# data[].attributes.body
1. In Cole & Luna’s piece, “Making Coalitions Work: Solidarity Across Difference Within US Feminism” (546), they talked about the social construct around social identity and standing up for who we are, and who the people are that make up and diversify society. Feminism for the 99 percent: A Manifesto (canvas) (28-57), elaborates on the myriad of ideas and examples of how capitalism impedes and infringes on lives of women, women of color, and queer communities through ecological crisis and the politics frame working around capitalism.
2. A foundational concept that I gained from the reading from the manifesto was of women’s liberation falsely being represented in racist and imperialized society. “Feminism that is truly anti-racist and anti-imperialist must also be anti-capitalist “(30). I understand this concept to be true, but something inside of me just doesn’t want to believe it. I think it’s interesting because of the educational background that I have in economics and politics and the little to no mention of feminism or marginalization in key foundational building block ideas. Before this class, I understood the oppression that women and people of color face In the work field, but it is a little bit upsetting since we did not fully divulge on the topic of feminism in my classes. The article that I have attached, provides a different view of feminism that incorporates the idea of capitalism, as well as how it’s perceived in society. These are along the lines of what I have had previous knowledge and assumption on. Though I don’t agree/disagree with this article I think it’s important to hear out other peoples research and opinions which can help us educate ourselves and other people. I think it’s important to read and discuss something that you might not agree with from a different perspective in order to gain insight as to where they are coming from, and to see how they believe women fit in a capitalist society.
3. Some thing that I learned from these readings, was about the ecological crisis which is inevitably caused by capital and not humanity. “It was not humanity in general but capital that extracted carbonized deposits formed over hundreds of billions of years beneath the crust of the earth; and it was Capitol that consume them in a blink of an eye with total disregard for replenishment or the impacts of pollution in greenhouse gas emissions” (32) Although I’ve already linked an article, I thought this New York Times article correlates well with what was quoted above. https://www.nytimes.com/2021/02/22/business/energy-environment/corporations-climate-change.html#commentsContainer Corporations’ actions speak louder than words and I think that corporations can say that they “want a more ecological and economical solution that benefits everyone” all they want, but if they don’t act upon it or try to make a difference, it’s no better than what they’re currently doing. I think that as customers/consumers, shareholders and investors, we need to make a bigger deal out of corporations and their massive use of natural resources that they use to produce and sell. We need to be more aware and direct of what corporations are doing, and start calling them out for it so that we can make change happen. Something to keep in mind, is that if masses of people do not support corporations they will have limited backing and market power. They will cease to be influential. I guess I always assumed that people are responsible for global warming and climate change by not recycling or leaving a carbon footprint when they’re driving their car etc. because for the longest time, that is what I’ve been taught… But it makes much more sense that it’s tied to the market since corporations are creating this problem.
4. Cole and Luna’s piece covered Grace Lee Boggs’ statement of self identity. She said, “ I don’t believe in getting stuck in one identity. I think that our tendency… It’s so easy to become fragmented because we live in a fragmented… Fragmenting society (549). This quote really resonated with me even after reading it, because social identities can be so restricting, and can get in the way of how we are perceived in society. I’ve personally struggled with this, I still do. I’ve missed so many opportunities and friendships and connections with people because I was trying to check off a specific box on “societies’ checklist”. It’s enlightening to read and be reassured that you don’t have to check off just one box. We need to normalize and spread awareness of the entrapment we put ourselves in because of how society perceives us. I think this applies to feminism and the feminist movement too. For example, a self identifying Black lesbian does not have to pick and choose which “side” she is fighting equality for. She is fighting for equality as a Black lesbian on behalf of Black lesbians in Black and LGBTQAI+ communities. I am very fond of Boggs and admire her thoughts and work. One of my favorite quotes from her is, “ you cannot change any society unless you take responsibility for it, unless you see yourself as belonging to it and responsible for changing it”. I think that this particular quote (though not in the reading) is extremely well put especially in this context.

# data[].attributes.body
1. The main points of today’s reading and video is the power that women have to make a difference. Arruzza et al.’s piece, “Feminism for the 99 percent: A manifesto” (canvas) talks about the importance of activism for and by all women. The Kanopy film, “Nothin Without Us: Women in the Global Fight Against AIDS” shows how uneducated our global citizens are about AIDS, and how it affects more than just white gay men.
2. One concept that I found interesting was about anti capitalism, “Breaking through the isolation of domestic and symbolic walls, the strikes demonstrate the enormous political potential of women’s power: the power of those whose paid and unpaid work sustains the world...an indispensable role played by gendered, unpaid work in capitalist society” (11). This whole article is really honing in on the effects that capitalism has on people who basically don’t have power. I thought this was super interesting because I am about to graduate with an economics degree, and I can’t honestly tell you that we’ve talked a lot about anti-capitalism. At least not in America – if America was an anti-capitalist society what that would look like for the marginalized. Additionally, I think people forget that not all economists jump into corporate ideology.
3. Something new that I learned was how undereducated people are globally, but also in America. In the kanopy film, it said that “worldwide, 51% of people living with AIDS are women”. That’s a horrifying statistic to hear of, but it’s even more horrifying to know that most people don’t even know how greatly AIDS has an effect on women, especially women of color. After watching this video, I was reflecting back on how much I learned in school about HIV and AIDS. For example, I had no idea that AZT was a somewhat effective drug to give to pregnant women and newborn babies to combat their chances of contracting HIV. To be honest, I didn’t even know that HIV positive women were even capable of having children. There’s such an unnecessary stigmatization around AIDS and HIV positive, when there’s nothing you can do about it, but also nothing to fear. I remember in my freshman high school health class had someone with AIDS come in and speak to us. Hearing this man speak from his own perspective about his life with aids was very impactful and knowledgeable to know you can live a great life even with such an awful disease. But even still, he was a white gay man. And I can’t really remember addressing any women, especially impoverished women of color and AIDS impacting their lives.
4.Liberal feminism is not the same as feminism. “Dedicated to enabling a smattering of privileged women to climb the corporate ladder and the ranks of the military, it propounds a market centered view of the quality that dovetails perfectly with the prevailing corporate enthusiasm for diversity” (14). In the “manifesto”, they explain how media is partially accountable by not distinguishing the two from each other. I think that it is important to be able to tell the two apart, but I am not particularly fond of their take. The way that I read it sounds like liberal feminists are radical feminist. I always understood liberal feminism as feminism tailored to law and policies. After reading this, I can see how liberal feminists are apart of the problem in society. I think that while their efforts may be true, women’s and feminist movements are more impactful as a foundation. Because liberal feminists don’t address ongoing matters of socioeconomic issues that women often face, it’s almost like they are breaking the glass ceiling, which is great! But then they reseal it once they are on the other side.

# data[].attributes.body
1.Common themes in today’s readings seemed to cover the idea of seeing other people from their perspective. Liam Oliver Liar’s, “Navigating Transsnes in the US” (459) focuses on the origin and bring up of the practice of eugenics and discriminatory sexology. In Wendy Seymour’s piece, “Putting Myself in the Picture '' (470) allows us to understand the ideas of vulnerability that the disabled face with technology and society’s sympathy. Maskni & Baruah’s, “Gender Equity in the Sharing Economy '' (483) elaborated on the uprising of Uber’s development and how it works for some but does not work for all. Lastly, Rachel Charlene Lewis’ piece, “Technology Isn’t Neutral” (489) gave me a better understanding of technological challenges and how technology discriminates against the marginalized.
2. A concept that I learned from these readings was medicalization. In Liar’s piece, he talked about how many people who want to change gender on documents and certificates have to go through inhumane requirements that satisfy the eugenic ideology. “In order to change a gender marker on birth certificates and other government documents, many US states require medical interventions that result in sterilization. While not “forced” sterilization, this is evidence of de facto sterilization requirements and is further evidence of the influence of eugenics (Open Society Foundations 2015, 463). This practice of medicalization and moral abuse of medicine is inappropriate and frankly unacceptable. To me, medicalization means that how people behave or associate qualifies them to be ‘medically treated’. It is absurd to me that people are being penalized for their non-binary conforming sexualities and genders. We need to reframe the thinking around trans people and educate the masses in order to justify the wrongs and hurt that we have caused as a society. I do not identify as being trans, that doesn’t mean that I shouldn’t be aware of what’s happening in the trans community! For example, currently in the news, New Zealand Laurel Hubbard will be competing in the 2021 Tokyo Olympics. What should be a watershed moment in history for women and the LGBTQAI+ communities is being overshadowed by controversy over science and biology. There are many researchers and scientist trying to prove and settle the transgender athletes debate (see NPR podcast). Interestingly so, many doctors, researchers, and scientists are working to ‘label’ Hubbard’s achievement.
1.. These readings helped me understand the importance of putting yourself in a different perspective, and that technology seems to sustain gender stereotypes. Seymour’s piece mentioned that, “People with disabilities make other people feel uncomfortable. Bodily pain and dysfunction are “one’s own business” to be managed in silence unless some specific information is required—perhaps by a clinician to confirm a diagnosis or by a social scientist to substantiate a point” (472). I think that I can look at disabled people and feel empathy instead of sympathy. I never considered that people with really any disabilities aren’t considered “normal”.  It’s extremely difficult to have a comfortable place in society when you are constantly being criticized on subjective matters. Maskni and Baruah’s piece talks more about the discrimination of technology and how that affects women in different cultures and countries which ultimately effects them economically and financially. I love anything to do with economics, especially outside of a traditional economic classes, and thought this perspective was especially noteworthy. In America, we view Uber as a company that gives you benefits, let’s you be your own boss, and allows tips. In other countries, (third world countries and industrialized countries), women do not even have access to personal assets. Not a car. Not even a bank account. How can equality prosper with such social and financial burdens?
4. Relating to my own life, Lewis’ piece on technology being bias is especially relevant in today’s society and what I’ve noticed in my life. I see platforms of social media that seem to marginalize people through content. Now I have a better understanding of how technology can manipulate you in both the content that you see and how you perceive yourself. I’ve seen so many TikToks of women making “re-do” videos of their bikini/swimsuit haul because they were demonetized because of the way they looked. The few that I’ve seen were all women, some women of color, and plus size women. This feeds back into how we are perceived in society.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.readable_text
subscribe to Short Wave podcast

The debate on whether transgender females should be allowed to play women's sports has become increasingly politicized. One transgender athlete and researcher is forging a middle ground with science.

AILSA CHANG, HOST:

The debate over whether transgender female athletes should be allowed to play girls' and women's sports has exploded this year. More than 30 states have introduced bills that would ban them from participating. The issue is emotionally charged, and it's hard to find a middle ground. But NPR's Tom Goldman reports on a pioneering researcher trying to get there.

TOM GOLDMAN, BYLINE: With the simple act of signing his name, Mississippi Governor Tate Reeves turned the debate over transgender female athletes into reality.

(SOUNDBITE OF ARCHIVED RECORDING)

TATE REEVES: Senate Bill 2536, the Mississippi Fairness Act, is now law.

GOLDMAN: The law, banning transgender athletes from high school and university female teams, is scheduled to take effect this year. The legislation Reeves signed in March and other similar state bills cite science to make the case that after puberty, transgender female athletes have an absolute advantage over cisgender female athletes, even after therapy to reduce the powerful hormone testosterone. And therefore, the trans athletes should be banned from female sports. But none of the lawmakers behind these bills reached out to Joanna Harper.

JOANNA HARPER: My official title is Ph.D. researcher at Loughborough University.

GOLDMAN: Unofficially, Harper is a scientist in the middle of a debate that's being waged at the angry extremes between those who want to ban and those who want blanket inclusion - any person who identifies as female can play women's sports. The banning side doesn't want to hear this.

HARPER: In most sports, after hormone therapy, it is perfectly reasonable to allow trans women to compete against cisgender women.

GOLDMAN: That's because the therapy, Harper says, can make the playing field more level, even though trans women still can retain advantages like strength and size after transitioning. She believes hormone therapy should be required at high levels of sport, and that restriction angers some on the other side.

HARPER: There are people who consider me a traitor to trans people.

GOLDMAN: What she is is a pioneer in transgender research, which Harper never intended to be. Seventeen years ago, she started taking pills to add estrogen and block testosterone as part of her transition from male to female. She also prepared to change athletically. At one time, she was ranked among the top male distance runners in her native Canada.

HARPER: Within nine months of starting hormone therapy in 2004, I was running 12% slower.

GOLDMAN: Which both bothered her as a competitor and intrigued her as a scientifically curious person - so she started collecting data. She got race teams from eight transgender women before and after hormone therapy. One of the effects of reducing testosterone is reducing hemoglobin, which carries oxygen-rich red blood cells throughout the body. It provides fuel for endurance athletes. And with less, the athletes slow down, which is what happened in Harper's study. Collectively, the women were more than 10% slower after therapy.

HARPER: And that's an important number because that's the difference between serious male distance runners and serious female distance runners - 10- to 12% sort of range.

GOLDMAN: In 2015, she published her data in the first paper on transgender athletes. She then wrote the book "Sporting Gender" and helps sports organizations like the International Olympic Committee craft policies in the middle - inclusive of transgender female athletes and restrictive by requiring them to undergo hormone therapy. Dr. Eric Vilain, a Washington, D.C.-based geneticist and expert on sex differences, said Harper's research has been groundbreaking.

ERIC VILAIN: Looking at data on trans athletes, I don't see that there is any kind of fear to have that suddenly the world of sports is going to be topsy-turvy and very unfair for all women out there.

GOLDMAN: It's harder to assess the impact with younger trans athletes. High schoolers develop at different rates, making it tough to create one-size-fits-all rules. Plus, the numbers are so small. Harper says transgender people make up less than 2% of the population, and trans kids are one-sixth as likely as cisgender kids to go out for school sports. Still, the debate rages, and Harper's goal of pulling people toward the middle continues. Since 2019, she's been at Loughborough University, a prominent sports science school in England. Harper says the science of transgender athletes still is in its infancy. She's broadening her research to different sports, fueled by a personal mantra - more data will lead to better policies.

Tom Goldman, NPR News.

Copyright © 2021 NPR. All rights reserved. Visit our website terms of use and permissions pages at www.npr.org for further information.

NPR transcripts are created on a rush deadline by Verb8tm, Inc., an NPR contractor, and produced using a proprietary transcription process developed with NPR. This text may not be in its final form and may be updated or revised in the future. Accuracy and availability may vary. The authoritative record of NPR's programming is the audio record.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
A Researcher Is Trying To Settle The Transgender Athlete Debate - Using Science

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
subscribe to Short Wave podcast The debate on whether transgender females should be allowed to play women's sports has become increasingly politicized. One transgender athlete and researcher is forging a middle ground with science. AILSA CHANG, HOST: The debate over whether transgender female athletes should be allowed to play girls' and women's sports has exploded this year.

# data[].attributes.body
1. These readings both had a common theme of technology in the world of femininity, and how society perceives women. The textbook reading, “Science Technology, and the Digital World (429 -445) discusses the idea of science being part of the social construct and can create discriminatory narratives that are projected back onto us through society. Emily Martin’s piece, “ The egg and the Sperm (477) talks about the fairy tale narrative of female reproduction and rethinking how biological discoveries have an impact on sociological efforts.
2. A concept that I learned about through the readings is posthumanism. The text defines posthumanism as, “a way of being and living where technology, human, and nature seep into each other” (444). A quote that I found helpful was, ““future in which the boundaries between humanity, technology and nature have become ever more malleable” (Graham 1999, 419)”. To me, I see this as another “reality” where people are comfortable enough to express their true selves. This is a place for people who want to explore and reveal their gender/sexuality. They aren't ditching who they are, they are just being who they are without criticism.
3.After reading Martin’s piece, I never correlated biological structures with sociological structures. What I mean by this, is that egg and sperm are biological features, but I never really thought of the egg and sperm having such an impact on how people are perceived in the real world when they grow up. “…egg as damsel in distress, shielded only by her sacred garments; sperm as heroic warrior to the rescue—cannot be proved to be dictated by the biology of these events(449). After reading this, how can you not see similarities between how people turn out and what society expects of them. If people think it is an accurate representation of how women/men are viewed, then maybe we are not diversifying and changing as much as we thought. It amazes me that there are such levels of inequality on a biological level which trickle into society.
4. After reading these pieces, I definitely have more respect for women in cyberspace. I never had too much of an interest with the gamer life, it just never personally interested me. It still doesn’t, but these readings have certainly taught me a lot about how people use the internet and cyber world to empower themselves. I guess I just hadn’t thought of that before.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.readable_text
An editor in Spain reminded me of this piece written almost twenty years ago. I'm reposting it here, but please read with a dose of generosity. I was quite young when I wrote it, many of the links are dead, and the discourse of digital studies has changed a great deal since then, even as the issues and concerns of cyberfeminism live on. This was first published in the journal Switch. I don't have the date recorded, but I think the text was written in the spring of 1999 and likely published that spring or summer.

