The Message Being Sent
I think I’ve finally decoded it! This is what it says:
- We, white feminists, will work to resolve the larger issues between ourselves and women of color just as soon as a suitably nonspecific larger issue arises.
- The larger issue must reference no actual behavior by any actual white feminists in order to qualify as “suitably nonspecific.”
- We prefer to deal with the larger issues by having many, many interminable conversations that “wonder how” instead of “get to work on.”
- We prefer such conversations to preference the needs of white people, because as white people we are profoundly sensitive to how monumentally hurtful it is to be charged with behaviors like racism, appropriation, silencing, etc.
- Part of taking care of white people is asking the people who are angry with them to please be respectful, while we allow the white people free reign to behave in as insulting a manner as possible.
- The ideal larger issue will be able to be blamed, in full, on white supremacist groups and/or McCainiacs.
- Failing the above, the ideal larger issue will have occurred so many years in the past that no practical resolution can be implemented in the present–at least not by ourselves.
- When necessary to spare our feelings, “two weeks ago” may count as “many years in the past.”
Hope that clarifies things for you as much as it did for me. Still: What a disappointment.
So we’re clear: I like what Jill was trying to do, and I like the update to the post, but I don’t like the turn that thread is taking, nor the people who are turning it there, nor the depressing realization that in all likelihood, no one is going to tell them to stop. That would be a little too specific.
UPDATE: Speaking of specifics, if this is true (and if anyone has screenshots, I’d appreciate a look at them), then I have a new position on this whole thing:
Though here there are pictures of darker skinned natives dressed up slinging spears and arrows at the fair-haired and skinned heroine. What are they representing? And the only woman is the blonde woman who’s rescuing the White man from the dark-skinned natives which I guess is supposed to be some sort of progress for women?
And that position is: If these are accurate descriptions of the illustrations used in this book, then not only is promoting either this book or its author not a neutral act, it is a hostile one. If that isn’t comprehensible to everyone, I give up.
Good GRIEF.
April 22, 2008 at 2:28 pm
Yes! So true. Especially the first couple of points. Lord, I’m done. I can’t argue with the entire lot of them alone. I hate arguing.
April 22, 2008 at 2:33 pm
I’m stuck in moderation over there and expect to be in limbo for the duration. So for those actually interested in airing two sides of an issue, as opposed to “sound and fury signifying nothing”:
First, what Ico said. And keeps saying. And keeps saying.
Secondly, what Jenny Dreadful said. I’ll repeat it - however “Republican” a tactic that may be *smirk* - since very little else that’s said here other than “let’s sweep it under the rug” doesn’t seem to be getting through:
What was it Dr. Free Ride said?
Oh, yes:
http://offourpedestals.wordpress.com/2008/04/14/i-pledge-to-do-better-at-listening-to-women-of-color-just-not-these-women-of-color-because-theyre-mean/
Third, those of you who continue to insist that “plagiarism” constitutes word-for-word copying, please check the definition of “alleged infringement” under Title 17 U.S.C. *rolleyes*
Fourth, there has to be some sort of linguistic theory underlying the “white” feminists — and particularly “white” womens’ — insistence that suppression and denial that an uncomfortable issue exists constitutes “playing nice” and “putting an issue behind us/them”. I’m going to look into it.
And finally:
Those of you who call yourselves scholars and attempt to continue to confuse the issue of “plagiarism” with the concept of “cultural appropriation”, STOP IT.
JUST STOP IT.
The intellectual sloppiness and laziness are not worthy of you. Personally, I’d be embarrassed. But, as it’s been clearly pointed out here ad nauseam, you’re not me.
—————-
(Not printed there:) Certainly the whine of “You all are acting like Republicans” holds less water than ever. Because in terms of attempting to control the frame of the discourse, I’d say these girls are getting honors grades in class.
Hypocrisy, hypocrisy. But why should anything less be expected?
April 22, 2008 at 2:36 pm
I hear you, Ico, but I did consider one faint positive here:
Jill wouldn’t have received any pushback at all on this if she hadn’t made such an effort in the first place to reach out, so that people felt comfortable bringing their concerns to her. That they did says something good about Jill, although it might not feel like that to her at the moment. But if folks really thought she were just a blockhead, no one would have said anything at all. On the plus side, that would mean “no shitstorm.” On the much-more-concern-worthy minus side, though, that would also mean Feministe had been written off and that yet more POC had just concluded, “fuck this.”
(Although, speaking of “fuck this,” I AM gonna have to write that thread off because damn, Faletti, get a job already, I mean one besides being the worst fucking self-appointed PR person ever. He’s such a dick.)
April 22, 2008 at 2:38 pm
There’s a cultural theory for it, littlem–it’s called “Minnesota nice,” sometimes expanded to “Midwestern nice.” It’s where if we don’t acknowledge the elephant in the room, then, magically, there is no elephant anymore. Even if we’re hip-deep in elephant shit. NO ELEPHANT.
Also, it fucking sucks.
April 22, 2008 at 2:39 pm
*delurks for a hot minute8
List of Bloggers of color taking breeaks from feminism /damn nigh quitiing in some vein
: BFP, vanessa,sudy,sylvia, me .
Lis of books non published or jobs retracted from anybody so far 0
iT is interesting to me that in all of this utter fracking bullshit , all of these newly converted trying harder allies have not noticed cared or changed on wit the fact that this has allienated many WOC and that none of the original people are debating this much anymore
( though thank you allies who keep trying we preciate it)
but of course theyll get to it
I’m just wondering how many of us do they assume will still be arund and willing to talk by the time they get to it
and that amazing fucking condescension of see I do favors for BFP
and teh sudden okayness with men tellingw omen hwo to behave and smearing women cuas ethey wnat to protect THIS woman
extra ally point right there!
*relurks*
April 22, 2008 at 2:40 pm
Damnit, it’s taken me this long (and your quote of Dr. Free-Ride, littlem!) to realize that I chose a template without comment permalinks. By gum, I am fixing that shit tonight. I depend on comment permalinks!
April 22, 2008 at 2:47 pm
But BA, that’s so mean! Facts don’t do what I want them to! [cries]
And, seriously, in all the most serious seriousness, now and forever amen, I REALLY thought nothing was going to top “X as in Malcolm X, I wonder what he’d think of that, hmm? Tsk tsk, you mean WOC.” But see, apparently I need to lower my expectations exponentially.
Oh, BA, damnit, I MISS YOU!
April 22, 2008 at 2:50 pm
Littlem, I admire your fierce determination. I really do.
Blackamazon, oh, your list depresses me! Ugh… *headdesk* This shit sucks.
