In defense of the sanctimonious women's studies set || First feminist blog on the internet

The Mystical Negro and Self Flagellation

Jill

A guest-post by Renee at Womanist Musings.

Who or what is the Mystical Negro? She or he is the one who has been granted permission by whiteness to speak on behalf of blacks. As a mystical negro it is your job to inform whiteness when they are being prejudicial as long as it doesn’t challenge the current power structure. It is also your job to issue the equivalent of hall pass by declaring that certain people and or behavior is not racist. Ever wonder how people like Dog the Bounty Hunter can find a black person to come to their defence when they have been so obviously racist – meet the Mystical Negro.

The Mystical Negro is almost a superhero to whites. Able to ignore white sheets with a single glance, while still marshaling out just enough guilt and pseudo Yoda like wisdom to appear relevant, the Mystical Negro is a wonder to behold. He or she does not hold any real power but their inflated egos allows them to believe that the false accolades and Cheshire like cat grins of their white patrons means that somehow they are a person of value when every other POC is being ignored.

The Mystical Negro is also essential to the necessary self flagellation that every good white liberal must perform to keep their left leaning credentials in good working order. It’s the one that allows them to say I am white but….It’s the one that allows whiteness to engage superficially without demanding any sort of commitment.

You ever wonder why so much of feminism is academic today? It is because such line of thought does not require investment on a real and personal level. White feminists can wax on with detachment about the importance of intersectionality without embracing its tenets. There is no rage in their writings, or speeches, only the appropriate amount of indignation. With check list in hand they mark off marginalized bodies; blacks, lesbians, disabled peoples, Latn@, Asians, poor, Muslims, third world bodies, everybody into the pot it’s soup for dinner. We are the consumable, the overly problematized, the often theorized, but the never heard.

Tell me, can you theorize hunger? Sitting with lecture notes in hand can you problematize the essential situation, thus deconstructing the word nigger to the point where you truly feel the meaning of that word. Say it over and over again, nigger, nigger, nigger, nigger, don’t shy away from it. It’s not some sort of abstraction, something you can sit there and consciousness raise about. It either pisses you the fuck off or it doesn’t.

Oh I know that you are all to careful to insure that when you do an anthology you include a certain number of each marginalized category, but did you ever think to give us, the women you seek to lead the chance to walk on our own. I remember hearing in womens studies about the fact that so much feminist work had either been destroyed or not printed in the first place. I remember learning about the feminist drive to create herstory.

Who is her? Who is included in the herstory because I sure as hell know who is not. Are you over forty? Are you of color? Are you a lesbian, or a transwoman? Are you disabled? Are you poor? Are you undereducated? Are you fat? If you have said yes to anyone of these, herstory is not your story. Herstory is what sells, white, educated, middle to upper class, and “conventionally beautiful”. Her story is the woman on the pedestal and no marginalizsed woman has ever stood on one.

The mystical Negro and its compatriots (read: Mystical Others) would love to believe that there is a place on the pedestal for them as well. They are after all invited to be the token representative in the room, published by the small firms, even given the occasional speaking engagement. How powerful is it though to rehash a story that is not your own, but the tall tale of the victors song? Am I making you uncomfortable yet?

When you hide behind your mystical Negro friends and pretend to self flagellate to prove how just how “down” you are for the cause, you stink of falsehood worse than a used car salesman at a midnight madness sale. It is obvious to all but you and your cronies. Cackling like hyenas, you snack on your cookies proud that your sheet is off white. Hey, I am only stop on your multiples sites of oppression tour. Perhaps the next mystical Negro will be more accommodating than I. You see, I have the nasty habit of truth telling, and that is not necessarily conducive to maintaining the lie of inclusivity and detachment.

Hello Feminists, you are not a doctor. There is no requirement for detachment. You are not going to loose yourself by becoming involved with us, rather than studying us like diseases in petri dishes. Understanding the “isms” takes more than reading a few works and penning a good paper. It means more than holding up a placard at a rally, and it certainly means more than writing the obligatory you rock, or go girl commentary on a blog.

Step away from your “mystical others” and your self flagellation routine. Touching my arm in friendship will not hurt you. Daring to engage with me and other marginalized bodes will not hurt you. Saying I need to STFU & L only buys you so many passes. Real feminism happens in the trenches. It is a lived experience and not something you pick up in first year womens studies. Is reading about sex the same as fucking? Is hearing about orgasms, the same as having your eyes roll back in your head with pleasure as you loose all connection with space and time? Live your fucking feminism ladies. Let go of all of the bullshit that comes with practicing theory and just fucking live it. My feminism and anti-racism is real, is yours?

72 thoughts on The Mystical Negro and Self Flagellation

  2. Wow Tom, way to interact intelligently with such a thought-provoking piece.

    There is nothing incoherent here. If you have a question about it that’s burning inside you so badly, just ask rather than suggesting that Renee is doing nothing but speaking nonsense out her ass. Because that’s something I’ve never seen Renee do.

  3. Anti-intellectualism isn’t any cooler just because it’s right on, you know. Also, what Tom Foolery said.

  4. Ha! Only three comments until someone dismissed it as “Anti-intellectualism”! That’s got to be a world record!

  5. @Sam C
    If that is what you took away from this post then you completely missed the point. The idea is that feminism can be experienced, it is not necessarily something that lives inside of the ivory tower. Women that have not gone to university like I have are still feminist and they come to it experientialy. It just as much a valid way to advocate and practice feminism as learning about it in a first year womens studies class. It is elitist not to validate their experiences.

    It is also a call to step outside of the elitist, detached approach that many have towards feminism. It should be something we are passionate about. It can be a guideline to live by. There are also certain events in life that no matter how much we read about we can never be in touch with. There are things that must be experienced to be understood.

  6. Sam C:

    You obviously didn’t understand the post at all. There is no anti-intellectualism about it. It points to real and very palpable problems within mainstream academic feminism, and it’s right on the mark.

    Renee:

    This is a great post. As a graduate student who routinely comes into contact with this kind of feminism, I think you’re absolutely right. I have also found what I’ve referred to as a “cheerleadery” trend within it that whitewashes feminist history and discourages any critical engagement with it. In a Women’s Studies graduate course, the professor regularly came down on me for being so “negative” about feminism and for “criticizing other women.” We had to read a revisionist history that claimed, “no, really, second wave white women really DID care about racial oppression, but Black women just didn’t want to work with them.” I’m glad you wrote this. And I’m disgusted with the ignorant comments you’re getting.

  7. This is an amazing post, packed with power. Thank you.

    Renee, if you’re inclined to talk about it at all, I’m also curious what your take is on all the “Barack the Magic Negro” garbage that’s been flying around. Not just the original LA Times article or the deliberately-asinine song (sung in a mockery of Al Sharpton’s voice by a white man) but all the reactions to the title of the song as well. There seems to be an implicit idea in a lot of the reactions that nobody should say “Magic Negro,” but more than that there just seems to be a lot of consternation about “something racist appearing” without really dissecting what’s up.

  8. Awfully ironic of you, Sam C., to accuse Renee of being the anti-intellectual in here. Try to keep up.

  10. Renee – I’m happy to believe I missed the point. But that’s because the point is pretty much buried beneath some very familiar anti-intellectual cliches. Sorry to have misunderstood you – but I don’t think it’s entirely my fault that I did so.

    Your gloss on what you wrote is that ‘The idea is that feminism can be experienced, it is not necessarily something that lives inside of the ivory tower.’ But that’s hard to square with, for instance,

    With check list in hand they mark off marginalized bodies; blacks, lesbians, disabled peoples, Latn@, Asians, poor, Muslims, third world bodies, everybody into the pot it’s soup for dinner. We are the consumable, the overly problematized, the often theorized, but the never heard.

    or

    Tell me, can you theorize hunger?