*

"Hardware, software, wetware -- before their beginnings and beyond their ends, women have been the simulators, assemblers, and programmers of the digital machines."
--Sadie Plant, Zeros and Ones

It would be hasty to dismiss Sadie Plant's recent book, Zeros and Ones, as being totally second-wave feminism. True, she seems quite interested in the deep, dark, technological feminine; she speaks of the male Ones and their binary opposites, the female Zeros; and she manages to weave together a genuine her-story of technology. Yet, she also reaches beyond these constrains into a complex relationship between women and machines. This relationship, tied up in problematics surrounding identity, technology and the body, is at the heart of the contemporary movement called cyberfeminism.

Emerging from Adelaide, Australia in the early nineties, a group of artists and activists, calling themselves VNS Matrix, published the first Cyberfeminist Manifesto. From this early rant, the cyberfeminist movement began to grow and shift. It began to coalesce around Europe. And on September 20, 1997 in Kassel, Germany, the First Cyberfeminist International met at Documenta X, an international exhibition of contemporary art.

Despite international recognition, cyberfeminism remains a highly problematic theoretical framework. No one is quite sure what it means. Its leaders, when they are not abandoning the movement all together, have often given less than inspired readings of political and technological issues. Because of this cyberfeminism remains a bit disappointing as avant-garde political movements go. There's no viable party line, strictly trade union consciousness.

That said, the emerging cyber culture has certainly produced a need for cyberfeminism. Let's describe that need through the following set of questions: How does technology gender us? Does the internet escape discrimination through gender anonymity? Can technology help us overcome patriarchy? Why are computer geeks disproportionately male? Who wrote the history of computers? Are digital machines fundamentally male or female?

My goal is to give a report on the status of cyberfeminism today, to approach the subject of feminism and technology, in both its historical and ideological dimensions. As Faith Wilding and Critical Art Ensemble have noted in their recent study of cyberfeminism, " the territory of cyberfeminism is large. It includes the objective arenas [of] cyberspace, institutions of industrial design, and institutions of education--that is, those arenas in which technological process is gendered in a manner that excludes women from access to the empowering points of techno-culture." Cyberfeminism in its very nature necessitates a decentered, multiple, participatory practice in which many lines of flight coexist.

Part of the same movement that produced "girl power" e-zines like gURL and the now famous Geekgirl, the nineties cyberfeminist is a unique mixture of activist, cyberpunk, theorist and artist. Historically, cyberfeminism has developed in two directions: the radical politics of Sadie Plant and VNS Matrix on the one hand, and the more mainstream work of the Old Boys Network (OBN is a mostly European consortium of cyberfeminists) and the FACES email community on the other (FACES, surprising enough for cyberspace, is a "women only" email list). Supplementing this are the various online publications that address the question of feminism and technology, including the new media art resource RHIZOME, the nettime community and the pop~TARTS web page, a feature section of Telepolis (a German-based online theory zine), which specializes in material on woman and technology. Cyberfeminist theory has also flourished in the print community with such recent books as Sadie Plant's Zeros and Ones and Sandy Stone's The War of Desire and Technology.... Although cyberfeminism has also benefited from the half-dozen or so anthologies emerging in recent years on digital studies--not the least of which are Timothy Druckrey's Electronic Culture, the Krokers' Digital Delirium and Lynn Hershman Leeson's Clicking In--much of this material remains male dominated, neglecting the scope and depth of contemporary cyberfeminism. Cyberfeminism's theoretical roots tend to grow out of an interesting mixture of Donna Haraway and French third-wave feminism and poststructuralism.

The schism between the two halves of cyberfeminism has been exacerbated within the community on more than one occasion, including VNS Matrix member Francesca da Rimini's description of the current state of mainstream cyberfeminism as nothing more than some " quaint essentialist quilted rant." To their credit, the Old Boys Network (OBN) has been instrumental in bringing cyberfeminism into the institutional PGA Tour of cyberspace: the ISEAs, DEAFs, and Ars Electronica festivals that run on and off throughout the year. Most spectacularly OBN was able to lead the so-called First Cyberfeminist International at last summer's Hybrid Workspace (a think tank for progressive politics and aesthetics at the recent Documenta X exhibition). That said, This paper is primarily addressed at what I believe to the more interesting faction of cyberfeminism, that of Plant, Stone and VNS Matrix.

Sadie Plant and Sandy Stone are perhaps the two best entry points into contemporary cyberfeminist theory. It is Plant's view that technology is fundamentally female--not male as the legions of geeks, computer science teachers, and Wired magazine editors would have us believe. Stone, on the other hand, focuses on how virtual communities produce things like bodies, identities and spaces.

Plant, like French feminist Luce Irigaray before her, belongs to the recuperationist school of feminism. She argues that power structures, which have unequally favored men and male forms in society, should be made more equal through a process of revealing and valorizing overlooked female elements. The book turns on the story of Ada Lovelace, the world's first computer programmer. Ada's history is enthralling. As assistant to Charles Babbage, Lovelace helped build early calculation machines such as the Babbage's Difference Engine. Clearly not enough is known about this figure and her interesting place in the development of computer society. Plant's goal is to recuperate this lost female origin from within the history of technology. However, as her manifesto-like "Feminisations: Reflections on Women and Virtual Reality" shows, Plant wishes not to valorize some negative space created by patriarchy, but to unveil the always already feminine space of technology. This is ultimately a more powerful move. Plant prophesizes that " Masculine identity has everything to lose from this new technics. The sperm count falls as the replicants stir and the meat learns how to learn for itself. Cybernetics is feminisation." Technology can give feminism something that it never had at its disposal, the obliteration of the masculine from beginning to end. With inspiration from the VNS Matrix and their cyberfeminist manifesto, Plant starts to move toward defining the pure feminine.

Zeros and Ones persuasively shows how women have always been inextricably involved with technology. Using the telephone operator as an example, she argues that women have traditionally comprised the laboring core of networks of all kinds, particularly the telephone system. From the power loom to typewriting, even to the discovery of computer "bugs," Plant categorizes technology as a fundamentally female object. She argues that women are intelligent machines, that the robotic is feminine, that the zero--the nothingness of binary code--has always been the 0-ther, the female.

On the writing of Zeros and Ones, Plant remembers: " when I started the book it was really to try and correct, what I thought was the great miss-conception at the moment about the relationship between women and computers in particular and technology in general. It seemed to me, that a lot of 'orthodox' feminist theory was still very technophobic."

Throughout her work the matrix is a primary metaphor. This materializes itself historically in the weaving processes of industrial power looms, in the predominantly female telephone operators, in the trope of the woman as computer programmer (Ada Lovelace, Grace Murray Hopper) and in the web-like structure of cyberspace. Because of this history, Plant writes that technology is fundamentally a process of emasculation. " The matrix weaves itself in a future which has no place for historical man," says Plant. If technology is essentially feminine, then the women is the computer. Or rather, like the Turing machine (a machine that can be any machine), women can imitate the computer. Women are the ultimate mimetic force. Plant writes, " Women cannot be anything, but she can imitate anything valued by man: intelligence, autonomy, beauty...perhaps the very possibility of mimesis." The imitating force is strengthened by the emergence of the digital as a powerful semiotic network. The digital provides a space of valences that exists outside of and potentially preempts patriarchal structures. As Plant describes it, " the introduction of binary code introduces a plane of equivalence which undermines the very foundations of a world in which male and female have played the roles of superstructure and material base." In this model binary code replaces what have traditionally been the producers of value, these being the phallus, the law, the father, etc. In Plant, technology is less a question of good or and more the possibility for an objective weakening of patriarchy. " Cyberfeminism to me implies [that] an alliance is being developed between women, machinery and the new technology that women are using."

Held aloft, yet notably aloof from the cyberfeminist movement is Allucquère Rosanne (Sandy) Stone, transgendered theorist of the history of cyberspace, desire and the virtual body. Stone's early essay " Will the Real Body Please Stand Up?" helped set the stakes for contemporary debates on the status of the body in virtual communities. The place of the body is central to cyberfeminism. Stone argues persuasively that binarisms such as nature/culture actually function logically as " a strategy for maintaining boundaries for political and economic ends, and thus a way of making meaning." The insertion of the body into virtual space actually produces meaning through the articulation of differences between bodies and non-bodies, between spaces and non-spaces. Like Foucault's rejection of the "repressive hypothosis," Stone claims that new technologies are not transparent agents that remove issues of gender from view, but rather they proliferate the production and organization of gendered bodies in space. She shows that the dominant spatial metaphor (what Doreen Massey might call an "imaginary geography") for interactions in virtual spaces is, simply enough, the metaphor of our daily physical, Cartesian space. And like our offline space, virtual spaces are inhabited by bodies with " complex erotic components." This working metaphor is, of course, totally arbitrary as Stone points out, since there is nothing in the logic of digital networks that necessarily prestructures itself as Cartesian, or body-based, or desiring. So then, why are online communities so based on desire, space and bodies? This is the cyberfeminist question for Stone.

Sherry Turkle echoes this sentiment in her " Constructions and Reconstructions of the Self in Virtual Reality." For Turkle digital technologies focus heavily on the question of identity. Like Stone, Turkle describes what happens in online communities, spaces where role playing and genderbending are par for the course.

Virtual space, then, is imagined as a prosthesis, as an enormous extension of our physical bodies. Through this giant phantom limb (the net) we must, of course, interact. Stone shows that communications technology is conventionally thought of as " 1) an apparatus for the production of community... 2) an apparatus for the production of body... [and] 3) a mediating [agent] between bodies and selves...i.e., interfaces." Community, body, interface--an unlikely offspring of binary code! Most fundamentally, participants in online communities like the object-oriented social spaces called MOOs " learn to delegate their agencies to body representatives that exist in imaginal spaces contiguously with representatives of other individuals." The creators of one of the most popular MOOs, LambdaMOO, describe this relationship of bodies in social terms: " LambdaMOO is a new kind of society, where thousands of people voluntarily come together from all over the world." As Stone and others show, a participatory social practice (i.e. community) based on an imagined ether-scape of desiring and interacting bodies is basic to how we conceptualize digital spaces.

Cyberfeminist pioneers VNS (VeNuS) Matrix provided the front line guerrilla tactics for Stone and Plant's theoretical efforts. VNS Matrix emerged from Adelaide, Australia, in the summer of 1991. Francesca da Rimini (also known as Gashgirl and/or Doll Yoko) gives her story of how it all started:

" Like all good coagulating stories it starts with slime, and maybe ends with blood. I live on the edge of the Australian desert in a small town of lies and whispers with a palpable palpitating underbelly... It was the summer of 91. Definitely not the summer of love. We were four girls. We were hot and bored and poor (for me not much has changed, except I am no longer bored). We decided to try and crack the porn cartel with some chick porn. We made some images on stolen computers, Beg, Bitch, Fallen, Snatch. We decided it was more fun playing with computers than endlessly scanning our pussies and so Velvet Downunder morphed into VNS Matrix. Tagging ourselves the virus of the new world disorder and fuelled by red wine and g-slime (which could only be replenished by engaging frequently in pleasurable distractions)."

VNS Matrix were Josephine Starrs, Julianne Pierce, Francesca da Rimini and Virginia Barratt. They have perpetrated a series of cyberfeminist interventions including a "bad code" anti-video game targetted at girls (or at least not targetted at 14 year-old boys) and featuring characters such as "Big Daddy Mainframe." Da Rimini (as Doll Yoko) writes, " cyberfeminism/s has become the field from which i work, from which multiple lines of flight errupt anarchically, generating dialogues, relations, conceptual and physical objects."

To appreciate the full force of the VNS Matrix cyberfeminist manifesto, it is worth including in its original form:

Their slogan "the clitoris is a direct line to the matrix" immediately jumps out of this provocative rant. It is meant to highlight a fundamental material coexistence between the machine and the female body. Originally ignorant of the work of Sadie Plant VNS Matrix built their own theory-based activism centered around women and technology. Julianne Pierce notes, " at the same time as we started using the concept of cyberfeminism, it also began to appear in other parts of the world. It was like a spontaneous meme which emerged at around the same time, as a response to ideas like 'cyberpunk' which were popular at the time. Since then the meme has spread rapidly and is certainly an idea which has been embraced by many women who are engaged with techno theory and practice." Pierce notes that cyberfeminists have never been anti-technology, rather they adore machines and use them integrally in their political action, art and writing.
In what produced a temporary antagonism between the nettime feminists and their more radical fringe, da Rimini (writing as Doll Yoko) posted in June, 1997 to the nettime list that " as artists, [VNS Matrix] were serious bout usin strategies like irony 'n inversion of cultural stereotypes to raise some of the many issues around women and technology .. access .. education .. jobs .. portrayal of girls/chix/women in popular/games culture etc etc." Da Rimini's sentiment is typical of the VNS Matrix brand of cyberfeminism, a crude, confrontational liberationist politics for women in the digital matrix.

Throughout all of cyberfeminist theory the theme of bodies and identities dominates. As one critic notes, " Bodies generally are all the rage on the Net--whether they are obsolete, cyborg, techno, porno, erotic, morphed, recombined, phantom, or viral." Indeed, much of the focus on bodies steams from the process of forgetting the body or trying to forget about forgetting the body. As Stone and others have written, the advent of cyberspace is the story of bodies migrating and morphing into new contexts. In fact, Lynn Hershman Leeson goes so far as to claim that " new [web] users are forming the largest immigration in history"--a powerful idea to keep in mind, that computer use could possibility constitute a real immigration of bodies from the offline to the online.

Another interest of the cyberfeminists, the "posthuman" body is the focus of TechnoMorphica, a recent book of art and essays from the Dutch V2_Organisation. Unlike Donna Haraway's early work on bio/techno hybrids, TechnoMorphica benefits from contemporary developments in areas such as augmented reality, nanotechnology and prosthetics to arrive at a more shockingly immediate description of the future of art and the future of theory. If this intriguing anthology must have a theme, it would be the "new cyborg," the rearrangement of the organic world around the model of the intelligent machine. The well developed transformation of machines into organisms and organisms into machines is the model for the new cyborg. Amazingly, the book includes a 180 page, full color, frame-by-frame photo documentation of Australian artist Stelarc's "Stomach Sculpture," a swallowed video probe exploration of the inside of the artist's digestive track. Says Stelarc, " the body has been augmented, invaded and now becomes a host--not only for technology, but also for remote agents." He elaborates on the "Stomach Sculpture" in a recent CTHEORY interview: " with the stomach sculpture, I position an artwork inside the body. The hollow body becomes a host, not for a self or a soul, but simply for a sculpture." Another piece that uses video footage of the inside of the body is Mona Hatoum's "Corps Etranger." Hatoum creates a haunting audio/visual space using video footage from a micro-sized video camera traveling down the esophagus and into the stomach. The footage is then staged within a larger immersive installation booth that includes a soundtrack of the artist breathing. Hatoum's interest in the immersive environment plays itself twice over: the user is plunged into the viewing booth, then plunged down into a sickening biological space lit up only by the techo eye. The body is at once reviled and revealed.