Ilyka, I think you’re right about Jill. It makes Feministe better than the other major feminist blogs. But I’m still pissed at them for advertising Marcotte’s book. Even with the update, it’s not taking a stand for the many WoC who have spoken out. It’s playing both sides… and in a situation in which one side has clear privilege, what it amounts to is writing off the concerns of WoC. You can’t have it both ways. Sometimes, you have to take a stand.
April 22, 2008 at 2:51 pm
“Midwestern nice.”
I was born in Indiana, and live in NYC now - where Jill is also, if I’m not mistaken - and it’s just as nauseating here in upper middle class white circles as it is anywhere else. I’m going to assume it came over with the other repressive BS constipated behavior on that Puritan boat.
I’m going to write to George Lakoff (since they’re apparently shutting down Rockridge *sigh*). Denial is mighty effective for controlling a frame, but there’s got to be an equally effective countertactic. Somewhere. They couldn’t have buried them all with Atwater.
Meanwhile, I may reach out to all my press friends downtown to let them know
1) nothing to see at KGB tonight. Move along.
2) despite however laudable some books may be, there may be other theories floating around - somewhere - that someone might have written, that might just be less than original. Maybe.
No elephants, though.
April 22, 2008 at 3:02 pm
BTW Littlem — your comment went through (yay!) I was so glad to see that, because it needs to be said and you say it quite well. :)
Ilyka, I’m rereading your snarky list after looking over that thread again, and I repeat, so much win.
April 22, 2008 at 3:29 pm
May his ghost rise up and give her an ass-whipping she’ll never forget.
Preferably right in the middle of a press conference.
April 22, 2008 at 3:58 pm
Eurgh. This whole thing is about to make my head explode. How these people deal with the cognitive dissonance of calling themselves progressives and feminists while ridiculing &/or minimising the concerns of WOC is beyond me.
And as far as Amanda’s comments go, all I can say is that I thought she’d reached the absolute limit of arrogance, self-absorption and sheer clueless asshattery when she compared herself to Malcolm X. Shows how much I know: her crapulence truly knows no bounds.
Bloody hell.
April 22, 2008 at 4:18 pm
As one who has failed at having it both ways myself, I have to agree with that.
And yet, I don’t want to help spawn another round of “What Do You Want us To Do, Kill Ourselves?” As in, “What Do You Want us To Do, Quit Supporting Feminist Bloggers?” Now on the one hand, no, I don’t want that; on the other hand, duh, I’m not a woman of color, and this whole mess didn’t come about as a result of an offense against me-wonderful-me, so who cares what I want?
I was glad to see Jill add the post promoting Nubian’s film, though.
Y’all, if I’m not around much rest of the night it’s because I’ve got to work until midnight my time (US MST). I’ll try to keep the mod queue moving, but I won’t have time to jump in and comment much myself. Please don’t anyone feel slighted! I appreciate that anyone would take time out of hir busy day to leave my dumb ass a comment, let alone several anyones who are damn smart besides.
April 22, 2008 at 4:29 pm
I lied! One last thing:
I sympathize with Jill feeling pulled in multiple directions. But: Emphasis on “multiple.” Because while I’ve seen a WIDE variety of suggestions by women of color regarding what Amanda could do to make things right, ranging from the mild (acknowledge that others have more expertise with the subject by linking to them in the Alternet article; acknowledge Nina Perales’ work as having contributed to her thoughts on the subject) to the severe (get fired from Alternet)–and probably at least a dozen more in-between–I’ve seen one, and ONLY one, position from Amanda’s supporters: Denounce this whole thing as a total bullshit hatchet job by Teh Haterz, and never refer to it in public again. That’s it. That’s the only position anyone can take that will make her happy.
And you know, that really ain’t a solution, and it’s asking way too much of her friends besides.
April 22, 2008 at 4:35 pm
i followed a link here from the comments in feministe.
on the issue of “getting on with the work,” feministe seems willing to start playing ball.
i commented about nubian’s film project being screened in chicago and jill put it up right away. she also credited me for the link.
–interestingly, nubian needs money for post production and her post is right above one about how to give $$$ to feminist/good causes. hope someone makes the connection.
i think we should keep encouraging them to publicize folks like her. either that, or there is a natural opening there for an editor with an eye for anti-oppression/anti-racist feminist work. that goes for seal press as well.
i wonder why publishing companies think narrowcasting is better than broad based anti-oppression work … printing books on only (white) feminists, only on black “issues,” (whatever those are, i guess anti-racism?) only (white) lesbians, etc.
we’re all equally able to access the human experience. so learning about sexism from a black woman is still learning about sexism, although you may get an additional critique of racism as well.
it’s like 2-for-1 publishing! if anything it makes book marketing more efficient *mostly joking, but isn’t that a valid point?*
if folks don’t feel like they can learn sexism from a black woman, what makes anyone think I can learn history from a white man? is seal press reading your blog? they should be.
i am.
–okay, climbing down from the soapbox before i slip off.
April 22, 2008 at 4:59 pm
From the comment thread at Feministe:
I think it’s possible to plug Amanda and her book without re-engaging the BFP issue.
Technically true, but it would seem to suggest never having really engaged in “the BFP issue” in the first place.
Why is it so freakin’ hard for high profile bloggers to engage in some critical self-examination, to cultivate empathy, and to see where maybe their behavior could be found lacking? I mean honestly …
April 22, 2008 at 5:02 pm
Dammit, wrong link!
This is the comment I was trying to link.
I’ve done some soul-searching, and my HTML skills suck. I apologize to those who have been hurt by my mis-linking, and I’m going to start working on a tagging tutorial so I don’t make the same mistakes again.
April 22, 2008 at 5:12 pm
With deepest respect, Prof Ilyka, I honestly don’t give a teeny little *&^%$#@ what will make Her Most High Whininess happy.
What I DO care about is the ongoing, endless, ad infinitum ad nauseam Mainstream Feminist Greek Chorus of
“What Do You Want Us to Dooooooo?”
Because, as you so succinctly stated yourself, in the face of ALL THIS
if all you can come up with is yet ANOTHER chorus of
“What Do You Want Us to Dooooo?”
then either
a) you are a venal hypocrite who deserves no credibility, or
b) you are a world class idiot who is only masquerading as a scholar/activist, and if I have a shred of intellect left I shouldn’t be listening to your wack butt anyway.
April 22, 2008 at 5:22 pm
Oh, and BTW - it was Mnemosyne herself who threw the “should Amanda get fired from Alternet” meme on the fire. Someone on ABW’s thread (it might have been Ico) called her out on it, suggesting that she was waiting for a WOC to agree with her and then accuse that WOC of having called for it.
http://theangryblackwoman.wordpress.com/2008/04/15/standing-is-solidarity-with-my-sisters/#comments
Tom Head about halfway down the page:
Pretty sharp tactics, actually. Nice subtle work on their part — from the way your comment reads it looks like you even thought a WOC called for Amanda’s firing.
