‘White’ Feminism

[Sociallydistancedcocktails]

I was recently on a thread which got me thinking about this.

Do you think ‘white’ feminism exists?

And your thoughts on the article below. I am quoting an excerpt

“White feminism is a term that has been on the tip of everyone's tongue since actor Emma Watson addressed past criticisms of her feminism in statement to her book club about the topic in early January. Though it's difficult to find an exact definition for "white feminism," it has come to describe a not-quite-feminist mindset that doesn't take into account the ways the women of color experience sexism, and how it differs from the way white women experience it. Simply put, white feminism is for white women who don't want to examine their white privilege. The term "intersectional feminism," which stands in opposition to white feminism, was coined by civil rights advocate and law professor Kimberlé Crenshaw in 1989 to help describe the experiences of Black women who not only face sexism, but systemic racism.

Understanding the ways race, gender, and other factors (such as disability, class, or sexuality) intersect is crucial to making our feminism more effective and impactful”

www.bustle.com/p/what-is-white-feminism-here-are-7-sneaky-ways-it-shows-up-into-your-life-7921450

@cakedays, oh definitly and in fact the link I posted above from the ISReview makes the point that it's not a new idea within black feminist thought.

I think though that "intersectional feminism" has now become it's own thing, and has only a tangential acquaintance to the original concept of intersectionality

And the whole work/job thing isn't meant to sound like "what a white feminist issue", either. Substitute race or disability or social class that isn't quite right or any of those things. Substitute a situation in a school where no teacher would ever say they were racist but somehow it's always the black boys who are getting told off.

Thinking about how direct and indirect discrimination and oppression work together ("we're not racists but somehow no black woman happens to work here, I don't know why!") is completely the kind of work intersectionality should be doing. I actually agree completely that white institutions perpetuate blind spot thinking where they can be both well-meaning and also structurally taking part in oppression.

However feminist activists tend not to be unaware of these issues; and you won't find much feminism written in the last fifty years or so that isn't fully aware of these issues, so it seems to me it's an own goal to be going after other feminists rather than joining forces to shift some structures.

[quote peacefulVistas]@cakedays, oh definitly and in fact the link I posted above from the ISReview makes the point that it's not a new idea within black feminist thought.

I think though that "intersectional feminism" has now become it's own thing, and has only a tangential acquaintance to the original concept of intersectionality[/quote]
Yes, I totally agree.

@LibertyMole

Yes, that makes sense cakedays, although I really wish people would not use systemic if they actually mean widespread, because they are not synonyms.

I think structural refers to how components of a system are organised but not the components themselves, for example a system could have a hierarchical structure of which the police force would be one instruction which is a component within a broader system.

So it might be easier to resolve the institution of the police, but harder to resolve inequalities that arise as a consequence of how the police interacts with social housing provision in terms of feedback loops, increasing complexity etc.

Structure might then refer to the difficulties in reordering a society in which certain ways of organising it have become entrenched.

Yes absolutely this too.

The job thing reminds me of a thing I heard ages ago (sexism not racism sorry to go off topic but it's a good example).

At a place men kept getting the job after interview when on paper the women were as good.

Watched video and saw that the male interviewers tended to greet the bloke and then have some football chat. The women it was no chat.

The men were more at ease due to the chit chat and so came across better in interview.

All fair on the surface. Candidates of both sexes. Same questions at interview. Man gets job. The reason was something more subtle.

Dunno if it's true but it sounded like the sort of thing that would happen in all the places I've worked!

And of course the interviewers didn't do it on purpose, didn't realise they were doing it I'm sure. The women just always seemed less relaxed and confident.

I'm WOC and have been on MN for years. I'm also working class (lived on disability benefits for years) and middle aged. I consider myself a second wave feminist, am strongly GC, and have been involved in women's rights since the 80s.

Yes, white feminism is a huge problem IMO. My personal definition of "white feminism" is a) women who claim to be feminists yet actively abuse women for no reason other than the colour of their skin; b) women who exploit feminist principles as a way to promote or condone or dismiss racism (for example, expecting black women to shut up about their own experiences on the grounds they are "being divisive"; advocating supporting far right wing politicians including those who are known to hold white supremacist beliefs on the grounds that they are anti-trans; being against anti-racism/intersectionality/wokeness on the grounds that people who are for those things are often pro-trans); and c; men and women who refuse to acknowledge that black women are treated differently by society than white women and either turning a blind eye to racism or actively defending or dismissing it.