    Those quotes don’t read to me as claiming that feminism is ‘not necessarily something that lives inside of the ivory tower’ – who denies that, anyway? They read as claiming that academics can’t be proper feminists, and as repeating some foolish ideas about academics as not part of the real world, and about thinking as totally divorced from practice.

    So, I’m sorry to have commented too quickly, and sarcastically instead of substantially. But this is something I’m passionate about: thinking and teaching are kinds of practice, and valuable ones. Although I believe you when you say you didn’t mean to deny that, that’s how the post read.

  11. You’re going to have to forgive me but I don’t see how this post goes beyond the cerebral level or the ivory tower. It talks about tokenism, it talks about how being considered an other marginalizes a person’s experiences, it talks about the whitewashing of academia, sure. But all of those points? Are FROM academic approaches to navigating the social and institutional realms of oppression. I don’t really see what grounds this, and contrary to popular belief, experience — like knowledge — has a foundation beyond expression.

    And I’m finding it rather ironic that I’m agreeing with the “wait, what?” school of comments considering that many of my “contemporaries” in different battles and different contexts have accused me of similar writings for nearly three years now. But that’s all I’m conjuring too. Because whenever I’ve written anything identical to this, it was always a meta-narrative to very real tragedies happening in the wings that people were neglecting or handling with kid gloves. Devoid of the context of that lived oppression mentioned, of that very real and palpable silence from people claiming to be my sisters, I can see why a lot of people chose to stop putting up with my writings. I can see why they resembled a specter of this and not of the issues I fought (and I keep fighting) to illustrate beyond the very real pain I feel for people like and unlike me.

    Besides, I always thought the magical/mystical negro was less a spokesperson and more of a transformation of a subhuman other into a superhuman. The once stupid Other has infinite wisdom; the once patient and reserved Other has fire and vitality. When white folks have no other place to turn, the magical/mystical negro lifts them to a “new” place by simply using common sense (emphasis on the “simply”) and being docile while doing so. For example, the right castigated Obama as a “magic negro” not because he was deigning to speak for all whites; but because white progressives and destitute whites in need of someone to help them through these confusing times started treating Obama like a rockstar, a messiah, a savior instead of a damned politician who is trying to do right by people (and may not succeed if things keep getting worse).

    It’s talked about more in these posts.

    TL;DR shorter Sylvia/M: What? Wait, what?

  12. I second Tom’s “umm, what?”

    Is it supposed to be ironic that this post mimics the original magical negro column both in tone (condescending) and theme (magical black people) and susbstance-free i-dare-you-ism (say nigger a million times–is that what passes for radical these days)?

    I certainly agree that there is much to criticize about white feminism; I have certainly done this on many many occasions. But how about this, let’s actually use this feminist space to do that. Let’s actually criticize something actual and real instead basing it on post-palin rhetoric of “too academic” and “not real enough”.

    This is frustrating.

  13. Thanks Renee. Its not every day you run into something that manages to be intelligent and persuasive while still being belligerent as hell (and I definitely mean that as a compliment). I’ve always seen the whole mystical negro thing as another form of the old “noble savage” trope; a kind of justification for the sickly sweet white “acceptance” that people who desperately need to prove they aren’t *ist use to cover their ressentiment.

    Oh, and Sam, just because someone argues that the cold detachment of objectivity isn’t the only means of investigating and discussing a problem doesn’t make them an anti-intellectual. Meaning comes from the subject, not the object, which seems to be what Renee was arguing. Denying that rage, emotion, and a visceral response to personal experience have a place in these kinds of discussions shows a narrowness in your thinking, not Renee’s. After all, her analysis couldn’t have been constructed without a certain amount of theory, she just recognizes that theory can only take one so far once they’ve moved beyond the cloister of the academy.

  14. William – ‘Denying that rage, emotion, and a visceral response to personal experience have a place in these kinds of discussions shows a narrowness in your thinking’. I haven’t denied that, and I wouldn’t. Please (re)read my considered comment 10.

  15. I don’t understand how people are reading this as anti-intellectual or anti-academic. I believe that part of what Renee is saying here is that what we think of as the academic study of feminism is often a) a watered-down, easy-to-digest version of what it ought to be, b) preoccupied primarily with the experiences of a select group of privileged women, and c) used as an excuse to avoid the more unpleasant, scary, hands-on work of feminism. A lot of us have settled into a comfort zone in our relationships with feminism.

    The academic theory of feminism can be extraordinarily powerful. In fact, I would say that Renee’s post is a prime example of what feminist theory can be at its best. It is powerful, it is complex, and it is challenging. What it is not is staid, simplistic, or dry. And thank you, Renee, for that. I originally read this post at WM, but I can’t post there from work, so I’m glad I’m getting the chance to comment here.

  16. Guys, all I would say here is that I wish you’d spend some time reading Renee’s blog Womanist Musings regularly.

  18. I think part of the reason this meta-discussion is necessary in spaces like this one is that every time the principles articulated here get applied, without much preamble, to actual shit that’s happening, somebody starts going off about how they don’t get it and why does it have to be about race and why can’t WOCs do more to educate, and every “hello, get yourself educated about racism” trope in the book. In other words, there is a lot of really boring, frustrating racial-justice 101 work that still has to be done in spaces like this one, a “very big” or “huge” level blog depending on the month, where there are all sorts of random people. I wish this was less of a “101 needed” space and more of a “301 discussions only, prerequisites needed” one, and we certainly could set up particular posts like that, but basically… it’s not. Which is why I’m glad that we get guest posts like Renee’s, even if they can be read as highly emotional meta-discussions where part of the point is to snap your fingers in front of some reader’s face and reiterate things like “there’s more to feminism than academic papers” which seem horribly obvious to others. Sometimes I feel like what’s needed more than anything is a satori-inducing battering ram, even if it would be a miracle to produce such a thing out of words.

  19. It has been a longg time since I sat in my undergrad feminist theory class, so I have no idea whether “feminist academia” is currently watered or easy-to-digest. My memories of my class is that it was neither. But that’ s not really my critique.

    In trying to understand my total frustration at a post like this:

    1. The underlying assumption of this post (with very little actual evidence or citations or authors or anything) is that dominant feminist discourse exists in this priviledged, academic space. Which I simply believe is false. Even white feminism—with all of its many priviledges–exists on many levels in many different spheres (ex. Clinton primary debates.) But this post blithely admonishes an entire intellectual viewpoint without any concrete criticisms or evidence or anything. We just experienced a (thank god, failed) national campaign that based its entire premise on this logic. Simply because it comes from the left, comes from “the right people” doesn’t make it any less distracting (ex. the statemetn above about deconstructing hunger. Nobody ever went hungry because too many people think too much about it.)

    2. I am also bothered by the racial tone of the post. I hate this whole premise of the “mystical negro”. I hated it in the original column (magical negro: barack obama) and it doesn’t suddenly become clever here. They are thinly veiled accusations of being the “uncle tom” at who exactly? I am not clear. Is the mystical negro the “white feminist academia”? How? Why? WTF?

    For just one example, let me take the whole criticism in the post on deconstructing the word, “nigger”. Some of the most interesting things I have read about this deconstruction doesn’t come from “academic, white feminists”, but from black writers and bloggers like Ta-neihsa Coates and the provocative (and interesting) book called “Nigger” by Randall Kennedy. Because I appreciated this reading, does that mean that I am somehow less affected when someone screams it at me from their car windown. The answer is an obvious no.

