Biologically I am
A mixture More and less
Complicated than I claim to be
Culturally
My mother my father they
Have their own identities
My phenotype is another story
Entirely
Where I grew up and how
Who my ancestors were
And why they died
All conspire to define me
In ways that are beyond even me.
Ambiguity is my home
Either/or does not apply
And my existence defies
So many names and claims
Of place
It would be a lie to check a race
All I know for certain
Is that it matters
That my existence
Confounds you
That your inability to classify me
Bewilders you
And there is some good done
Each time I cause confusion
There is some good done
Saturday, June 14, 2008
Thursday, May 15, 2008
Why Ranking Oppressions Never Works
This election has brought out the ugly in many people. At the heart of this ugliness is a mistake. A mistaken belief that we can rank the oppressions we face in order of severity and make decisions about how and when to address different forms of injustice accordingly. This belief is misguided.
We don't need a woman in the white house before a black man because women are more oppressed than blacks. We don't need a black man in the white house first because blacks are more oppressed than women. These are the kinds of arguments that only make sense in a world where Black women don't exist. Blacks are not men. Women are not white. And none of us is class neutral. Some of us are gay, some of us are immigrants, some of us are disabled. There are no pure categories.
And there is no hierarchy of oppression we can chart which will resolve this. White woman benefit from white skin privilege. Black men benefit from male privilege. Straight people benefit from heterosexual privilege. Able-bodied people benefit from abelist privilege. Middle class people benefit from class privilege. Skinny people benefit from size privilege. There are not pure categories of people and there are very few people who do not simultaneouly benefit from some form of privilege while being oppressed as a result of their membership in some group. (The obvious exception is middle class, heterosexual, able-bodied white men. They are not oppressed and they are very privileged).
So can white women claim to be more oppressed than black men? Can Black men claim to be more oppressed than white women? No, of course not. They are privileged and oppressed in different ways. And their maleness is qualified by their blackness, their femaleness is qualified by their whiteness.
Sexism is raced. Racism is gendered. Oppression is complicated.
So it is absurd to say that it would be worse for Obama if he were a woman or worse for Clinton if she were black unless you are willing to recognize that they would both have to turn into black women for the claim to make sense. Would a black women have a harder time in this election than either a black man or a white woman? Probably she would since currently most people appear to consider the possibility unthinkable. Black women don't exist for most of the commentators. Otherwise they would not consistently overlook the fact that Obama and Clinton differ in both race AND gender.
Their race/gender analogies only work in the absence of Black women. Can a woman who does not exist run for office? Probably not. But if a Black woman ran we would have to take into account her class, her sexuality, her able-bodiedness in addition to her race and gender.
Maybe this country is ready for a black man or a white woman but not both. Maybe the outcome of the election will be a result of whether the electorate is more racist or more sexist but we can never truly know since we don't have a white man running against a white woman or a black man running against a black woman. Race and gender are tangled up in these two candidates and other factors are also playing an important role.
Oppression is complicated. Too complicated to be ranked and addressed in serial order. Addressing racism won't eliminate sexism. Addressing sexism won't end racism. Gay people are not going to stop being bashed to death when a straight white woman or a straight Black man get into office.
One form of oppression is not more important than another. Some forms of oppression are not more egregious than others. Anytime we deny the humanity of an individual on the basis of his or her inclusion (perceived or actual) in a group , we are enacting oppression. Oppression is always unjust and unearned privilege always aids oppression. Until we are both willing to fight oppression and to give up privilege, we will be plagued with social injustice.
We don't need a woman in the white house before a black man because women are more oppressed than blacks. We don't need a black man in the white house first because blacks are more oppressed than women. These are the kinds of arguments that only make sense in a world where Black women don't exist. Blacks are not men. Women are not white. And none of us is class neutral. Some of us are gay, some of us are immigrants, some of us are disabled. There are no pure categories.
And there is no hierarchy of oppression we can chart which will resolve this. White woman benefit from white skin privilege. Black men benefit from male privilege. Straight people benefit from heterosexual privilege. Able-bodied people benefit from abelist privilege. Middle class people benefit from class privilege. Skinny people benefit from size privilege. There are not pure categories of people and there are very few people who do not simultaneouly benefit from some form of privilege while being oppressed as a result of their membership in some group. (The obvious exception is middle class, heterosexual, able-bodied white men. They are not oppressed and they are very privileged).
