Tagline: Little Light
Wondering why Queer Dewd? Wondering what happend to Bitch | Lab? Read Why Queer Dewd and Shame Affirmative.
Skip all this. Take me straight to the comment form »
Impromptu Carnival: Privilege in the blogosphere…
Wow, where to begin? I’m not really sure who the audience of LWG is all the time, unless people comment or link here or tell me they read, but for the purposes of this post, we can assume there are…
Leave a comment, a trackback from your own blog, or subscribe to an RSS feed for this entry.
"For what it’s worth, I don’t like Bitch Lab, I don’t read her, I don’t think she’s very bright, and I think the main thing she piggybacked on recently was a comment thread to a post she didn’t author. Nice appropriation, that. ... Don’t like Bitch Lab? Join the club, and don’t read her. Read the women she rips off instead. They’re better." - Ilyka Damen
"Most outlandish creative class critic of the year. Or maybe the decade." Â Richard Florida
Listed on Top 10 Sources
"Speaking as a progressive radical Leftist feminist  supporting Black man, I say: BRA FREAKIN' VO! Ms. Bitch."  Anthony Kennerson
"Your blog warms my pervy queer heart. \m/" Â The Prophet Lilith
"This blog's lay out rocks. Extremely well written. Can't just drop in for a quickie here. You'll fill many evenings of catching up.... I must say, all well done!" Â DH Spicy
Note: This blog is a natural product. Slight variations in spelling and grammar enhance its individual character and beauty and are not to be considered flaws or defects.
Heh. This touches on something I’ve known for a long time — by unfortunate and direct experience. But when I have used the term “anti-racist racist” in the past, few people have accepted that I knew what I was talking about. It’s funny, though. The white people picking at each other’s nits. And these are not really nits — they are hypostatised, imaginary nits, designed and fabricated to make us feel better.
And so the little white girl refugee from rural Africa had to be picked on as a big ogre neo-nazi rightwinger, in order to make certain westerners feel more confortable about themselves. Such an easy target I was for a long time, too — as I had had no ideological training about left or right… didn’t even know what an ideology was for the longest time. (Perhaps this is hardest for people to believe — that their “ogres” really aren’t positioned all that well to play their nominated role, either from the point of view of skill or actual social power. I had no idea why I was being petulantly abused or ostracised.)
Later, I started to get a clue that there were anti-racists who were against me on the basis of what they perceived to be my “race”. So, in my head, I formed the sense that my natural born enemies were the “anti-racist racists”. It was a crude and paradoxical term, but it continually summed up my situation very well when I explained to myself and anyone who would listen (nobody very much) that I was being victimised by “anti-racist racists”.
Did they understand, these anti-racist racists, that every time I tried to get a stable foothold in the society I had migrated to, that they dislodged that foothold, causing me to fall back into a situation of unemployment and poor health which led DIRECTLY to my being at the mercy of my father’s misogynistic abuses, AGAIN??
This outcome (if they were to believe it at all) is something which they would probably like to trace back to the poetic justice due to me as a purported racist from colonial Africa. Thus, by turning a blind eye to me and the experiences I had as an outcome of discrimination, certain ideologues mete out a default justice to me — actually merely the justice they think that I deserved.
The sense of outrage I have had is that my values were never as racist as those who judged me — hard to believe but true. I never judged anyone on the basis of race to the degree that I have been judged on the basis of my own origins. I have never tried to mete out homegrown justice on the basis of my ideological certainties. I did find that the viciousness and indecency I was treated to turned me, defensively towards the right, after quite a number of years — when I finally understood that there was an ideological war being waged against me systematically and personally.
The anti-racist racists are still despicable in my eyes — they target children (as I was), females, migrants… in other words people already extremely vulnerable within society. These are all too easy targets for them. Do they target really vicious perpetrators? Did any of those self-annointed politically correct come to my aid when I claimed on the Internet and elsewhere that I was being psychological and physically abused by some misogynistic Christians — and that I couldn’t do anything because I’d already been knocked down so hard I was having a hard time getting up?
Resoundingly NO! Nobody did anything.
Because somebody who has actual power (patriarchal social power, or whatever) is a HARD TARGET. The ideologues do not go for hard targets. They only get their rocks of by attacking easy targets like I said — females, adolescents, migrants.
Oh yeah, and if you want to call me “oversensitive”, I’ll wear that too. I’m more than tough enough already.
Wow, this is a great contribution to this debate. You’re right, we should remember that we should not let individual level challenges to racism usurp systemic challenges to it. But neither should we let ourselves off the hook. There’s got to be a healthy balance, I think. People are “only human”, though; we all get angry sometimes. And that’s where the use of it “as insult” comes into play. Often in these sorts of things it’s righteous anger. And that’s important. We shouldn’t dismiss that. There’s got to be space for it. But the reality is no matter who you’re talking to when it gets to that level, people stop listening. They get defensive. Dialogue stops. The conversation, the real listening stops. And that’s what bothers me. The end of the conversation. So while I’m not saying people should not call other people out and I’m even not saying that it’s not valid when it gets to the level of the insult, I am saying that I haven’t ever seen it be very effective.