  20. I think I understood the central point of the argument, and agreed with it, but it did confuse me. I don’t find that “feminism today” is mostly academic, and the bits of “herstory” I’ve read tend not to focus on young middle-class white women. I don’t know what Renee means when she says that feminists don’t live their theory. It’s all a bit vague, and it would be nice to have names and links.

  22. To set the record straight because so many keep coming back to Barack the Magic Negro, the term mystical Negro is something that I have been using long before this song came out. I have referenced it repeatedly on my blog. Any connection with Barack the Magic Negro is neither implied or meant. You are simply reaching for the closest association that you can make.

    What I find most interesting is that when a WOC pens an opinion piece such as this that the standard of proof is far different than when written by a white person. It reminds me of something Noam Chomsky said about presenting a leftist argument in a society that has been colonized by the rich and right wing. One must have an encyclopedic mind and meet a burden of proof that is never applied to faulty discourse that we have normalized.

    Often the lack of trust ensures that what is said is not what is heard. It makes one uncomfortable; and therefore the desire to dismiss becomes overwhelming. It is far easier to sit and dissect commentary than to think of why it makes one uncomfortable.

    When I wrote this I clearly referenced my experiences in womens studies. As far as I know, no one commenting on this thread attended the same classes as I did. What give you the right to question the reality of my experiences? Do you know what it is to feel isolated in a room of women claiming to be serving the needs of women, while at the same time systematically creating large groups as other in order to maintain white, able bodied heterosexist privilege? Do you know what it is to attempt to engage only to be told that your voice is threatening, or that your facial expressions are hostile? These are my experiences. Had I not come to an understanding of feminism through my lived experiences rather than what academia chose to present to me as theory I would not be a feminist today.

    The continual disavowal of feminism by marginalized bodies is only partially based upon past erasures. Daily it is reinvigorated when so-called academics believe that because they have read something in a book that they know more than the person that is inhabiting the body. Can I tell you about how many times I was corrected about my culture. Taking a vacation to Antigua and reading Jamaica Kincaid does not make someone an expert and yet this is the attitude that is routinely expressed.

    Theory has its place. It gives us a way to organize our thoughts and in some cases see the Macro effects of the systemic “isms,” but there is no greater lesson than living in the oppressed body. It is knowledge that cannot be taught. It is knowledge that is real and concrete in a world that has continually chosen to marginalize those that it has exploited out of the opportunity to become credentialed.

    Your teaching may be precious to you, but is it anymore important than my lived experience or the experiences of any marginalized body. You are able to take the positions that you do because of the privilege in which you live. I may have empathy for the child that grows in a slum, or that is forced to become a child soldier but I can never feel their pain. I can only imagine from the outside the nights of hunger, terror, and loneliness. One must engage to learn, but also keep in mind that on this path to knowledge we are only spectators. Expertise need not be credentialed with cap and gown. It is every breathe we take in which we are not defeated.

  23. the point is pretty much buried beneath some very familiar anti-intellectual cliches. Sorry to have misunderstood you – but I don’t think it’s entirely my fault that I did so.

    Sorry, Sam, but assertions like that just don’t work. You’re arguing that Renee’s point was “buried beneath” anti-intellectualism and that its partly her fault if you misunderstood her. The first part of that argument seems to be an exaggeration since, even if we grant you the point about anti-intellectual cliches, you still only managed to cite two. The second part of your argument seems to be idiosyncratic, as it seems quite a few of your peers understood exactly what Renee was saying without explanation.

    Those quotes don’t read to me as claiming that feminism is ‘not necessarily something that lives inside of the ivory tower’ – who denies that, anyway? They read as claiming that academics can’t be proper feminists, and as repeating some foolish ideas about academics as not part of the real world, and about thinking as totally divorced from practice.

    I think you’re reading into Renee’s post a bit too much. Renee was criticizing a certain strain of feminism that is prevalent in academia which is divorced from the realities of the battle as she perceives them. I think you’d be hard pressed to find any area of study with both theory and practical application where there isn’t some gulf between the people in the trenches and the people on tenure tracks. Their concerns are going to be different, their priorities, their interests, the nuances of their stances, all because the realities of their situations differ greatly. The difference between the way an academic and an activist see feminism is just as valid, and just as real, as the difference between how a traditionally disenfranchised woman of color and an upper class woman from the suburbs view feminism.

    In reading any author it is generally valuable to pay attention to the context of their speech and try to understand it’s meaning rather than responding immediately to whatever has been triggered in you. People like Renee have been expected to shut the fuck up and listen for a long time, but that is necessarily a two way street. If you respond defensively you’ll learn little and further widen the gulf between your camp and the camps of others.

    So, I’m sorry to have commented too quickly, and sarcastically instead of substantially. But this is something I’m passionate about: thinking and teaching are kinds of practice, and valuable ones.

    But your response had less to do with what Renee said than with your own personal concerns. Rather than step back and think you decided to go on the defensive and attack. Indeed, you are still doing that as you qualify and disown every apology you make. Just because you are passionate about something and you have seen it attacked in the past does not mean that Renee was attacking that now. Even if she had been, your response was not one of discussion but of dismissal. I would have expected that someone who cared about thinking and teaching would have paused to think and perhaps tried to learn.

  24. Nice.
    Many people often turn statements and criticisms into cartoons or strawmen and sit and argue the strawmen and call it a day. I guess I expected more. My bad.

  25. Just to set the record straight:

    Examples of strawman-creating:

    1. My criticism was not that “you copied this from the magical negro column”. It was that its entire basis was faulty for all the reasons I stated above. The reasons that I found it offensive there are the same reasons I find it offensive here.

    2. Hmm, asking you to cite even one academic anything since your entire post was about this topic is because you are a woman of color? And this is because I don’t know what it feels like to be a woc in a feminist class? This makes sense if either of these statements were true, of course. Neither are.

    Seriously. Why don’t you actually speak to the actual critiques of your post? Does doing so make you uncomfortable? I guess if I just say you disagree with me because “you are uncomfortable with my ideas”, that this will just become true.

  26. I feel like this debate gets at the heart of the difficulties with experience as a basis for argument or analysis, especially if it’s the only acceptable basis for analysis. (I’m not saying Renee said that it was the only acceptable basis for analysis, but without reading her post closely I can see how it felt that way to readers.)

    For example, this: Tell me, can you theorize hunger? sounds very like saying that if you haven’t directly experienced poverty and hunger, you have no business writing or talking about them. That’s how I read it, initially. And I’ve heard that argument made many times. And while it’s true that I can never live the experiences of others, I would like to believe I can empathize (as you later say in a comment) and come close to understanding. I mean, that’s what novels and good works of history do, right? They help us imagine or understand, in a nuanced way, others’ lives.

    When I wrote this I clearly referenced my experiences in womens studies. As far as I know, no one commenting on this thread attended the same classes as I did. What give you the right to question the reality of my experiences?

    That wasn’t clear to me, actually. And one of my impulses (especially about the “herstory” part) was to respond with my own experience, which is that I came to history as an undergrad specifically because marginal women were put at the very center of my first women’s history class in 1998. Labor of Love, Labor of Sorrow, To ‘Joy My Freedom, Cannery Women, Cannery Lives, and Boots of Leather, Slippers of Gold, to name only a few, were the first history books I read that made me excited about the subject.
    So, you and I had opposite experiences. Both are valid and true. But that doesn’t tell us what is true about the academy in general. Not that I disagree with your points about the academy and the impulses of many (most?) within it to maintain emotional distance from these subjects – I think that’s quite true. But when it comes down to experience, it’s like opinions – we’ve all got one. So how do we productively use that as the basis for analysis? I’m not saying we can’t; I’m just asking how we should.