So can white women claim to be more oppressed than black men? Can Black men claim to be more oppressed than white women? No, of course not. They are privileged and oppressed in different ways. And their maleness is qualified by their blackness, their femaleness is qualified by their whiteness.
Sexism is raced. Racism is gendered. Oppression is complicated.
So it is absurd to say that it would be worse for Obama if he were a woman or worse for Clinton if she were black unless you are willing to recognize that they would both have to turn into black women for the claim to make sense. Would a black women have a harder time in this election than either a black man or a white woman? Probably she would since currently most people appear to consider the possibility unthinkable. Black women don't exist for most of the commentators. Otherwise they would not consistently overlook the fact that Obama and Clinton differ in both race AND gender.
Their race/gender analogies only work in the absence of Black women. Can a woman who does not exist run for office? Probably not. But if a Black woman ran we would have to take into account her class, her sexuality, her able-bodiedness in addition to her race and gender.
Maybe this country is ready for a black man or a white woman but not both. Maybe the outcome of the election will be a result of whether the electorate is more racist or more sexist but we can never truly know since we don't have a white man running against a white woman or a black man running against a black woman. Race and gender are tangled up in these two candidates and other factors are also playing an important role.
Oppression is complicated. Too complicated to be ranked and addressed in serial order. Addressing racism won't eliminate sexism. Addressing sexism won't end racism. Gay people are not going to stop being bashed to death when a straight white woman or a straight Black man get into office.
One form of oppression is not more important than another. Some forms of oppression are not more egregious than others. Anytime we deny the humanity of an individual on the basis of his or her inclusion (perceived or actual) in a group , we are enacting oppression. Oppression is always unjust and unearned privilege always aids oppression. Until we are both willing to fight oppression and to give up privilege, we will be plagued with social injustice.
Tuesday, May 13, 2008
What About Darfur?
What about Darfur?
What happened in Nazi Germany in
The 1940s
Was a terrible terrible thing
A crime against humanity
6 million killed
Waiting and waiting while
The United States did nothing
What happened in Rwanda
In the 1990s
Was a terrible terrible thing
A crime against humanity
800,000 dead in 100 days while
The United States did nothing
Now it is a new century
A new country
400,000 humans dead
People dying daily
In a land called Darfur
It is a crime against humanity
How can we do nothing?
What happened in Nazi Germany in
The 1940s
Was a terrible terrible thing
A crime against humanity
6 million killed
Waiting and waiting while
The United States did nothing
What happened in Rwanda
In the 1990s
Was a terrible terrible thing
A crime against humanity
800,000 dead in 100 days while
The United States did nothing
Now it is a new century
A new country
400,000 humans dead
People dying daily
In a land called Darfur
It is a crime against humanity
How can we do nothing?
Tuesday, May 6, 2008
Election Deciding itself without Mixed Me?
As the race that many say wont end appears to be grinding to a necessary halt.......
it looks like my tallying of Clinton and Obama pros and cons must also come to a long overdue halt.....
Lets see where was I.....?
1. I dislike the fact that Obama renounced his own minister.
2. I dislike the familiar racism of the press in dealing with this issue more
3. I think Clinton should have stuck up for Obama in this (and thus dislike her for not doing so). Call me idealistic but I expected more from the wife of our first black president (ok, just kidding. Why DO people say Bill Clinton was black? Was it just the sax? Does nobody remember the welfare reform he instituted that has resulted in twice as many black children now being in foster care? Does nobody recall how he refused to apologize for slavery? Alas, I digress.....)
4. I like the fact that Obama appears to be forming a multigenerational coalition that it is interracial and includes feminists (Is this true or just really good PR?).
5. I like the fact Clinton is a woman (with at least some proto-feminist leanings). Even though I know biology is not destiny, I would like to think the sexism she has inevitably faced simply by living in this androcentric and sexist society with a vagina her whole life must have influenced her to take women''s issues more seriously than most men would.
