and the archetypical "terrorist" are associated with the immigrant and refugee Muslim. Unfortunately, many feminists and women's groups have accepted this definition. Many feminists see themselves as "saving" Muslim women. They have been seduced by the way the war on terror has been framed ideologically as a fight against misogynist Muslim men who are medieval fanatics, and who not only hate women but also threaten the national security of the US, Canada and "Western" civilization itself. Many feminists have wholeheartedly accepted this framing and consequently have reproduced extremely damaging stereotypes of Muslim men and women. We are seeing a brazen return of the "civilizing" mission of the "West" that remains at the heart of white supremacy.

This framework has opened the door for a self-Orientalizing process among communities of colour. Muslim women who self-Orientalize by reproducing notions of Western superiority and Islamic misogyny - and especially the strereotype of Muslim men as misogynist and fanatic - have suddenly found that many doors previously closed to them have been opened up. They have found space in the media; they are now able to make films and get books published. But the price for this is that they must collaborate with a very racialized imperialist agenda - something for which they are celebrated in the mainstream. Any woman who is willing to stand up and attack Islam and Muslim men gets a lot of support and her bravery is lauded. She becomes a celebrity. The West holds these women up as role models, as examples of Muslim women who can be civilized and who are grateful for it.

The women's movement, and indeed feminism, is going to stand or fall on the question of how it deals with this "war on terror," which is remaking the world and our future. Feminism is going to have to oppose this war, in all its aspects. In Canada, it is going to have to oppose further involvement in Afghanistan. It has to work to break the Canadian alliance with the US. We have to foster a sense of social justice that doesn't play into the current co-optation of human rights happening with the international NGO community. Feminism will either stand up and rise to the occasion and become an oppositional force against imperialism, or it will become historically and ethically bankrupt - nothing more than a handmaiden to imperialism.

Western feminism has played that role in the past. It colluded with colonialism and slavery. It colluded with empire-building. I think this is a moment where other forms of feminism must stand up against co-optation and transform the movement. Otherwise feminism will become one more instance of collaboration. It will be remembered as a movement that was contained, neutralized, and that actually sustained and strengthened American and Canadian imperialism so that they could continue their rampage over the globe.

Have you found anarchism and Marxism useful for understanding oppression?

Marxism and anarchism have both had a major impact on my thinking and political development. I think the anarchist critique of centralized state power has been very important. On a theoretical level, I think it's an important development, but there are serious practical limitations that need to be addressed. For example, how would anarchist theory respond to the political developments in Venezuela? How would an anarchist support somebody like Hugo Chavez? What about Palestine and Hamas? Or Lebanon and Hezbollah? What would anarchists have to say about those situations? What do anarchists have to say about the resistance in Iraq or Afghanistan? I think anarchism advances a very good critique of centralized state power but, when societies come under foreign occupation, I question how much anarchism has to offer.

The question of centralized state power is very important and needs to be addressed. Both Marxism and anarchism are very important critiques of capitalism and they come from very important radical traditions in the West. However, I think they are limited because they continue to be shaped by the idea that lies at the heart of all Western ideologies - that they have to remake and educate primitive societies and primitive cultures in their Western image. Both Marxism and anarchism are limited by their core Western ideas and values. Black Marxist Cedric Robinson said "Marx made the mistake of equating European history with world history," and I think he was absolutely right.

For me, anti-colonial and anti-imperialist politics are much better at shaking up Western supremacy and Western power. Anti-racist and anti-colonial movements have a radical critique of Western society, of its values and beliefs, and of how power has been organized to maintain Western domination. I feel that Marxist and anarchist movements in the West are seriously limited when they refuse to challenge some of their notions of Western supremacy - political supremacy, racial supremacy, and supremacy in terms of knowledge and ideology. These two movements are not able to completely critique and transform this core of Western ideology. Anarchism and Marxism can help us get a better understanding of capitalism, and of Western societies, but ultimately they are hindered by the frameworks they continue to reproduce in their practice, in their concepts, and in the knowledge they produce.

 

edit- reason im posting this is because esp the marxism thing she basically said what I always felt and still do but didnt know the words for cuz in the bacc of ur mind ur still thinking so hmm we get socialism in canada. Aint I still a nigga?