Mumsnet has a serious problem with racism, of varying degrees. On one end of the scale are posters who just don't "see" racism and think black women are just making a lot of fuss about nothing. Posters who think racism means actively hating black people, and anything other than outright hate isn't racist. Then you have posters who seem to have an agenda to dismiss and deny racism (while simultaneously talking about how serious anti-white racism is). Posters who hold black people to a different standard. Posters who find it funny to start goady threads about golliwogs or how their toddler said "mummy that man looks like he's made of chocolate!" on the bus. Posters who are fine with black people as long as they behave in a certain way but get upset if they start being "uppity" or "thuggish." Posters who think it's fine to call black people "uppity" or "thugs." Posters who think it's fine to call black people "n*gger." All the way through to a small number of posters who really actively have a violent loathing for black people, like the mere sight of a black person sends them into a fury of rage.

Here are some examples of racism I've personally experienced or witnessed on Mumsnet:

*Constantly being told racism doesn't exist, or "but what about anti-white racism", and having my own and others' personal experiences dismissed or disbelieved. For example, I once posted saying I was upset because I'd witnessed someone say something really racist, and got probably four or five comments saying "well we can't judge because we don't have the other person's side of the story" or "we only have your word that this happened." Like their default was racism-denial.

*Being active on a long thread about racism without revealing that I'm WOC and basically being treated okay by other posters, then disclosing that I'm WOC and immediately witnessing the tone and way I'm treated do a total 180. Like 20 pages of other posters politely disagreeing but without any personal insults, then suddenly the second I say "well actually I'm biracial" I suddenly get a wave of really nasty personal abuse, literally get called stupid, thick, angry, aggressive "cunt", bitch, and generally be treated with far more hostility.

Making a post saying "well actually I'm biracial and I think..." and the very next post after mine was something like "well I just think it's hypocritical that black people are allowed to say NR and I'm not." Except she did not use asterixis, she wrote the word out in full, and yes the N word was typed in all caps. It didn't even make sense in context since no one had even mentioned the N word before, she basically changed the subject because she obviously desperately wanted to engineer a situation where she could scream "NGGER" at a biracial poster. Literally, her first reaction to seeing someone say "I'm biracial" was to immediately scream the N word at them.

*Accidentally posting the acronym "BIPOC" once because I'd been editing documents for an American company all day (it was something like "I don't have a problem with BIPOC actors playing Shakespearean roles"), apologising for using it, and coming back to three pages of outraged posts about how I was being controlling and trying to dictate what terminology people should use and posters literally saying "how dare froggy try to force us to say BIPOC", as well as posts calling me stupid and accusing me of engaging in "American identity politics."

*Having two separate usernames, under one username I'm "out" as biracial, the other one I'm not. People always assume the later username belongs to someone white and I get treated totally differently when I use that username, even though I post the same content in the same style. Other non-white posters have told me they've experienced the same thing. For example posts under my biracial username are much more heavily policed. If I make a grammatical error or typo, it'll be jumped on. Everything from snide comments like "I think you meant 'were' and not 'we're', are you sure you went to university?" for what's obviously an autocorrect error. Or posters ganging up to gleefully crow "isn't it sad that froggy is so stupid"/"yes poor thick froggy really isn't very bright, is she?" I've been on threads where I've been roundly attacked over the tiniest SPAG error, then seen posts like "ppl shuld leave Wills and kate alone there great" (or even posts written in barely comprehensible text speak) and no one says a word.

*Witnessing the extreme abuse and hostility over the mere suggestion that MN should have a section for black women, which was so bad it required police action. Some Mumsnetters were so angry a black woman requested a Black Mumsnetter section they even photoshopped a fake PM to try to get her banned.

*So many goady threads about racial issues, like those endless stupid golliwog threads.