I’m starting to think Rethuglicans could learn a thing or two from the “Regressive Progressive I Don’t Know What I’m Doing But I Will Collapse With the Vapors if Anyone Dares to Call Me On It” Pseudo-Feminists.
April 22, 2008 at 5:25 pm
Coco, that has a lot to do with niche economics in content based businesses (books, music, blah blah). But I won’t drag this thread further down with all that.
April 22, 2008 at 5:31 pm
*sigh*
So… any ideas from this point on? I am so frustrated with the mainstream feminist sites’ responses to this issue. I don’t know what else to do but keep scouting across the big blogs and whenever a relevant post comes up, hammer in the point again. And again. But I think they really are going to just try and wait it out. Like always. Let it blow over until the next time this kind of shit happens.
Urrrrgh.
April 22, 2008 at 5:35 pm
Littlem,
Yeah, it was me, though you and Ilyka said the same before I got to it. :) Mnemosyne’s tactics there were pretty juvenile, and you’re right, straight out of a Republican playbook, eh? Jeez.
April 22, 2008 at 5:37 pm
>>I’m going to write to George Lakoff (since they’re apparently shutting down Rockridge *sigh*)>>
not to derail, but really? Damn.
anyway: What you all said. -le sigh-
per Jill, I get that it must be awkward if you’re talking about, y’know, a personal friend. As I’ve said to her. It’d be nice if more friends’d call her out more firmly in public, though, Amanda, because friends do do that sometimes. It’s even a sign of real friendship and respect, or can be, as noted. Yeah, I’m sure Amanda wouldn’t exactly take to it real kindly, because, well, check it out even as it stands. Fun times. But…well, you know.
I suppose it’s also possible that even if they did, it wouldn’t make a dent. But even if it didn’t make an impression on AM itself, it’d help wrt relations between teh friends and, well, everyone else.
April 22, 2008 at 5:38 pm
“i wonder why publishing companies think narrowcasting is better than broad based anti-oppression work … printing books on only (white) feminists, only on black “issues,” (whatever those are, i guess anti-racism?) only (white) lesbians, etc.”
“atomization” in a larger sense, too, I thought.
April 22, 2008 at 6:31 pm
[...] Please, please, please, please, please, please, please, please, please, please, please, please, please, please, please, please, please, please, please, please, please, please, please, please, please, please, please, please, please, [...]
April 22, 2008 at 8:18 pm
what i was more trying to say was, a narrow casting of authors, or a narrow idea of who would be sucessful or appealing to a broad audience.
April 22, 2008 at 8:19 pm
what i was more trying to say was closer to a narrow casting of authors, or a narrow idea of who would be sucessful or appealing to a broad audience.
April 22, 2008 at 9:38 pm
You can email them, too.
Even though I’m banned from Feministe, Jill still sometimes reads my emails. So, it’s worth a shot.
April 23, 2008 at 3:40 am
I am very sad that some WOC bloggers, including BFP, have decided to shutter their blogs. I empathize with the impulse to do so, but I am convinced that more speech is always better than less.
April 23, 2008 at 5:13 am
I wish I could say this was shocking, but it isn’t. And no I don’t think they are worried that woc bloggers who were here during the drama won’t be here when they get around to doing the right thing; I think they are hoping that woc will not be here so they don’t have to.
I’ve been trying to highlight good behavior as a counterpoint to all the bad, but its been a stretch most times . . . still pondering the girlcott response from Brooke . . .
April 23, 2008 at 6:29 am
This makes me hate them. It is just so… argh!
Re: the girlcott, did those Seal Press people actually go and apologize to BA?
I am so disgusted with Feministe. Maybe it was naive of me, but after Holly’s post I thought maybe, just *maybe* at least ONE big feminist blog would stick to doing what is right. Instead not a week later we are proving we haven’t learned a thing.
A week.
*headdesk*
April 23, 2008 at 7:20 am
ico a small note form someone who has been in this for two years now
Please stop head desking
concussiosn are quick silent and lethal
April 23, 2008 at 8:13 am
Hahaha, thanks BA! :D
How you’ve stuck this kind of stuff out for 2 years, I don’t know. I really am starting to feel that concussing myself would be more productive than talking to white feminists, especially the big “mainstream” ones who get book deals and fret about their careers.
April 23, 2008 at 9:24 am
Oh my god. HUGO concedes, albeit incredibly obliquely, that the images in Marcotte’s book are racist. *and the world grinds to a halt*
http://www.feministe.us/blog/archives/2008/04/22/today-amanda-marcotte-at-kgb-bar-in-manhattan/#comment-166750
Of course the book advert is STILL there. NOTHING is being done about it. But it still made me do a double take.
April 23, 2008 at 9:38 am
If you want photographic proof, let me know, I can drag my camera to the bookstore tomorrow, though it seems fairly confirmed that the pictures are there, and racist. (But let me know tonight so I put my camera in my purse.)
But don’t gve up on Hugo yet, Ico. He then reminds us that, even if there are “troubling” images in the book, the book is important, deserves the widest possible audience, and deserves support within the racist parts of the feminist and progressive communities.
I might have fixed his wording a teeny bit there.
April 23, 2008 at 10:06 am
LOL! I love your rewording of Hugo’s prose. :D
And yeah, re: photos, if they haven’t changed the thread to denounce the racism then I think it would be awesome if you could take some.
April 23, 2008 at 10:06 am
As a straight white male coming at the last couple weeks entirely from the outside (though with deep feminist sympathies), who’s spent the last couple days traversing blogs and comment threads and just trying to piece together the hugely complicated jigsaw puzzle of actions, responses, perspectives, histories, etc., I want to say this: It’s been more educational than any previous exposure to feminism I’ve had, and I include a lot of reading and classes and personal experiences in that.
And I don’t mean “educational” in a bad way, like “Wow, I thought I was a feminist but on witnessing this circular firing squad, I want out.” I mean “educational” as in the struggle to collect and process all the various strands of the controversy has illuminated more facets, has exposed more voices, has articulated more personal difficulties and structural problems than I thought possible. It’s been like a boot camp in what’s being fought for.
That’s not to say that, on the whole, the controversy is positive, only that there’s a few small silver linings to a lot of dark clouds that still cast long shadows.
April 23, 2008 at 10:34 am
What I would love to know is why the book is so important, and why it automatically deserves support. I think that it deserves an honest response, sure, a fair criticism: but fair criticism is critical, and it can be negative, and them’s the breaks. I — and look, I have neither read the book nor seen the images, so I’m mostly making this all up — am not sure why we absolutely need to ignore racism in this book.