In the same way cyberfeminism aims to exorcise the essentialized female body through a complex process of revalorization and rebuilding. The Cartesian subject is irrelevant here, as Plant explains: " Basically the two positions that are established at the minute are either that you talk about disembodiment or you talk about embodiment. Either you're out of the body in some stratospheric zone or you're in the organism. I think that neither of those are correct. When people talk about getting out of the body they are still assuming that there is some kind of great transcendent space like heaven for the soul, or something non-material at any rate, to occupy. And as far as I'm concerned that isn't there. The universe isn't like that, it's a material process not some sort of idealist construction. So you can't get out of matter, that's the crucial thing. But you can get out of the confining organization of matter which is shaped into things and of course, organisms. The organism is literally organized around its organs, the vocabulary says it all really."

Contemporary cyberfeminist art, including VNS Matrix's self-described "cunt art," follows Plant's guideline to the letter. Like Fluxus artist Shigeko Kubota's performance "Vagina Painting," VNS Matrix focused on a raw, fleshy, expressive use of the body. Other cyberfeminist, technology-based art includes Eva Grubinger's " Netzbikini." The Netzbikini project parodies the act of buying a bikini, by offering bikini patterns that one can download from the internet and sew together out of "sheer, transparent net fabric." The project turns interactive as users are invited to submit photos of themselves in their new bikinis. The photos are exhibited on the Netzbikini site. Nancy Paterson goes in a different direction on the question of the body. Her " Stock Market Skirt" is composed of a blue taffeta and black velvet party dress, a computer and a stock market ticker. The dress is connected to the computer, which with the help of a robotic device is able to raise or lower the length of the skirt. As the stock market rises and falls, the computer reads the market prices and varies the length of the skirt accordingly. These two pieces show the various ways cyberfeminist art has considered the body.

Following close behind the question of the body is the question of identity. The question of identity is always a delicate balance between a desire to critique essentialism and a desire to remain politically committed. Although not connected to digital studies, Elspeth Probyn, in her Outside Belongings is one person who has tried to define a theory of identity after antihumanism. There is thus a natural affinity with her work and the goals of cyberfeminism. Probyn writes, " I want to figure the desire that individuals have to belong, a tenacious and fragile desire that is, I think, increasingly performed in the knowledge of the impossibility of ever really and truly belonging, along with the fear that the stability of belonging and the sanctity of belongings are forever past." Probyn's longing, then, is to navigate a theory of practices--a theory of living--having already digested a steady diet of antihumanist rhetoric a la psychoanalysis and poststructuralism. The word "performed" reminds us of Butler whose original Gender Trouble was itself a struggle with questions of identity. Unfortunately Probyn's navigation of the unknown space after humanism leaves much to be desired. The exciting early convocations of Foucault, hints of a radically singular psychogeography of the self, an aspiration to perform a "sociology of the skin," the mention of Stuart Hall's concept of articulation, Deleuze's rhizomatics--all these ill prepare the reader for Probyn's lapse into analyses of the "richness" of her childhood, her mother's "passion for horses" and other autobiographical absurdities. An informal style not dissimilar to Stone, Probyn's first person narration would profit from a higher level of objective-ness, more new novel and less memoir. In the end, I say to Probyn's "longing" what Foucault says to Deleuze's "desire": " I cannot stand the word desire; even if you use it differently, I can't help myself thinking or living desire = lack, or that desire says repression." Can we use the master's tools?

In the case of Butler, feminism and the question of identity are distinctly poststructuralist. Because of this she participates in a critique of humanist theories of subjectivity and social space more suited to the cyberfeminist project. In Gender Trouble she has yet to consider the "after" of humanism that is in Probyn, only a critique of what she calls alternately " ontological constuctions of identity," " gender ontologies" and " metaphysics of substance," in short, humanist metaphysics. And well done too. Butler deftly navigates through the Scylla and Charybdis of the theoretical left: avoid essentialism, maintain the political agent. As Butler queries, " what sense can we make of a construction that cannot assume a human constructor prior to that construction?" Butler, then, rooted in a deep materialism, posits a human subject that is both constituted by and constitutive of his/her social environment. Butler's affection for Derrida shines through clearly in this text as her marxist logics take on a decidedly poststructuralist flair: " Gender is a complexity whose totality is permanently deferred, never fully what it is at any given juncture in time. An open coalition, then...will be an open assemblage that permits of multiple convergences and divergences without obedience to a normative telos of definitional closure."

Like Probyn and unlike Butler, the cyberfeminism of Plant, Stone and VNS Matrix seems at times to be experimenting with the post-gender, not merely a critique of gender. The potentiality of the posthuman (artificial life, prosthetics, viruses, cyborgs, etc.), something only available with the advent of technology, is instrumental here. Haraway's prescient claim that " the cyborg is a creature in a post-gender world" might easily be turned around to fit the needs of the cyberfeminists, that the cyberfeminist is a post-gender creature in a virtual world.

But is this post-gender world possible? And do we really want it? Catherine Richards highlights a curious potential fate for cyberfeminism: will cyberfeminism become nothing but ironic nostalgia for past difference, that is, if we are ever truly post-gender will we only be able to wax poetic on the state of struggle in the gendered past? Asks Richards, " if something about contemporary virtual technology erases gender as articulated, will radical cyber-feminism be consigned to nostalgic content as much as traditional lonely male heroism?" Plant, Stone and the VNS Matrix are our best allies for navigating these difficult questions.

+ + +

2 Sadie Plant, "The Future Looms: Weaving Women and Cybernetics," in Lynn Hershman Leeson, Ed. Clicking In (Bay Press, 1996), p. 132.

5 Stone, "Will the Real Body Please Stand Up?" p. 102.

8 Allucquère Rosanne Stone, The War of Desire and Technology at the Close of the Machine Age (MIT Press, 1995). p. 89.

11 Joke Brouwer and Carla Hoekendijk, Eds. TechnoMorphica (V2_Organisation, 1997), p. 15.

14 Judith Butler, Gender Trouble (Routledge, 1990), pp. 5, 33, 25.

16 Ibid, p. 16, emphasis mine.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
An editor in Spain reminded me of this piece written almost twenty years ago. I'm reposting it here, but please read with a dose of generosity. I was quite young when I wrote it, many of the links are dead, and the discourse of digital studies has changed a great deal since then, even as the issues and concerns of cyberfeminism live on.

# data[].attributes.body
1. These readings discussed the importance of being unapologetic of who you are regardless of the racial construct around gender, and to be accepting of all people, bodies, and races. The main ideas that I picked up on from Janet Mock’s , “From Redefining Realness” (357) is never allowing other people to make you feel bad about who you are. Be unapologetic and be real. Mock describes her life as a transgender woman, and how underrepresented trans people are in society and even in LGBTQAI+ communities. Han’s piece, “Being Oriental I could Never Be Completely A Man” (375) talks about the intersectionality between race and sex and masculinity in society. As a society, if we proceed to hyper-masculinize, we will be accepting and allowing these projections from society’s view. We’ve talked about social construct in the past couple of readings and in the lecture video that was recently released. Kimberly Dark’s piece, “Big Yoga Student” (421) was a refreshing perspective from her viewpoint as a woman who loves to do yoga regardless of how her body is perceived or “who yoga is meant for”. Yoga is meant for everyone, and Dark relayed that message of acceptance vs. attainment. Lastly there are  the two poems, one by Joanna Gordon, “Sketches” (427) and Christina Lux’s, “10,000 blows” (428). Similar to Dark’s piece, Gordon reframed and reworked the idea of how we as a society should perceive women and women’s bodies. Lux’s piece focused on physical violence especially violence committed against race.

2. A new concept/term that I gained from these readings was from Dark’s piece about yoga and what she framed it as acceptance versus attainment. I connected with this mostly because I love practicing yoga, and I have finally come to terms with my body and how I use it during yoga exercise. I think it's the most difficult thing not to compare yourself to others once you're practicing. I related a lot when she said, "… and sometimes this is personally challenging in ways that it isn't for someone who looks the part, though surely personal doubts about credibility can assail anyone” (422). I think that acceptance versus attainment is a practice that anyone can use in their own example, but I felt that I could personally relate to yoga in the sense that Dark was explaining her story. I think it's important to remember that it doesn't matter how quick you get to your end goal as long as you get to your end goal. In my experience, when I compare myself to other people it takes the achievement away from what I'm actually trying to get done. I think it's great to achieve goals and I think that is why goals are established in the first place, but, I think acceptance is far better than achievement/attainment. I have linked an article that talks about what practicing yoga and meditation can do for you in terms of working on yourself and not comparing yourself to others especially during a time of meditation.

3. Something new that these readings caused me to consider was regarding masculinity and how its normalized in society which Han talked about in his piece. I think as a society, we will sometimes find ourselves writing men off and their issues regarding masculinity, and how it's perceived in society. I think especially now, there seems to be a culture of “anti-men”, which I don't know if that's what it is, but that's how I perceive it when I see it on social media platforms. I think this is something that we need to break away from and cease any correlation between how masculinity is viewed and what masculinity really is. Han said, “…Black men are not able to achieve the “European American standards of manhood as provider, protector, and disciplinarian” and instead redefine masculinity in a way that emphasizes “sexual promiscuity, toughness, thrill seeking, and the use of violence in interpersonal relations” (280, 376). To me, this is saying that (a Black man in this context, but saying that) men of color are denied what it means to be a successful man, husband, son, brother etc. That the color of your skin is the deciding factor on what kind of person you are. This is more of an issue between race as a biological term and ethnicity as a sociological issue.

4. These readings relate to my personal life because of the pressures that society projects on people who come from different backgrounds, and who aren't 100% one nationality or come from one specific ethnic background. In my case, I am German American, but sometimes it feels like I have to choose to be one or the other in order to be fully accepted in either society. I grew up in America and I'm accustomed to American values and culture, but at the same time, I am thoroughly and heavily invested in my Germanic background, and one is not better than the other, but sometimes I feel that is how society perceives me and other people of multiple backgrounds.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.readable_text
As a newbie to the freelancing world, I'm still getting used to lulls in between assignments. This last month I haven't had an office gig, so I've been going to yoga a minimum of twice a week. My chaturanga have been growing stronger and more controlled. Boat pose still sucks, but it sucks less. I've even started being able to balance a little in crow pose. I've been pleased with my progress.

But last week I ended up behind one of those yogis. You know the type; super skinny and flexible, matching yoga outfits from an expensive brand, huge rock on her finger. The studio where I take class always has a balancing section. This month we've been working on crow pose. She held it for at least twenty seconds while I, quite literally, toppled forward on my head. "God, I'll never be as good as she is," I said to myself.

I've always been competitive, and a Type A personality who wanted the highest grade, to be top in her class, and who used comparisons to others to push myself higher. It's something I've been learning to overcome and release in my post-divorce life, to find a happier and more peaceful me. But in that moment, I compared myself to her, and that comparison made me unhappy.

Compare and contrast is one of the building blocks of literacy in children, and a tool that parents are supposed to work on with toddlers. Bigger, smaller. Taller, shorter. Hotter, colder. Comparing things allows toddlers to begin forming neural pathways to make sense of their world. But as we get older comparison starts to take on a bad rap.

"Comparison is the thief of joy", said Theodore Roosevelt.

But is it, really? It's through comparing our life experiences that we bond with other divorced women. I can't tell you how many conversations I've had over messenger, via text, or on Instagram, with other women exclaiming, "My ex did that, too!" Through storytelling we forge bonds, we relate to others, and we create empathy.

Empathy is sharing and understanding someone else's emotions. One of the first ways we build it in children is by comparing someone else's experience to theirs. "How would you feel if someone took your toy?"

It's not comparison that's the thief of joy, in my opinion. It's when we attach a value judgement to that comparison. My problem wasn't that I was looking at the yogi on the mat in front of me and comparing her pose to my falling over, knees slipping off my triceps pose.

Comparison isn't all bad, it's the messages you take with you out of that comparison that can be damaging.

My problem was that I was comparing my pose to hers and thinking less of myself. I could have viewed her as an inspiration. I could have gone up to her after class and asked for tips on how to keep from toppling over. If I'd had the courage to ask how long she'd been practicing the answer might have told me to keep trying. When I compared her pose to mine I could have looked for changes to improve my own - was she holding in her abs more? Where had she put her knees? But I didn't. I attached a value judgement to my crow pose. I was 'worse' than her.

It can be tempting to compare your divorce, your co-parenting relationship, or your new relationship to other women in your circle. But in comparing and relating, remember to be kind to yourself. Everyone's circumstances are different. Just because one friend can hang out with her ex and the kids doesn't mean you're a terrible mom. You're not a financial failure if it takes you longer to pay off your legal bills than the other women in your mom's group.

When I was married, I'd often compare my marriage to other marriages around me. Everyone else looked happier, seemed to have more money, and didn't fight as often. In that case, comparison definitely stole my joy. But it also pushed me to start questioning the abusive aspects of my relationship, to reach out and ask if the way my ex-husband spoke me to was normal, and to eventually talk to a therapist about leaving him. Comparison isn't all bad, it's the messages you take with you out of that comparison that can be damaging.

Comparison can push us to be greater. It can show us where we need to improve. I only think it's the thief of joy when we attach judgement and unhealthy criticism to it. I'm still working on my crow pose. I actually held it a few seconds during my last class and managed to get out of it without falling. My personal best is getting better. Because right now, in yoga and in life, the only person I'm trying to improve on is myself.
Dena Landon
//= get_template_directory_uri() ?>//= get_template_directory_uri() ?> //= get_template_directory_uri() ?>//= get_template_directory_uri() ?> //= get_template_directory_uri() ?>//= get_template_directory_uri() ?> //= get_template_directory_uri() ?>//= get_template_directory_uri() ?> //= get_template_directory_uri() ?>//= get_template_directory_uri() ?> //= get_template_directory_uri() ?>//= get_template_directory_uri() ?>

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
What Doing Yoga Taught Me About Comparing Myself to Others

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
As a newbie to the freelancing world, I'm still getting used to lulls in between assignments. This last month I haven't had an office gig, so I've been going to yoga a minimum of twice a week. My chaturanga have been growing stronger and more controlled. Boat pose still sucks, but it sucks less.

# data[].attributes.body
The theme for these two readings and the Kanopy film was shifting the narrative through media in the hope of creating a more accepting society. Courtney Bailey’s piece, “A queer #metoo story: Sexual violence, consent, and interdependence” (302) brings attention to the necessary discussion and rethinking of how rape differs from sex. “For all its limitations, the word “rape” carries a certain kind of weight; it has a certain kind of specificity and rhetorical force” (304). As a society, we need to break outside of the heteronormative framework in order to normalize queer consent. I think as a society we don’t recognize or consider queer sexual violence the same as heterosexual violence. In Elly Belle, “Knee jerk Biphobia: What Responses to Miley Cyrus’ Breakup Say About Queer Erasure” (333), Belle uses Miley Cyrus as a sort of Bi+ icon in the queer community. “One Twitter user wrote that Cyrus is a prime example of why you shouldn’t trust bisexual people—although Cyrus has been explicit that she identifies as pansexual, not that that statement would be true, either(334)”. I never really thought of queer communities not being accepting of others. It seems like they are making a mockery of Cyrus and her coming to terms with her sexuality. A potential issue is that these communities are the reason there is such stigmatization in the LGBTQ+ community. Fattitude on Kanopy was the true epistemology about fat people. In the eye of the media, fat people have always been portrayed as the “monsters” or “bullies” in movies and tv shows that are presented as early on as preschool. This leads to fat discrimination in society. In the movie, it was described by one of the women as, “death by a thousand cuts”. Fat people are people too, and should not stigmatized in society. It’s very upsetting to me that fat people are thought of as a threat to society. I guess I never thought of fat people as oppressed. Sometimes, I think we as a society see discrimination to solely be bias against age, race, sex, or even religion that I think we miss others who are oppressed. In this case, fat people, bi people, and victims of sexual violence that are part of the LGBTQAI+ communities are the oppressed.