 

Rexdale_Punjabi Rexdale_Punjabi's picture

Slumberjack wrote:

martin dufresne wrote:
 But  when men try to use that, e.g. painting the women's movement as lily-white (conveniently ignoring Florynce Kennedy, Sunera Thobani, bell hooks, Audre Lorde, Rosemarie Brown, Alice Walker, Cherrie Moriaga and countless others on the front-lines - there are plenty here in Montreal I could name), it just becomes divide-and-conquer. Very convenient for us guys even though white men don't give black men the time of day but no one is on their backs about it.

Martin, your counter-point isn't being advanced by referring to those individuals.  Does anyone want to tell Martin why?

edit:  actually, I momentarily forgot which forum this was.  If a mod could check with RP about possibly moving it to the AR forum, I don't know but to believe that it woudldn't be best discussed there.

they either need more categories or something I noticed that most of the topics Ive ended up posting and others I seen can fit into almost all of the categories lol

Rexdale_Punjabi Rexdale_Punjabi's picture

Slumberjack wrote:

martin dufresne wrote:
 But  when men try to use that, e.g. painting the women's movement as lily-white (conveniently ignoring Florynce Kennedy, Sunera Thobani, bell hooks, Audre Lorde, Rosemarie Brown, Alice Walker, Cherrie Moriaga and countless others on the front-lines - there are plenty here in Montreal I could name), it just becomes divide-and-conquer. Very convenient for us guys even though white men don't give black men the time of day but no one is on their backs about it.

Martin, your counter-point isn't being advanced by referring to those individuals.  Does anyone want to tell Martin why?

edit:  actually, I momentarily forgot which forum this was.  If a mod could check with RP about possibly moving it to the AR forum, I don't know but to believe that it woudldn't be best discussed there.

double post

Slumberjack

It's just that if a bunch of guys are going to get together to discuss women, we'd probably best be seen doing it elsewhere.

Rexdale_Punjabi Rexdale_Punjabi's picture

Slumberjack wrote:

It's just that if a bunch of guys are going to get together to discuss women, we'd probably best be seen doing it elsewhere.

tru say idk if martinz a guy or not aint it just me n u? n im not talking no more i did that at the top of the thread now dem sistas are doing the talking for me and it seems we saying the same things I said

Slumberjack

Rexdale_Punjabi wrote:
 So u know 1st it was just R_P then slumberjacc now it sistas and while martin was right on some stuff and wrong on others. Scout u gotta give it up.  
 

Yes, I've made a few posts here and there regarding anti-racism, but I think now that I see my name in some of your posts, it's important to put whatever understanding I may have obtained into some context.  I'm a white guy for starters.  Whatever I may have picked up along the way certainly didn't come from any material that originated in the circles I normally exist in.  It came from the literature and voices of people who do not need to read about it, because they've lived it, and speak about it.  Retaining awareness of the concepts is far removed from the reality I know nothing about.  For me the cautionary issue has to do with understanding and learning, without appropriating the knowledge and experiences of others.  Bit of a balancing thing because the only exposure to it for someone like me is from people unlike me.  That is not to say that I don't fall into the ways of the patriarchy that surrounds us all, because it happens from time to time.  A lifetime of scales takes awhile to remove one by one, if its at all possible, and its doubtful imv to completely remove them in the long run, because everything in the systems and culture is geared against it, not just for me but for anyone.  A equally worst thing though would be in not giving a shit about any of it and going on our merry way with things, blissful ignorance is far easier for us you know.

Martin was right about divisions that are exploited to drive wedges between people who should have some common causes to draw upon.  But I also feel that some of the divisions that exist defy reconciliation through neglect and denial, and not necessarily due to exploitation.  Sometimes it is self-perpetuating between the sides, as was proven here many times over.

martin dufresne

Reading Sunera Thobani, and many other feminists of colour, I have always understood that these divisions were dialectically challenged, struggled against and mediated through political process. I hear Thobani remaining adamant about not giving up feminism where she is a major voice. As a man, and especially a white man, it is not for me to judge or attempt to leverage her words against her sisters and alliances.

I don't doubt RP's intentions, but I must say I am as ill at ease with (t)his thread title as I would about seeing a white person presume to post a subject entitled "Sexism is the Black Liberation movement Now and Historically".  So I'll exit this discussion now.

Rexdale_Punjabi Rexdale_Punjabi's picture

martin dufresne wrote:

Reading Sunera Thobani, and many other feminists of colour, I have always understood that these divisions were dialectically challenged, struggled against and mediated through political process. I hear Thobani remaining adamant about not giving up feminism where she is a major voice. As a man, and especially a white man, it is not for me to judge or attempt to leverage her words against her sisters and alliances.

