White women- it's all your fault

[WeldMeDaphne]

I will preface this by saying that I am indeed a white woman. And I realise this affords me a lot of privilege.
Among a lot of the rhetoric around the Events unfolding in the US (mostly Charlottesville), I've seen a number of open letters to white women about our complicity in the neo-nazi and white supremacist movement in the US and elsewhere. Clearly those women marching last week on the nazi side were white, but there was a lot of suggestion that those white women not marching but associated with men marching (wives girlfriends etc) were just as culpable as the men wielding torches and assault rifles. I guess I would like some help understanding how this is a white woman issue rather than the white men being responsible for their own actions? I get that one of those pieces said those men are going home to pie cooked by their doting wives but I just feel as though a man who holds those views and has no issue with demonstrating them publically is unlikely to be a caring loving husband?
I am fully prepared to listen to all view points and I totally understand that the people on these marches are white, but they're mostly men, right? Sonhow is this women's fault?

'I think it's a white people thing and there's no reason to suggest white women are any less likely to be that racist than white men.'

One of the links upthread said that experts in the field believe 15-20% of white supremacists are female.

There's no reason to think that political communities have the demographics of normal communities, because so much ideology is spread and maintained online. Like much of political extremism, I would expect it to be spread by millennial age men, which is what experts claim also.

What we do need to watch out for is hybrid discourses like alt right wing feminism. This is an emergent thing. Check out prospective UKIP leader Ann Marie Waters. It's to the tune of 'we don't these Muslims coming over here oppressing women so we need to close our borders'. Eugenics also has a place in certain extreme quarters of feminist discourse. Just saying that this isn't a simple divide of left and right, but often quite a warped coalescence of different political trains of thought.

My problem is suggesting that non-racist white women should be able to fix the problem of white supremacy. I don't know how we could do that. I don't think i have come across this. Women to fix the men from racist or violent behaviour. I would assume it exist because there is all sorts of views out there. I have tried looking into the James fields mother and the comments. I can't find it. I probably looking in the wrong places. What I came across was her video interview and I lost all sympathy for her. I assume a lot of black people did the same too. Let me just say I was left open mouth at the end and almost laughing from shock. She was so blasé about the whole thing it's shocking.

What I found though, while digging for context to all the articles that popped up calling out white women, they bounced off each other and it stemmed from the #thisisnotus. This was mostly by white women and liberals distancing themselves from what was happening. They saw it as unusual alter-right being racist. But from POC this was just another racist thing to happen in America. The two were the same and nothing new. What happens next was the articles detailing how women were racist too and the history of it. White feminist saw this as an attack and the same rhetoric of "blame the women".
POC then did articles on how this should not be turned into a white feminist soul searching excise or why they are even mentioned in something that does not involve them, and benefiting from it while nothing changes.

Erm...not quite sure I follow. If the women weren't marching with the men then of course we can't say they're culpable in absence of evidence of their support for neo-fascist ideologies the racism is seen as the same racism people face everyday. And most are saying they saw it coming. The racism is not being rated on a number scale to see which one is worse. While on the quest on finding out how all of this developed. I found some journalist contemplating on writing, "I told you so" article because the event was inevitable.

What we do need to watch out for is hybrid discourses like alt right wing feminism. This is an emergent thing. Check out prospective UKIP leader Ann Marie Waters I think people like them are doing a disservice to white feminist. In the future they will be pulled out of the brexit archive and they will be the voice of white women and why brexit happened. It will be even worse because you won't just have hearsay and pictures but video evidence. What I will say is that they will shout the loudest even when they are dead and gone.

The impression I got from that woman's interview was that she was in a state of shock, and that it is completely unethical for journalists to break the news to someone that their son has just killed someone.

But we may have seen different videos.

When men come on here NAMALTing I get their point it's not them, but I want them to admit that it is a problem that some men are for example sexually violent, and discuss how to fix it. They just talk about how unfair it is to say men are violent.

This feels different though

Of course it feels different. It's not though, is it? If you think it is, well then you'd need to admit that complete objectivity and empathy is beyond even the best of us. A great deal has been said (on this thread and elsewhere) to try and rationalise a way out of this. However, it's fundamentally dishonest and a lot of people call it for what it is. They do get shouted down though.

You don't know the difference between socialisation and ideology?? Socialisation is how we are conditioned to behave as women, trained to appease men.

Ideology is the believes they follow.

Ideology can include theories on how socialisation works. A lot of what you say is not fact, even if stated as fact. It's an opinion. Time and again, rebuttals come on here that are just parroted maxims; "this is true cos I say it is". Sorry, no, you've just got an opinion and so's everyone else.