This kanopy video that I attached is what I thought would have fit well with Fattitude because it talks about women and men in advertisements and how damaging it is to someone's mental health when we allow society's projections.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.readable_text
In this new, highly anticipated update of her pioneering Killing Us Softly series, the first in more than a decade, Jean Kilbourne takes a fresh look at how advertising traffics in distorted and destructive ideals of...

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
In this new, highly anticipated update of her pioneering Killing Us Softly series, the first in more than a decade, Jean Kilbourne takes a fresh look at how advertising traffics in distorted and destructive ideals of...

# data[].attributes.body
The common theme of these readings consist of the reproductive justices and choices that women have, and argue that more protection is needed in order to protect women and their bodies. One of the issues on the matter consists of a woman's impossible decision to choose between her career and her family. Catherine Rottenberg, and her piece,“The rise of Neoliberal Feminism” (257) discusses the importance of neoliberalism and how we are seeing more of it stem from women who work for corporations. “ In government, in industry, and in corporations, she tells us, women are still lagging behind in terms of representation at the top'' (260). I will admit that feminism and women’s rights have come a long way, but we simply must do more. I see Sandberg’s logic as an  intimidation factor that women might feel in their place of work. Empowered women empower women. More women need to fight for themselves and their personal life outside of the workplace. It was refreshing to read about Fernando Tormos-Aponte’s, “The Politics of Survival'' (270), and the history and political agenda regarding neoliberalism in Puerto Rico. This makes me wonder… if America were to change its view of how society views women and women of color regarding her reproduction rights, would other countries and territories change theirs view as well.? No matter how flawed, America is seen as a powerhouse in other countries, and thinks it would have an impact. Loretta Roass’, “The Color of Choice” (279) gave me insight about how to better understand women’s rights and how reproductive choice and justice aligns with human rights. It was interesting to read that, “The UN estimated a worldwide total of 529,000 maternal deaths in the year 2000, with less than 1% of deaths occurring in developed nations'' (283). What do you think of when you read this stat? To me, it sounds like childbirth is a leading result to the mortality rate of women. If women’s lack of health reforms were not bad enough, people believe that population control is a “justifiable” means to environmental issues like climate change. It is insulting [to me] that, “Women’s bodies are treated as means to demographic end” (291). I know that women’s reproductive rights have nothing to do with increases in the carbon footprint or scarcity of basic resources. Policy makers must take more initiative to dismiss this irrational correlation between climate change and reproductive rights.

This is a fascinating Yale Law paper explaining 12 cases [that include the two I mentioned above] regarding constitutional law, and how that has impacted feminist theology.

# data[].attributes.body
These readings focused on the sociopolitical issues of immigrant movement, economics, lack of access to public relief and family values. In Monisha Das Gupta's, “Broken Heart, Broken Families: The political use of families in the fight against Deportation" (224). Roxroy Salmon's deportation case is an example of standing against the systemic ways of the law to try to protect immigrant families and try to prevent splitting up of the families. Themes of immigrant movements and anti deportation cases show the uniqueness and rarity of immigration regulation and regulations of genders and sexuality that are outside of the  feminist and queer. “Family values have been appropriated by the Right to push a conservative white heteropatriarchal agenda to promote sexual, economic, and political control over women, measures that are particularly punitive for poor women'' (225). This made me think of the show The Fosters on Freeform, In season 5 ep. 17, an undocumented family was arrested by ICE and were forced to slip up.Even migrants who shared connected neighborhoods and communities with Black families, LatinX, or Asian families, were often racial profiling which was banned in 96 with the IIRIRA removal. Sara Mirk's, “Propaganda: Queering Family Values (229) discusses family values and shapes individuals into the people, and how an openly non-binary, queer woman grew up in an cis-hetero family. Do you think you can change family values while still being part of a family who is not accepting?  Marlene Kim's“Policies to end gender wage gap (239) explored the policies to reduce and hopefully end the gender wage gap. Title VII and AA, Family friendly policies, Unionization, and Pay secrecy are all which are backed up proving that with these policies, “ research indicates that all of these policies improve women’s wages and lower the gender wage gap” (243). A study in 2011 showed that women's wages were 82% compared to men. This was even less for women of color. There is debate over Neoclassical and feminist beliefs. According to O'neil, women are less productive, Choose lower paying jobs in order to care for their families, and because women work fewer years than men, they are underrepresented and seen as unequal. Despite neo-classical economic thinking and practice, women are just as productive, educated, and motivated, and yet are still faced with the choice between their families and their careers. This is the exact reason why I majored in economics! I want to break the stigmatization around women working jobs that they are qualified, and that you do not have to be a man to make something of yourself. Dean Spade's, “Compliance is Gendered: Struggling for self-determination in a hostile economy (245) mentions feminist theories about race economies and that some people heavily rely on the public relief systems because of violence/ harassment and sexually segregated behavior that make up for the lack  of resources . At the end, I tacked on an article about transgender violence in the prison system.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.provider_name
National Center for Transgender Equality

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.readable_text
Transgender people are too frequently targeted for violence and abuse because of their gender identity or presentation. Routinely, however, that violence and abuse comes from the very authorities entrusted with their safety. Police frequently harass and profile transgender people of color, sowing distrust among the very communities they have sworn to serve. According to the 2015 US Transgender Survey, a majority (57%) of transgender people are afraid to go to the police when they need it.

Transgender people in prison are exposed to horrific rates of abuse by both staff and their fellow inmates, facing physical and sexual assault at much higher rates than their counterparts. As the USTS found, transgender people are ten times as likely to be sexually assaulted by their fellow inmates and five times as likely to be sexually assaulted by staff. Transgender prisoners also face numerous other challenges behind bars, including denials of medical care and lengthy stays in solitary confinement.

Across the country, local advocates and communities are working to hold officials accountable and foster relationships meant to ensure the safety and rights of all. NCTE seeks to empower these advocates to effect change where it is needed most by providing publications, research, and technical assistance to local advocates. If you are working to improve the standards faced by transgender people in prison or the treatment of transgender people by your local police department, please contact NCTE's Racial and Economic Justice Policy Advocate Mateo De La Torre at mdelatorre@transequality.org.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
Transgender people are too frequently targeted for violence and abuse because of their gender identity or presentation. Routinely, however, that violence and abuse comes from the very authorities entrusted with their safety. Police frequently harass and profile transgender people of color, sowing distrust among the very communities they have sworn to serve.

# data[].attributes.body
The main points in arguments that the readings covered were based on women’s gender and sexuality that’s Play a role in the labor market. “While some women advance, it is clear that progress is not evenly distributed”(191). I like this quote because it really shows you that a lot of the middle-class and upper class white women experienced opportunity where there was a little off for opportunity and  improvement for women of color and women in poverty. I'm currently interning for the United States department of agriculture in Fort Collins, and from the three years of experience that I’ve worked there, I’ve seen very little women or women of color in my line of work. So I’m just an intern, it goes to show how women, and especially women of color aren’t given the opportunity to advance in their careers. The gender pay gap is something beyond frustration when it comes to women with children which is an additional barrier for them to grow through their professional careers. It’s upsetting that Women lose their wages once they become mothers known as mothers pay where men receive bonuses when they become fathers known as fatherhood bonuses. I think we need to normalize women asking for an negotiating their wages, because it’s simply not fair that they don’t get paid for the same amount of work that men do in the labor market. This is why I’ve always loved Ruth Bader Ginsburg because through her work, she really broke the glass ceiling as far as recognizing and supporting Women, people of color, the LGBTQPAI + communities in professional positions. Even in an economy that protects human rights, “each woman’s success is not a political success if it only serves to secure individual wealth and devisive National practices that are in bedded in the US labor market” (196). In this reading, some thing new that I hadn’t considered was protecting sex workers in the labor market. Women are often exploited and resort to sex work as a means of monetary consumption. I hadn’t realized that sex workers should earn the same amount of rights as any other workers. I think this is a very stigmatized subject in society that I would love to see change in the near future. I also think it’s very interesting that while these women are literally risking their lives in order to be financially compensated, they are not granted benefits or recognized on international, national, or by state regulations. Not to mention, the men involved in sex work and sex trafficking are rarely prosecuted. This has changed my views on sex workers and people who are involved in sex trafficking, because I think we often forget that at the end of the day these are people.

# data[].attributes.body
The themes of these readings had to do with race, class, and sexuality.   The objective of The Combahee River Collection, from "A Black Feminist Statement" was to draw attention to the intersecting oppressions within society. This piece conceptualized the idea that (mostly) white women do not understand the importance of feminism to other women other than white women. The ideology and history of Black women root back to Black feminism. "We realize that the only people who care enough about us to work consistently for our liberation are us" (142). I re-read this quote several times empathizing as much as I could with the women who see and feel that white women and white feminism are taking away from keeping the freedom from women of color. This segues nicely into Jo Carillo's "And When You Leave, Take Your Pictures With You". This significantly structured poem, similarly spoke about white women and their idea of what feminism means. White women wear the badge of feminism to show the surface level of respecting all women, but that could not be further from the truth. White women do not comprehend that some of their fortunes are the misfortunes of other women, but as long as white women succeed, that's all that matters. I do not think you can consider yourself a feminist if you do not support all women of all races, of all backgrounds through and through. This includes women of the transgender community. "The elimination of transsexualism is not best achieved by legislation prohibiting transsexual treatment and surgery, but rather by legislation that limits it and by other legislation that lessens the support given to sex-role stereotyping” (172). I remember when I was in 8th grade, a story about a first grade transgender girl made national headlines about whether she should be allowed to use the girls restroom or not because she was not “identified as a female at birth”. I remember wondering why schools could not just allow gender neutral bathrooms in schools, and was honestly confused as to why this was making such controversial national news. To me, this is something that should not be an “issue”, but rather a right. Trans People should have the same rights as you and me, with no exceptions. (I’ve linked the article above). This goes to show how great feminism has failed to recognize AND support the trans community. After reading Jason Kratz’s piece, I have learned and been reminded of the importance of men and the “social construction of American masculinity”. I never really thought of tying emotional distress of conventional thinking and violence (and gun violence) together. Male gender and sexuality is an important part to cultivate conventional thinking, which is seen as invisible because it is not talked about enough. Angela Davis’ piece on the prison system was also an eye opening piece. I think we need to talk more about the population of the incarcerated and put an end to privatization. These people who are being imprisoned were written off as a social issue that are composed of the poor and the minorities, and women. “Prison labor is like a pot of gold. No strikes. No union organizing. No health benefits, unemployment insurance, or workers’ compensation to pay. No language barriers, as in foreign countries” (Eve Goldberg and Linda Evans). I didn’t know that private corporations profit from privatized prisoners solely due to the fact and reliance of employment from non unionized labor. It’s extremely disappointing to see women’s race, class, and sexuality overlooked and exploited in society. Like Tina Vasquez said, society has come a long way, but it has been a slow and tedious process, and there is still so much work to be done in the future.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.readable_text
In the course of the documentary, the Mathises moved from Fountain, Colo., a small town near the headquarters of the conservative organization Focus on the Family, to Aurora, Colo., and have since moved elsewhere in the state. They retreated from public view and are unlikely to participate in the promotion of the documentary.

The film could not be timelier, with transgender issues at the fore and 11 states suing the Obama administration over its directive telling schools to allow students to use whichever bathroom matches their gender identities.

But, Mr. Juhola noted that he and Mr. Stulberg embarked on the project before, in his words, "trans was, quote, trending." Wanting to document a transgender person's fight for rights, the filmmakers were equally intrigued by the Mathises' staunch support of their child.

"They're really the first generation of parents letting their young kids express themselves as whatever gender they identify with," Mr. Juhola said. "A lot of older transgender people who we met, who just transitioned in their 40s, 50s and 60s, said, 'Oh my God, I can't even imagine how different my life would be if I'd had parents like them.'"

The Mathises' troubles with Eagleside Elementary School began in late 2012, when the principal told them that Coy, who began identifying as a girl when she was 18 months old, could no longer use the girls' bathroom. At that point Coy, who as a triplet has a brother and sister, along with two other sisters, had been living as a girl for a while, wearing sparkly, flouncy dresses and long hair, and had been identified as a girl in medical and legal records. In the documentary, the Mathises describe Coy's misery in her earliest years when the couple - Jeremy is a former Marine and Kathryn is a freelance portrait photographer - dressed her as a boy.

Deeply anxious, Coy refused to go outside, rarely smiled, had meltdowns when told to line up with the boys at school, and asked her parents when they would take her to the doctor to remove her penis. (No such operation was or is being planned.) "It was just what it was," Mr. Mathis said in the film. "This wasn't a phase."

After hearing from the principal, the Mathises contacted Michael D. Silverman, executive director of the Transgender Legal Defense & Education Fund, who wrote to the school board, hoping for a resolution. The board's response - they cited concerns for other students sharing the bathroom with Coy as she grew older - prompted the Mathises to withdraw their children from the school.

After some soul-searching discussions, Mr. Silverman said, the family agreed that the best action was to take the case public. By showing how achingly normal Coy and her family were, they could put a face - an adorable, impish face - on an issue that many people at the time were not just unfamiliar with but also stigmatized and feared.

"The motivating factor was, how can we create the conditions where we can win for Coy?" Mr. Silverman said in an interview. "It wasn't clear without speaking publicly that anyone would understand what was at stake."

The same reasoning probably prompted the Mathises, who did not respond to interview requests for this article, to also agree to the documentary, Mr. Juhola said.

"It's really about making the world a better place for Coy by putting images out of transgender people that are positive," Mr. Juhola said.

Just as public controversy raged about Coy's name and image being made public - the public editor of The New York Times weighed in, while, in Colorado and elsewhere, the Mathises were accused of being child abusers and setting Coy up for harassment - the documentarians also asked themselves about their own responsibility to protect Coy. In the end, Mr. Juhola said, they deferred to the Mathises' judgment, which Ms. Mathis addressed in the film.

"We weren't the ones who stigmatized her to begin with," Ms. Mathis said. "Sending a little girl into a boys bathroom, that's setting her up to being hurt."

As the couple, in the film, wrestled with whether to agree to yet another interview (they would turn down offers to be in ads and to star in a reality show), Ms. Mathis also mused, on camera, about the duress of living under the microscope. "Where should we draw the line?" she asked. "We don't want her to look back and see that we didn't stand up for her."

While the news media pressure depicted in the film seems acute, the worst of it largely ended after about six months, in the summer of 2013, when Colorado's civil rights board ruled in the Mathises' favor, chastising the school for its "severe and pervasive treatment" and for creating an environment that was "hostile, intimidating or offensive."

Mr. Juhola said that as far as he knew, the Mathises remain settled, and welcome, in their new community, where Coy, who will turn 10 this year, is living happily as a girl.

"She doesn't want to have to explain who she is, and talk about how she's different," Ms. Mathis says, in the film. "She just wants to be."

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.keywords[]
eagleside elementary school (fountain  colo)

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
'Growing Up Coy' Explores the Fallout After a Family Fought for Its Transgender Child

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
In the course of the documentary, the Mathises moved from Fountain, Colo., a small town near the headquarters of the conservative organization Focus on the Family, to Aurora, Colo., and have since moved elsewhere in the state. They retreated from public view and are unlikely to participate in the promotion of the documentary.

# data[].attributes.body
These three readings and the video had a common theme of women’s suffrage in the history of women’s rights and feminism. In the Seneca Falls convention, “declaration of sentiments and resolutions”, “The history of mankind is a history of repeated injuries in and usurpations on the part of man toward women, having a direct object the establishment of an absolute tyranny over her”(114). After a list of what men are supposed to provide for women and later show the resolution, you really get a sense of the authoritative relationship and the power that is still being supported through white supremacy. In Ida B Wells’ “ A Red Record”, suggests the very idea of the maintenance of white hierarchical Socio economic power that these men had through lynchings. “As no white man has been lynched for the murder of colored people, these three executions are the only instances of the death penalty being visited upon white men for murdering Negroes”(118). It’s important to emphasize that only three men were held accountable for over 200 lynchings that Wells witnessed. Truth’s “1851 speech” was recognized at the women’s rights convention in 1851 to commemorate her activist work for women’s suffrage and black rights. I really liked what she had to say, “you need not be afraid to give us our rights for fear we will take too much, or we can’t take more than our pint’ll hold” (117). This speaks to both sexes about being equal, and how men fear the power that women might have if we are in control. But why would there be something to fear? That’s entirely missing the objective which Truth points out. And by using biblical stories and references, she really makes an impact because of the religious influence in white communities at that time.