I don't doubt RP's intentions, but I must say I am as ill at ease with (t)his thread title as I would about seeing a white person presume to post a subject entitled "Sexism is the Black Liberation movement Now and Historically".  So I'll exit this discussion now.

 

aii peace ima sticc to what I said cuz ima a man like dat. At the same time tho it aint the same about a white person sayin this cuz it like a dude who never been shot tellin someone how it feel. To someone who been shot 2x talkin to sum1 who been shot 3x as a example.

Slumberjack

martin dufresne wrote:
  I don't doubt RP's intentions, but I must say I am as ill at ease with (t)his thread title as I would about seeing a white person presume to post a subject entitled "Sexism is the Black Liberation movement Now and Historically".  So I'll exit this discussion now.

I'll just hang for a moment before heading out as well, to bask in the irony.

Maysie Maysie's picture

Despite the fact that it's mostly men having this discussion, and Rexdale Punjabi has identified himself as a (young?) man of colour, this thread does belong here, in the feminism forum.

Personally, I've opened this topic a number of times on babble in the past, perhaps not so "up front" as Rexdale Punjabi has. I've not received a great deal of support.

For the past two months, a part time job of mine means that I'm living the reality of this theory, almost every day. I don't have the energy to talk about this to people who it doesn't affect in real and lived ways. No offense folks.

And to pose another rhetorical question, whose voices are missing from this thread, and any thread on how feminism has tended to ignore the complexities of race and gender? Hint: women who experience both racism and sexism, also known as women of colour and Aboriginal women.

Ghislaine

Rexdale_Punjabi wrote:

And for example one thing I see is a lot of women of color looked down upon by white women for some of their choices that white women believe are not right. Like havin kids instead of an abortion, or staying at home and havin ur man work.  

Wow. I have never heard of this supposed phenomenon before - you say you have heard this from personal experience?

 

Tommy_Paine

Despite the fact that it's mostly men having this discussion,

Therefore as interesting as I find this topic for a lot of reasons, I will just pop in to suggest to Rexdale Punjabi that Judy Rebick's book, "Ten Thousand Roses" provides historical background to this very issue.

 

Slumberjack

Maysie wrote:
And to pose another rhetorical question, whose voices are missing from this thread, and any thread on how feminism has tended to ignore the complexities of race and gender? Hint: women who experience both racism and sexism, also known as women of colour and Aboriginal women.

In the absence of participation from affected individuals though, the obvious implication from this would be for everyone not involved to avoid the topic altogether.

thanks

"anti-colonial and anti-imperialist politics are much better" - this is a good line from #12.

 

 

remind remind's picture

RP stated:

Quote:
I said I wouldnt bring sistas but sistas got my bacc cuz

Seems to me like you won't let them have their own voice!

Michelle

Yes, definitely, Ghislaine.  When it comes to reproductive choice, women of colour have very different experiences to white women.  For white women like me, access to abortion is our issue, because we are pressured by the right-wing, anti-feminist and racist forces in society to do our part and reproduce. 

Women of colour have a very different experience.  They are demonized for reproducing, stereotyped as overly-fertile, assumed to be promiscuous.  They get stereotyped as "welfare queens" if they're poor, assumed to want babies just for welfare cheques, etc.  So, not only to women of colour have to deal with access to abortion and contraception issues if they need an abortion, but they also have to deal with the demonization they receive if they choose NOT to use contraception or abort their pregnancies.

I have certainly known a number of clueless white women (some feminists, some not) who are completely unaware of the fact that women of colour have had different experiences around feminist issues like reproductive rights.  I've been one of them, and still am to some degree, although I think I've learned a lot over the past decade, not the least from people like Maysie, and a dear friend who is Jamaican-Canadian, lived in the same whitebread town as me, went to the same whitebread church, and had very different experiences than I did.

Yes, maybe R_P isn't a woman of colour.  But I'll bet he knows a lot more women of colour than a lot of us white feminists do, and he's likely learned an awful lot from them, and heard them talk about these issues.  I'm betting that he'd hear a lot more from women of colour about how they feel about white feminists who "don't get it" than many of us white feminists do.

Scout

Okay so this meant zero:
 

Quote:
I'm going to close this since R_P has been asked to stay off topics relating to women and feminism on babble.

http://www.rabble.ca/babble/feminism/deconstructin-misoginy
I must be a fucking idiot.

remind remind's picture

Thanks for reposting that scout!