Collective belief in a series of related opinions is an ideology. Fearing all men equally is an ideology. It paints Alan Bennett, Mo Farah, Ched Evans and Richard Ayoade as identical. It's base stereotyping. This is the point I'm making: men are seen as one class and women as another - both are concepts and both are flawed. The concept of women as a class according to the ideology of feminism wears the face and speaks with the voice of the people that wrote the ideology: educated, middle class white women. Yet underneath it includes the statistics and lives of woc. There's also economically disenfranchised and poorly educated white women, and a lot of things fail to resonate with them too.

It paints Alan Bennett, Mo Farah, Ched Evans and Richard Ayoade as identical

No it doesn't. It paints them all as having something in common. Which they do. They are all men.

Noone says all men are identical. What feminists say is that men are more likely to be dangerous than women and there's no way to tell from other characteristics (colour, class, age etc) which men are most likely to be dangerous. Therefore it makes perfect sense to be wary of all men. That is not stereotyping.

Do you rush up to every dog you meet and pet it, or are you more reserved until you've figured out whether it might bite you? Your argument is like saying that people who are reserved around dogs are stereotyping dogs. When being reserved is a sensible approach and what we teach our children.

Like much, this latest post shows what your agenda is and it isn't improving our understanding of challenges facing WOC.

Ugh, it's such an evil belief system. So much insidious racism. And sadly most of the racism I have experienced is from white women.

Lord, if there was a quid for every keyboardist yabbering on about other people's supposed agenda...

Go back and read it again and you'll see that I was referring to a statement - you can see it there in black and white - that says the poster "fears all men equally." She sees them.. wait for it... identically.

Yes, they all have something in common. They are indeed men. But the difference across the vast spectrum of that commonality is far wider than is ever acknowledged in these supposed truisms. It is beyond doubt that not all men should be feared equally - exposing the wide gulf between the realities of individuals and an ideology based on class.

However, I only use this as an illustration for the point that followed: just as men are all grouped into one class, so are women - and women as a feminist construct no more represents all women than men as a feminist construct represents all men.

As previously discussed, much of what is written is relevant to women at the very top of society: the wealthiest, the most powerful, the most educated. Does it really strike you as likely that an ideology could apply at those levels and still find resonance in the least privileged corners of the female sex?

Does it really strike you as likely that an ideology could apply at those levels and still find resonance in the least privileged corners of the female sex?
Yes of course. Discrimination on the basis of being female applies across the board. A rapist won't decide against raping a woman because she is rich. Domestic violence isn't restricted to particular demographics of women. Neither is being expected to be responsible for childcare/elderly care.
As I've said numerous times up thread, there are clear differences in the degree and nature of how women are discriminated against dependent on other factors such as age, race, health problems, sexuality etc. But no woman is free from oppression on the basis of sex.

Fearing all men equally doesn't mean that poster sees them identically. Because....wait for it...the word "fear" is not synonymous with "see" and the word "equal" is not synonymous with "identical".

Anyway I don't think you are posting in good faith, so I'm done here.

Discrimination on the basis of being female applies across the board. A rapist won't decide against raping a woman because she is rich. Domestic violence isn't restricted to particular demographics of women. Neither is being expected to be responsible for childcare/elderly care.

I would be extremely surprised if levels of DV, rape and domestic burdens fall equally across the economic spectrum, or between white women and woc. So, no, it doesn't apply equally across the board.

I suspect you know that it doesn't, but suggested it did simply to counter an argument. So.... who's not posting in good faith?

(Quite apart from the rather ludicrous semantics. I think we know why you're done here but if accusations help you feel better about it, all power to you. S'only the internet.)

"Violence against women affects women of every age, socio-economic class, ethnicity, sexuality, religion or belief and ability. Research shows that women are most at risk from men who are known to them. This is demonstrated in cases of domestic violence, partner/ex-partner rape and domestic violence homicides. Apart from the physical, emotional and psychological trauma sustained by women experiencing violence, there is also a substantial cost to society as a whole"

www.cps.gov.uk/publications/equality/vaw/vaw_eia.html

Statistics in the report suggest that black men are more likely than expected to be offenders (6.5% of people prosecuted vs 2.3% population, table 2) but white and especially white British more likely to be victims (white %victims 92.7%, % population 90.9%; white British % victims 92.2%, population 87%; table 6)

So you're back. But with what? Does that confirm or deny that levels of DV, rape and domestic burdens fall equally across the economic spectrum? You haven't said.

I wonder what your take-away is from your final paragraph? Can you confirm that you're saying that black men, as a class, are violent, and that white women, as a class, are most at risk from them?

The statistics don't say that.

QuentinSummers what agenda would that be exactly?