    Also, I think two points you’re making are getting tangled up in a lot of readers’ minds – First, that academicians should realize that these are people’s LIVES, for God’s sake, and not just something interesting to do thought experiments on; and second, that they shouldn’t have the hubris to believe they know better about a subject than someone who’s lived it. Both are clearly true, and they’re obviously related. But they are different, I think, and the discussion gets muddled when we’re not being clear which we’re talking about at any given moment. I think it’s also confusing because you criticize feminist historians for only focusing on white, privileged women, but then seem to suggest that those same white privileged women don’t have the authority to write or speak about women other than themselves. I don’t think that last part is what you’re saying, but I can see how it would come across that way.

    Sorry this is so long. It’s a really engaging piece, so I’m trying (with what success I don’t know) to engage with it. Also, I may have missed a bunch of other comments in the 30 minutes it took me to write this. (This is why I never get anything related to my own work done!)

  27. Hmm. I guess I deserved a certain amount of snark for an ill-considered first comment. I don’t know what I did to deserve being slowly and fumblingly patronised to death by William, though. I’m going to duck out now, although I’d like to see Renee respond to Sonia, who seems to me to describe what’s wrong with the original post very neatly.

  28. I didn’t read this as anti-intellectualism or that it was only relevant to academia. It is about the difference between saying and doing. Not that words can’t be acts in themselves, but that many people equate their political positions with political action, and that equation is false.

  29. @Sonia @Sam C

    I address this to both of because it seems that it is your desire to be intentionally obtuse. I am not here to perform like a monkey for your pleasure. Neither of you have the decency to argue in good faith and I am not going to pretend that either of your arguments have any substance. I love the way that you feel that you can rip apart my personal experiences and then demand I rephrase, or reshape my post to your liking. Though this is not my blog you can both still take a flying fuck. I will not be policed, or silenced in any way. Your circular elitiest arugments may scare some young feminist who has yet to find her voice but I know the truth of what I am saying.

    I will tell you quite frankly I am absolutely fed up with the kind of behavior that you have both displayed in this thread. The oh noez bullshit has got to come to an end. Your desire to privilege your learning , your education and your role in feminism over the voices of the oppressed is exactly what is wrong with feminism today. You want to know why WOC routinely reject the label of feminist look in the fucking mirror. Every time we try to engage and offer a different perspective we are met with hostility. We cannot even move past anti-racism 101 and discuss issues with real in-depth analysis because the overly credentialed white feminists have something to say. I know that in the post I wrote that stfu&L only buys so many passes but the both of you have not moved past that stage. Sitting on some idle computer ordering me to rephrase to your liking, fuck that and the both of you. White privilege in action, that is exactly what has happened.

    Show me your sources you say…this was about my life, exactly how would you like me to reference my life? I would further like to point out that this was a blog post, it was not offered as a an academic entry, it was not written for an academic journal but somehow this is the standard that you have both chosen to employ. Show me where you have demanded source work for a work based in experience from a white feminist. I eagerly await your links. This is exactly the kind of impossible standard that whiteness creates when it is being questioned.

    I would also like to point out the ridiculousness of demanding source work on a piece that was clearly about experience and moving away from the ivory tower. You are so caught up maintaining your damn privilege that even the notion that ideas, or thoughts, may stem from something else that you immediately become defensive. Deal with your own damn discomfort

  30. Sitting on some idle computer ordering me to rephrase to your liking, fuck that and the both of you. White privilege in action, that is exactly what has happened.

    FYI, it’s my understanding that Sonia has identified here was a WOC.

  31. I think a lot of people should take a deep breath. I’m seeing a lot of defensiveness and nothing to warrant it. I’m in academic feminism right now and I know exactly the sort that Renee is talking about. Fortunately, my department isn’t one of them (which is why I’m in it), but oh yes, I’ve seen it.

    The only criticism I’ve seen so far that’s very interesting is Slyvia’s.

    “I don’t see how this post goes beyond the cerebral level or the ivory tower…whenever I’ve written anything identical to this, it was always a meta-narrative to very real tragedies happening in the wings that people were neglecting or handling with kid gloves.”

    This is what I’m wondering about. Because, well, we’re bloggers, and many of us (myself included) are also academics, so yah we do do the cerebral thing on a fairly regular basis. Does this post only engage on a cerebral level? I don’t know if I can agree with that, because it touched me in a way high theory certainly doesn’t, and it called me to action in my day to day (whatever our day to days are). Does a post really need a basis in a real world event to have real world applications and legitimacy? I don’t really think so…

  32. What a ridiculous response.

    First of all, I read Sam’s comment, and it was completely different in tone than mine (which might have been a bit harsh, but I am not so sorry anymore.) And yet you felt the need to paint us both with this incredibly self-righteous diatribe.

    Again and again you say nothing that actually answers either of our criticisms. Again and again you turn legitimate criticism into cartoons and get self-righteous over your own self-made carciture. In fact, according to your response, us even questioning your basic premises is akin to asking you “play the monkey”. And anyone who doesn’t automatically agree with you is a “feminist who has not found her voice.” Seriously. Are you ever how utterly condescending you are of your readers?

    I never said my big problem with your piece was that it lacked citations and sources and links. That was not my point. My biggest problem (among others) which I stated quite clearly was the racial tone of the post. I don’t want to retype what I wrote above. I assume people know how to scroll.

    And pullleeezzee you are going to pull the white priviledge card? This annoys me on so many levels. I believe that the fact that I am an immigrant, queer woc should not give me any more “legitimacy” on speaking about this matter than anyone else. Which is why I chose not to rub your face in it. But if you are gonna call me on some white priviledge bullshit… I gotta claim my space.

    Come onnn, this is the internet. Why would you ever assume you understand and know what my epxeriences have been? I never did this with you.

  33. One more thing. This is not the standard that “whiteness” creates. This is the standard that folks who wish to understand an argument and see it written well with a minimum of lazy and desperately sensationalist logical leaps as possible (mystical negros standing in for white, academic feminists, apparently. Or something. Who knows? Apparently neigther does Renee.)

  34. @Sonia …
    I’m done…elitist bullies don’t impress me. Bending and twisting commentary is hardly original though you seem to think that it represents some sort of skill. I care not what your background is,, the post stands for itself as well as all commentary made in reference to it. If you cannot engage in good faith, which you have clearly proven that you cannot, I simply refuse to acknowledge you. My patience for the the fauxgressive nonsense that passes as engagement is done.

  35. me too. Same. You claim to not care about my background (which I am sure you don’t), but you felt no qualms about using it to justify your childish tantrum. It speaks volumes about your own priviledge that you think you get to decide whether you will “acknowledge me” or not. That’s not how it works. (and no, I am not talking about whether comment moderation)

    funny, I am elitist?

  36. I think a certain amount of disconnect comes when a post like this; a discussion theory vs practice is by it’s very nature theoretical. In this case it becomes more difficult to address because the subject is tokenism and self-flagellation, yet it’s a guest post and the tone is pissed off.

    Agreeing seems like knee-jerk privileged guilt, yet disagreeing throws you into an academic discussion which the post itself excoriates.

    Would this have worked better as link rather than a guest post?

    Either way, what ripley said…

    “many people equate their political positions with political action, and that equation is false.”

  40. Personally I think it’s insane to call someone a bully when all you’ve done is refuse to deal with their criticism and accuse them of being white (shock).

  41. My feminism and anti-racism is real, is yours?

    Yeah, I’m good with it. Thanks for asking, though.