Well, what you’re saying rings a bell for me in a way related to the revival of the feminist “sex wars:” you always hurt the ones you love. Or, more accurately, the ones that you feel most connected to, the ones you’re likely to feel most hurt by, abandoned by, betrayed by. And, more cynically, the ones that you can reach. Which is pretty much what you’re saying: “easy targets.”
Thing is that while there’s truth in that, the kick-the-dog syndrome, there’s always–*always* something else going on as well, I think, with the “realness” debates and suchlike at least. Most people don’t see themselves as the bullies, of course; they see themselves as the powerless; the lashing out is not kicking the nearest target but righteous retribution. Which, maybe it is, and maybe it’s not. Or, in this case, most likely it’s righteous retribution against the wrong target, simply because it’s handy.
And then, too: even the most hostile attacking is a form of trying to connect, I think. Not the most ideal one; but, for most of us it still feels better than nothing at all.
slip, was replying to Jennifer.
It’s funny, because I was just thinking about this, the idea of coming clean about your own privilege, and I decided that I don’t think it’s a very good idea. Certainly, there is a charge in pointing it out in other people, but pointing it out in yourself, even in some sort of confessional style rings false for a lot of folks. Abstractly, I think it’s because the purpose of self-flagellation is self-aggrandizement–monks whipped themselves to find greater favor with God, not because they actually wanted to be better people (you can’t get that with a whip. It doesn’t even make sense. Anyway…). Additionally, I think it’s because as aware as a person can be of their own privilege, they can’t be aware of all of it all the time. Having a bit of awareness and being able to be that much more conscious in thought, speech and action feels pretty good, but it is possible to be blinded by that self-flattery from other privileges, and then to be called on it can really jar a person out of the buzz. I’m reminded of this every time my wife reminds me that, in all of my railing against sexism on the internet, I have neglected to do the laundry and cut the boy’s fingernails (again). I then feel like kind of a fraud. So I understand how the guys feel, but at the same time, it’s like, “so you’re a fraud, so if you don’t want to be, then listen to what people tell you and fix it.”
Yesterday, R and I were talking about something somewhat unrelated and he said something like, “If everyone’s saying that Anonymous Person is wrong, you’d think Anonymous Person would figure it out. If no one’s paying attention to Anonymous Person, you’d think Anon would go away.”
I said, “You’d think. But you and I’ve both been on the Internets ™ for years. Every few months or so, we see it happen in one space or another: someone clings for dear life to their cerititude. They are certain that all the criticisms are from those who’re the ones who are dishonest. Like Belledame said yesterday, ‘There’s an old expression: If one person kicks you, THEY have a problem. If everybody is kicking you, YOU have a problem.’”
I paused and said to R, “How many times have you seen anybody come to that realization?”
Simultaneously: “Never.”
And, whera aldahlia handled things quite well, I suspect that it was only because she mistakenly assumed I was black. Which is interesting. I identify with and read more women of color blogs than I do white women’s. I am steeped in black feminist thought in a way most white women aren’t (at least for my cohort).
Dunno. Anyway, I’d be happy to hear how that rant was sexist or how this Web site is sexist. And, apparently, how everyone here is. Someone wrote me off list saying that this is what is being said.
But, like Angela, I’d want evidence. Strangely, this isn’t offered.
The funny thing about Angela’s rant, I ws involved. I’d gotten upset with a guy. I felt the way he treated Angela was sexist. Because I said something about how he plays the “I’ve got a bigger hard on for Marx game” during that convo, he told me I was racist (since he was black). He also told me that, because I’d nicknamed him “Chaz” that I was a racist.
I remember apologizing and then Charles digging in his heels and refusing to make up and be friends. But that’s Chaz. We’ve been good buds ever since — though we can sometimes still get in heated debates. Most notably over two things: evolutionary theory and the biological determinism in sexuality debate. :)
The problem with blogspace is that people have to want to share something bigger than themselves — they have to want to belong to a group.
Since these groups are indentified with persons or personallities, no solidarity will every be built on the internets ™ at least not through blogs.
Impromptu Carnival: Privilege in the blogosphere…
Wow, where to begin? I’m not really sure who the audience of LWG is all the time, unless people comment or link here or tell me they read, but for the purposes of this post, we can assume there are…
Oh I didn’t know my trackback would leave a little excerpt like that but here’s a better explanation: basically I was just trying to summarize the conversation thus far ’cause it’s really cool and I tried to link to all the posts I’ve read on the topic. That’s what that “Impromptu carnival” up there is.
I guess it depends on what one means by naming one’s privilege. I mean, for me class is the most uncomfortable one; I suppose I figured incoherently that being white was less mutable and more self-evident than the money/background situation. Probably it’s mainly because we like to pretend class doesn’t exist even more than we like to pretend racism doesn’t exist, in this country/culture(s). Eventually I figured that I just am who I am, and it was how it was, especially with regard to how I was raised.
