‘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

I feel exactly the same about male privilege. It’s helpful on a class level, not an individual one. I know that I have significantly more privilege than a homeless man with a drug habit. No, he won’t face sexism but so what when you take into account what else he faces? However, I know that women on average earn less than men and are often disadvantaged by their sex.

Yes, that's exactly how I see it.

But to say that race and experiencing racism doesn't make a shitty situation worse, I just don't agree with that.

But the way the argument is framed is not in those terms. By talking about privilege, the argument is that a shitty situation is made better by not experiencing certain things. It’s that framing that i object to. And you say yourself that there could be lots of variables at play (eg how supportive your family is - a factor that has been shown to confer huge psychological benefit on children, so arguably a privilege).

@froggygoneacourting

Not sure what that's referring to, where are people talking about It's a Sin or LGBT?

It was a derail/side discussion, sorry. Ereshkigalangcleg made an excellent point about society having higher expectations of women and I was just thinking out loud and expanding about that issue.

Ah, OK, fair enough, must have missed that comment as I was like eh? lol

It’s helpful on a class level, not an individual one.

That's why it needs to be kept on a systemic level though, and not applied to individuals.

It's not wrong to say that people of colour as a group experience oppression and barriers that white people do not face. It's not wrong to say that disabled people as a group experience oppression and barriers that able-bodied people do not face.

Something that I argue about constantly irl and in my job is this misperception that privilege is a ladder, and that each discrete group occupies a different rung on the ladder. It's not a question of who is higher on the privilege ladder, black people or disabled people, because there is no ladder, and privilege is not binary.

The whole point of the discussion around intersectionality is to try to unpick how those different things (like class and race, or race and disability) collide with each other. it's not a case of trying to make the argument "everyone in X group is on rung 1 of the privilege ladder, and everyone in Y group is on rung 5 and therefore anyone in X is automatically less privileged than anyone in Y."

It's just about acknowledging that systemic barriers and systems of oppression exist.

It's just about acknowledging that systemic barriers and systems of oppression exist

But what are these 'systems of oppression'? If you acknowledge that oppression is experienced as a result of the inter-play of various factors rather than just one particular characteristic ( race or sex or class) for example). 'Systemic' suggests something organised, structural, with intent.

That's what I personally dislike about 'intersectionality' as a tool for analysis. It states the obvious ( that people experience difficulty and barriers due to various personal characteristics), but then goes on to formalise those experiences of oppression into some sort of enduring monolithic blunt object of assertion. It also negates personal, social, familial & cultural factors, behaviours and choices which in themselves act as barriers to success.

It's not wrong to say that people of colour as a group experience oppression and barriers that white people do not face. It's not wrong to say that disabled people as a group experience oppression and barriers that able-bodied people do not face.

And I totally agree with that

That's what I personally dislike about 'intersectionality' as a tool for analysis. It states the obvious ( that people experience difficulty and barriers due to various personal characteristics), but then goes on to formalise those experiences of oppression into some sort of enduring monolithic blunt object of assertion.

True but then what's the alternative. No-one (worth listening to) thinks that no white person ever faced adversity.

I also think that as soon as someone uses ‘privilege’ it becomes obvious that they don’t actually do any activism or work with people experiencing multiple disadvantages.

Because people who do those roles have ways of discussing all of the issues a person will be facing without describing them as privileged.

That's what I personally dislike about 'intersectionality' as a tool for analysis. It states the obvious ( that people experience difficulty and barriers due to various personal characteristics), but then goes on to formalise those experiences of oppression into some sort of enduring monolithic blunt object of assertion. It also negates personal, social, familial & cultural factors, behaviours and choices which in themselves act as barriers to success.

This is where the importance of criticial thinking comes into play
Tools are limited by the ability of the operator using them

Intersectionality is a tool developed for lawyers. Outside of that sphere, nobody actually uses it. It is just a buzzword people use when they want to say that different people experience different disadvantages.

Not caught up fully.

My post was during a discussion about 'white women's tears' in response to quaagars saying '
'It actually makes me feel a little bit sick, to know that me as a white woman could turn on the tears and be automatically believed or defended.'.

My posts at the time explain why I wanted her to convince me that this is true in the UK, specifically with women lying and fake crying to get random black men into trouble, and the police acting on what she says.