  42. Cara,

    I meant that part of Renee’s point was her experience and feminism’s engagement on those terms.

    “Daring to engage with me and other marginalized bodes will not hurt you.”

    So better to throw the discussion and traffic to her arena and engage and expand on her on her terms, instead of having a guest-post which, given the content, has the feel of a checked-box that invites Go-Girl responses.

    Maybe that’s a minor, quibbling point, and I don’t mean to suggest that this would be the case for every guest-post, that’s just the way post and comments struck me.

    Renee, does that make sense? Am I misinterpreting your post?

  43. Renee,

    Are you really so surprised that when you write what amounts to “If you haven’t lived your feminism, it isn’t real” that the response you get from a lot of people is “fuck you, don’t tell me not a feminist”?

  44. I’ve been thinking about this post throughout the day and am still working through my response to it. I aspire to be a feminist academic (historian)–right now, I’m just a college senior–and wholly admit my racial and class privileges, which inevitably shape my work, I suppose, though I try and acknowledge and mitigate that. I don’t want to claim to understand certain experiences when I don’t. I don’t pretend that my (future) work is going to be of significance to the entire feminist movement. Feminist scholarship as a whole may well be fairly insignificant in the grander scheme of things. I’d like to think that my feminism isn’t limited to scholarship, but I do think the academic world is more suited to my abilities (and disability) than a lot of other work environments. I hope that we can start bridging the gap between the academy and the trenches, but you’re right. Privilege can’t be erased; most academics cannot lay claim to the oppression of poor WoC. Where does that leave us? I don’t know. Academia, with all of its emphasis on ultra-specialization and dry, unemotional language, is not the ideal vehicle for feminism, and academic feminists need to stop pretending that it is. What academic feminism’s role should be, I’m not sure.

  45. Renee (or anyone), any thoughts on my above question about how to use experience as a basis for analysis? It was/is so important for feminists and other activists as they challenged the heavy weight of the patriarchal expert knowledge about themselves, so I see very clearly its value. But (to simplify) if two people have very different experiences on a given topic, is the experience of one of them more valid as a springboard for analysis than the other? If not, what to do with diametrically opposite conclusions that can be drawn from them?

    It’s a problem (both theoretical and practical) that’s been plaguing radical movements for 40 years, at least, so I don’t expect there to be one pat answer. But I’m curious what people think about it.

  46. Well, crap, this thread wasn’t looking great when I last read it, and it’s certainly devolved since then.

    So let me get this straight. Renee is upset that mainstream feminism and many mainstream feminists fail to engage with WOC and other marginalized individuals in the feminist community/movement. There is an expectation that these marginalized individuals should teach us in a gentle, palatable fashion. Renee suggests that we make an effort to be more engaged, through active discussion, friendship, and working towards our goals together. Many readers respond with anger. Right.

    I suspect that many of the people who were upset by this post would actually agree with it if they gave it a good, hard read. There seems to be a reluctance to (surprise!) engage with it on any level other than the initial, visceral response to Renee’s very understandable anger.

    (Also, reminder: if a criticism doesn’t apply to you, don’t make it about you.)

  47. Oh geez. I don’t even know where to start. I feel like I’m about to blow dry my hair in the shower.

    Whatsername, I’m not saying that only posts based in reality are legitimate or illegitimate. I was basically drawing, heh, from my experience of writing posts. I’ve reacted (angrily, happily, and otherwise) to people, to events online, to events in my life, and to hypothetical situations in fairy land. I wanted to ground people so they wouldn’t think I’m trolling if they didn’t know anything about me. But what I meant is the lack of context to connect people with the experiences and observations here makes this entry seem really… confused? Off balance? Not saying we must know what it is to be a WOC in the White Man’s World (some things people can’t know, as Renee says), but we can at least know a little more about what led from A to Z.

    Context is everything. You don’t need a link or a catastrophe or anything like that to ground people in a post. But the context wasn’t very clear here.

    For one thing, Mystical Negro and Magical Negro are used almost interchangeably in discussions of this dynamic. So is it any wonder that people thought for a moment (like me, honestly) that Renee was referring to the most recent incident of this happening that’s widely known — i.e. Barack Obama and that ignorant-assed parody?

    From there we move to ivory tower academia and feminism, where white middle-class able-bodied heterosexual feminism is argued as women’s studies classes and academics favor most. This may be true for Renee and from her experiences. But she presents it here as fact and (ironically) erases the contributions of countless WOC, PWD, LGBT, and poor/underclass people who have broken into the lily-white towers of theory. So that was confusing.

    Then we go back to attack the Mystical Negro trope as a person willingly being a token. This person now seems more like an Uncle Tom figure rather than a dangerous projection of white folks (as most people of color see them). The Mystical Negro is now someone eager to play this role, rather than the person of color having this role projected onto them in attempts to form relationships with whites. And that, folks, really isn’t the same thing. I’ve played people’s Mystical/Magical Negress unintentionally in friendships and relationships. It hurts when you realize you’re a symbol for someone else’s needs and not a friend, when there’s no reciprocity or connection there. I don’t care to reprise that role or volunteer for it. There are some who may use the trope for opportunism, but the shift from white projection to willing POC participant looking for cookies was abrupt.

    Finally, we see how being in the movement means making real connections, forming relationships, and not distancing oneself from the streets and what’s going on in the world.

    We see the conclusion that people can’t remember or learn everything about experiences that are inaccessible (not all experiences will be permanently unavailable to you, e.g., disability or upward/downward class mobility, having a multiracial child or raising a child of a different gender or a transgendered child — but you still will not necessarily be the principal in those experiences).

    I get that. I think that’s what resonated with the people who are giving this post accolades.

    But the high irony to me about this post is while the writing asks for engagement as a course to this “real connection” — yet when people try to engage and they are less than flattering and asking for clarification and context, they’re becoming ivory tower elitists who are white privileged and white-identified academic snobs.

    Even MORE ironic is the comment telling people that they need to read Renee’s blog to understand her, as if the context and the confusion here will clear up as if by (heh) magic.

    This post is grounded in Renee’s experience — and it seems like Renee is speaking more to those people she’s met and very particular instances that she has not granted us access to understanding. If it was done on purpose, then I stand confused, and no amount of accusing me of being a white-identified academic shrew will change that. But I don’t think it’s MY fault I’m confused if there’s no context — link, work, anecdote, or otherwise.

    (And before this straw man pops up again, I read Renee regularly when I read around the blogosphere. Not the point. Really not.)

  48. What NicoleGW said. I also agree with whatsername that Sylvia’s critique is the only interesting one that I’ve seen here so far. I don’t think that I share it, but I do see what she’s saying.

    sonia, I have to say that your critiques here surprised me, and i wonder if you have not, in fact, made yourself entirely clear? What in the world do you mean by the “racial tone” of the post? Renee is writing about racial oppression and her experiences of academic feminism. What’s the problem here? I’ve seen you engage meaningfully with posts about racism in the past, so I’m surprised to see you level this charge. So I’m wondering if your point is clear and what you mean?

    If, in fact, you do mean that you think Renee is out of line for infusing a post about racism with what you view as an improper “tone” (which is how your argument sounds to me and, I think, to others), then I’m surprised, but well… I certainly understand–and share–the vitriol leveled at you here. Is this actually what you mean? I’ve never seen anyone talk about a writer’s “racial tone” in any other way. It’s just…a surprise.

  49. “This may be true for Renee and from her experiences. But she presents it here as fact and (ironically) erases the contributions of countless WOC, PWD, LGBT, and poor/underclass people who have broken into the lily-white towers of theory. So that was confusing.”