*Threads about anything to do with racism are always full of posters who seem desperate to say that racism doesn't exist and to generally do their best to dismiss, condescend to and undermine BAME posters.

*Black women constantly being told they should be nice and not be aggressive or accusatory because it'll make white people feel defensive and therefore they'll stop caring about racism, and trying to act like "angry black people" are to blame for forcing white people to be racist. Which is exactly the same tactic men have used on women for decades, blaming women for being aggressive and acting like "gee whiz we'd have been happy to give women rights but some of you had to act all angry and get our backs up, so now we won't, see how this is all your fault?"

*Clear double standards along racial lines. For example the threads about the BLM protests were overwhelmingly hostile towards the protestors and contained racially coded language like "thugs". But a week later a thread about the Far Right protest, which was attended by protestors visibly displaying Nazi imagery and doing the Sieg Heil, was noticeably far less negative and and the general attitude was "they are just defending their right to free speech." The BLM protestors were widely accused of spreading Covid yet these accusations were largely absent from the Neo Nazi protest threads. That's just one example of hundreds.

*People making false analogies, like insisting on comparing wealthy upper class black women with poor working class white women in an attempt to prove that white privilege does not exist. Which doesn't even make sense since black people statistically have lower incomes and are much more likely to live in poverty than white people. Do people really believe that "white privilege" means "every single white person is more privileged than every single black person"? Because that is simply not what it means. The definition of white privilege is that white people do not face the additional barrier of racism on top of whatever barriers they face. When discussing white privilege, you have to compare like for like. Compare two working class kids from the same village with the same income level, one white and one black. Who has it worse?

That is a useful post @froggywentacourting

Thank you @froggywentacourting
That was a valuable insightful read

Thanks for the post @froggywentacourting, it's going to take me a while to consider all of that.

froggywentacourting
Useful and quite depressing read.
I have some questions:
You say you've been on Mumsnet for some time, do you think it's getting better or worse and if so, why?
You said:
"advocating supporting far right wing politicians including those who are known to hold white supremacist beliefs on the grounds that they are anti-trans" - are there any far right politicians standing in the UK? I wasn't aware of this any more, I thought the BNP completely died a death.
Also:
"People making false analogies, like insisting on comparing wealthy upper class black women with poor working class white women in an attempt to prove that white privilege does not exist."
I totally agree that white privilege exists, but I think people get pissed off when so many middle class kids who've done nothing to help POC in any practical way and probably know very few POC start lecturing working class people about white privilege. They've had hard lives, sometimes very hard, and it's fucking irritating for rich kids to lecture those less fortunate than themselves about how good we have it, especially when it's coming from rich middle class white kids who've only taken up identity politics as their latest hobby and are in it for the virtue signalling. I've worked with refugees for years, and I get sick of the sanctimoniousness from people who've done sweet FA. Personally think it's as much about that, although undoubtedly there will also be racists.
As for the grammar police, I find that happens whenever someone disagrees with you and can't find a better way to win an argument, but I don't doubt it can be fuelled by racism too.

It seems to me that intersectionality makes sense when talking about law. In Crenshaw's example, if I recall correctly, she talks of a company in which black women miss out on their rights because the law only recognised race and sex as protected characteristics. So black women who were discriminated against as black women had to sue for racial discrimination or for sex discrimination. The company could then defend themselves against race discrimination by pointing at all the black men they employed, and against sex discrimination by pointing at all the white women they employed. The way the law was structured made it actually impossible for black women to take action. The law needs to take account of the intersection of two protected characteristics.

But this is a process of creating a tool, recognising intersectionality between protected characteristics, to deal with a clear and identifiable lack in another tool (the law) which has been consciously and intentionally created for a specific purpose. Law is required to be coherent and, well, systematic so that it can be used to decide issues in the business of a variety of different interests, institutions, individuals and groups, as well as people's relationship to the state and state institutions.

But I don't think "society as a whole" has been consciously and intentionally created in the same way. It isn't systematic, though it does contain different systems within it. It comprises a whole bunch of different people who will not agree with each other, will not have exactly the same values and beliefs, and also should not really have to. So when applied to "society as a whole", the theory of intersectionality just creates a totalitarian pecking order that will not allow people to be different and to disagree. It creates a view of the world where there is only ever one right answer, only one viewpoint is correct. That's why it turns into an "Olympics of oppression", as one PP upthread called it.

