The need to place feminism in different contexts in order to gain a more wholesome understanding of the concept is vital. Feminism obviously has many pretexts that almost anyone can give the stereotype to - the image of the overly assertive, free spirit, outspoken lesbian. However, especially today, this could not be farther from the truth. Women have made considerable progress in furthering their rights, finding ourselves in the 'Third Wave' of the Feminist movement today. But in a way, we could not be more polar on the issues among women everywhere. The question of race is something that rests central in the debate of what feminist values truly are. I think it is safe to say that each and every woman has her own personal definition of what feminism is. What is considered offensive to one woman, another may consider 'sexy.' These are only the smaller issues that rest within the movement. Audre Lorde points out the stark differences between American women - race, sexuality, class, and age. All of these things that are supposed to make our country unique and define are values, are exactly what is tearing women apart. Like Tiya Miles' experience with her school newspaper, movements of unity and progress are often plagued with issues of power relations and disagreement. Lorde eloquently states: "Difference must be not merely tolerated, but seen as a fund of necessary polarities between which our creativity can spark like a dialectic." Women need to embrace their differences, taking into account the different sentiments of all women, and sending a unified message, rather than one of disbandment. Women must use this as a "force of change." Unfortunately, I think Lorde is completely validated in her sentiments of poor women and women of color feeling differently about the feminist movement than a woman who is 'privileged.' The key to understanding is dialogue and education.
Going along with the theme of dialogue and education, Miles points out that the women 'On the Rag' were at a severe disadvantage in not being well versed and educated on the history of the women's movement. In order to make progress, it is so important to contextualize a situation. Enter Peggy McIntosh. She has done something so remarkable in pointing out the small things that a white, privileged woman enjoys without ever having to acknowledge or recognize this. The history of our country has always stressed white supremacy. Granted, many civil liberties have been granted to those no matter race, gender, or socioeconomic status, but one cannot deny that things like racism still vehemently exist in the United States today. Many females that are in the 'majority' oppress unconsciously, as McIntosh points out. This is not particularly their own fault - but rather what Johnson and Frye discuss as working within the system that has been predetermined in society. Many historical factors play a role in these 'daily effects of white privilege.' Just like the word 'oppression' has become out of context in some situations, the meaning of the word 'privilege' has evolved to "dominance because of one's race or sex." Instead of a "favored state," it has negative connotations.
I think that dialogue is most important in establishing the conversation about race. Miles and the group of women, essentially in two years, mirrored the walls that the women's movement has run into since it began. Constructive dialogue turns into discord and unfavorable feelings towards other women. In order for this movement to be strong, women, no matter race, must understand the other. Education and dialogue are key. In order to make waves and establish major change, women must be a unified front. This may be an idealized vision of what this movement 'should' be, but I think that pointing out these stark differences between different groups of women is a huge step in educating women everywhere about their own differences. By beginning to understand these differences, women will find themselves subconsciously viewing themselves and others in a different light.
I think Katie's point regarding the degrees of privilege is very interesting and important to flesh out further. Peggy Mcintosh's acknowledgement of the differences between the experiences of white women from black women, as well as other racial minorities, in the feminist movement highlights one of the key aspects that has troubled the movement. This concept of degrees of privilege where white women inherently have an 'easier' path in society than their minority counterparts opens the 'How could she relate to my experience' dialogue within the core of the feminist movement, women. This differentation based on race acts as a diverging force preventing the common rallying around femininity and acts as a hindrance to the movement on the whole. As Katie has also pointed out, this is another form of working within the system which creates an air of hypocrisy within the feminist movement. The aim to subvert the patriarchal system that guides society and avoid programming seems idealistic and contrary to the movements own beliefs when there is a racial system within the movement as opposed to the gender system the feminist movement is attacking. I think Katie brought many interesting points, however this was one of the more provocative and pertinent points to highlight both from her post and from the reading.