I really enjoyed watching the Kanopy film, because I think it was refreshing hearing women from different backgrounds speak on the women’s suffrage that is still obviously prevalent in different countries today. I think one of the things that was mentioned in the film that I really enjoyed was what hooks had to say about television and the poor light that’s shed on feminism and women’s rights. Growing up I always watched the news with my parents before dinner time, and it never really crossed my mind that they are exploiting people and women’s stories and traumatic experiences in order to gain profit and media attention for it. Which is pretty messed up! And the statistic that they mentioned, that in North America, men caused 90% of violent crimes because they’re providing control and dominance in a relationship, which when media news covers it, it exploits women and is tolerant of sexual harassment or abuse or even rape. I also really liked the segment that they did regarding the economic burden on women after divorce and how childlessness can be a positive choice for women and what’s best for her life. I would especially like to hear from others who have divorced and have custody of her kids, because it’s a lot of work being the breadwinner and caretaker while you make almost no money to support your family and more often than not the husbands don’t provide any financial compensation for their children.

I’ve been really liking all of these multi cultural outlooks on feminism, because it has really shown me how tolerant the world is of miss treatment of women. I will be very happy to know that one day we will live in a society where nobody will care about what your gender or sexual preferences which more specially will not infringe on your rights or equality.

I've attached this other Kanopy film that I came across that introduces women who caretake for people's kids while they work. It's a neat little production and touches a lot on Chirla (the organization to fight for domestic worker's rights) and the Domestic worker bill of rights for women.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.readable_text
Amy Poehler ventures into the world of the invisible women who help keep the California economy afloat: domestic workers. What she finds is a human story far more complex than the simple exploitation of poor women by the...

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
Amy Poehler ventures into the world of the invisible women who help keep the California economy afloat: domestic workers. What she finds is a human story far more complex than the simple exploitation of poor women by the...

# data[].attributes.body
Both Gunn Allan’s, “Who is your mother? Red Roots of Feminism” and the text from Historical Perspectives in Women’s, Gender, and Sexuality Studies both exemplified the main ideas of American culture and history of traditionalism and interconnectedness of women in their communities.

“Indians think it's important to remember, while Americans believe it's important to forget” (15). Gunn Allan primarily focused on colonial oppression and the rejection of cultures, and in her point of view, Americans need to incorporate and assimilate more Native American culture. Additionally, she mentioned the importance of learning your own identity from your past, and family’s past. In the text, the overall theme and idea was insisting that wanting equality now is developed and built upon the inequality from the past. By breaking down time periods throughout America, one by one, women and the LGBTQAI+ communities were able to continually stand up and fight against the historically biased system through watershed movements like the Seneca Falls Convention, labor organizations and revolutions. During the revolution of the housewives, Betty Friedan’s quote in her 1963 book, The Feminine Mystique was eye opening and a moment for realization that I think most housewives could relate to. “As she made the beds, shopped for groceries, matched slipcover material, ate peanut butter sandwiches with her children, chauffeured Cub Scouts and Brownies, lay beside her husband at night—she was afraid to ask even of herself the silent question—‘Is this all?’” (15, 99). She went on to describe it as “the problem that has no name” which implies there were many women who felt this way and never had the resources or ability to speak up and discuss why this was a persistent feeling.

