Lost Grrrls

hate-wizard:

Despite the fact that I just read a post that claimed I could not define what is and what isn’t racist, or cultural appropriation, because I am white, I am going to defend the use of body modification for as many cultures and peoples as I can.

So, the post claimed that white…

laborreguitina:

1) Say we are too “involved” or biased in regards to the subject, and claim that you are more “objective”.

This is frequently done to silence people who are trying to tell their own story. Academia is famous for this, but it happens outside academia as well. For example, who are the acknowledged “experts” about our cultures, religions, and lives? Why are there white upper-class men teaching Women’s studies, white upper-class women teaching African or Latin American studies, and white upper-class Christians or atheists teaching Islamic studies? Why does the media go to people outside the group they are speaking about to ask their opinion and views on a subject? The claim is that people of color and women are not “objective”. Especially in regards to religion, this is frequently thrown out there when discussing “Eastern” religions like Islam, Buddhism and Hinduism; we are viewed as too biased to speak about our own history, culture and beliefs.

2) Say we are ignorant of the subject, even though the subject is our own life, history, culture or religion, because we have dared to speak to our own story and question the way outsiders have portrayed it. This includes questioning our academic background (or lack of), our writing style/ability, and whether or not we cite “accepted” texts to prove our points.

So called “experts” are the most obvious examples of this, and this ties in with
number one above, but it is also enacted regularly by non-experts. The blogging world, for example, is full of people who think they know about something because they read it on-line or have a friend of a friend who experienced xyz, and then they use this as a means to say that this is the only version that is valid. Rarely are women of color allowed to speak to our own experience, to say that we were mistreated or discriminated against without someone else claiming that we are “reading too much into it”. Similarly, if we speak of the beauty and empowerment we have found in our own culture or religion, there is someone quick to dismiss it as an anomaly or us not knowing enough about where we come from to realize the intricate workings of oppression inherent in what we have stated we are not oppressed by.

3) Speak condescendingly towards us. Tell us we are too young or too old, naïve or bitter, and that we are angry or emotional, etc.

This is one of the most offensive things done by other women. We all recognize it when done by men, and we all rally around the anger and hurt that it causes then, but some of us experience it more frequently from our fellow women. Women of privilege regularly say these things to women of color as a way of silencing our questioning of their intentions, goals, and strategies. Rather than engaging why we are angry, we are dismissed for expressing deep emotion. Rather than accepting the opinions of a woman that differ, it is said that she is “old school” or “out of touch” or that she is too cynical because of past experience and therefore not giving the new guard a chance. Young women who come full of energy and new ideas are discouraged from changing the way things have been done and told that they are ignorant of the big picture. Act as though you are protecting us, mentoring us, looking out for our good – basically patting us on the head and telling us to pipe down.

4) Pull out your “credentials” to show that you have more support and legitimacy than we do.

This ties in with the idea of “experts” but goes one farther. If writing for a large feminist blog, the offending woman will say that the size of the blog is proof of her legitimacy. She will claim to have many followers, and her followers can’t be wrong, so she must be saying something right. She will point to a woman of color’s blog and say that it is small, or accuse her of the bad grammar, unprofessional writing, and “hating” to show that her blog and writing is more appropriate, thereby her ideas must also be more correct. If the white feminist has been published in magazines or has published books, she will point to these as further proof of her credentials and acceptance from the larger society, mocking the woman of color who has not attained this sort of approval even if the woman of color doesn’t want to be published.

5) Say we are hurting the cause of feminism, or that we aren’t really feminist at all.

This one is perhaps the most damaging of all. First, it presumes that we consider ourselves “feminist” at all and thereby implies that there is something wrong with us if we don’t. Then it attempts to define what feminism is, what counts as feminism, and tells us that we aren’t really part of it, while trying to shame us and discount anything we have to say because it is “not feminist”. It does not allow that feminism could have different forms and faces, but limits it to what serves the white woman and nothing more. If, as women, we cannot set our own goals, speak to our own needs, and create our own agenda, then how “feminist” are you? Ignoring us, pushing our concerns to the back, this is what is really hurting the “Movement”. It is arrogant for certain women to sit in judgment of other women and whether or not they should be allowed into the ranks or allowed to use a label. But then, that’s probably why so many women of color are throwing away the label of our own accord. We don’t want to be confined to your self-serving definition.

Number 5… holy crap. I did actually have someone tell me recently that the “Shit White Women Say To ___” videos are anti-feminist. That they should be called “Shit Ignorant People Say To ___” instead but they aren’t because that’s not as funny.

No. Fucking hell. Dear fellow white women, please get this through your heads: when a woman of color complains about comments they get CONSTANTLY from SPECIFICALLY WHITE WOMEN that are maybe not racist women, but they’re clearly ignorant that their comments are problematic (because they’re based on stereotypes, etc), THAT’S NOT ANTI-FEMINIST. Those comments are just from “ignorant PEOPLE.” They’re from ignorant women, specifically ignorant white women. What’s anti-feminist is white women saying these things in the first place, and then getting up in arms because women of color notice the trend and complain about it. And I’m sorry, but the content of those videos was things white WOMEN specifically would say, NOT men. Should there also be “Shit White Men Say To ___” videos? Yes, absolutely. But if white women are saying ignorant bullshit, why the hell are you putting it on women of color to show that white men also say ignorant bullshit? So you don’t have to feel so bad because other white people are doing it too?

Because honestly? Here’s the thing. You’re not supposed FEEL BAD about the videos, or attacked. Here’s what you SHOULD do: watch and listen. If you’ve said any of the racist/problematic comments in the video, look inside yourself, ask why, and KNOCK IT OFF. If you haven’t said any of the things in the videos, and you realize why those comments are problematic, good; keep it up and keep paying attention when women of color call people on their bullshit, and call other white people on their bullshit when you see it. But don’t just go, “God, why are they attacking white women? What have we ever done to them?” when the videos are telling you EXACTLY WHAT you’ve done.

cultureofresistance:

wespeakfortheearth:

infoneer-pulse:

Congress may take books, musical compositions and other works out of the public domain, where they can be freely used and adapted, and grant them copyright status again, the Supreme Court ruled Wednesday.

In a 6-2 ruling, the court ruled that just because material enters the public domain, it is not “territory that works may never exit.”

The top court was ruling on a petition by a group of orchestra conductors, educators, performers, publishers and film archivists who urged the justices to reverse an appellate court that ruled against the group, which has relied on artistic works in the public domain for their livelihoods.

They claimed that re-copyrighting public works would breach the speech rights of those who are now using those works without needing a license. There are millions of decades-old works at issue. Some of the well-known ones include H.G. Wells’ Things to Come; Fritz Lang’s Metropolis and the musical compositions of Igor Fyodorovich Stravinsky.

» via Wired

Ummm… This seems kinda shady.

Further privatization of the commons. :/