    Sylvia, I see what you’re saying, but I honestly did not read Renee’s post in this way. I read it as a discussion of a specific trend within academic feminism that dovetails with Renee’s personal experiences–and not as a totalizing critique of all academic feminism that erases the academic contributions of WoC. I have also observed the trend that the author pinpoints within academic feminism, and I share these criticisms.

    Like you, I am somewhat unclear on the choice to use the mystical negro trope here, but I don’t think that it particularly obscures the meaning of the post. Nor did I find more context necessary in understanding the critique made here. As someone else has mentioned, I think it’s true that any discussion of theory/praxis is by nature fairly theoretical, and while the mystical negro discussion is something I’d seen clarification on in an academic article, I think it works in the context of a blog post.

    In any case, I think… I have to say that I think Renee has received the worst treatment and the worst reception of any guest blogger I’ve ever seen here (And here, I’m talking about the way that I saw commenters treat her over the summer.), so I can understand (and often tend to share) the defensiveness in this space.

  50. Oops, this part should read as follows:

    “As someone else has mentioned, I think it’s true that any discussion of theory/praxis is by nature fairly theoretical, and while the mystical negro discussion is something I’d seek clarification on in an academic article, I think it works in the context of a blog post.”

  51. @INOTI
    I find your commentary very interesting for several reasons. I think that when we talk about living our feminism that there is this perception that involves extraordinary acts or living a life of marginalization. To me this comes down to something that I have termed micro activism.. Each day we have a multitude of opportunities to disturb patriarchy, challenge sexism and in fact most other isms we just don’t recognize them as opportunities.

    Motherhood is an example that I will use because it is a huge part of the way I live my feminism. I am the mother of two and see it as my responsibility to raise feminist sons. This means when we see something sexist instead of just letting it go I point it out to them and make sure that they are aware that this is sexist and why. Feminist parenting can be a radical act and it can be done daily. Living feminism means making feminism a part of your everyday life.

    I seek to infuse my life with feminism because it is important to me and I encourage other women to do same anything can be turned into a feminist act.

  52. Okay last comment because if I keep going my head will hurt.

    Kristin, you say you see my points; but for your own reasons, you chose not to worry about it. I opted to ask questions because I thought them important, like other people in this thread. It is ironic to make a post that says engagement is key to working with people of color in feminism, and then expect people to opt out of engagement with that declaration and the premises that led to that conclusion.

    The way I understood Sonia’s concerns is while it goes into critiquing feminism and its occasional tunnel vision on young white pretty ladies, it conflates Mystical Negro with Uncle Tom. She asked about that. She also asked where this was coming from, and who exactly was receiving criticism — white-centered feminism or the Mystical Negroes who court white feminists, or both, or neither. And she got lumped with an argument about anti-intellectualism (and there are elements of that in here, but I did choose to ignore those because they weren’t pivotal to Renee’s point in my opinion; not faulting Sam for that) and dismissed.

    I don’t see how the reactions to this post have been harsh at all, honestly. People have been trying to engage and it hasn’t happened unless the remark was “wow, good” or “oh, Renee, tell us more.” Which is ironically illustrative of this:

    He or she does not hold any real power but their inflated egos allows them to believe that the false accolades and Cheshire like cat grins of their white patrons means that somehow they are a person of value when every other POC is being ignored.

    The Mystical Negro is also essential to the necessary self flagellation that every good white liberal must perform to keep their left leaning credentials in good working order. It’s the one that allows them to say I am white but….It’s the one that allows whiteness to engage superficially without demanding any sort of commitment.

  53. @Sylvia M

    Actually I think that dissent and question are essential. I very rarely delete commentary on my blog or refuse to engage. While I cannot respond to each comment individually I think that some interesting questions have been raised. I especially found the comment about whose experience do we privilege and value very thought provoking.

  54. at Kristen:

    I am not sure I understood how my comment was perceived. But I didn’t mean to suggest that that there cannot be a discussion about race and feminism. In regard to the mystical negro, it’s an irritating term. I realize Renee came up with it entirely on her own; but that is besides the point. The whole idea is the same (as the magic negro column by Ehrenstein who says basically the exact same thing.) It’s the 2008 version of calling someone an Uncle Tom. I don’t believe it works on a rhetorical level and more importantly at a conceptual level. And when discussing problems with white feminism. At all. It is confusing and to be honest, just weird. It’s like if I wrote a post about racism and just said, “see that’s like being a mystical negro”. Which was pretty much exactly what happened here.

    My second problem is the strong anti-intellectual tone in the post. I completely realize that academia needs to be held accountable. I have sat through many lectures and many discussions where the disconnect between theory and what happens in communities is vast (this is not unique to feminism.) But let’s not dismiss everything under one sweeping fall and call it a day for feminism and women of color and marginalized communities. In fact these discussions do occur in academia all the time. (which is not to say there is nothing to criticize, but let’s be clear. No feminist theory class worth its salt is NOT talking about race, class, gender, sexuality.) So I am left scratching my head as to what the hell the post was actually about.

    In fact, if Renee had just written her last comment about motherhood into her post, it would have made a whole lot of sense. But it wasn’t and instead I got eviscerated for being “white priviledged” (I am not) and called on not understanding what it means to “really understand racism” (whatever, I do) because I am choosing not to “really understand” Renee’s post.

    I keep quoting Coates because I love him. But he had once written, We all have our prejudices, but every time I have mistaken mine for an insight I have paid for it.

  55. Sylvia: It’s just I see blog posts as informal writing and don’t generally bring the same kind of conceptual critiques to them.

    And I didn’t say that I choose not to worry about anything. I said that I didn’t agree that this was a totalizing critique of all academic feminism. So, I guess I could see how one might come away with that interpretation, but I didn’t. It resonated with me because I just finished up a semester in which I saw many of these same dynamics reproduced.

    What I said that I was less concerned with was the use of the term mystical negro (largely because I’m less concerned with the possibility of theoretical elision in a less-formal blog post). I saw this as a clear critique of white feminism in academia, and not as a critique of those who are cast in the role of the “mystical negro.” I think that’s why I was confused about what sonia was saying, but this helps to clarify. I just did not interpret it in that way at all.

    Also, wrt reactions to this post. I was speaking more of past guest posts in feministe that received very harsh criticism, and not necessarily about this one. I am a little unclear about what’s going on here, to be honest. It seems like there is probably some kind of past history between various commenters here that I don’t know about.

    Anyway, where I do agree with you, Sylvia, is that, sure, further clarification of the use of the “mystical negro” could be helpful here. And that it makes sense that the term could confuse readers about who precisely is being critiqued here. That said, I think the actual text of the post makes it clear that it’s a dominant strain of white academic feminism that is being critiqued–and a tendency for white feminists to research WoC by theorizing them in the role of the “mystical negro.” As someone who is working on a PhD in a dominant Women’s Studies program, I see these dynamics *all the time.* They make me furious. And I’ve written similar pieces about my own experiences. I guess that’s where I’m coming from.

    Also, what’s being criticized here is itself anti-intellectual, so I do not understand those who are suggesting that there is any strain of anti-intellectualism here.