Something that I learned from these pieces are the power that white women hold. In the text, a portion was dedicated toward talking about privileged feminist, “less privileged women may not have been intentionally excluded, but, in large and small ways, they were made to feel like second-class citizens within the movement” (105). I never really thought about white females who are feminists as opressors. I understood this as white fragility and what’s known as white tears. I think that understanding this concept is just as big of deal as understanding feminism as a whole. Johnson-Odim wrote, “...privileged women in the United States and Europe must interrogate their complicity in the imperialist relationships that bring their own countries wealth at the expense of others” (Johnson-Odim ). I am curious to know what other women’s viewpoints are of ‘American’ feminists. You can either call yourself a feminist who help all women and queer communities get up and out of their third world oppression or you cannot call yourself a feminist at all. It’s almost like white privileged feminists are taken as a joke, which I know is not the case that applies to all white women, but I think it can be validated since oppression is a somewhat broad term, it is not a one size fits all. Thought history, women of color are the women who seemed to work twice as hard to be recognized even just a little.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.readable_text
WHITE FEMINIST FRAGILITY: FROM PART OF THE PROBLEM TO RADICAL ALLYSHIP by TESSA MAE MACINTYRE BFA., The University of Regina, 2013 A THESIS SUBMITTED IN PARTIAL FULFILLMENT OF THE REQUIRMENTS FOR THE DEGREE OF MASTER OF ARTS in THE FACULTY OF GRADUATE AND POSTDOCTORAL STUDIES (Gender, Race, & Social Justice) THE UNIVERSITY OF BRITISH COLUMBIA (Vancouver) April 2020 ©Tessa Mae MacIntyre, 2020 ii The following individuals certify that they have read, and recommend to the Faculty of Graduate and Postdoctoral Studies for acceptance, the thesis entitled: White Feminist Fragility: From Part of the Problem to Radical Allyship submitted by Tessa Mae MacIntyre in partial fulfillment of the requirements for the degree of Master of Arts in Gender, Race, & Social Justice Examining Committee: Dr. Janice Stewart, Professor & Acting Director of the Institute for Gender, Race, & Social Justice, UBC Supervisor Dr. Jennifer Jenson, Professor, Faculty of Education, Department of Language & Literacy, UBC Supervisory Committee Member iii Abstract Feminism has a whiteness problem. Feminists of colour such as Audre Lorde, Angela Davis, and Kimberlé Crenshaw have been talking about this problem since the 1970's, and the term 'white feminism' emerged to describe the predominantly white, upper-middle class, academic, heterosexual women who had taken control of mainstream feminist discourses. The problem being, after the early grassroots feminist consciousness raising of the 19th century, the feminist movement turned academic, an arena where radical feminists, lesbians, women of colour, and poor women were largely underrepresented. The result of this is decades of feminist theorizing, philosophy, and activism became focused on the problems of the privileged few. While feminists of colour started speaking out about this problem over 50 years ago, in 2017 the viral #MeToo movement brought to light the continued indifference towards women of colour and those who experience intersection systems of oppression. #MeToo was overwhelming focused on elite Hollywood actresses, and when it was later revealed that the phrase 'Me Too' had been in use by African American activist and community organizer Tarana Burke since 2007 to show solidarity to young, socioeconomically oppressed women and girls of colour, there were renewed calls to examine why the women in our society who hold the most privileged were also gaining the most attention for their causes. The purpose of this work is to define white feminism, understand the structures and strategies that support it, and explain how white supremacy functions to prevent advancement and maintain divisions between feminists. I will use concepts from writers like Audre Lorde, Layla Saad, and Marilyn Frye to analyse feminist discourses, past and iv present, in order to establish a pattern within feminism to centre whiteness. As a feminist who is white, I will call upon other white feminists to challenge institutional racism, decentre whiteness in feminist practice, and commit to radical anti-racism work as a main tenant of feminist activism. v Lay Summary White feminism is a term used to describe feminists who are predominantly white, heterosexual, upper-middle class, and who lack an understanding of the intersectional problems faced by women of colour, queer, and poor. While women of colour have been writing, theorizing, and speaking out about this issue for decades, when the #MeToo movement became viral in 2017, a movement which focused on the privileged and predominantly white Hollywood elite, there were renewed calls by women of colour for white feminist to question why institutional sexism are only taken seriously when voiced by some of the most privileged women in our society. This work will examine the history and strategies of white feminism, and challenge white feminists to consider how their own feminist practice can evolve towards intersectionality and anti-racism. vi Preface This thesis is original, unpublished, independent work by the author, T. MacIntyre. vii Table of Contents Abstract........................................................................................................iii Lay Summary.................................................................................................v Preface.........................................................................................................vi Table of Contents...........................................................................................vii List of Figures.................................................................................................ix Acknowledgments.............................................................................................x Chapter One: Introduction.................................................................................1 A (White) Feminist Awakening..................................................................1 White Feminism & Black Erasure..............................................................5 White Feminism & White Fragility..............................................................6 Background and Relevance.....................................................................9 Methodology.......................................................................................11 A Call to Action: White Feminist (Ignore)ance.............................................12 Chapter Two: White Feminism: A Her-story........................................................15 Votes for (White) Women.......................................................................17 The Sins of my Foremothers: Eugenic Feminism........................................19 The 'Me' in #MeToo..............................................................................22 Chapter Three: Beyond Intersectionality: White Feminist Fragility............................25 The Feminist Bio-Politic.........................................................................28 White Fragility.....................................................................................31 Angry White Women: White Feminist Resentment.......................................35 Chapter Four: The Functions and Failures of White Feminism................................37 White Supremacy and Me: Radical De-Colonization....................................38 Spiritual Bypassing: "We are all alike in soul and diverse in outer experience"...42 Tone Policing: "Thank you for not coming out swinging"...............................43 Centring: "It was a personal experience for me that felt like an attack".............45 Is it the task of women of colour to educate white women?.................................46 Chapter Five: Conclusion................................................................................49 viii Radicalizing Feminist Consciousness Raising..........................................49 Radical Disloyalty to Whiteness.............................................................52 Power to embrace our Difference...........................................................53 Pathways to a Wholistic Feminist Consciousness......................................54 Radical White Feminism.......................................................................55 Works Cited................................................................................................59 ix List of Figures Figure 1 Screenshot of @Alyssa_Milano Tweet, October 16 2017......................22 Figure 2a Screenshot of LaylaFSaad Instragram post July 2018..........................40 Figure 2b Screenshot of LaylaFSaad July 2018 Comments Section.....................40 Figure 2c Screenshot of LaylaFSaad July 2018 Comments section Cont...............40 Figure 3a Screenshot of LaylaFSaad Instragram post August 2018......................41 Figure 3b Screenshot of LaylaFSaad July 2018 Comments Section.....................41 Figure 3c Screenshot of LaylaFSaad July 2018 Comments section Cont...............41 x Acknowledgments I would like to give my eternal gratitude to my supervisor Dr. Janice Stewart, who provided me the encouragement, and endless patience to help me (finally) complete this thesis. Thank you Janice, for your support and easy going attitude - even in the moments I felt like I would never pull this off, a check in with you always reinvigorated my efforts and gave me the confidence I needed to follow through with my goals. I would also like to thank Dr. Jennifer Jenson for the feedback, comments, and thought put into helping me revise and polish this paper. I also would like to thank Dabney Meachum and Marika Yeo for their camaraderie, good humor, support, and friendship as we completed our course work. I am so grateful for the opportunity to have met so many intelligent, talented people during my time in the Social Justice Institute. 1 Introduction: A (White) Feminist Awakening "Feminists are made, not born." - bell hooks I had a comfortable childhood; born in 1990 in Nova Scotia, Canada, I grew up in a middle class household with my white nuclear family. My parents had and continue to have a solid marriage, my sister and I tolerated each other's existence, and all-in-all, the most hardship I faced was school yard bullying. It shouldn't have come as a surprise to my mother when I firmly rejected the notion of feminism in my teenage years. Afterall, I had grown up in the 'Girl Power' generation: Spice Girls, Xena Warrior Princess, Buffy the Vampire Slayer, The X Files. Pop culture was teaching me that women could do anything men could do - all while wearing tightly fitted, glittery outfits (with the exception of Dr. Dana Scully from the XFiles). You see, I didn't reject feminism because I didn't believe in equality (more on this later), I rejected feminism because I did not see myself or other women as oppressed. I could point my number at any number of influences as an explanation for my disinterest in feminism; the media, pop culture, the general suspicion that feminism was somehow equated with lesbianism (since I now identify as queer, this internalized homophobia can take some of the blame). Acclaimed feminist theorist bell hooks, author of influential works such as Ain't I a Woman? Black Women and Feminism (1981), Feminist Theory: From Margin to Centre (1984) and Feminism is for Everybody: Passional Politics (2000) has spent her career understanding and deconstructing pathways to feminism and the importance of intersectionality. In her book Feminism is for Everybody, hooks offers an explanation for my disinterest which may be less tied to 2 my generation, and more so related to the timeless patriarchal nature of our society. As hooks explains; "When women first organized in groups to talk together about the issue of sexism and male domination, they were clear that females were as socialized to believe sexist thinking and values as males, the difference being simply that males benefited from sexism more than females and were as consequence less likely to want to surrender patriarchal privilege. Before women could change the patriarchy we had to change ourselves; we had to raise our consciousness."(9) What I had been missing was this opportunity to raise my consciousness - to remove the blindfold of societal constructs and start questioning the ways women around me were treated. Soon after staring my undergraduate degree in the 2010's, my feminist consciousness began to take form. I could no longer ignore the seemingly endless series of news headlines covering stories about sexual violence and harassment, stories like the tragic suicide of British Columbia Teen Amanda Todd in 2012, who took her own life after a sexual predator posted nude photos of Todd online, and she became the target of brutal bullying at the hands of her peers. The term "slut shaming" took form to describe this behavior: bullying young women for perceived promiscuity, regardless of circumstances. (Murphy, "Amanda Todd: Bullied to Death") I was learning the hard truths about our society: it wasn't just that there weren't enough women becoming doctors, politicians, and CEOs. The world is a dangerous and unforgiving place if you had the bad luck of being born female. I became an avid reader of feminist websites like Jezebel and Feministing. I devoured the book Full Frontal Feminism by influential writer Jessica Valenti (founder of Feministing) and started gifting/ lending/ strongly recommending the book to all of my 3 friends who had yet to have their own feminist awakening. I became involved with #Hollarback to combat street harassment, I vocally supported the Slut Walk movement, and I became so enthralled with it all I even penned my own blog titled Release the Feminist Kraken. I was filled with fire and purpose: I was going to join my foremothers in the fight to dismantle the patriarchy. While I had in many ways raised my feminist consciousness, my pathway towards enlightenment was not exactly what hooks was describing when she talks about the original living room gatherings of women across all social-economic and racial divides. As feminist thinking progressed, feminists forming political and sociological theories sought validity through academia. Universities, to this day, are exclusive institutions accessible only to those with class and race privilege. What this means is that as feminism came to be officially recognized by academia, it was the privileged white, middle class women leading the discussions in university lecture halls. hooks makes a strong connection between the transition to academic feminism and the silencing and erasure of women of colour: when academia is the accepted standard of validation and credential, the radical queer, black, indigenous, and or poor women are easily ignored and dismissed. Privileged white women were choosing which oppressions were worth studying and analyzing. They created a hierarchy of need based on the concept that gender based discrimination was the ultimate discrimination, and once equality was achieved, all over forms of oppressions would fall away as well (hooks, 9). The result of this is that the gatekeepers of the feminism I embraced and learned from are the white feminists born of academia, the feminists who focused solely on the 4 universality of sexism as the rallying point for all women. In terms of what this meant for me, individually, is that for a while at least, I lived and practiced a feminism which focused solely on the inequality between (white) men and (white) women, because I had failed to seek knowledge outside of the mainstream feminist discourses. When I reflect on my feminist awakening, I can see clearly who is missing from the articles, blogs, and websites I was exposed to, which victims of horrible crimes were worth mentioning. Overwhelmingly, the stories being told were those of white women, as shown by Researcher Sarah Stillman in her 2007 study titled The 'Missing White Girl Syndrome': Disappeared Women and Media Activism. Stillman found that between 2000 and 2005, 76% of missing children featured on news outlets CNN were white children, while only accounting for 54% of abductions (492). While all violence is tragic and unacceptable, ignoring the disproportionately high rate of violence against women of colour, in particular the institutional neglect in regard of the safety of Indigenous women in Canada as proven by the 2016 inquiry into missing and murdered indigenous women and girls (National Assembly of First Nations), has only served to further isolate and oppress those women who are already vulnerable. While I made an effort to educate myself on racial oppression and include intersectionality in my feminist practice, I felt that issues of racism were best left to those who experience it; I was not racist, and as a privileged white woman myself, I understood it was not my place to take on these challenges. I continued my silence on issues of race until the #MeToo movement went viral in 2017. The viral hashtag, and the focus on the entertainment industry hit close to home. My career was in the film and television industry, and I had experienced the rampant sexual harassment and assault 5 being described by famous Hollywood elites, yet still felt as if I was not in a position of enough power in my role as a production assistant to speak out. I started thinking about power, who has it? Who does not? Who was #MeToo for, and who was it actually liberating? Only once #MeToo went mainstream did anyone realize that 'Me Too' was already being used as a symbol of solidarity for victims; the major difference is the original creator, African American Activist and Community Organizer Tarana Burke's version of Me Too was to help young women of colour in her community, many of whom are poor and facing any number of intersecting challenges. It's quite ironic that a movement intended for disadvantaged women and girls of colour was co-opted so completely by the white Hollywood elite. It is uncomfortable to admit that it took something of this scale to cause me to question my own complicity with centering whiteness in my feminism, and to recognize the real world implications of racial erasure within a movement dominated by upper-middle class white women. White Feminism & Black Erasure In 1979 Black-Lesbian-Feminist icon Audre Lorde attended a feminist conference by the New York Institute for the Humanities. The type of feminism that Lorde encountered there was overwhelmingly white, heterosexual, upper-middle class, and academic - just as hooks describes (10). Lorde was one of only two women of colour invited to speak at the conference. In response, Lorde penned the famous essay The Master's Tools Will Never Dismantle the Master's House. To Lorde, "It is a particular academic arrogance to assume any discussion of feminist theory without examining our many differences, and without a significant input from poor women, Black and Third 6 World women, and lesbians"(16), Yet there Lorde was, at a conference dedicated to difference, in a sea of whiteness. Fast forward to 2017: white actress Alissa Milano takes to twitter and makes a simple request to her (millions) of followers: "If you've been sexually harassed or assaulted write 'me too' as a reply to this tweet." The response was instantaneous. By the next day, the hashtag #metoo had been used 500,000 times (@Alyssa_Milano). The movement only gained momentum, and 45 days later, the hashtag had been used across all social media platforms 85 millions times (Sayej). The virility of the hashtag, along with the downfall of a number of powerful men in Hollywood, meant that the discussion about the rampant sexual abuse in Hollywood was covered by most major news outlets. Though these two events took place almost 40 years apart, the similarities are difficult to ignore. #MeToo centres white, heterosexual, rich women, at the expense of further subjugating poor women and girls of colour. White Feminism & White Fragility The problem revealing itself in the paragraphs above has come to be known as white feminism. White feminism is a term which has been in use since feminist theorists of colour such as hooks, Audre Lorde, and Kimberlé Crenshaw began writing about racism in feminism in the 1970's. The qualities of white feminism are more defined than simply a feminist who is white. For the purposes of this paper, I define the term white feminism as the practice of feminism that centers the problems of predominantly white, middle to upper class, heterosexual women, and tends to focus exclusively on gender inequality as the primary source of all other societal oppressions. White feminism is also, intentionally or otherwise, committed to white supremacy. 7 Here I will take a moment to re-contextualize the term 'white supremacy' from the image the term conjures in contemporary times. Today, the term white supremacy brings to mind the Klu Klux Klan, burning crosses, and the era of slavery long past. However, white supremacy continues to be the foundation of modern western societies , and can be found within anyone holding white privilege. Sociologist and lecturer Robin DiAngelo defines white supremacy in her 2017 book White Fragility: Why it's so Hard for White People to talk about Racism. As DiAngelo puts it, "Most white people do not identify with these images [white supremacy as described above] of white supremacists and so take great umbrage to the term being used more broadly. For sociologists and those involved in current racial justice movements, however, white supremacy is a descriptive and useful term to capture the all-encompassing centrality and assumed superiority of people defined and perceived as white and the practices based on this assumption" (56). White supremacy, while jarring to many well-meaning white people, is important language to use in a discussion of white feminism because the desire to protect latent racial superiority and denial of personal responsibility is one of the main ways white feminists can cause harm to women of colour. DiAngelo provides useful language in her book which helps me to better understand that implicit and insidious nature of internalized white supremacy. The most important term in DiAngelo's book is in the title: white fragility. As she explains: "We perceive any attempt to connect us to the system of racism as an unsettling and unfair moral offence. The smallest amount of racial stress is intolerable - the mere suggestion that being white has meaning often triggers a range of defensive responses. These include emotions such as anger, fear, and guilt and behaviors such as 8 argumentation, silence, and withdrawal from the stress inducing situation. These responses work to reinstate white equilibrium as they repel the challenge, return our racial comfort, and maintain our dominance within the racial hierarchy" (26). White fragility is a powerful tool of white feminism, and as I explore the functions and strategies of white feminism further, I will show how white fragility is one of the major challenges that must be overcome. Though white feminists have had the language, theory, and opportunity to embrace intersectionality and difference within the movement for the past 40 years, thanks to the work of black feminist philosophers and theorists, white feminists continue to practice a form of feminism which centers whiteness, denies difference, and subjugates women of colour. What this shows us is that intentional or not, influential white feminists who are the gate keepers of feminist knowledge and theory remains firmly planted in the false universality of the white westernized experience of sexism and fails to provide more than a passing reference to intersectionality. The aim of this work is to understand the systems which built and maintain white feminism, identify its structures and strategies, and to provide a vocabulary for these strategies. In the conclusion of this work, I will propose a call to action to disrupt conventional white feminist discourses and provide pathways towards feminist consciousness raising which centre the voices of women of colour and anti-racism theory. This can only be accomplished if white women who practice feminism commit themselves to radical consciousness raising, taking responsibility for the deconstruction of racism, and to acknowledge and reject the internalized allegiance to whiteness. Background and Relevance 9 White feminism has deep roots, but with so much research, theory, and philosophy by women of colour available, why do white feminists still struggle to talk about race? Philosopher and radical feminist Marilyn Frye is one of first white feminists to reflect on and deconstruct what she refers to as 'whiteliness' in feminism, penning The Politics of Reality in 1983. In an essay titled On Being White: Thinking Towards a Feminist Understanding of Race and Race Supremacy, Frye reflects on her own journey towards understanding her own complicity, and the complicity of other white feminists, in the intentional ignorance towards issues of racism and white supremacy which ran rampant within feminist institutions. Frye embarks on what must have been an uncomfortable personal journey as she describes the problematic ways she herself initially tried to engage with anti-racism work in her feminism, an early misguided strategy was to create a racism consciousness raising group, for white women only (111). As a result, Frye admits she was on the receiving end of anger and frustrations from feminists of colour: while Frye meant well and was attempting to take responsibility for raising white feminist consciousness towards issues of race, what this whites only group actually achieved was to reproduce silencing and erasure that feminists of colour were trying to fight against (113) Frye refers to her own behaviour, and that of other white feminists as the 'whiteliness' problem. Frye realizes that this problem is caused by what she calls false universalization. When people generally say 'men' they mean white men; when we say 'women,' we mean white women. In short, says Frye, "we don't think of ourselves as white" (117). 