6. I like the fact that Obama wants to "change Washington." Somebody needs to!
7. I dislike the fact that Clinton is in so tight with lobbyists and I like the fact that Obama is advocating election reform and has passed legislation in Illinois to limit the influence of lobbyists.
8. I like the fact that Obama is committed to renewable fuel sources
9. I dislike Obama's patriotic rhetoric (sounds far too bush-like to me. UGH. Stop the war already!) but am quite fond of his support of the new GI bill and his commitment to providing better health care (esp mental health care) for veterans.
10. I like the fact that Clinton has the support of many feminist organizations but I dislike the fact that they don't identify key feminist issues that she has un-equivocally supported (and no, claiming that health is a feminist issue and therefore her universal health care plan is a FEMINIST project does not cut it)
......
.......
......
BUT in the final analysis,
I think I have to vote for the MIXED MAN, despite his unfortunate possession of a male member. In the end, I found Clinton's campaign racism of the last few days unsettling and divisive.
I wanted to vote for a an anti-racist feminist candidate but alas, neither candidate appears to have proven they are both.
Still, Clinton has made it clear she has some work to do on race and I am still not clear on her feminism. Since Obama has yet to make any explicitly sexist or racist moves I am gonna have to go with him. I'll hedge my bets.
Of course my late decision may be mute if the numbers already indicate Obama has the nomination....but I believe in slow and careful deliberation.
it looks like my tallying of Clinton and Obama pros and cons must also come to a long overdue halt.....
Lets see where was I.....?
1. I dislike the fact that Obama renounced his own minister.
2. I dislike the familiar racism of the press in dealing with this issue more
3. I think Clinton should have stuck up for Obama in this (and thus dislike her for not doing so). Call me idealistic but I expected more from the wife of our first black president (ok, just kidding. Why DO people say Bill Clinton was black? Was it just the sax? Does nobody remember the welfare reform he instituted that has resulted in twice as many black children now being in foster care? Does nobody recall how he refused to apologize for slavery? Alas, I digress.....)
4. I like the fact that Obama appears to be forming a multigenerational coalition that it is interracial and includes feminists (Is this true or just really good PR?).
5. I like the fact Clinton is a woman (with at least some proto-feminist leanings). Even though I know biology is not destiny, I would like to think the sexism she has inevitably faced simply by living in this androcentric and sexist society with a vagina her whole life must have influenced her to take women''s issues more seriously than most men would.
6. I like the fact that Obama wants to "change Washington." Somebody needs to!
7. I dislike the fact that Clinton is in so tight with lobbyists and I like the fact that Obama is advocating election reform and has passed legislation in Illinois to limit the influence of lobbyists.
8. I like the fact that Obama is committed to renewable fuel sources
9. I dislike Obama's patriotic rhetoric (sounds far too bush-like to me. UGH. Stop the war already!) but am quite fond of his support of the new GI bill and his commitment to providing better health care (esp mental health care) for veterans.
10. I like the fact that Clinton has the support of many feminist organizations but I dislike the fact that they don't identify key feminist issues that she has un-equivocally supported (and no, claiming that health is a feminist issue and therefore her universal health care plan is a FEMINIST project does not cut it)
......
.......
......
BUT in the final analysis,
I think I have to vote for the MIXED MAN, despite his unfortunate possession of a male member. In the end, I found Clinton's campaign racism of the last few days unsettling and divisive.
I wanted to vote for a an anti-racist feminist candidate but alas, neither candidate appears to have proven they are both.
Still, Clinton has made it clear she has some work to do on race and I am still not clear on her feminism. Since Obama has yet to make any explicitly sexist or racist moves I am gonna have to go with him. I'll hedge my bets.
Of course my late decision may be mute if the numbers already indicate Obama has the nomination....but I believe in slow and careful deliberation.
Can I vote for Father Michael Pfleger?
Notes from a disenchanted election observer....
Today my dad sent me a link (click the title to access link) to an amazing video interview of a white priest being interviewed about Reverend Wright. His name is Michael Pfleger.
The man is articulate, knows his facts, and has a passion we so rarely see expressed by public figures in the media. All efforts by the reporter to trip him up failed. He was unflappable: talked about racism, Martin, the right of Americans to dissent, poverty, our shameful foreign policy, and white politician privilege, all without breaking into a sweat. Here is a man with convictions able to stand up for what he believes in. Why didn't Obama respond the way this guy did?