Ghislaine

I had forgotten about that Scout - good catch.

Michelle, I agree with you that there are totally different experiences. Isn't the "welfare moms having babies just for the money" meme directed at women on welfare of all races. I live in a province that is probably at least 90% white and I have heard this a lot as a child welfare worker (disgustingly even from fellow colleagues..but I don't want to digress). 

 

Michelle

What Maysie actually said, and that I was following up on in the thread, was this:

Quote:

I continue to value your voice here, but you clearly don't get how sexist you are, and how offensive your sexist words are. As a moderator I need to tell you not to talk about issues around sexism until you're able to follow the rules of babble around no sexist language.

It was around R_P's use of sexist slang words.  Which he hasn't used in this thread.  So clearly, he is learning to "follow the rules of babble around no sexist language".

We've got lots of moderators here, folks.  And we're clearly present in this thread and watching what's happening.  And I'd really rather not have this thread turn into a big off-topic debate about whether R_P should be allowed to post in it.  Maysie and I have our eye on it, and you can feel free to give us your input by e-mail.  michelle AT rabble DOT ca, and bigcitygal AT rabble DOT ca.  Thanks.

Scout

A man is asked not to post here as does anyway because he just has to tell us like it. That is sexism.

At what point did you tell him could join in again? Or did he just do as he please and now your just going to let it slide?

As always male privelge trumps all.

I'm not an idiot. Babble is not for Feminists.

remind remind's picture

Oh...so as long as he is just being sexist, and not using sexist slang it is okay?

Michelle

That's interesting.  I have, when the subject has come up.

Michelle

Well, yeah.  I was one of them, for years.  And my friend was too - she's the one who talked to me all the time about the racism she experienced, from white women at church, from white feminists who "don't get it", from institutions like social assistance agencies, the CAS, even from other poor people who are white or working class.  It's only been in the last two or three years that I've had anywhere near a "middle class" life during my adulthood.  Probably shouldn't make assumptions.

RosaL

.

RosaL

.

RosaL

Michelle wrote:

Well, yeah.  I was one of them, for years.  And my friend was too - she's the one who talked to me all the time about the racism she experienced, from white women at church, from white feminists who "don't get it", from institutions like social assistance agencies, the CAS, even from other poor people who are white or working class.  It's only been in the last two or three years that I've had anywhere near a "middle class" life during my adulthood.  Probably shouldn't make assumptions.

 

I wasn't just talking about being on "social assistance". But I may have been wrong about you (you being Michelle, not "you" plural). You are right to point that out and I apologize. In any case, this is not a good topic for me to discuss on babble. 

 

Michelle

Well, that's true, about making assumptions being the essence of the topic. :)

I guess all I'm saying is that my experience has been, as a white feminist, that I don't hear that much from people of colour about their experiences of racism with white people who are supposed to be allies, simply because a) I'm white person who is supposed to be an ally, and white people who are supposed to be allies are often defensive about it when they hear about it (and I think this thread has a couple of good examples of that), and b) when I do hear about it, it's from friends that I've built huge bonds of trust with over time, and yet I still know that I don't hear anywhere near as much about it from them as perhaps other friends of colour might from them, because I can't relate since I don't have the personal experience of it.

It seems to me that anti-racist feminism is equally about anti-racism and feminism.  And that the oppression that women of colour face is equally about race as it is about gender (not to mention class).  So it seems to me that someone like R_P can relate just as much to the race oppression that women of colour experience as I can relate to the gender oppression they experience.  That was the point I was trying to make.  I think what he has written in this thread is worthwhile to read, even if his gender analysis isn't perfect.  Certainly most of us white lefties don't have perfect race analysis, but that doesn't stop us from participating in discussions and trying to learn, and screwing up and being called on it and then learning from that if we're not too defensive.

Catchfire Catchfire's picture

Did Michelle call you 'defensive', Rosa? I didn't think so. I'm not even sure you've offered enough of an opinion in this thread to be considered 'unorthodox' (I don't know why you put scare quotes around that word, no one on this thread has used it). I'd be interested in hearing about your experiences you alluded to a few posts ago, if you're willing.

RosaL

It's like arguing with a Freudian: any disagreement or difference is "defensiveness" Frown

I know better by now than to say anything where I diverge too far from babble orthodoxy and it was a stupid waste of time for me to comment. So I'm going to get back to work....