10 This is where the conflict lies: The majority of well-meaning white feminists are ignorant to their own racialized existence. In addition, when white feminists centre themselves in this frame of mind, the movement becomes overly simplified. White feminists speak with a sort of grand generalization, a false universality of their own specific problems. As bell hooks writes in her 1989 book Talking Back: Thinking Feminist, Thinking Black, Contemporary feminist thinkers often cite sexual politics as the origin of this crisis...Such an assumption has fostered the notion that elimination of sexist oppression would necessarily lead to the eradication of all forms of domination... Ideologically, thinking in this direction enables Western women, especially privileged white women, to suggest that racism and class exploitation are merely the offspring of the parent system: patriarchy" (19). What hooks is identifying is at the root of the white feminist problem; a hierarchy of need, one which prioritizes the patriarchal oppression of middle class white women over intersecting forces of oppression and dominance faced by women of colour, lesbians, and the poor. When white feminists insist racism will be solved once women achieve equality, they deny the reality of racial oppression and white supremacy, and in turn, are supporting and reinforcing that white dominance over women of colour. This is why it is of critical importance that those who consider themselves feminists understand intersectionality and have done the work to understand the structures and functions of racism - even if this involves the discomfort of acknowledging personal behaviours which reproduce the racist patriarchy. 11 Methodology The methodology of this work will be a qualitative discourse analysis, which will consist of data relating to white supremacy, white fragility, and white feminism. This data will be collected in the form of academic books, news articles, editorials, and social media posts. I will use the theoretical work of Audre Lorde, bell hooks, and Marilyn Frye to frame my analysis. I will also consult contemporary feminist writers such as Layla Saad, and Rachel Cargile, among others, to support my findings and underscore the urgency in which contemporary white feminists must address the systematic ignorance within the modern feminist movement. In order to capture the true complexity of white feminism, this work requires historical context. Therefore, I will provide a brief histography of the women's suffrage movement/ feminist movement in order to contextualize the contemporary problem of white feminism and white feminist fragility. I will also make limited use of the Michel Foucault's ideas regarding bio power to help provide context and depth to our understanding of how white supremacy functions in our society. Foucault was fascinated with the complex ways governments, states, and judicial systems exercised power over a population, and how this developed starting in the 17th century. Biopower is concerned with how the state holds the power to subjugate bodies (251). According to Foucault, there are two poles to biopower, one being disciplinary, referring to the power of the state to incarcerate, limit the movements, and disenfranchise the population. The second pole "focused on the species body, the body imbued with the mechanics of life and serving as the basis of the biological processes: propagation, births and mortality, the level of health, life expectancy and longevity, with 12 all the conditions that can cause these to vary. Their supervision was effected through an entire series of interventions and regulatory controls: a biopolitics of the population."(251) Bio-politics is the practice of bio-power: the intersection of power/knowledge and discourse to influence the physical minds and bodies of a population. As Foucault discusses at length in Society Must be Defended, control of the physical body is a tool of capitalism. Under capitalism, bodies must be used as a means for production, or else that body will not have access to the basic necessities of life. This has led to the prison industrial complex, a broken western system of poverty and welfare, and sweatshops worldwide. This exploitation of bodies, according to Foucault, leads us directly back to the topic at hand: white supremacy. We can draw direct comparisons with the problem of white feminism, and again back to what Audre Lorde writes about in The Master's Tools. If white women maintain their allegiance to the white bio-politic, meaning, valuing and protecting their whiteness before dismantling systems of oppression, then by its very nature white feminism functions to further oppress women of colour while seeking equality with white male oppressors. A Call to Action: White Feminist (Ignore)ance If mainstream feminist practice is white feminism, is the movement capable of creating any meaningful progress? Until white feminists recognize that their allegiance to their race is redirecting feminist discourse, resources, and energy towards protecting and reproducing white supremacy, there can be no meaningful progress. In this work I call on white feminists to end the cycle. Kimberlé Crenshaw's concept of intersectionality is not enough - white feminists need to do the introspective anti-racism work required to fully understand the extent to which white supremacy and 13 the patriarchy dictate our global society. By asking women of colour to use their time, knowledge, and emotional energy to convince us that racism is real, we are wasting time. Instead of using our difference as power, our difference has divided us, and distracted us. To summarize, in this work, I will form a clear connection between historical patterns of colonization with the current form of Westernized bio-power - a form of white supremacy that seeks to protect itself at all costs. Once this connection has been established, I will explore how white supremacy - through exercising the various facets of bio-power - has worked to create a society where the white majority is encouraged, either explicitly or implicitly, to protect whiteness and how the feminist movement came to embody and replicate this values in white feminist practice. I will argue that until white feminists do the radical self-reflective work to de-centre whiteness from feminist practice and consciousness-raising, the fight to dismantle the patriarchy in any meaningful way cannot begin in earnest. The ambition of this work is to propose a strategy to help facilitate the deconstruction of white feminism; this will include utilizing the work of women of colour such as bell hooks, Lyla Saad, and Rachel Cargle. I will identify terms, behaviours, and vocabulary which assist with identifying and disrupting white feminism in practice. My main argument is that anti-racism must be centred in feminist practice, because, as is made clear by Kimberle Crenshaw, bell hooks, and many more, racism and sexism occur concurrently. Racism is exasperated by gender; sexism is exasperated by race. Overcoming white feminism will not only require a reconfiguration of how white feminists understand difference; it will require radical self-acceptance. Accepting that white 14 fragility exists in everyone who holds white privilege, and that intentional or not, we are all complicit in structural racism. Ignorance can no longer be an excuse; as Fyre writes "ignorance of these sorts is a complex result of many acts and many negligences. To begin to appreciate this one need only to hear the active verb to 'ignore' in the word 'ignorance'. Our ignorance is perpetuated for us in many way and we have may ways of perpetuating it for ourselves" (118). Only once white feminists are able to fully accept their participation is white supremacy and reject their willful ignorance can they take steps towards true intersectionality. 15 Chapter 2: White Feminism: a Herstory In 1979 Audre Lorde was invited to participate in a conference by the New York institute for the Humanities. Lorde, a Black lesbian feminist, wrote the essay The Master's Tools will Never Dismantle the Master's House to reflect on her experience at the conference, where she was one of only two women of colour invited to speak. The essay speaks strongly to the lack of diversity in this academic setting, and how this causes damage to the movement as a whole: It is a particular academic arrogance to assume any discussion of feminist theory without examining our many differences, and without a significant input from poor women, Black and Third World women, and lesbians. And yet, I stand here as a Black lesbian feminist, been invited to comment within the only panel at this conference where the input of Black feminists and lesbians is represented. What this says about the vision of this conference is sad, in a country where racism, sexism, and homophobia are inseparable. To read this program is to assume that lesbian and Black women have nothing to say about existentialism, the erotic, women's culture and silence, developing feminist theory, or heterosexuality and power. And what does it mean in personal and political terms when even the two Black women who did present here were literally found at the last hour? What does it mean when the tools of a racist patriarchy are used to examine the fruits of that same patriarchy? It means that only the most narrow parameters of change are possible and allowable. (Lord, 18) Lorde begins her essay by questioning the very purpose of feminist discourse when it so sadly lacks diversity of thought. Who is this feminism for, and what exactly is it trying 16 to accomplish? This essay is a call to action to white women, an invitation to accept difference as power and to liberate themselves of the patriarchal notion that there are acceptable women, and unacceptable women. To Lorde, the patriarchy isn't just men. The patriarchy, which feminism purports to dismantle, is protecting the status quo; meaning white, elite, heterosexuals. A feminism that only challenges the patriarchy based on gender inequality for white women isn't really challenging the patriarchy at all - in fact, it only serves to protect it: "For the master's tools will never dismantle the master's house. They may allow us temporarily to beat him at his own game, but they will never enable us to bring about genuine change. And this fact is only threatening to those women who still define the master's house as their only source of support" (18). This last statement, which identifies white women who ultimately view the patriarchy as something to live with and live under, resonates throughout time. The Women's Suffrage movement of the mid 19th century is what many consider to be the beginning of modern feminism. White women around the world, primarily in Europe and colonized countries, started fighting for legal personhood, the right to vote, and to own property (Franceschet et al. 5). This movement was ultimately successful, in Australia, women nationally won the right to vote in 1902; in America 1920, in the United Kingdom in 1928; Canada 1940. Other European and nations colonized by Europeans followed suit along a similar timeline. While without question the suffrage movement made big strides towards gender equality, it is important to remember that in most cases the suffrage movement was only by, for, and about, white women. In Canada, Indigenous people were not granted the right to vote until 1960; Aboriginal peoples of Australia 1962; in the United States women of colour, while technically eligible to vote following the Civil War, 17 were effectively banned from voting due to laws tying voter rights to property ownership, and property ownership was denied to women of colour. They were fully granted voting rights in 1965 (Franceschet et al. 5). To anyone who might suggest that white women in the Suffrage movement may have simply excluded women of colour because of social segregation, I will use the Canadian suffrage movement to illustrate that women of colour were not only excluded; they were often targeted for further oppression. Votes for (White) Women A major milestone for the Canadian Suffrage movement was what is famously known as The Persons Case. Before the Canadian Constitution was known as such, the Dominion of Canada was governed under the British North America Act, 1867 (The BNA). Section 24 of this act stated that only 'qualified persons' could be appointed to the Senate. While most white women in Canada had gained the right to vote and run for local government and magistrate positions by the mid 1920's (with the exception of Quebec, who did not follow suit until 1940), women were not considered 'qualified persons' and therefore ineligible for seats in the Senate (Devereux, 5). In 1928, a group of suffragettes now known as The Famous Five (Emily Murphy, Nellie McClung, Irene Parlby, Louise McKinney and Henrietta Muir Edwards), signed a letter petitioning the Supreme Court of Canada to consider the definition of 'qualified persons' and if that could be interpreted to include women. The Supreme Court unanimously voted that while women were 'persons', they are not 'qualified persons'; meaning, they would not be eligible for a seat in Senate. It is reported that the judges of the Supreme Court at the time based their decision on interpreting the law as it was 18 intended at the time it was written - 1867. The Supreme Court decided that women were not intended to be included (Devereux, 4). The Famous Five then decided to take the petition to the Privy Council - at the time the Privy Council, as an entity of the British Empire, was the last level of court above the Supreme Court. The Privy Council ruled in favour of the Famous Five, and on October 18th, 1929 white Canadian women where finally declared qualified persons. The Famous Five are widely celebrated in Canadian history. A Canadian Heritage Minute which ran on public television in the 1990's depicts the series of events. The Persons Case is taught to students in Social Studies classes across the country. A monument of the Famous Five signing the petition is immortalized in Alberta and on Parliament Hill in Ottawa. Before continuing this discussion, I would like to return for a moment to the logic used by the Supreme Court when deciding that women were not qualified to run for senate. The decision was based on the idea that law is ironclad, irreversible, and assumes those who came before held an almost god-like power to know what truth is. This argument, which has been repeated throughout history, is a function of patriarchy. It serves only to protect the status quo, and has vast implications for our legal institutions, notions of truth, and historical revisions. This commitment and defence of the past is extremely relevant to a discussion of feminism, as feminism shares a colonial history with the patriarchy. How much or how little we hold historical figures accountable for not only their actions, but the future consequences of those actions, is fundamental to anti-racist practice. 19 The Sins of my Foremothers: Eugenic Feminism In 2005 Dr. Cecily Devereux of the University of Alberta published the book Growing a Race: Nellie L. McClung and the Fiction of Eugenic Feminism. In this book Devereux examines McClung's legacy to see to what extent her activism was influenced by eugenics. Eugenics was a popular philosophy in colonized nations; Eugenics, based on ideas gleaned from Darwinism, is the notion that humanity and civilization can be improved with selective breeding. If those with undesirable traits are not permitted to reproduce, then those undesirable traits will simply cease to exist. Undesirable traits essentially included anyone not able-bodied, mentally stable, white, and heterosexual (Devereux, 4). The information that McClung was an advocate of eugenics is not new, but often downplayed. In the same year that McClung and the Famous Five were petitioning the Supreme Court, McClung and Emily Murphy were also vocal Eugenicists and in full support of the 1928 Sexual Sterilization Act (McCavitt, 362). This act granted the province of Alberta the authority to sterilize anyone deemed mentally deficient in order to protect the gene pool. The term 'Mentally deficient' could be applied liberally (unlike the use of the word 'person' apparently), and applied to: alcoholics, the homeless, poorly behaved children, social deviance, those with epilepsy, and most often, simply being an Indigenous woman (Devereux, 10). While estimates differ widely, by the time forced sterilization was repealed in the 1972, the closest official estimate of the number of individuals who underwent legal forced sterilization is roughly 2500. Despite making up approximately 3.4% of the population of Alberta, Metis or Indigenous people accounted for 25.7% of sterilizations (McCavitt, 364). 20 Forced sterilization of women was just one arm of the 'take the Indian out of the child' policy established by first Canadian Prime Minister John A MacDonald, and McClung was a enthusiastic advocate for 'uplifting' the native people of Canada. With the advantage of hindsight, in 2019 we have a clearer understanding of the damage caused to the Indigenous population by these actions, laws, and policies. How do we reconcile the irony of a figure who dedicated much of her life to fighting for (white) women's equality, while simultaneously supporting what is now officially recognized as cultural genocide? Devereux addresses how many contemporary critics attempt to engage with McClung's duality" Like so many feminists of the first wave, she is understood to have paradoxically done 'good' work for many women that is 'bad' because it took place within a framework of cultural imperialism. Contemporary critical evaluations have tended to negotiate this paradox by swinging between a sense that is it 'inappropriate to judge a woman like McClung by contemporary standards and a sense that a woman like McCLung must be judged by contemporary standards because she figures at this time as a national hero. Neither approach is entirely satisfactory, the first because it seems to suggest that the ideas of earlier generations cannot be properly assessed or that they should not be assessed, the second because it leads to a kind of historical denial and to a serious overwriting and reconfiguration of a problematic past. (Devereux,12) 21 Both of these approaches to assessing McClung and her legacy, in my opinion, are reductive. The discussion should not be whether or not McClung was a good or bad person, or what her intention was at the time. These are simply moral judgments. Systematic inequality was not created because of the lack of morals of one or even many individuals. Those who argue that McClung was a product of her society are not wrong; McClung lived in an imperial society focused on the enduring domination of the British Empire. However, declaring her a product of her society does not absolve McClung and other Eugenicists of their legacy. To argue that 'they thought they were doing the right thing' only serves to further victimize those who continued to suffer under colonial patriarchy. While 'right' and 'wrong' may have been a philosophical exercise for colonists, the Indigenous people of Canada were always aware that what was happening to them was wrong. To use historical (white) social norms to defend actions of the past only serves to further disenfranchise oppressed people and ignores the autonomy of past and present-day individuals who wish to hold institutions and governments accountable. I am choosing to engage with Nellie McClung not to demand she be erased from the feminist herstory books; McClung will continue to be an important historical figure and should be remembered and studied. I am choosing McClung as an example of how the roots of white feminism were established long ago and continue to be reproduced. As I will discuss further in the next chapter, the desire to place people in a moral good/bad binary is a problematic trait of current and contemporary feminism. 22 The 'Me' in #MeToo We cannot change the past; we can only learn from it. When I look to the actions of McClung, and then to the white women holding the Feminist conference Lorde attended in 1979, and again to contemporary feminist movements such as #MeToo, there is a discernable pattern. A cycle of repetition is characterized by white women dominating feminist discourse and receiving the most credit and praise. We are nearing a century since McClung and the Famous Five signed their petition, yet an analysis of how the 2017 #MeToo movement unfolded, arguably the most visible feminist moment in recent years, it seems that very little has changed. Much of the public conversation surrounding topics of social justice often take place on social media, with hashtags becoming the rallying point to create a collective voice of resistance. However, as many black, indigenous, and queer activists have drawn attention to, this resistance often only seems to apply to wealthy, heterosexual, white women. The series of events leading up to and following the 2017 #MeToo movement is a convenient example to illustrate how little has changed. The social media hashtag #MeToo went viral in 2017 after popular white actress Alissa Milano tweeted: Fig.1 23 According to a report published by The Guardian in December 2017, in the 45 days following this tweet, #MeToo was used on twitter and facebook 85 million times (Sayej). While the popularity of this hashtag was obviously successful in drawing attention to the often-ignored reality of workplace sexual violence, the majority of the discussion in the weeks following Milano's tweet was led by white, privileged, Hollywood actresses. In addition to the narrow scope of #MeToo, black feminists were quick to point out that MeToo was already in use as a call of solidarity against sexual violence. As Dr. Penny Griffin summarizes in the Australian Journal of Political Science, #MeToo is not a movement by and for white women, although it has arguably been coopted by and for white women. The origins of the #MeToo movement lie in the work of Tarana Burke, a black, US-based women's activists. Burke established 'Me Too' in 2006 as an activist group to help and locate resources for young survivors of sexual violence in underprivileged communities, especially (but not only) young women of colour. (562) It is ironic that a movement intended for underprivileged young women of colour being was overrun by the white, wealthy, social elite. Even if unintentional, this series of events is reproducing a tradition of white women only looking out for the interests of other white women. Violence against women of colour in the workplace and in general is experienced at significantly higher rate than white women. Indigenous women in Canada are particularly vulnerable, with the Canadian Human Rights Commission reporting that "young indigenous women are five times more likely than other Canadian women to die as a result of violence" (Assembly of First Nations). Returning to Lorde's words I quotes earlier: "It is of particular arrogance to engage in a discussion of 24 feminism without the without examining our many differences, and without a significant input from poor women, Black and Third World women, and lesbians" (Lord, 18). Yet, here we are, once again, centering wealthy heterosexual white women in the conversation. On November 10th, 2017, the Washington Post published a piece by Tarana Burke, reflecting on the sudden virality of her programs namesake. The article, titled '#MeToo was started for black and brown women and girls. They're still being ignored.' Burke reflects on her own work, and the work of other black activists over the last decade. What history has shown us time and again is that if marginalized voices- those of people of colour, queer people, disabled people, poor people - aren't centred in our movements then they tend to become no more than a footnote. I often say that sexual violence knows no race, class or gender, but the response to it does. "Me Too." Is a response to the spectrum of gender-based sexual violence that comes directly from survivors - all survivors. We can't afford a racialized, gendered, or classist response. Ending sexual violence will require every voice from every corner of the world and it will require those whose voices are most often heard to find ways to amplify those voices that often go unheard (Burke). The series of events which took place which resulted in an elite and white-washed version of #MeToo was predictably ironic. This pattern pre-dates the Suffrage movement and illustrates how black-erasure is a critical feature of main-stream or, what I'll be referring to as 'white feminism'. Burke's writing in this piece helps me define what is meant by the term; 'white feminism' is a form of feminism generally practiced by 25 white, middle class, heterosexual women, which disregards race, sexuality, poverty, or gender identity as causes worth including in their activism. In the following chapters, I will examine and analysis the functions of white feminism, and propose an approach to disrupt it. 26 Chapter 3: Beyond Intersectionality: White Feminist Fragility Lorraine Bethel is an African American lesbian, feminist, poet, and author. The following excerpt is from a poem, titled What Chou Mean 'We', White Girl, Bethel penned when she and Barbara Smith, who is also an African American lesbian feminist, were the guest editors of the "Black Women's Issue" of Conditions: Five, a literary magazine predominantly for black lesbian women. The full poem, which fills up 6 pages of Conditions is a raw, visceral take down of the academic, white feminism which has alienated and further oppressed feminists of colour in the 1970's. The following passage touches on the tokenism and subjugation black feminists often experienced when approached by white academic feminists. I knew it was coming when she said "You don't know me, But I got your name from..." They never know us, selecting their victims from a rolodex labeled feminists, Black or Lesbians, Black or better still, lesbian feminists, Black a list I'm convinced some white girl is selling and has made enough money from to retire with a Swiss bank account an index of Black women, feminists, lesbians literate ones who don't eat white women or bite their heads off or say "That's irrelevant to my struggle as