This whole endless debate about Jeremiah Wright is God-awful (pun intended) and needs to end. This man - Micheal Pleger-does a pretty good job of putting the discussion to bed. Unfortunately he does not appear to be running for office.
Why the heck not?
Today my dad sent me a link (click the title to access link) to an amazing video interview of a white priest being interviewed about Reverend Wright. His name is Michael Pfleger.
The man is articulate, knows his facts, and has a passion we so rarely see expressed by public figures in the media. All efforts by the reporter to trip him up failed. He was unflappable: talked about racism, Martin, the right of Americans to dissent, poverty, our shameful foreign policy, and white politician privilege, all without breaking into a sweat. Here is a man with convictions able to stand up for what he believes in. Why didn't Obama respond the way this guy did?
This whole endless debate about Jeremiah Wright is God-awful (pun intended) and needs to end. This man - Micheal Pleger-does a pretty good job of putting the discussion to bed. Unfortunately he does not appear to be running for office.
Why the heck not?
Sunday, April 27, 2008
Can I vote for Michelle Obama?
I have been sitting on the election fence for some time now. So long in fact that my backside is beginning to get chaffed by the sharp edges of the fence and my political allies are beginning to wonder. You can only put off people for so long. Eventually they begin to fill in the blanks with their own answers. They become suspicious. They come to unsound conclusions. They talk.
In order to save myself the effort of endless diversionary moves, I have of late been doing some serious online research on the candidates. I was a Kucinich delegate in the last election so I needed some time to mourn his no longer being a candidate. It looks like I will have to settle for a less progressive alternative.
So, publicly, I am working on a tally of pros and cons for Clinton and Obama. Privately I am fantasizing about various political coups. Can Michelle Robinson Obama be the first black AND woman president? Can she and Kucinich team up for a super ticket? She is smart, articulate, incredibly well-educated, and is a mother. What is not to love?
But back to the tally.......
1. I like Clinton''s universal healthcare plan
2. I like the fact that Obama spoke out against the Iraq war when it was not popular to do so
3. I like Clinton's plans to make higher education more accessible and to institute student loan forgiveness
4. I like the fact that Obama is mixed like me and as a result identifies with a great many people. I like what he calls, "the sum of [his] parts"
5. I dislike the fact that neither one of these candidates appears to be unapologetically feminist. Saying that you support a woman's right to choose but consider abortion "horrible" and insist it should only occur on "rare" occasions (Clinton) or saying you support a woman's right to choose but sympathize with the anti-choice people because they alone understand the "moral" implications (Obama) does not cut it.
6. I like the fact that both candidates want to leave Iraq but am unhappy with both their timelines. Exactly how many people have to die before we leave?
7. I like the fact that Obama has experience working against racial profiling and working for poor people.
8. I don't like the fact that Clinton voted for the Patriot Act
9. I disilike the fact that neither candidate supports gay marriage
10. I don't like the fact that Clinton argued in one of her speeches that if we voted for her, there would be a "wife, mother, sister and daughter in the White house." Shouldn't a woman candidate be beyond an androcentric relational female identity?
11. I find Obama''s stance on racism far too timid and Clinton's stance on racism invisible.
hmmm....
Can someone bring me a pillow for my toush? Alas, despite my best efforts, it looks like I am stuck on this fence a bit longer.....
In order to save myself the effort of endless diversionary moves, I have of late been doing some serious online research on the candidates. I was a Kucinich delegate in the last election so I needed some time to mourn his no longer being a candidate. It looks like I will have to settle for a less progressive alternative.
So, publicly, I am working on a tally of pros and cons for Clinton and Obama. Privately I am fantasizing about various political coups. Can Michelle Robinson Obama be the first black AND woman president? Can she and Kucinich team up for a super ticket? She is smart, articulate, incredibly well-educated, and is a mother. What is not to love?
But back to the tally.......