Look, I was vaguely pro FFF, because a book aimed at upper middle class white teens to get them to feminism isn’t really a bad thing — until the disagreement over the rest of the content, and over (dis)honesty in the aim of the book. So I’m willing to say that a funny, pop-cultury book about feminism is worth a glance. But, you know, at some point, you need to decide what things you have to give up. And you always, always have to give something up. Does the book stand up to the racism? I don’t know. I suspect not, because, just on the numbers, very few do. And there’s a certain lack of “prisoner of the culture” argument Marcotte can make, given the content of the book and the blog.
So maybe you say, yes, it’s racist, but, overall, it’s worth the racism. (I’m not claiming it. I haven’t read the book, and even if I had, it’s not up to me to say what levels of racism are okay.) But you need to explain this, more than just state it as a fact and insist that everyone band together and support the book!
April 23, 2008 at 11:12 am
BA - I see you did not answer Ico’s question; would you mind letting us know if they apologized?
wolfa - I know you aren’t advocating this, but when is racism acceptable? isn’t the problem that some people think it is in exchange for book deals, pubs, or whatever?
This whole multi-thread thing has made me physically sick and mentally fatigued. You can add me to the list of bloggers on hiatus. Tho my blog continues to have posts, with one exception I haven’t written a post in almost a week and have another week’s worth of previously scheduled posts to cover the coming days. I’m not even making comments on my blog right now b/c I can’t guarantee I won’t go off. How sick is that
April 23, 2008 at 11:25 am
Ico, a quick explainer on why the post is still there: I’m going to leave it up because I think the post and the comment thread deserve to be preserved, if only as evidence of how well-meaning white feminists can do idiotic things that cause a lot of damage. Taking the post down, or replacing it with something else, would certainly be less embarrassing for me, and maybe I could re-position myself as the Good White Person. But then that erases the history of what happened. I think promoting Amanda’s book and her event without any recognition that doing so was pouring salt in the wounds of a lot of readers is something I deserve to be called out on. Leaving the post up is me saying that I’m remembering this, and that I’m not going to quietly wipe away my fuck-up.
April 23, 2008 at 11:37 am
Profbw, I am so sorry to see you on hiatus as a result of all this stuff! I have really found your blog informative and wonderful, and you know, the infinite patience with which you’ve been handling everything so far (especially the Seal Press stuff) amazes me.
If you do decide to go off on somebody in the comments, I think that would be totally awesome. Because so many people need a good swift kick right now.
April 23, 2008 at 11:39 am
I guess I’m thinking of, say, Shakespeare and Twain and other writers of that calibre. At some point, you decide whether the stuff in there is worthwhile despite some issues (some of which are product-of-the-culture issues, perhaps all). I am IN NO WAY saying that this book is Shakespeare-level or that racism in it should be ignored.
I think acceptable isn’t the right term — I’m having trouble finding the best words here. Sometimes the badness is outweighed by other good factors, but usually not. And the people who can really comment to it are people who are directly affected by the badness, not dilettantes like me. (Well, I can point it out, but I don’t think it’s up to me to say “sure, it’s there, but it’s only troubling!”) Maybe a book tries to be non-racist and fails, because it’s written by someone in a racist culture, and you think that the parts that are anti- or non- are good enough, the content is important enough, the writing is wonderful enough — or that it just failed anyhow. (I enjoy lots of sexist things, even as I recognise the sexism as I am enjoying them.)
Is this any clearer? My initial point was just that you can’t — especially not as a rich straight white Christian dude — claim that the racism is only “troubling” and that the book is nevertheless important and deserves enthusiastic support from everyone without, you know, making an argument. And the burden of proof is more, the more privileged you are. Well, should be, anyhow, in reality it usually works the other way.
April 23, 2008 at 11:47 am
Jill,
I do think it’s a good idea to leave the thread&comments up and intact. But I’m not the person who needs to hear an explanation or apology; I’m not one of the people who was hurt by all this. So I don’t know why you would explain yourself to me. I think your explanation needs to be directed to the women who were/are involved and who are still very much affected by all that has happened.
Leaving the thread up as it is, with no additional explanation or retraction or anything of that sort, makes it seem as if Feministe is still supporting the book. Please add a statement retracting that support, apologizing to those for whom this was salt rubbed into very fresh wounds, making note of the book’s racism, and (though I doubt you will do this part) refusing to support Marcotte until the initial grievance has been satisfactorily resolved. I appreciate the balancing act you’ve tried to maintain here; but I really think this situation calls for *justice,* not balance.
April 23, 2008 at 12:29 pm
I just woke up (yes, my sleep schedule is disturbed as all hell) and WHOA:
1. Feministe got Metafiltered? Do I even want to look or will that just make me fwow up my raisin bran?
2. Tobes: It’s performance art, right? Right? I’m not really reading an in-high-dudgeon stand against Teh Reverse Racism written in earnest, right? Please, somebody hold me.
3. Are we seriously arguing that racist art subverts the dominant paradigm?–Oh, no, we aren’t. But Hugo is!
4. ProfBWoman, I just don’t even know about that response from SP you got. I only know that if I’m in tall grass and I hear slithering, I have to mind where I put my feet.
5. Blackamazon, “quick silent and lethal” is cracking me up.
6. Hi Jill! Hi Wolfa! Hi Justin!
I need moar coffee.
April 23, 2008 at 12:30 pm
Jill wrote in her post:
Perhaps I’m too optimistic in thinking that I can support the voices that challenge the workings of white feminism and also support the work of a white feminist who has been challenged.
I don’t think that’s naivete. I think that’s the best possible response. Obviously, we’ve got a lot of folks who want to see tangible action rather than “more jaw-jaw” about inclusion. Some might argue that the only way to demonstrate bona fides with the WOC blogging community and others who have criticized Amanda is to withdraw all publicity and support for the book until some sort of formal mea culpa — backed by tangible action — comes forth from her. I think that’s the wrong resposne.
I don’t like the images inside the book, though I can see what Amanda’s intention was. But a poor editorial choice deserves critical comment — not necessarily a boy(girl)cott.
Amanda’s greatest strength — her ability to use polemical language to devastating effect — is a double-edged sword. When she uses her biting sarcasm and wit in the cause of justice, she does good work in a fine traditon of caustic progressive commentary. But some of her comments in the threads these past few weeks have been regrettably inflammatory, and have made it more difficult to defend her.
April 23, 2008 at 12:54 pm
Ilyka, the metafilter post isn’t too bad. Your head will explode if yuo read the post about open-source boobies, though. God, it makes me angry just thinking about it. (Yes, this is a clear example of my privilege,)
Hugo, a boycott isn’t the necessary reaction. But it’s a defensible reaction, and a lot of arguments for that response have been made. The other side — your side — seems to be a lot of restating of “she *meant* well”, or “it’s a good book and important and deserves attention”, a statement which needs some really good arguments behind it. What makes it good? Given that it’s racist, why does it deserve attention? Why are people obliged to support it at all?