  56. i want to talk about this, really have a dialog.
    but i can’t.
    i am cherokee, i was raised cherokee, i spent over half of my free time as i child on the rez. i was not identified by “the authorities” (be they teachers or government officials) as “white”. that is, until i moved to Alabama at 16. i have porphyria, and it bleaches the melanin from the skin (along with a bunch of other symptoms, most of which are horrible and nasty), so by the time i was 16 my skin was light enough that people who hadn’t been around me for years would look at me and see “white”. but i didn’t grow up white, and i sure as hell didn’t grow up with white privilege. and while i DO sometimes experience white privilege now, as an almost 32 year old woman, that has totally been subsumed by the fact that i am disabled and walk with a cane. I am a disabled indian.

    but in every single women’s studies class i have been in, i have been lumped into the section of the class that is “white-middleclass-heteronormative”, and everything about me has been ignored. certainly *my* life has not been one of white middle-class-ness – it was impoverished disabled Cherokee. and if *I* resent all of my life experiences being discarded, castigated and ridiculed because i am not as disadvantaged as a Latina or Black woman (despite all the disadvantages i do, in fact, obviously labor under… HAVING to use a cane to be able to walk at all should mean that professors accept at least some of my life experiences), how are we supposed to engage teen age white girls?

    please understand, Renee, i am not trying to attack either you or your post. but i feel i am really really going out on a limb to say even as much as i have. i totally agree that for years feminism was skewed towards that white-middle class-heteronormative narrative, and that only looking at that specific narrative is WRONG. and disengenious.

    intersectionality IS where the future of feminism is. but how do we get there? how do we move past all of this?
    this is the dialog that i want to have. but never can.

  57. at Kristen:
    you said:

    “In any case, I think… I have to say that I think Renee has received the worst treatment and the worst reception of any guest blogger I’ve ever seen here (And here, I’m talking about the way that I saw commenters treat her over the summer.), so I can understand (and often tend to share) the defensiveness in this space.”

    You know I happened to follow the commentary line over the summer too and I agree. Especially the ones on Clinton. It doesnt’ matter, but last year I was defending those posts. After I wrote my second comment, I was a little sorry. Because I actually agreed with the basic idea that white, privileged feminism (or liberalism) is a bad thing (and that it happens to good people.) But I quickly lost my sympathy after Renee’s response which was what it was.

  58. I disagree that “herstory” is and must be only about white middle-class women. I think that the discipline of feminist history is now mature (old) enough to have accumulated a reasonable amount of work on WOC, and scholarly interest remains high. The representation issue seems to be most acute in entry-level coursework, and use of canned syllabi.

    One undeniable issue is that early work in a field tends to be done on easily obtainable material (published memoirs, diaries, letters, novels; unpublished but cited material residing in an organized archive). These materials tend to be products of middle or upper class literate people with leisure time and with enough talent or connections to get published or be considered a worthy donor of documents to an archive. Furthermore, the background information available for members of a dominant class or society is readily available, and the potential audience for material in a new field tends to be greater if the audience already has some context. Connections to existing disciplines and subjects also help validate work in the new field. It is easier to write and publish a biography of Alice James than a study of women slaves in the Dutch colony of New Amsterdam (ie, New York) – 1. more primary and secondary documents (by her friends, family) 2. more likely to be preserved, accessible, and organized (member of famous literary family) 3. finished study more likely to get published and read, because people already know and are interested in the other family members. Academics tend to go first for the low-hanging fruit that has a ready-made scholarly market.

    Women’s studies has now had a chance to become a recognized scholarly specialty, and the most obvious and popular low-hanging fruit have been taken. How many feminist analyses of the novels of Jane Austen can get published? At the same time, interest in and literature of ethnic studies has grown, so there is now a more substantial context for studies of WOC, more effort put into acquiring archival material, more career credibility for novelty of work given by non-WOC academics and academic publishers, and a larger and possibly better-informed audience.

    The obvious complaint should be “why should early work in a new discipline be disproportionately about the groups/ individuals closest to “the norm”, the group possessing the most power and influence in the society outside academia?” Of course there was early feminist work about WOC, but it generally didn’t have as many publishing outlets and as much influence on the overall discipline as work about white middle-class straight women.

    A lot of Renee’s post is commonsensical. Of course one is going to care more about an issue affecting a good friend or respected colleague than the same issue affecting people one has never met. Of course knowledge is meant to be used to improve the real world. Of course individuals facing a problem have potentially useful observations and opinions about the problem and feasible solutions.

  59. sonia: Thanks for clarifying. I read this post as being fairly clear in critiquing white feminists for casting WoC as a “mystical/magical negro.” Also, I did not read this as a totalizing critique of all academic feminism. Not at all.

    I absolutely agree with you on this point:

    “But let’s not dismiss everything under one sweeping fall and call it a day for feminism and women of color and marginalized communities.”

    I just did not interpret this post as making this move. Maybe because it resonates so closely with my own experiences of academic feminism.

    But, yes, I have read your blog before and realize that you are not white privileged. Your response helps to clarify my questions. Thanks.

  60. Let me begin by saying, that while I may disagree with you from time to time, I appreciate your perspective. So…you know there’s a but coming right?

    BUT

    “White feminists can wax on with detachment about the importance of intersectionality without embracing its tenets. There is no rage in their writings, or speeches, only the appropriate amount of indignation. With check list in hand they mark off marginalized bodies; blacks, lesbians, disabled peoples, Latn@, Asians, poor, Muslims, third world bodies, everybody into the pot it’s soup for dinner. We are the consumable, the overly problematized, the often theorized, but the never heard.”

    I know this is your experience and of course it is a valid criticism from that perspective.

    But don’t you see the internal contradiction here? In the same breath in which you criticize “white” feminists for failing to understand or embrace intersectionality you deny the intersectionality some white feminists experience. Not all white feminists are straight, monogamous, abled, upper middle class, etc.

    Certainly, I agree that there is a problem with the h/t to intersectionality mentality that tends to permeate mainstream feminism. It pisses me off to no end and I bitch about it at every opportunity

    But white feminists are not equivalent to narrow-minded, fully-privileged, and cold-hearted academics. To suggest otherwise is to deny some “white” feminists the reality of their own oppression.

  61. @denelian

    Thanks so much for shaing. It breaks my heart to hear you say that you don’t believe that you are as disadvantaged as latinas and black women and that is why your concerns are not getting attention. I truly believe that there is no such thing as a good oppression and therefore the pain of one should be the pain of all. I recently wrote a post about this very issue entitled What does WOC mean We have a tendency to view racism through a white/black binary that erases the experiences of other women of color. It limits the conversation and it is wrong. It is my belief that as WOC we need to really assert that the term actively represents us all. I know that the same systems that oppress me also oppress you and I believe that we should approach the issues from a sense of sisterhood. I have reached out to other women in the opes to learn their stories and their struggles. I know that fighting amongst each other for a small slice of the pie is exactly the aim of the oppressors.

  62. Coming in here late, I’m not sure why folks are seeing anti-intellectualism here. It seems clear to me that Renee finds academic intros to intersectional critique, feminism and anti-racism to be useful up to a point. And is critiquing what happens when things leave off at that point, and these experiences, plus the a tendency to prove ones understanding by self-flagellation, don’t add up to either useful activism or engagement with WOC as human beings rather than themes or mirrors for ones liberal self-worth. It is in the latter sense that I interpret “Mystical Negro.” Nowhere do I see here, assuming I’m not misreading, a criticism of intellectual studies in and of themselves.

  63. @Kristin

    I am not using the term Mystical negro as a criticism of POC. I used it to discuss the ways in which black bodies are constructed and disciplined by whiteness. The mystical Negro is an invention quite similar to the more familiar “my friend is black meme” The friend that allows whiteness to ignore privilege and excuse racist acts. The mystical negro is also a reference to the fact that a person can be empowered to speak on behalf of their race so long as they do not issue a dissenting opinion. It is a caricature rather than a being, and should a person decide to dissent someone else is just slotted in to fill the position.