1. I like Clinton''s universal healthcare plan
2. I like the fact that Obama spoke out against the Iraq war when it was not popular to do so
3. I like Clinton's plans to make higher education more accessible and to institute student loan forgiveness
4. I like the fact that Obama is mixed like me and as a result identifies with a great many people. I like what he calls, "the sum of [his] parts"
5. I dislike the fact that neither one of these candidates appears to be unapologetically feminist. Saying that you support a woman's right to choose but consider abortion "horrible" and insist it should only occur on "rare" occasions (Clinton) or saying you support a woman's right to choose but sympathize with the anti-choice people because they alone understand the "moral" implications (Obama) does not cut it.
6. I like the fact that both candidates want to leave Iraq but am unhappy with both their timelines. Exactly how many people have to die before we leave?
7. I like the fact that Obama has experience working against racial profiling and working for poor people.
8. I don't like the fact that Clinton voted for the Patriot Act
9. I disilike the fact that neither candidate supports gay marriage
10. I don't like the fact that Clinton argued in one of her speeches that if we voted for her, there would be a "wife, mother, sister and daughter in the White house." Shouldn't a woman candidate be beyond an androcentric relational female identity?
11. I find Obama''s stance on racism far too timid and Clinton's stance on racism invisible.
hmmm....
Can someone bring me a pillow for my toush? Alas, despite my best efforts, it looks like I am stuck on this fence a bit longer.....
Saturday, April 19, 2008
"Indian Giving" and Other Racist Reminders
Yesterday, while pet-sitting for a friend in Sanford, Florida, I stood out in her driveway loading luggage in my car when two young white males walked by. Apparently perturbed by my brown skinned self in their lily-white cul-de-sac and further enraged by my "Support Indian Sovereignty" bumber sticker, they felt the need to remind me of my place. One boy loudly shouted to the other one, ""Hey Look, An Indian Giver."
I didn't look up. They were trying to get a rise out of me and I was not going to appease them. Or maybe I was just too shocked? Or maybe because as a person of color, I have developed such a thick skin and a slow response time to potentially dangerous stimuli that it sometimes takes a while for racist and derogatory statements to register? I don''t know. Maybe I should admit I was scared but that feels like defeat so I won''t. I was pissed.
I had been warned about this particular town and maybe I should have listened but after living all over this country, its not clear to me that racism is something I can avoid. Last year I was in my front yard in an entirely different part of Florida when a car full of white boys drove by and yelled "nigger" at me. It was the "Space Coast"- where the average citizen has post-graduate education and an income over $50,000. You don''t have to be a redneck to be a racist.
Am I a Black or an Indian? Does it matter? Racists, it seems, come in many sizes and shapes and their hate adapts.
Whether it is the little white boy in Frantz Fanon's story, saying to his mother, ""Look, a Negro", teenage redneck white boys saying "'Look, an Indian Giver," or a car full of rich white boys yelling, "Hey, Nigger" its meant as a reminder to those of us brown-skinned humans who have forgotten what our position is in society.
Just in case for a moment we have imagined we are human beings
living lives full of inspiring possibilities and beautiful promise........
The racists are always there to remind us.
I didn't look up. They were trying to get a rise out of me and I was not going to appease them. Or maybe I was just too shocked? Or maybe because as a person of color, I have developed such a thick skin and a slow response time to potentially dangerous stimuli that it sometimes takes a while for racist and derogatory statements to register? I don''t know. Maybe I should admit I was scared but that feels like defeat so I won''t. I was pissed.
I had been warned about this particular town and maybe I should have listened but after living all over this country, its not clear to me that racism is something I can avoid. Last year I was in my front yard in an entirely different part of Florida when a car full of white boys drove by and yelled "nigger" at me. It was the "Space Coast"- where the average citizen has post-graduate education and an income over $50,000. You don''t have to be a redneck to be a racist.
Am I a Black or an Indian? Does it matter? Racists, it seems, come in many sizes and shapes and their hate adapts.
Whether it is the little white boy in Frantz Fanon's story, saying to his mother, ""Look, a Negro", teenage redneck white boys saying "'Look, an Indian Giver," or a car full of rich white boys yelling, "Hey, Nigger" its meant as a reminder to those of us brown-skinned humans who have forgotten what our position is in society.
Just in case for a moment we have imagined we are human beings
living lives full of inspiring possibilities and beautiful promise........
The racists are always there to remind us.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