April 23, 2008 at 1:05 pm
Wolfa, I just saw that! I am definitely on board with the immediate initiation of the Open-Source Cockpunching Project in retaliation. Sign me up.
April 23, 2008 at 1:12 pm
Well, there’s another problem particular to you there, too: I’m convinced that some dynamics can become larger than the people within them, and one of those dynamics is the white man defending the white woman. This is unfair to you in a sense–can’t you just defend her on the merits? Or as a friend? As a feminist colleague? It isn’t fair that your own sex and your own race work against you in those efforts.
But if these discussions have taught me anything, it’s that our own various privileges work against all of us, all the time, and people need to be mindful of that. I need to recall that if I gang up with other able-bodied people to tell someone living with disability why s/he is wrong about something, I’m participating in a larger dynamic with a baaaaad history, whether I intend to be read as one of those “I know what’s best for you poor dears” types or not.
Lately I have been thinking of it as akin to the concept of ecological footprints: I can complain that it isn’t my fault that I’m an American and leave a larger footprint on the world than I ought to, or I can watch where I step and do what I can to reduce the size of it.
April 23, 2008 at 1:59 pm
PRof BW I left a commentin you say hey thread about that I wnat to talk to you about that one off blog cause
I have my feelings on it and I don’t wnat o go into those in public as of now
April 23, 2008 at 2:25 pm
I don’t blame you.
But permit me to say that THIS SUCKS.
And you know, it isn’t as though I can pretend I don’t know just what would happen if heaven forbid you said anything: You’d be made spokesperson for the WOC–excuse me, “WOC” or perhaps “RWOC,” must have those quotes!–community. White blogs would condemn your remarks as unhelpful and divisive, while urging work on the larger issues. Someone would come empty out her overstuffed knapsack on your front doorstep, like that’s any kind of way to say “hello” to you–”here, BA, clean up my mess! Don’t be mean! I didn’t INTEND to drop it here.” And then someone else–oh, let’s delete this part. There are enough people out there seeking star billing without my putting their names in lights.
Anyway. Seen that movie too.
April 23, 2008 at 4:24 pm
Ico, I was responding to you because so far, you’re the only person who has called for me to alter the post.
Yeah, don’t. I haven’t, since MetaFilter usually makes me want to kill myself.
April 23, 2008 at 5:43 pm
Bearing in mind the maxim about opinions and how many of us have them and what they are like, and further bearing in mind that I’m not a woman of color: I personally don’t see the value in pulling or altering the post at this point. When Seal Press torpedoed their original response to Blackamazon and WOC in general, it just came off like a bury-the-evidence sort of shady maneuver.
But I think we all know by now that I favor the warts-and-all approach to blogging. Let it all hang out.
April 23, 2008 at 6:01 pm
But if these discussions have taught me anything, it’s that our own various privileges work against all of us, all the time, and people need to be mindful of that. I need to recall that if I gang up with other able-bodied people to tell someone living with disability why s/he is wrong about something, I’m participating in a larger dynamic with a baaaaad history, whether I intend to be read as one of those “I know what’s best for you poor dears” types or not.
Lately I have been thinking of it as akin to the concept of ecological footprints: I can complain that it isn’t my fault that I’m an American and leave a larger footprint on the world than I ought to, or I can watch where I step and do what I can to reduce the size of it.
Okay, I hear that. I really do. And I’m going to think about how to respond. Thanks.
April 23, 2008 at 6:06 pm
April 23, 2008 at 6:17 pm
I don’t agree.
Not if the author in question continues to refuse to credit her sources in the most recent egregious instance of “erasist” racial behavior (the illustrations, given what I’ve observed as the author’s dismissive treatment of racism) — AND NO OTHER MAINSTREAM FEMINIST CALLS ON HER TO DO IT.
In a fit of vanity disguised as efficiency, exacerbated by frustration because there are some major figures here (who will go unnamed for the time being) who make me feel as though my face is screaming but no words are coming out, I will re-post a repetitive paraphrase of what I repeated (!) several times last night and the past several days:
The more I read and see, the more convinced I become that Amanda Marcotte is much less feminist and much more opportunist. So I’m less concerned with what she does at this point than I am with “mainstream” feminists who cry “Racism and Cultural Appropriation are Wrong!” and then proceed to blithely defend and support people who are committing what they’re allegedly condemning.
Rank hypocrisy at best.
Racist community destruction at worst.
April 23, 2008 at 6:17 pm
It’s called a “glacial pace.”
Icebergs are perceived as white, too. ;-)
April 23, 2008 at 6:35 pm
Well, to quote Miranda Priestly, “You know how that thrills me.”
I did read, Prof Hugo, that a chunk just broke off one of the large Antarctic icebergs a couple of weeks ago — so apparently even the warming is speeding up.
You’re not the type that strikes me as relishing being behind the curve.
April 23, 2008 at 6:37 pm
OIC. Okey dokey.
Respectfully, Ilyka, I disagree.
Jill, while I do appreciate the post quoting/linking Sudy, and the admission that the book promotion post was pouring salt on the wounds, that doesn’t change the fact that the post is still there PROMOTING AMANDA’S BOOK.
You know. The book with racist pictures?
It is not cool for Feministe to promote that, and leaving it as is sends the message that, despite all the controversy, you are going to support this author AND her racist text. Please add a note to the post, or write a new post, denouncing the racism of the images and retracting support/promotion of the book.
Also, I second all littlem’s remarks. How many times does Marcotte have to say something terrible or prove in just one more way that she doesn’t give a damn about WoC before you will publicly call her on it? I’m really glad that you have kept the post open. I’m really glad you have kept up a dialogue and encouraged productive discussion. But at some point there has to be more than just talk.
That point, if you are indeed regretful of pouring salt into those festering wounds, is NOW.
April 23, 2008 at 6:38 pm
Littlem, I have to contain my squeeing at the fact that you just quoted Miranda Priestly. :D I love that character!
April 23, 2008 at 6:46 pm
Wolfa, if you are around, have you been able to take pictures? :)
April 23, 2008 at 6:55 pm
I’m jumping in the fray, cuz, well, it’s a slow night in Brazil…
If someone kicks me in the ass, whether or not they intended to, it is still gonna hurt.
Regardless of my intentions, wishes, or hopes, I am judged and should be judged by my actions. Of course, there are mitigating circumstances, but there are only so many times one can you that excuse before it becomes hollow.
There are so many times that POC will listen to their so-called allies defend or excuse inexcusable behavior with “she didn’t mean to.”