It's a great ideology for authoritarians, as it justifies coercion as much as any religion ever has and enables control through "divide and rule", such as suggesting that "white feminists" aren't real feminists, pitting women against women. Intersectionality is one of the most anti feminist ideologies out there in the world today because it denies that women can have issues and interests purely as women. This implies that there is no right for women to organise politically as women. They always have to step aside for other people (which, clearly, means men).

The points froggy brought up in her excellent post upthread need to be taken very seriously and dealt with. But they can't be if other people are systematically denigrated for "privilege" (yes, I know froggy isn't doing that. I'm talking generally). The absence of oppression is not a privilege. It's a situation which needs balancing, but there is nothing unjustifiable in not being oppressed.

@froggywentacourting
That was a great post.

I feel like white feminism needs to be reclaimed. I’m white. I think white people are not a monolith, but various groups of white people have issues relating to their whiteness that need to be resolved. Definitely in the US (where I lived for a while) my observation is that seems like some white people are hugely struggling with issues of knowing where they came from and feeling connected to a valued culture - they are suffering emotionally from having been subsumed into whiteness (which I know for their ancestors and mine would have been a very morally troubling bargain that was made, at best). I think a lot of white people are finding it hard in that they know what they must not be i.e. racist, but they don’t know what they should be. It’s up to white people to fill in the blank, but it’s not easy. Into the void people are trying to fill you get unfortunate missteps like cultural appropriation, and you also get self-flagellation which frankly I don’t think is that helpful either.

For me personally, I havent really felt included in white feminism which I associate with rich, white, capitalism and to a large extent with the USA. It seems like it doesn’t have loads to do with my own background or my future goals.

There are loads of intersections within whiteness that need to be explored, until the whiteness is sort of gone as right now whiteness is obscuring more than it is illuminating.

I really enjoyed reading Nell Painter’s The History of White People and I think it’s kind of typical that a black person did the work in putting this together.

just great post. I hate the way "intersectionality" has been hijacked and used as a stick to beat feminists with. Privilege isn't a ladder. In fact I hate talking about privilege as it sounds like something that can be earnt/removed. I prefer to talk about specific disadvantages groups have.

froggy I appreciated your post. To refer back to ops article, now I don't know whether to respond, and if I do, how to not seem defensive or dismissive. I'm really horrified you've been treated like that on here and I see posts fitting those patterns too. I'm not sure if that's "white feminism" or just straight up racism.

It's a great ideology for authoritarians, as it justifies coercion as much as any religion ever has and enables control through "divide and rule", such as suggesting that "white feminists" aren't real feminists, pitting women against women. Intersectionality is one of the most anti feminist ideologies out there in the world today because it denies that women can have issues and interests purely as women. This implies that there is no right for women to organise politically as women. They always have to step aside for other people (which, clearly, means men).

Yes. I've bolded the part I have most issues with. I see the value of an intersectional approach but I agree with this post on how it tends to work out on social media etc.

Suffering from being subsumed into whiteness?! What does that even mean?

I'm white. I lived in a mixed race family for decades. Nobody's been subsumed into whiteness - not me, not my mixed kids, not their SE Asian father.

US based discourse always seems so incredibly flattened to me. People of all colours have interesting, connected, culturally rich lives. That's a human thing. How odd to lose sight of the universal nature of human culture.

White people, like other people's, have diverse cultures and connections. They're not stumbling around looking for something to plug up the hole having to quit the KKK left behind.