ReplyDeleteKatie and Dave both touched on one of the main themes of this week's class discussions: privilege. I read Audre Lorde's piece first, and I found myself drawn to her strong voice and candid arguments about the importance and of recognizing difference - whether it be of race, sexuality, class, age, etc. - within the lives of American women. Out of context, this may seem obvious - people are different. Women are different. But we live in a society that views similarities as comfortable and differences as awkward. In fact, oftentimes we would rather avoid differences than acknowledge them. This view puts a blatant negative connotation on the word "difference," as if to be different is to be "less than." Attending a conference as a self-described "black lesbian feminist," Lorde felt under-represented, and even more so, unacknowledged. How are women supposed to move forward if we can't even acknowledge and embrace our differences? In one of the many powerful parts of the reading, Lorde says:
ReplyDeleteWithin the interdependence of mutual (nondominant) differences lies that security which enables us to descend into the chaos of knowledge and return with true visions of our future, along with the concomitant power to effect those changes which can bring that future into being. Difference is that raw and powerful connection from which our personal power is forged. As women, we have been taught either to ignore our differences, or to view them as causes for separation and suspicion rather than as forces for change. Without community there is no liberation, only the most vulnerable and temporary armistice between an individual and her oppression. But community must not mean a shedding of our differences, nor the pathetic pretense that these differences do not exist.
Interestingly, put perhaps not coincidentally, parts of Lorde's "The Master's Tools Will Never Dismantle the Master's House," is reminiscent of Sojourner Truth's famous "Ain't I A Woman?" speech. Throughout the reading Lorde repeatedly questions her white audience - what is the theory behind racist feminism? Why don't white women educate themselves about the differences between the histories of white women and black women? Why weren't more women of color asked to participate in the feminist conference? Aren't they women too? It is as if the question "Ain't I a woman?" is yet to be answered.
And therein lies the problem - in failing to acknowledge the differences between women, women are only becoming more and more divided. Differences do not automatically divide people - people divide people. Race is one of the differences that too few women in the feminist movement have not addressed or acknowledged, and it is one of the many. Tiya Miles' "On the Rag," offers a very real example this. As Katie pointed out, movements of unity and progress are often plagued with issues of power relations and disagreement.
I agree with both Katie and Dave - dialogue and education are key. Talking about differences - in race, gender, class, socioeconomic status, sexual preference... - is the first step in beginning many important conversations. These conversations are key to helping feminist women create a more cohesive, defined, and empowered movement.
As Katie points out in her post, it is imperative to approach feminism within a variety of contexts while touching upon specific issues. Audre Lourde emphasizes this point throughout her speech. As a black, lesbian feminist, Lourde is confronted with a wide array of social injustices. While speaking at The Crossing Press Feminist Series in 1984, Lourde focused upon the fact that the feminist discussion must be all-inclusive. The speaker claims a failure to recognize certain inequalities stemming from race, age, class and sexuality is “a particular academic arrogance” and is similar to the type of patriarchal inequality that defines so much of our culture.
ReplyDeleteI found Lourde’s argument to be extremely compelling. It seems ironic that feminists strive to achieve equality for all women however appear to be inadvertently oppressing fellow women. To ignore the problems faced by all women, regardless of sexuality or race, would be acting in the same oppressive manner that women are trying to fight. This should not be seen as a burden, but as a means of reaching better results. Lourde comments that “failure of academic feminists to recognize difference as a crucial strength is a failure to reach beyond the first patriarchal lesson.” It is necessary for us to reach as large of an audience as possible, to do this we must include every female in our efforts.
Peggy McIntosh recognizes her position of inadvertent advantage as a white woman and begins to break down this barrier in her piece on white privilege. As a culture, we are conditioned to blame the victim while no blame is put upon those in power. As a white female myself, I found this article to be very relevant and eye opening to the subtle advantages I have in day to day life.
Nice responses, all. You've done a wonderful job of getting at some of the most compelling parts of these articles, and have really identified the main calls these authors are making: for unification (through acknowledgment of difference), dialogue, and education. I also appreciate the connection to Sojourner Truth: the two articles are related both in their message, and in the sort of "call to action" tone that they take -- perhaps because both were intended for verbal delivery?
ReplyDelete