 

remind remind's picture

Michelle wrote:
I guess all I'm saying is that my experience has been, as a white feminist, that I don't hear that much from people of colour about their experiences of racism with white people who are supposed to be allies, simply because a) I'm white person who is supposed to be an ally, and white people who are supposed to be allies are often defensive about it when they hear about it (and I think this thread has a couple of good examples of that),

That is a BS slanderous slam Michelle.

Quote:
So it seems to me that someone like R_P can relate just as much to the race oppression that women of colour experience as I can relate to the gender oppression they experience.

Well that is interesting that you acknowlege the gender oppression "they" experience as R_P certainly doesn't in his post slamming feminism.

 

Stargazer

I didn't see R_P as slamming feminism. I saw him as bringing up issues POC and FN women experience within the feminist movement.

remind remind's picture

I saw him, as a male, bringing up those issues, while denying voice to those he says he is speaking about, as such, along with his history of sexist tripe, IMV it is a slam of ferminism, and nothing more. Let's not pretend this is a stand alone occurance, okay?

Also, I am not denying that those issues are there, as sure enough they are. And I probably know this almost as intimately as you, stargazer.

However, I am not goinmg to go further, as it is becoming a male driven wedge issue, like it was supposed to have.

Slumberjack

remind wrote:
  I saw him, as a male, bringing up those issues, while denying voice to those he says he is speaking about... However, I am not goinmg to go further, as it is becoming a male driven wedge issue...

You have a point.  Another wedge has appeared though, between the topic, and people who wish to speak about it while being given the chance to align themselves with where they are, while still relaying it from their vantage point.  Which begs the question why, is it the topic itself?

Rexdale_Punjabi Rexdale_Punjabi's picture

remind wrote:

I saw him, as a male, bringing up those issues, while denying voice to those he says he is speaking about, as such, along with his history of sexist tripe, IMV it is a slam of ferminism, and nothing more. Let's not pretend this is a stand alone occurance, okay?

Also, I am not denying that those issues are there, as sure enough they are. And I probably know this almost as intimately as you, stargazer.

However, I am not goinmg to go further, as it is becoming a male driven wedge issue, like it was supposed to have.

whose voice am I silencing? and when am I slamming feminism this is defensiveness when Im bringing up something that there but rarely talked about n u and scout dont like it and trying to get me kicced out the topic. Hmm interesting when it was just me and you could say that o ur just a man forgettin that u aint talkin to a white man yall was arguing with me. When I had ppl bacc me up other women too yall just tryna get me kicced out.And till u wanted me to be kicced out u never said I was sexist n fucc the babble rules u really think if I never sincerly thought I was disrespectin my queenz I would have stopped sayin that shit? U know that ill do something if I would have done it n if I aint gonna do it I wont.

 

N maysie I hear u personal tip doesnt matter to me I could be in the bin 2mor if the trial dont go well so I aint got nothing to lose.

Aii remind on the voice part no1 else started the topic so I did aint silencing no1 I dont choose who gets to post on this and u think im silencing their voice by saying the feminist movement a lot of it is racist and ur saying some would argue that it isnt? On a racial tip we call those ppl selloutz cuz they sellin out n denying the truth. 

 

n remind n scout just say why yall dont like me every topic feminism or not yall arguing with me and most times yall been wrong. so whatz ur problem?

 

n ghislaine think about it like this whoz stereotypes as being on welfare?

 

n Scout the difference in that is racism n sexism is crossing so if I never posted it most likely u would never know. So the argument u cud use against a white man posting on this and just reposting articles n shit aint stand here cuz most of the shit Ive said is personal expierience only brought other ppl in to prove that I aint bullshitting and michelle even told u the same thing I just said. 

remind wrote:

Well that is interesting that you acknowlege the gender oppression "they" experience as R_P certainly doesn't in his post slamming feminism.

I was mostly talking about the racial part the gender part ties into it. Like the abortion thing for example it both the fact that a women of color is treated differently is gender and racial.

so remind u think im driving a wedge between women by bringing this up? that "wedge" already there n that been highlighted are you gonna argue my points or just try n get me banned?

Scout

Quote:
n Scout the difference in that is racism n sexism is crossing so if I never posted it most likely u would never know.

 

Go fuck yourself.

RevolutionPlease RevolutionPlease's picture

Denial is not a river in Egypt.

Scout

Fuck you too revolution.

Pages

Topic locked