Privilege isn't a ladder. In fact I hate talking about privilege as it sounds like something that can be earnt/removed. I prefer to talk about specific disadvantages groups have.
I agree with this. Telling a white woman who has lived in poverty all her life and been violently and sexually abused throughout that she has 'privilege' is deeply insensitive, even if it's true that she hasn't had to face racism on top of her other disadvantages. To have race not be a disadvantage in life should be considered something everyone is entitled to rather than a privilege. The focus on this as a privilege can be used to erase all the other factors which can disadvantage an individual. For example, adverse childhood experiences, which are most likely to occur to impoverished children is one of the biggest factors in determining disease, social and emotional problems throughout life.
stopabusecampaign.org/what-are-adverse-childhood-experiences/take-your-ace-test/what-does-your-ace-score-mean/
I'm not wanting to deflect away from racism, it's important, just not to dismiss all the myriad other ways in which people can be disadvantaged, just because too they happen to be white. As I said before, I think it the problem is middle class white kids who've led very sheltered lives, have never mixed with and thus never been aware of the incredibly difficult odds underprivileged white kids are up against, shouting about 'white privilege' because it doesn't occur to them that white people can live lives so different to their own. Y'know, horrible chavvy white people who probably voted for Brexit anyway and they just need to be "educated" - a lot of it's coming from snobbery and ignorance.

@BlackWaveComing
I did say some white people, and I was talking specifically about the USA where I feel the issue is most potent, though I feel something similar but different operates here in the UK which I would like to know more about the mechanics of. Of course white people come from diverse cultures, but some people have left behind parts of their culture to blend in and it’s been a painful experience for them, albeit they gained benefits from this which need to be examined head on. This is a significant story in US history. That’s why I think intersectionality needs to be applied to white people much more - because we are definitely a hugely diverse group of people with different histories and different current positions.

Here's a Ted Talk from the woman who researches the effects of ACEs:

[quote ATieLikeRichardGere]@BlackWaveComing
I did say some white people, and I was talking specifically about the USA where I feel the issue is most potent, though I feel something similar but different operates here in the UK which I would like to know more about the mechanics of. Of course white people come from diverse cultures, but some people have left behind parts of their culture to blend in and it’s been a painful experience for them, albeit they gained benefits from this which need to be examined head on. This is a significant story in US history. That’s why I think intersectionality needs to be applied to white people much more - because we are definitely a hugely diverse group of people with different histories and different current positions.[/quote]
But what do you mean, subsumed by whiteness? What is this all-consuming whiteness which hollows out (many) whites?

Are you talking about ppl trying to fit in with WASP culture? Literally, there is nothing to grab onto when you talk about whiteness.

Other than a lack of melanin, what are you using it as shorthand for?

@Ereshkigalangcleg

It's a great ideology for authoritarians, as it justifies coercion as much as any religion ever has and enables control through "divide and rule", such as suggesting that "white feminists" aren't real feminists, pitting women against women. Intersectionality is one of the most anti feminist ideologies out there in the world today because it denies that women can have issues and interests purely as women. This implies that there is no right for women to organise politically as women. They always have to step aside for other people (which, clearly, means men).

Yes. I've bolded the part I have most issues with. I see the value of an intersectional approach but I agree with this post on how it tends to work out on social media etc.

I'd really appreciate hearing your issues. I see the value of intersectionality in framing solutions to practical problems of policy, but I don't see why one group necessarily has to see itself intersectionally when defining itself as a group. Really, this is an enormous and complex issue that I don't fully understand.

I live in Scotland, where 0.7% of the population is black. I honestly don't often check my privilege or think 'how does this affect black women' because in my daily life I see and meet so few black people it just isn't on my radar.

Racism is still alive and well all over the UK, I have no doubt. But 'white feminism' is a US concept which might also have some application in eg larger English cities but I just can't see how it might affect my community. Half of whom are female.

I agree that whiteness as a concept is of limited use and probably doesn’t reflect much about how people experience their own ethnicity and culture. Being from Italy or Russia or Cuba is much more important than whiteness in people’s ideas of cultural norms.

Badly written second para, sorry

I'd really appreciate hearing your issues. I see the value of intersectionality in framing solutions to practical problems of policy, but I don't see why one group necessarily has to see itself intersectionally when defining itself as a group. Really, this is an enormous and complex issue that I don't fully understand.

My issue isn't so much with the concept of intersectionality, and I completely agree with the idea of oppression being compounded. It's more the way in which it is used, and the way that commonly it denies that biological sex can be an axis of oppression, and should be trumped by "gender" including indistinguishably "gender identity" and following queer theory and gender identity ideology.