I also asked her to discuss some UK specific deaths of black men where the police were involved. Specific cases with real things to discuss about racism and the police and the UK. I haven't caught up fully but she didn't seem to want to.

Why we have to discuss the USA when we have enough issues here to discuss on a country where we could actually they to do something is beyond me.

Thanks to the other person for calling me racist and saying I wanted quaggers to prove to me that racism exists full stop.

I felt my posts were clear but apparently not.

Yet the onus to "do diversity" nearly always falls to women (and often also people of colour), when women have relatively little power. It's a huge gender double standard, because white men can make plays or films that are just about white men and no one says a word, but if a woman does then it can't just be a film that has women in it, it also has to perfectly represent the entire spectrum of both race gender and sexuality
YES! This absolutely does my head in. In books too. E.g. "a sense of an ending" by Julian Barnes or "intimacy" by Hanif Quereshi. Cannot imagine a female author getting a load of introspective wank published.
Where are the plays/films/TV about women?

nice thanks for posting about Smiley Culture - I didn't know about it and now I'm

Where people earn 8% less on average than poc in my region of the U.K. according to ons data. There is nothing hypothetical about that fact.

White people, sorry.

Sorry, I am not meaning to deny racism exists, nationally or globally, but I do think that people often view things through the lens of their own geographical area and experiences.

Oh god it's a sin

Very mixed feelings

All the women I know who watched it were ???!!! at the woman who was his friend and basically spent all her time supporting him, doing activism, etc etc and seemed to have no life of her own whatsoever. A really good example of how women are seen by so many men as existing to look after support and champion men, and do all the heavy lifting in the areas that affect the man.

Quentin it's appalling isn't it.

Look up inquest who focus on this area.

www.inquest.org.uk/

“ huge gender double standard, because white men can make plays or films that are just about white men and no one says a word, but if a woman does then it can't just be a film that has women in it, it also has to perfectly represent the entire spectrum of both race gender and sexuality”

It is because men don’t bang on about a universal ‘brotherhood’

Black men usually see white men as oppressing them.

Lower class white men see upper class white men as oppressive

Sex doesn’t trump every other identity.

Men AND women from the socially dominant group often benefit to the detriment of men and women from marginalised groups.

Why should women from marginal groups see women from the dominant group as their natural allies? They may have some common interest and some opposing interests.

@Tealightsandd

Jewish women often look white (not all, as not all Jewish people are white). They absolutely experience racism. Just look at the David Baddiel zoom chat thread and you'll see what I mean. It's shocking actually.

I assume no one acknowledged this. Yes it is wrong to say white women (and men) don't experience racism.

It is because men don’t bang on about a universal ‘brotherhood’

Historically almost every major philosophical movement has done, including pretty much every religion that I'm aware of!

😃 Ok, but they don’t bang on about betraying the brotherhood if black men point out that perhaps white men are complicit in oppressing them in the current system.

Could we have some examples of white women and women of colour having opposing interests? I’m not questioning it - I’m just wanting examples to help me get a better picture. I think we talked about white women’s professional promotions not being beneficial necessarily to women of colour and I’m on board with that. But in terms of opposing interests I could use some scenarios. In mainland Europe, I can think of hijab bans as one possible example.

@peacefulVistas

That's what I personally dislike about 'intersectionality' as a tool for analysis. It states the obvious ( that people experience difficulty and barriers due to various personal characteristics), but then goes on to formalise those experiences of oppression into some sort of enduring monolithic blunt object of assertion. It also negates personal, social, familial & cultural factors, behaviours and choices which in themselves act as barriers to success.

This is where the importance of criticial thinking comes into play
Tools are limited by the ability of the operator using them

But it's not personal characteristics. It's class/set/group memberships right from the start. It then encourages people to think of others (and perhaps themselves) in group terms only. I remember as a kid, people would ask "What sign are you, man?" (Yes, I'm that old) and ascribe characteristics to me based on the date of my birth. I'm lazy because I'm a Saggitarius, or empathic and understanding because I'm Aquarius, or whatever. Astrology is nonsense. Intersectionality (with a capital I) is also nonsense.

Tools are mainly limited by their design and build quality. I think operator ability, though it's definitely a thing, is different.

But there is probably a way in which intersectionality (with a small i) is not nonsense, and I'm interested in exploring that. It probably involves working with large data sets rather than critical or legal theory. Where to start?