    I do want to say that in writing blog posts I try to be concise as most readers will not read long posts. Often times I do not expand on ideas that I otherwise would have. Due to the nature of blogging itself I approach writing from a completely different angle than I would writing something academic or even of a professional nature. This post in particular is an example of this in that I am not grounding my ideas in a specific incident but rather relating in general how I came to certain conclusions. I certainly don’t believe in the concept of universal truth and therefore know that my experience is not the last word on academia and feminism but I cannot believe that these experiences are unique to me.

    When I blog it comes from a very personal place. It comes from a desire to share something intimate with others. This is not something I bring to my other work. I believe that if what I write resonates with anyone at all it is because I lay myself bare before others. THe best posts that I have written come from a place deep within me. I think this is part of the reason that my temper flares when I suspect dishonest engagement. Patience never has been and suspect never will be my virtue. Blogging may be an exercise to some but for me it is a deeply personal experience.

  64. Great commentary, Renee, it resonates with me quite a lot. For all the discussion of solidarity and inclusion that I see, it inevitably feels like those of us who aren’t white, cisgendered, middle-class, or academic are only polled about our experience in relation to the experience of white, cisgendered, middle-class academics. The story is still their story, and at best we might end up as a sidebar feature.

    “When I blog it comes from a very personal place. It comes from a desire to share something intimate with others.”

    Thank you for that. I’ve grown tired of academic language, and I’m much more interested in reading about actual experience in passionate terms. I think feminism, and progressive thought in general would be well served by more of this.

  65. at all the ‘zomg anti-intellectualism’ comments:

    rofl apparently academia reduces reading comprehension or something.

    Renee has captured perfectly why I refuse to ever take another women’s studies course again, for what it’s worth.

  67. denelian – thank you for sharing. WOC here.

    i would love to have that dialogue too. i agree with you that intersectionality is the way of the future, not just for feminism but also for other movements.

    i’m not from the US but i have heard that native americans are basically ignored when it comes to race. it sounds like your experience reflects that. *looking* white (and the widespread belief that to be brown, black or however different POCs identify means you have to *look* it) also seems to be permeating the prejudice/discrimination/oppression.

    i think in any women’s or antiracism activist group, feminist class – intersectionality should be foregrounded, part of consciousness raising, group principles, etc.

    i also partly agree with Kristen J., intersectionalty applies to everyone and not every white woman is ignorant of her white privilege, but in my experience MOST ARE – notice how i said most. so while i can’t be bothered teaching white feminists anything, it is important to recognise true WOC allies. and in my experience not even all WOCs are allies. and like denelian’s experience this can cut across racialised lines.

    i also appreciate the reality check that sonia is giving. i think to write off women’s studies is problematic. yes there are still the token weeks of race but in most classes lecturers cannot not consider race. damn in any of my classes we have never even considered ability. anyway women’s studies is supposed to give us a foundation for further thinking and study not to give us all the answers. there are also some awesome radical woc teachers out there, and plenty of people supporting them. undoubtedly any women’s studies that just considers white, middle class women should be relegated to the feminist stone age.

    yet i also fear we’re going around in circles – this shit has been said so many times (and thank you so much for putting yourself out there and sharing renee), but the cycle repeats itself. i completely understand renee’s frustration. so what can we do?

    i think that women’s studies has definitely changed my life and given me a preliminary framework to understand the intersecting dominations in my life. I think white feminists can be passionate in their speech but for most of them, they don’t really consider race, look at their white privilege. whiteness as power is not going to change anytime soon…but while it’s good to call out people for their crap, i’m starting to think that some of us are wasting our emotional energy doing it so regularly (not that this applies to you renee). i know recognition is important but truly this movement does not belong to anybody…

  68. Pingback: RSS agregator » Blog Archive » So that nice lady at Womanist Musings is at it again.

  70. Renee:
    thank you for saying all of that. and thank you for not getting angry at my rambling.
    you are totally correct – fighting for one small slice of the pie is EXACTLY the game that those who are invested in the patriarchy want us to play. i try not too – i am not afraid to speak out, for myself, for my Nation, for my friends, for other disabled people. but i am often made to feel ashamed – because i can now “pass”, or i don’t need a wheelchair all the time, or whatever.

    i think that the only way we can “win”, by which i mean gain some true measure of equality, is to continue to speak up and speak out. i sometimes fail (ok, i often fail) to speak for those who are in my situation but worse. i speak up for those i know directly, or i speak in generalities (for instance, i complain about lack of handi-cap access, but after my needs are met i don’t always go back and make sure everyone else’s is too).

    so you have inspired me to speak up and out more. and made me feel a bit better (which in itself is no mean feat – i have been horribly dpressed because the huge surgery that was supposed to get me off of the cane didnt work.) so i am taking away, i guess the best way to phrase it is “your support” – which i really need. or maybe “validation”…

    i am not getting that at school. i spoke to one of my professors about this discussion today (she holds a double Ph.D in poly-sci/women’s studies, and is the only professor i have had at OSU with whom i feel a connection) who is Mexican but like me many people assume she is white (because she took her [black] husband’s name of Jones because apparently NO ONE could spell her name) and she struggles like i do, to be seen as someone with a “worthy narrative” (and honestly, her life was harder than *MINE* – we were poor, she was homeless for almost a year as a teen). i recommend this site, this post, and your site to her, and she seemed interested, if intimidated by the intratubes (she’s 62? or 63). but she had an interesting question, and it really relates *I* think.
    why is it that, when we are online, unless we go out of our way to say something, we are ALWAYS considered to be *White*??? because, world wide, white people are not the majority online. that we have this chance and this space where we can actully finally be color-free…
    but everyone is “white until proven not guilty”, at which point that user is shuffled right back into one of those “other” categories. i don’t have an answer here, EXCEPT that when i DON’T make it clear that i am not white, i get in trouble. always. i say the same things, but adding color changes it (which makes me think i live in Oz)
    so, renee… can i get you to write about that? i think that maybe, if we start examining what went wrong with the internet (as far as it not being the Utopia it could be) we can figure out how to fix it. and if we fix the blogosphere, we have started the revolution.
    (i’m sorry this is so long. i just cant seem to make it any shorter…)

  71. @sonia:

    yeah, it is sad that i can’t take women’s studies courses because of the grand idealization of writing academic papers and being a big name and ugogurl-ism. the transphobia didn’t help, either, nor did the girl who claimed she was SOOOO radical but couldn’t comprehend how being a women’s studies major is just participating in the institutionalization and mainstreaming of feminism. or the near-weekly discussions about leg-shaving like it’s actually a big deal. or the ragging on blogs and internet-feminism and idealizing the good ole days of the 1970s movement, but yet only considering the views of academics and big names.

    yeah, it gave me angina.

  72. if I’m a seventeen year old, white, middle class female does that mean i will be forever ignorant? i’m not trying to be antagonistic, i’m becoming more and more aware of the fact my life is bloody easy and it really concerns me that i wont be taken seriously as someone who wants to help get everyone’s voice out there and to try and empathise to as close to understanding as is possible with the above. i know i have it easy, but is that my fault? if you’re lucky enough to not have to struggle about something, but to be shunned from helping others with their struggle, is that fair? of course you dont know how theyre feeling but can’t someone help with a problem anyway as its clearly huge, even if its not your personal problem, but that of your friends/relatives/other human beings?!
    i’m going to put my energies into reading and listening to all the above perspectives and trying to experience as much as life as possible… i dont want to have a narrow perspective because of what i’ve been born into..

    this is probably naive and incoherent and straying far far from the point of the main article but thanks to renee, supporters and opposition for some eye opening anyway.

Comments are currently closed.