Quencher it's not the articles she linked it's the comments from woc following, claiming it's white women's fault because they don't report their DV husbands and because they don't leave them. And numerous similar posts even when myself and others pointed out that women are most likely to be murdered after they leave their abuser The false narrative that the women who are actively part of white nationalism are all victims of DV is ridiculous and not taking responsibility.

Whenever there are blatant acts of racism people of colour are asked to find solutions to said racism. So if we go with the argument that non racist White Women should not be expected to resolve or fix the issues of White Supremacy. The argument would also apply that POC should not be expected to solve the issue of racism and White Supremacy since they are the victims. Case in point Lady GG recently tweeting to Black people and asking them what White people should do to solve racism is laughable and a great example. This is an individual who widely portrays herself as a feminist. And yet she has been known to make comments that could be construed as racist. There is also a picture of her floating round the Internet in Black face with other people in Black face at a Alledged "Slave Party". Case in point it is not POC job to fix racism. Racism will not stop if non racists don't challenge it as they see it in their community. However if on this thread, feminists cant even agree that there are women who actively and willingly participate in White Supremacy and do so with their own free will as they benefit from the status Quo then it's a non starter as far as I'm concerned.

Women have always been part of and enjoyed the benefits of White Supremacy. Black women cleaned,cooked, provided child care, sexual favours for said women during slavery. Black men and women provided free labour, and at the time Black men where used as studs fors these White Supremacists. There are pictures of said women at lynchings watch the burning of Black people with glee in their faces.

I have watched numerous documentaries about White Supremacy and the women are just as active in these movements. Including seeing those famous white hoods. You can't address something if you won't even acknowledge it no matter how uncomfortable.

In America these people have a genuine fear of Black men and Women. They see them as a threat, and are scared of being outnumbered.

This is why I don't feel like feminism can ever apply to POC in exactly the same way as Black men and Women have had to endure racism and White Supremacy together for hundreds of years therefore the dynamic will always be different.

I wonder what your take-away is from your final paragraph? Can you confirm that you're saying that black men, as a class, are violent, and that white women, as a class, are most at risk from them?

I'm not saying anything. Just providing some stats after you said "I would be extremely surprised if levels of DV, rape and domestic burdens fall equally across the economic spectrum, or between white women and woc. So, no, it doesn't apply equally across the board."

I'm not saying anything

Never a truer word was spoken. The stats you posted did not offer any real evidence to the contrary of what I'd said. Keeping schtum is therefore your natural choice.

But I did wonder why you specifically chose to cut and paste a figure that suggested black men were disproportionately violent. Sure.... you can let that hang in the air too, but I suspect that people will draw conclusions.

It's a rather obvious statement that reported crime statistics between white and poc are unlikely to be very helpful given the word reported and the variances in people's relationships with the authorities. The same goes for the economic spectrum.

I suspect that you know this. Your argument, that a feminist ideology written and advanced by educated middle class white women can resonate across the significant divides of a single gender, is riddled with problems.

If nothing else, all of this shows how stupid it is to view things as competing privileges and disadvantages.

My DP. Black, Zimbabwean, privately educated, parents demanding a focus on learning, cleaners and cooks at home, city and country homes. Definition of privileged.

then, father dies due to not being on the right side of things. Flees country. Asylum seeker in a country (UK) that has a thing against foreigners. Unable to work. Denied asylum and now living with spouse in third country relying on the privilege spouse has as an EU citizen (that Brexit threatens). Same person. No longer privileged.

Who was privileged when Betty Jo Shelby met and murdered (and got away with it) Terence Crutcher.

The narratives are different in the US. The Talk is something that parents don't have to give. . White women do suffer at the hands of the patriarchy. Its not a bad thing to recognise though that its a white patriarchy that defends its whiteness.

scottish taking one or two examples of Black People who have done exceedingly well against all odds is not an example of overal

Is not an example of overall priviledge . I can rake up examples of highly successful Black people in my social circle too. Quite frankly given his your partner I would think you would know better

Actually Scottish the talk is something that I know every Black parent I know had had to and does give. The talk of you have to work twice sometimes three times as hard as you'd white counterparts. The talk about being wary of the police. The talk about experiencing racism in whatever form from the moment they start school, in particular secondary school. So don't make blasé comments about what you think Parents of colour say or don't say to their children.

muchomo

Either I didn't explain myself properly or you misunderstood. Your three replies don't make sense to me.

1. Privilege is a movable concept that can move so much as to be rendered pointless when discussing wide ranging issues.

1. But if you want to stick to point versus point privilege I would argue that white women have privilege over black men.

1. The female cop and The Talk are examples of this privilege.