And then too, these days I’m less and less inclined to do the shame-on-me thing for *anything,* because I had more than my share of it for any number of reasons, personal and/or sociopolitical, and frankly I don’t think the sackcloth and ashes routine does anyone any real good. I try to be more aware of class and money issues than I would have been growing up, say; it’s not hard to at least be aware, as I live in a largely working-to-middle class neighborhood in Queens (which is diverse as hell overall, as is New York, in a number of ways); and then I learn from my friends and acquaintances, and vice versa.
So if it seems germane, I’ll now casually mention what I think my class background is (middle to upper middle, I expect), same as I would any other piece of self-identifying information. I don’t know as how there’s much need to go on and on about it unless it’s an indepth discussion of class and/or related issues. The only reason I might go on and on about a piece of self-id’ing information that I *don’t* believe I’m on the privileged end of (queer, kinky, female, Jewish albeit that far less often) outside of the context of such a discussion, uninvited, is–well, yes, because i feel attacked or threatened. Ultimately it’s about hitting hot buttons as much as anything, isn’t it.
My experience is that generally people mostly want to tell their own story and be heard, and that just listening to it attentively without introducing my own (unless invited) is sometimes the best–and the most challenging–thing that I can do.
And that when people react like your friend Charles, to me it usually means they’re stuck, at least temporarily, in the I-need-to-be-heard part and not really in a place of wanting to hear anyone *else’s* story. I’m slowly coming to the belief that regardless of *why* a person is in that place, be it for a “legitimate” sociopolitical reason or a less generally-sympathized-with sociopolitical reason (the “privileged” person arguing as though they’re the ones without the power, who aren’t being listened to)–that at that point, it’s pretty much the listener’s discretion how to respond. It’s *always* a gift to just listen to someone and try to hear them, whatever the hell their story is. Sometimes one may not just not feel able or willing to give that gift to any given person, and you know, I think that’s always legitimate. I also think it’s probably more productive to recognize that and say something like “You know what, I really can’t/don’t want to hear this right now (or at all, as far as that goes),” rather than turn it around with “You you YOU YOU!!!” And then mean it: just let it go, at least for a time, whether that means changing the subject or backing out of talking with the person(s) altogether, until I feel ready to engage again.
Some people I may never feel ready to engage again, because I don’t find it productive. When I’ve ceased even to be amused by taunting and flaming the people I consider to have put themselves in the “beyond actual communication but still won’t stop trying to engage and annoying the crap out of me” category, I stop talking to them, too. Arguably I should maybe just do this to begin with, but that’s another whole discussion (how to handle malicious trolls, as opposed to the possibly-honest-but-still-largely-intractable people that I violently disagree with)
Do I do this myself, all the time, even one quarter of the time? Hell naw. I am not Mother Fucking Theresa. But I am aware that in the instances when I have been able to do this, it’s just about always led to much MUCH better results than if I did it the old way, i.e. “Sit your ass down and listen to the ways in which you have been WRONG. Hell, ARE wrong, as far as that goes.” And that when I do indulge in the Voice of Wrath, it’s primarily because it makes *me* feel better, not because I actually believe that the person I’m righteously smacking down is going to go “Gee, you’re right! I AM being a bigoted asshole! I suddenly understand everything you were patiently trying to explain to me before, now that you’re yelling and insulting me! Wow, I really learned something today.” It is a nice fantasy, of course.
Well, that, and I do think there’s some value in calling out someone who’s behaving in an ugly way in front of an audience; but in that case you’re really talking to the *other* people in the room, not so much the troll/cementhead/asshat/whoever. Some people have referred to this as sadism, or “mobbing,” and you know, it’s not totally invalid; but at the same time, I still believe there *is* at least value in confirming other peoples’ reality (why yes, in fact, this person *is* behaving like an asshat! I thought so, too!)
And, too, as has been pointed out a few times here: it’s not really reasonable to expect everyone to “play nice” all the time. Everyone’s a human being, yes,* and may even have something sympathetic about them, yes, but that doesn’t necessarily mean they mean you well, or really have any real interest in genuine communication (i.e. listening *and* talking) at all.
*one of my favorite refrigerator magnets says: “Republicans Are People Too. Mean, Selfish, Greedy People.”
>What would it hurt other than my leftist pride if someone said I was being racist? I’ll ask for evidence and I will most likely debate it, but it doesn’t destroy my sense of self.
That’s an excellent question. I think the answer is because of that old bugaboo, essentialism (or if one prefers, the shame vs. guilt thing). In other words, you’re not BEING racist, you ARE a racist, i.e. a Bad Person (which is pretty much the bottom line for a lot of people who understand that Racism Is Bad but, inexplicably, don’t quite seem to get *why.*) So, then: you didn’t just *do* or *say* something that can be rectified or atoned for (guilt) you just *are* racist (shameful), and that’s all there is to it. Personally I think that when people do this (”you’re a racist!”), while it may be a fair assessment based on context (or not), it’s usually also a shame-dump. That is: “I feel like you’re pressing all my shame buttons wrt my identity issues; I’m gonna give it right back to you (and THEN some, sometimes).”
Personally I’m in favor of declaring not just the “isms” but the “ists” mutable and dependent on context. At minimum, it’s a continuum, one dependent on action, not something you just are or aren’t.