Unfortunately unintentional racism and racist propaganda are just as effective, potent, and dangerous as intentional ones. In some ways they are even more devastating because the offender is “seemingly” unaware or unwilling to acknowledge their error.
April 23, 2008 at 7:33 pm
Welcome to the fray! ;)
I have to bow out at this juncture and probably won’t be around until afternoon tomorrow, but if you get those pics Wolfa, could you email them to me?
On a parting note, I second what Godschocolate says.
April 23, 2008 at 7:55 pm
Ico, Miranda as portrayed by La Streep … there are no words. I will never, ever be that cool.
Because you are an inspirational genius leader type, I have issued a challenge in response to your call
Jill has put up a new post ironically titled: Expecting More.
I’m in moderation (as usual :D) so I will repost in entirety:
*sigh*
Jill, I’m really impressed with your eloquence and even-handedness.
I am less impressed with your passivity and static self-flagellation.
As a part-white ID’d WoC, I want to know what you’re going to do NOW.
(And since you seem to be engaging directly with Ilyka, and Ico, and not with me — which is a related issue that’s been raised in the general flap but I won’t dwell on it — I don’t think I’m the only one who wants to know.)
I read this post of yours
[cf., above]
over on Ilyka’s blog. And it all sounds very noble and nice.
If you were reading/moderating yesterday’s thread (or reading anywhere else in the blogosphere on the issue) you know my position(s) on this issue, and the supporting critical rationale(s) therefor. I won’t beat them to death again here.
I’ve answered the MFGC (Mainstream Feminist Greek Chorus) question, “What Do You Want Us to Dooooo?”
1) I want you, as a widely-read mainstream feminist, to firmly suggest to your friend that she should amend her AlterNet article and credit her sources.
I won’t bore you with the reasons why. You are brilliant and you can read.
I don’t believe it has to be a public flogging. You can quietly pull a colleague aside, and make a recommendation, and point to the raft of reasons (both career-oriented *eyeroll* and principled/community-based) as to why such a course of action would be advisable.
As a friend and supporter, you (and anyone else who chooses the course) are in a unique position to do so.
2) In the wake of the related kerfuffle re: the book’s images, I would prefer NOT to see yet another announcement on Feministe that Amanda is going to be doing another reading downtown tomorrow. (What? You think that just blended into the BG?)
So are you going to back up the guilt and pontificating with some action??
(’Cause I know we’re all a bunch of academics and professionals, but Jeebus it seems like there’s been an awful lot of verbal *flap flap flap flap* on this, even in the face of multiple suggestions re: specific concrete responses)
Or is tomorrow going to be another round of
- Feministe is supporting Amanda by announcing a reading for her book! Even though it has purportedly racist images and we’ve said we don’t support that!
AND
- “article amendment/retraction - 0″?
I’ve answered your questions. So here’s the call and response (and feel free to pass it on to any of your colleagues/allies, and/or discuss it with them — Prof Hugo and I had a brief discussion on glacial movement, and how one’s position can in fact be influenced by a principal player’s response to crisis):
“What Are YOU Going to Do???”
April 23, 2008 at 7:59 pm
godschocolate (I think I need a shirt with that on it :D), that is why, as I’m sure you know, in the little law books they have 2 different sections:
1) Intentional injury (”You did that on purpose!”) and
2 )Negligent injury (”I didn’t mean it!”)
As you so succinctly put it, either way, you’re still bleeding.
April 23, 2008 at 8:01 pm
Hugo, I’ve asked you this before, and I don’t think you’ve ever answered.
Why do you keep using such dismissive language about these things? These discussions are not around a “kerfuffle” or “kerfluffle” or however we are spelling that this week - they’re around serious issues that affect the lives of the women of colour who you are dismissing with a word that means “disturbance or fuss”. These are not women kicking up a fuss, for crying out loud. These are women who are writing about how their work is treated by White Feminism, and how they are silenced in the current atmosphere.
Then, when discussing the proposed girlcott of Seal Press, you reword it as boy(girl)cott. It’s called a girlcott for a reason. If you would like that clarified, ask.
Words matter Hugo. The word choices you use when discussing these issues say a lot about how you perceive them. If the intention is not to sound dismissive and pompous, perhaps it is time to reconsider those word choices. I am not the only person who has called you out on your language, and maybe it’s time you admit that we have a point.
April 23, 2008 at 8:22 pm
Well, to be fair, Anna, littlem uses “kerfuffle” above in her long comment to Jill.
But point taken. My goal for this year in my blogging is to be less of a pompous ass. Seriously. Forget the sweeping promises — I’m good at those — I want to be winsome and accessible without falling into obtuse clueless self-parody. And I know that’s a problem.
Words do matter, a point I made in the first post I made after the BFP/Amanda issue arose earlier this month. And you’re right, I can do better. This is not a kerfuffle or a brouhaha; it’s a serious, emotionally charged discussion, and it deserves to be labelled as such.
April 23, 2008 at 8:56 pm
Well littlem, if you liked that I got some other t-shirt ideas “It ain’t a tan babe!” “Don’t touch the ‘fro.”
I’m not sure if I want to delve into this, but well, it’s a hot and muggy night in salvador da bahia and I’m missing ma lady.
Hugo, dude, where you at? On this blog and the feministe blog, you first defended Amanda, then backtracked and admitted that the images were problematic. I happened to go to pandagon and I read the post “Fun was had,” and I read your comment:
#
Hugo
April 23, 2008 at 6:36 pm
Yeah, Amanda, you rock. Great picture too! Keep us all posted.
#
Hugo, where you at? According to the timestamps (which of course, could be wrong, but that is beside the point) you don’t like the images at 12:30, you are “hearing” it at 6pm, and then at 6:36, Amanda is rockin’? WTF?
How is it possible for Amanda to still rock for you when you’ve acknowledge her “poor editorial choice,” (which somehow should not be construed as foregrounding and privileging white women as saviors and the natives as the backdrop. And I’m sorry, she didn’t mean it that way, she wasn’t thinking of the image in that way ain’t gonna fly anymore) acknowledge her own inflammatory behavior, and then comment that you are “really” hearing Ilyka, and pull this “you rock” bullshit.
C’mon man, WTF? I don’t know you, we have never met, I have maybe commented on your blog once or twice, but you definitely loss some cool points with me. (although, to be honest you were already down to your last cool points with me ).
Yes, you did write that you think the book, notwithstanding the “problematic” images, is an important book on the feministe blog.
However, it is hard to take your pensive and thoughtful posture seriously here when Amanda still rocks for you.
Hugo, where you at?
April 23, 2008 at 9:10 pm
Littlem, you brought to mind something for me when you mentioned that private or public confrontation work equally well:
I obviously can’t speak for Jill, but I know for myself I’m often guilty of doing this sort of effectiveness calculus, where if I have to confront someone, the first thing I try to evaluate is whether it’s going to do any damn good. And that’s an “ugh!” moment for me because it means that, for all I make fun of Minnesota nice, no-elephant behavior, I’m obviously engaging in some of it myself.
In other words, I go, “If I’m going to risk all that unpleasantness, I damn well better see RESULTS.”
And maybe it’d be fuckloads better not to do that–to just speak up and say what’s right and let go of the result. Either it registers or it doesn’t, but at least I made an effort and did something.
Sylvia/M had a good post loosely related to this, about being bothered to help, being bothered to care, being bothered to make the effort. Ah, here we go:
If I were in Jill’s shoes, I’d be worried about the best way and the best time to say something to Amanda. Totally understandable route to take with a friend–except that it’s also become a problem that is “absolutely critical for someone else.”
(Okay, something is up with either this mouse or this browser/template combo [I suspect the latter, 'cause for work I'm forced into using IE], because I can NOT highlight any of your excellent comment to quote here, littlem–and yet it highlighted Sylvia’s excerpt just fine. Aaarrgh! Can there just be a fucking decent template with two columns, tabs, comment permalinks, and it works in IE? Can that just exist already? Anyone have a recommendation?)
April 23, 2008 at 9:14 pm
Godschocolate, I’m kind of glad that your lady ain’t around if it means you’re around here.
(Kidding a little! Here’s to her swift return.)
April 23, 2008 at 9:21 pm
Hugo, you’ll permit me an loooong eyeroll at the “She did it, why can’t I” defense. Particularly in context.
And speaking of context, you’ll note that my comment was directed at Jill, not at the general blogosphere, and was utilized in an attempt not to come off as a “defensive, ANGRY *gasp!horror* WOC” in a situation where there were facts, opinions, and intentions still being debated and where that stereotype continues to be tossed about relentlessly, particularly — again — in this context.
By contrast, YOUR tendency, in your writings on this particular issue, as I’ve observed it, has been to utilize the word dismissively when attempting to “educate” and “demonstrate” on a point to those with less privilege than you — by virtue of which, you exhibit the educator’s tendency to assume that those people with less privilege than you automatically know less than you.
(My father is a Professor, too, my mother was a private school head for many years and I have education credentials of my own. I’ve seen that trick many times. It’s not new — you didn’t invent it. And it’s not cute. )
I’ll elaborate on Anna’s point: Not only do words matter, so does context.
And do me a favor, Professor. Please don’t invoke my conduct to excuse your own behind my back again ever. You don’t know me from Eve’s housecat to go there like that. Especially when the summit from which you look down and attempt to pontificate is ostenstibly predicated on intellectual rigor.
Not worthy of you.
April 23, 2008 at 9:45 pm
Holy fucking shit, y’all:
Well, someone’s quit worrying about how to say it all nice and sweet-like. Damn!
I basically violated the hell out of my own Rule #4 for this post because I thought the thread at Feministe was destined to become one hot mess in which no one in her right mind could possibly feel comfortable participating. For this, however, I will reinstate: Talk about the spinster aunt’s words AT the spinster aunt’s. Unless that becomes a hot mess, too, obviously.
April 23, 2008 at 10:26 pm
Ilyka, I didn’t see your post until after my most recent one.
The first thing that I want to say here is that I have no illusions that Amanda would “do the right thing” out of anything other than self-interest.
I wrote a comment on Plains Feminist’s blog some weeks ago, when I just started finding out about this issue, addressing the career-related advantages of always crediting one/s sources if the articles you write are out in the public sphere (scroll down) . I NEVER assume that a source is “too obscure”; if I’ve used it, I don’t assume that I’m the only scholar in the world that can find it – and I don’t want to ever have to contemplate the possibility of someone in my face with an excuse to say to me, “You used my ideas and didn’t credit me as a source”. It makes me look unprofessional, and lazy, and arrogant, and stupid, and I care about my reputation like that.
The rest of the points you bring up require some more thought, because I want to offer an analytical response.
And although, like I said, I completely understand where you’re coming from (career alliance risk, public voice, socialization to passive womanhood and anticipated commensurate punishment for not conforming to the ideal, blah blah), being from Indiana, and by all means, if you feel like it pass it on to Jill – I gotta say that there are days when it’s exhausting to do the strategy homework for the “passive girls paler than you”. (And I don’t mean YOU here; I mean Jill, Feministe, et al.) Especially when they’re writing like they’re trying to convince you 1) that they’re fighting alongside you and 2) that you should fight alongside them.
‘Cause if nothing else, it’s just more of the same.
April 23, 2008 at 10:37 pm
Well, well, well.
And at this point, Ilyka, I’ll permit myself a small smug smile.
Because this was EXACTLY the point I was trying to make at Plains Feminist’s post (two weeks ago) that I just linked for you.
If you don’t give a damn about the principles in question?
You credit your sources anyway.
Because — no matter how contemptuously you think of them, no matter how obscure you think they are — you don’t want someone you purportedly respect (and the more, and more, and more, and more, someones that could agree with them) making you look stupid.
Because then you can’t blame anyone else for ruining your career — at that point, you have no one to blame but yourself.
April 23, 2008 at 11:15 pm
(Okay, so if I go into the comments edit function I can quote from comments, but now I’m worried about accidentally editing one. Oh, WordPress.)
You’re right. I’m sorry for dancing the But It’s So Hard! atcha. What about what’s hard for you? What about what’s hard for BfP?
Rather than dive back into the dashboard to fiddle with c-n-p, can I just give a standing ovation to your entire last two comments, and the one at Plain(s)feminist? It’s true: You really DON’T want someone you purportedly respect making you look stupid. That is basic professionalism, basic courtesy, and basic intellectual honesty.
April 24, 2008 at 12:48 am
As per pulling/altering the post: I agree with not pulling it altogether, on the “not trying to erase history” tip. that said, at this juncture, I think there are maybe more ETA’s that could be made. I won’t presume to write them. just saying, y’know…
April 24, 2008 at 12:59 am
>>) I want you, as a widely-read mainstream feminist, to firmly suggest to your friend that she should amend her AlterNet article and credit her sources.
I won’t bore you with the reasons why. You are brilliant and you can read.
I don’t believe it has to be a public flogging. You can quietly pull a colleague aside, and make a recommendation, and point to the raft of reasons (both career-oriented *eyeroll* and principled/community-based) as to why such a course of action would be advisable.
As a friend and supporter, you (and anyone else who chooses the course) are in a unique position to do so.>>
One would think, and hope.
I’m not sure if it’s because I like Jill and am rather deeply cynical about Amanda at this point or if it’s something else that I suggest it’s just possible she has done, privately, and it hasn’t made a dent.
I do think it’s possible to say “you know, actually, yeah, doing ___ would be on” in public without making it a “flogging,” even if we all know Amanda will react as though it were one.
as per two, can we not have another book promotion tomorrow at least, I think that’s pretty reasonable. and honestly? ultimately, I am starting to think it might just have been kinder to even Amanda, much less everyone else, -not- to plug the book, given that the pic business is now coming into play on top of everything else.
ah well.
April 24, 2008 at 5:12 am
I had a much longer comment, but really, it amounts to this:
Hugo, consider why I would call you out on your language, and why I wouldn’t call littlem out. It is not because I agree with littlem and disagree with you.
It’s because you have a history of doing this After the imbroglio back in November over FFF, you said that you were going to take the criticism of you under advisement, consider what was said, and would write about your responses later. I checked your blog daily for over a month. Nothing came of it, and then I stopped checking.
Then, another situation comes up where WoC are criticising a Nice White Lady Blogger, and you… do exactly the same thing, with the belittling language and the dismissive attitude and the arrogance, and I’m left questioning your committment.
And frankly, Hugo, littlem could be writing “this is a tempest in a teacup, a bunch of women who should be going back to their knitting, a stupid little tiff over fame, and Amanda eats babies for breakfast and anyone who calls belledamme a bully is just a monster” and it doesn’t matter to me one whit it discussing your language choices. If you have a problem with littlem’s language choices, bring them up to her. If *I* have a problem with littlem’s language choices, I will do as I have done with you, and bring them up to her.
Littlem is correct - context bloody well matters. And trying to somehow say “oh, but, see SHE DOES IT TOO” in the context of an apology leaves me incredibly unimpressed with you.
(Littlem, I’m sorry for talking about you as though you weren’t here.)
April 24, 2008 at 5:13 am
(Actually, while I’m busy being Your Tax Dollars At Work, does anyone have a suggestion or a push on where I could go to have a discussion about how to write about immigration issues in Canada effectively? We have this Bill coming up, see, and it got tacked on to the end of something else and OMG WHAT THE HELL IS WRONG WITH MY GOVERNMENT and… yeah. But I don’t know how to talk about it in any way that is effective, and would love some guidance, and I know this thread isn’t the place.)
April 24, 2008 at 6:22 am
Anna, I’m not sure, but I think that may have come up on We Move to Canada recently?–No, okay, the post I was thinking of was about a different bill, C-537. Unless that’s actually the same bill, but it’s being written about at WMTC in the context of health care and abortion rights.
April 24, 2008 at 6:36 am
I’ve never found any place that discsuses Canadian political issues effectively, including good comment sections, immigration or otherwise, except for a few that are specifically about municipal issues.
April 24, 2008 at 6:57 am
We’ve got three really lovely bills out there right now - the Unborn Victims of Crime Act, the bill that wants to ban funding for any arts-related stuff the Chritian Right thinks is obscene (they specifically pointed out a gay comedy that has nothing to do with sex in it whatsoever, so me thinks their protestations that it’s all about the icky pr0n are a bit too much) AND the “Let’s Make It Impossible For Folks To Get Refugee Status” Act. Sadly, the numbers are slipping my mind at the moment.
I love having a Conservative Government.
However, as much as I want to indulge myself in some serious thread-drift where I can actually talk about this without someone saying “But… immigrants want our jobs!” as a rebuttle, this really isn’t the best space.
I will check out We Move To Canada, though. Thanks, Ilyka!
April 24, 2008 at 7:10 am
Okay, I see it. Littlem used kerfuffle in a way I didn’t.
Look, all I can promise is that there will be noticeable changes in the language I use, just as there have been major changes in my syllabus as a result of these discussions over the past six months. Language matters, and I know enough to know that it always matters who uses the words and how the words aare used — as well as WHAT words are used. (Ugh. I need more coffee to prevent sentences like that.)
April 24, 2008 at 7:17 am
Wait, Canadians!–Can you tell me why every day I have another search string for “Noellee Mowatt deport her!” (except with more exclamation points than that)? Is this being discussed up there as seriously an option?
April 24, 2008 at 7:42 am
Ilyka: no, it is not. She’s out of prison, by the way.
April 24, 2008 at 10:24 am
ilyka, Ico, I sent you a bunch of images. Let me know if you got them or they got caught in some kind of spam or enormous attachment filter.
April 24, 2008 at 11:06 am
I’ve seen nothing about deporting Noelle Mowatt, but I’ve been avoiding the comment sections in the Globe & Mail, so who the heck knows.
April 24, 2008 at 2:09 pm
Posted!
http://dearwhitefeminists.wordpress.com/update/
Disgusting, isn’t it?
April 24, 2008 at 2:14 pm
Yeah.
I’m speechless, basically.
April 24, 2008 at 2:20 pm
Okay. Okay, I have several thoughts:
1. Why’m I shocked? Given the history of the publisher and the history of the author with regards to people of color, why am I shocked?
2. I don’t feel GLEE about this, like, “Ho-HO, gotcha now!” I feel horror and sadness.
3. It’s 2008 and this is the progress we have to show? Actually no progress, lots of regress? So much for the myth of a post-racism society.
April 24, 2008 at 2:38 pm
I am not horrified, maybe because I was expecting to see such images after Radfem’s post. I am just PISSED. Really pissed. Because how fucking much has to happen before Jill et al actually realize, “Oh wait, this shit is racist as hell and that makes US racists for promoting it and promoting Marcotte and ignoring all the people who’ve been shouting at us for weeks and weeks and weeks.” And I’m not talking about those of us that just got involved, I’m talking about the bloggers BA mentioned, GREAT bloggers like Sudy and BA and BFP etc — the ones who realized that expending energy fighting the people who are supposed to be “allies” just isn’t worth it because we don’t ever fucking listen. I mean look at those pictures. With “allies” like us, who needs enemies? I am SICK of seeing us drive people away.
Women of color shouldn’t have to fight to be heard (and then get ignored anyway). WE should fucking GIVE A DAMN and LISTEN.
…. *whew* Ok, sorry for the rant, and for all the cursing — I usually don’t swear this much, really. But it is damned depressing. As someone who grew up colorblind and continued to be stupid about my white privilege for a long time even after college (and I still am stupid about it, much too often), I like to think people can change. But they are doing their damnedest to prove me wrong.
April 24, 2008 at 2:49 pm
Oh, Ico, go on and rant. I hear you on wanting to think people can change and how depressing it is when they seem bound and determined to prove you wrong.
April 28, 2008 at 6:19 am
[...] sisters, and the allies, the comrades, the supporters, the colleagues, the companions, the supporters [...]