a Black woman," or "The women's movement is a white girl trip," 27 or "Are you a bull dyke?" or "Get out of my face, bitch!" when feminism is mentioned to them. (Bethel, 86) In this passage, Bethel acknowledges she is one of a limited number of black women who identify as feminist, something that at the time was considered rare thanks to underrepresentation in academia, along with the commitment white feminists had to only discuss topics which were relevant to their lives; topics that did not resonate with women of colour. The powerful title of this piece, What Chou Mean We, White Girl, summarizes the feelings of exclusion, willful ignorance, and disdain feminists of colour felt when attempting to engage with white feminists; there is a certain amount of irony with the use of the collective 'we' when a privileged white woman speaks from a podium at an academic conference where there are only one or two women of colour in attendance. It is thanks to women like Bethel using their anger that acclaimed writer and feminist Kimberlé Crenshaw introduced the widely influential concept of Intersectionality in the 1989, in an effort to articulate and communicate to white feminists the intersecting challenges faced by women of colour. As feminists seemed unwilling to discuss racism, and anti-racism activists seemed unwilling to discuss sexism, Crenshaw took it on herself to provide language and make space for the often-ignored problems faced by women of colour. As Crenshaw explains: "The failure of feminism to interrogate race means that the resistance strategies of feminism will often replicate and reinforce the subordination of people of color, and the failure of antiracism to interrogate patriarchy means that antiracism will frequently reproduce the subordination of women" (3). These words echo the experience of Audre Lorde at the conference which inspired her essay 28 The Master's Tools will Never Dismantle the Master's House and will be echoed once again in 2017 when Tarana Burke addresses the #MeToo movement. In the previous chapter a brief analysis of historical feminisms reveals the early precedent to centre whiteness in mainstream feminist practice. What this analysis makes clear is that colonial patterns of disenfranchisement of people of colour have been replicated in Suffrage movements around the globe, in the 2nd Wave feminism of the 80's, through the so called '3rd wave' of the 90's and 00's, and again in the 2017 #MeToo movement. African American feminists such as Angela Davis, Audre Lorde, and Kimberlé Crenshaw have been writing about the exclusion of women of colour, poor women, and queer women for decades. If women of colour have been talking about the problem of white feminism for so long, why does feminism to this day continue to struggle with centring whiteness? White exclusivity in feminism has been a topic black feminists have theorized about for decades, yet almost all eventually come to the same foundational conclusion: an internalized and often invisible commitment to white supremacy. The Feminist Bio-politic Understanding the why of racism is crucial to understanding the problem of white feminism. While I have made the intentional choice to exclude white male academics in this work, I do believe any examination of power, especially how power operates in society and on individual bodies, can benefit from the theoretical work of Michel Foucault. Foucault, the highly influential French philosopher and theorist, was fascinated with the complex ways governments, states, and judicial systems exercised power over a population, and how this developed starting in the 17th century, as global 29 European colonization was in full swing. The History of Sexuality: Volume I theorised that there are two forms of power - "two poles of development linked together by a whole intermediary cluster of relations" (139). The first pole of power is disciplinary power, and the second pole - which will be of focus in the work - is "focused on the species body, the body imbued with the mechanics of life and serving as the basis of the biological processes: propagation, births and mortality, the level of health, life expectancy and longevity, with all the conditions that can cause these to vary. Their supervision was effected through an entire series of interventions and regulatory controls: a biopolitics of the population (139). Bio-politics is the practice of bio-power: the intersection of power/knowledge and discourse to influence the physical minds and bodies of a population. As Foucault discusses at length in Society Must be Defended, control of the physical body is a tool of capitalism. Under capitalism, bodies must be used as a means for production, or else that body will not have access to the basic necessities of life. This has led to the prison industrial complex, a broken western system of poverty and welfare, and sweatshops worldwide. This exploitation of bodies, according to Foucault, leads us directly back to the topic at hand: the racism. In Society Must be Defended, Foucault writes: "...a battle that has to be waged not between races, but by a race that is portrayed as the one true race, the race that holds power and is entitled to define the norm, and against those who deviate from that norm, against those who pose a threat to the biological heritage" (61). What this means is that our governments are not racist by accident. As Foucault writes, bio-political racism is "a racism that society will direct against itself, against its own elements and its own products [...] the internal racism of 30 permanent purification, and it will become one of the basic dimensions of social normalization" (62). As Foucault predicted, racism has become a pillar in contemporary society. Racism has become so normalised, it is invisible to most white folks. The government does not have to be explicitly racist, because racism is the default. Bio-power and bio-politics are the invisible systems at work in our society which creates a perpetual cycle of race and gender based discrimination. Angela Davis, an icon of radical black feminism and civil rights, has dedicated her life to dismantling racism. Davis has lived through different political periods and different waves of feminism and has a unique perspective to analyse the bio-political implications of structural racism and how it functions on colonial societies. In a 2008 talk at Murdoch University titled Recognizing Racism in the Era of Neoliberalism, Davis identifies how the solidified definition of racism which formed following the Civil Rights movement of the 1960s has contributed to patterns of structural racism: "Definitions of racism informed by particular historical conditions became trans- or ahistorical ways of conceptualizing racial discrimination and subjugation. The persistence of these meanings beyond the particular historical conditions that produced them has hampered the evolution of a new vocabulary and new discourse that might allow us to identify new modes of racism in what is known as the post-civil rights era" (Davis). The definition Davis provides for neo-liberalism is "the flawed assumption that history does not matter" (Davis). What Davis argues is that racism was moved from present, to past. It became understood that slavery is racist; segregation is racist; the Klu Klux Klan is racist. Keeping generational wealth generated by slave owners is not racist. The war on drugs is not racist. Police brutality against people of colour is not 31 racist. All of these instances, under neo-liberalism, are justified because every instance is treated as an individual data point - not a trend which builds on hundreds of years of subjugation (Davis). Sociologist Robin DiAngelo, author of White Fragility: Why It's so Hard for White People to Talk about Racism expands on the explanations Davis provides us in her talk on how ideas of a post racial world continue to disadvantage people of colour. DiAngelo emphasises the institutional structures of our society, institutions built by the state, designed by and to measure the success and validate the accomplishments of the white population. "To say that whiteness includes a set of cultural practices that are not recognized by white people is to understand racism as a network of norms and actions that consistently create advantage for whites and disadvantage for people of colour" (DiAngelo, 51). DiAngelo is describing the functions of bio-politics. Invisible, structured systems which are designed to benefit those with white skin, and harm those without. White Fragility Through biopower, Foucault provides me with the ability to see the invisible structures within our institutions designed to advantage white people, and further subjugate people of colour. I also believe that the actions of white fragility as proposed in DiAngelo's book have the qualities biopolitical power in practice, ingrained behaviours which act to correct discourses which challenge white supremacy. DiAngelo describes white fragility as the adverse emotional reaction experienced by white people due to what she calls the "good/bad binary (DiAngelo, 50). The good/bad binary is a simplistic worldview that certain people are 'good', law-abiding, kind, and moral, while people who are sexist, homophobic, or racist, are 'bad.' In this dichotomy, all discrimination must be 32 explicit, intentional, and with the goal of causing harm. Due to our commitment to viewing ourselves as moral and good, according to DiAngelo, "we perceive any attempt to connect us to the system of racism as an unsettling and unfair moral offense" (26). DiAngelo also focuses on what she refers to as white progressives as the main group vulnerable to white fragility; white progressives are white people who believe they are not racist, less racist, and are already allies to the cause (29). This group are even more likely to react negatively to accusations of racism because in their mind, they are 'one of the good ones,' and are very concerned with being perceived as such. DiAngelo says "I believe that white progressives cause the most daily damage to people of colour" (29), because, based on the good/bad binary, as good people, nothing they do could be considered racist. Casual racism and microaggressions are invisible to those who refuse to accept the reality of internalized racism. White feminists I believe would fall under the umbrella of progressive whites, as they view themselves as already committed to the anti-oppression cause. In terms of biopower functioning to protect white supremacy, white fragility is an insidious and effective way to keep even the most progressive white people in line to inadvertently protect racial superiority. While DiAngelo offers useful terms to help describe some of the bio-political functions of white feminism, the problem is more complex than simple miseducation and hurt feelings; the solution more complex than appealing to white people to become radically self-aware. The suggestion that racism is a result of misunderstanding and poor self-reflective skills and regarding casual racism as inadvertent feels like a gentle attempt to lead white people towards anti-racist work, while simultaneously exonerating us from responsibility. 33 White fragility is a term I would apply to behaviour, however we're still lacking an understanding of why we see this behaviour, and why are white feminists prone to it? In the 2012 book Leadership by Resentment, Dr. Ruth Capriles takes on the philosophical challenge of understanding the pathology of resentment. According to Capriles, resentment (or ressentiment, a linguistic choice in the text) "is understood as a phenomenon and an emotional process that proceeds by phases of repression and transformation of emotions which sink deeply into the centre of the personality until they are removed from consciousness and rational control. When the emotion surfaces it is experienced as a renewal of both the original grievance and the feeling of impotence" (20). Capriles metaphorically describes resentment as an illness; something that can grow in an individual, a community, or even a society. Resentment, more than an unconscious bias, is what I would argue is a more accurate explanation of the phenomenon of white fragility as is proposed by Robin DiAngelo. Since resentment is common among those who consider themselves to be disenfranchised (20), I can start to understand why white women and white feminists have always struggled with intersectionality and exclusion. In a world of 'have' and 'have nots' racism is not only a symptom of oppressive governments; racism is a symptom of a larger pattern of oppression and a capitalist system which by necessity of function creates social stratification. Nobody wants to be on the bottom. For white feminists, who have taken up the mantle of activists against sexism, we start to understand why other groups are ignored: discussions of race, sexuality, and gender might eclipse the issues which seem most urgent to heterosexual white women. Rather than place anger and resentment towards those who cause the oppression, resentment is most often directed towards 34 other oppressed people who are perceived to be getting 'more' - social programs, equal opportunity initiatives, legal protections, etc (21). Feminista Jones, an African American social worker, author, and community activist echoed this sentiment on an episode of the podcast Just Between Us in July 2019. When asked why she thought white women vote against their own best interest (in reference to the statistic that 53% of white women votes for Donald Trump in the 2016 American Election), Jones provided an answer that captured the complexity of female oppression. Most oppressed people vote against their own interests, and white women are oppressed... And I think a lot of times when people are oppressed, they can act out towards others, nobody wants to be at the bottom. I also think that white supremacy and white privilege is like currency, right? So, I always say this, and I challenge you all to think [about] this. If I am with my 12 year old son, and you are with your 12 year old son, as a white mother, and somebody's standing in front of us, and pointing a gun at us, who's child would you want to be shot? Not yours. And that's the position that people end up being in. I am going to do whatever I can to live and to survive; and if it means relying on some of the most evil things in our society, when it comes down to it, I want to live and I want to survive. And I think that's where 'isms' come from: it comes from survival, it comes from greed, it comes from the need to survive and as altruistic as you may be, you're going to go for your own self-interests first... So when white women are voting, they know the strongest currency they have is whiteness." (Jones) 35 Jones touches on something that DiAngelo overlooks in her book; fragility doesn't only steam from imagined threats to power; those who are oppressed in other ways are sometimes even more prone to protecting whiteness as a means of survival. When put next to writers such as Cargile and Jones, DiAngelo's explanation for white fragility falls flat. As I will explore further in the next chapter, unconscious social bias is one possible explanation; however, it also serves to downplay the intention of racist behaviour. Angry White Women: White Feminist Resentment White feminist resentment is especially acute in those who consider themselves as virtuous, or as DiAngelo would describe, one of the good white people. By denying complicity with white supremacy, white feminists continue to perpetuate institutional racism against women of colour. While there is no shortage of examples of WFR, a higher profile example is the response to a series of social media posts by Black activist and writer Rachel Cargile following the 2018 racially motivated murder of Nia Wilson. Wilson was murdered by a white supremacist while taking public transit in Oakland, California. (Cargle) In the days following Wilson's tragic death, Cargile took to her social media to challenge white feminists by asking "where are the voices of all my white feminist friends when a black woman had been tragically murdered"(Cargle)? Some of Cargile's white followers took this as an opportunity to show solidarity with the black community, however, according to Cargile, just as many responded with resentment. Instead of sharing in the outrage of Nia's brutal murder, they came with fury for being tagged in a post that they felt challenged their own perceived feminist accomplishments. There were grand displays of defensiveness, 36 demands that they be acknowledged for all the things they had done for black people in the past, and a terrifying lashing out that included racial slurs and doxing. (Cargle) To Cargle, this reaction is indicative of the deep seeded problems within White Feminism - the need to protect whiteness overpowers their self-proclaimed desire to protect women. These attempts at discourse correction is an exercise in bio-politics; the goal of this behaviour is to protect their perception of identity and morality at the expense of people of colour, and at the expense of denying Nia Wilson the most basic respect of acknowledging the forces which lead to her death. Cargile refers to this expression of resentment as 'white toxic feminism', because the aim is not to engage in a meaningful discourse, to advance women in society, or advocate for any kind of equality; this expression of 'feminism' is aimed at actively harming women of colour for challenging the status quo. 'White toxic feminism,' 'white feminism' and 'white feminist resentment' are part of the same phenomenon. 37 Chapter 4: The Functions and Failures of White Feminism In my previous chapters, I discussed the what and the why of white feminism. Here, I will explore the how of white feminism - the strategies, tools, and actions which continue to perpetuate the practice far longer than the black feminists writing in the 1970's and 80's could have imagined. Returning once again to Audre Lorde, in the following passage Lorde explains one of the most basic - and ongoing - strategies white feminism deploys which prevents adequate intersectionality in feminist practice. Women of today are still being called upon to stretch across the gap of male ignorance and to educate men as to our existence and our needs. This is an old and primary tool of all oppressors to keep the oppressed occupied with the master's concerns. Now we hear that it is the task of women of colour to educate white women - in the face of tremendous resistance - as to our existence, our differences, our relative roles in our joint survival. This is a diversion of energies and a tragic repetition of racist patriarchal thought. (Lorde, 21) The 'tremendous resistance' Lorde speaks of is the fragility Robin DiAngelo defines of in her book; the resentment Capriles speaks of; Lorde is identifying the struggle to engage white feminists with topics of race; topics which challenging white supremacy. What Lorde is proposing, and what disenfranchised people have reiterated and repeated over the last century, is that it is not the responsibility of women to educate men, for black women to educate white women, for queer people to educate heterosexual people. White feminism exists to protect power by denying the existence of difference, to deny other ways of knowing, and other ways of living as a global community. Moreover, by playing into a system which continues to 'other' members of the population, the power 38 of feminism becomes diluted. Rather than accepting and embracing our points of difference, white feminism is reinforcing the patriarchal system it seeks to dismantle. How can feminism overcome this history of exclusion and fragility? DiAngelo's solution of radical self-reflection is only one small part of the potential cure. Unpacking the discourse which has been formed by a century of bio-politics aimed to subjugate certain members of society in order for other groups to flourish is no simple task. As Marilyn Frye writes "Race is a tie that binds us to men: "us" being white women, and "men" being white men. If we wish not to be bound in subordination to men, we have to give up trading on our white skin for white men's race privilege" (151). Here, Fyre is explicitly tying sexism and oppression to whiteness. When considering feminism in this way, it becomes very clear that white women must extricate themselves from white supremacy before they engage with even the basic principles of feminism, or else their ability to fight oppression will be extremely limited. In order to take on this work, we must first understand the toolkit and strategies of white feminism, to learn to recognize red flags and disrupt the discourse. White Supremacy and Me: Radical De-Colonization Layla Saad is an author, activist, and teacher. Saad, who is an East-African, Arab, British, Black, Muslim woman, uses her uniquely intersectional identity to study and analyse the functions of white supremacy. Over the summer of 2018, Saad challenged her social media followers with the following post: White Folks: time for some radical truth-telling about you and your complicity in white supremacy. Not those white people 'out there'. Not white people as a collective. But you. Just you. We start tomorrow. 28 days of simple 39 yet direct questions for you to share where you are at in your journey so far of understanding and owning your racism. This is not me educating you. This is you being honest about the work you have been doing so far, and how you have been internalising that work. Don't comment unless you are willing to be all the way honest. I don't care about perfectionism. I care about truth, because truth sets us free and makes us better. Use the hashtag #MeAndWhiteSupremacy if you want to share. See you tomorrow. (LaylaFSaad) What started out as a social media challenge evolved into what is now titled the "Me and White Supremacy Workbook," available as an online PDF, and to be published in print in 2020. Saad takes the proposal DiAngelo makes about personal responsibility for racism to another level, turning anti-racist work from a passive and reactive activity into an active and productive exercise. The next 28 days, Saad provided followers with simple yet complex prompts, which include: You & White Fragility, You & Tone Policing, You & White Centering, and You & Optical Allyship (Saad). The language Saad uses here is important, and these concepts are a common thread among academics and writers focusing on anti-racism and whiteness. When Rachel Cargile wrote her piece for Harper Bazar addressing white feminism following the death of Nia Wilson, she included a list of behaviours white feminists engage with as defence mechanisms. Before elaborating on these concepts, I have included a sampling of comments on Saad's Instagram channel which highlight four major strategies identified by Cargile and Saad, which are commonly utilized by white feminism: Tone Policing, Spiritual By-passing, White Savior Complex, and Centering. 40 Fig. 2a Fig. 2b Fig. 2c 41 Fig. 3a Fig. 3b Fig. 3c 42 In the first set of images (Figure 2a-2c), Saad posts a quote which speaks about 'spiritual white women' who are lacking an intersectional approach to their feminism. Instagram user Thecosmiccrysalis, a self-identified spiritual white woman", chimes in claiming that racism 'goes both ways' and that she too experiences 'positive discrimination' (price gouging due to the perception that she is a wealthy white person). The comment ends with a call to action; 'No blame cards, no race cards, no excuses.' Saad's gentle suggestion that Thecosmiccrysalis should educate herself on institutional racism is essentially ignored, as Thecosmiccrysalis rejects this suggestion and continues down the path of spiritual bypassing. Spiritual Bypassing: "We are all alike in soul and diverse in outer experience". What is 'spiritual bypassing'? Influential Psychologist John Welwood, who has advanced studies of including spirituality in psychological practice, first coined the term 'spiritual bypassing' in 1984 to define the use of spiritual practices and beliefs as a way of avoiding dealing with unresolved psychological issues (69). The term is common with psychologists who incorporate religion and spirituality into their practice. As Welwood explains, "Spiritual bypassing often adopts a rational based on using absolute truth to deny or disparage relative truth. Absolute truth is what is eternally true, now and forever, beyond any particular viewpoint" (70). In an interview originally published in Tricycle Magazine, Welwood elaborates on the concept and how it can function in interpersonal relationships: "When we are spiritually bypassing, we often use the goal of awakening or liberation to rationalize what I call premature transcendence: trying to rise above the raw and messy side of our humanness before we have fully faced and made peace with 43 it" (Welwood). When applied to the functions of white feminism, the "raw and messy side of humanness" Welwood describes is the latent white supremacy Cargile and Saad are calling on white women to disrupt. In Cargle's article, she applies the term specifically to white feminists, making the observation that "the easiest way for white women to skirt around the realities of racism is to just "love and light it away." When confronted with ways they have offended a marginalized group with their words or actions, they immediately start to demand unity and peace; painting those they harmed as aggressive, mean, or divisive (Cargle) Cargle summarizes the phenomenon of Spiritual Bypassing in the context of white feminism quite concisely: When we look to the exchange in figure 2c, Thecosmiccrysalis demonstrates all of the above: "My point being, regardless of race we are all divine souls. To even speak about race is to create a boarder, create an illusion." Thecosmiccrysalis dismisses the concept of race entirely due to the fact that we are all divine souls. Though Thecosmiccrysalis is clearly trying to relate to Saad on a level above our physical plain, what this Instagram user accomplishes is perpetuating one of the main functions of white feminism; denying the race-based discrimination experienced by many women of colour. Rather than listening and benefiting from the resources, discussions, and opportunities Saad provides Thecosmiccrysalis to evolve her thinking, Thecosmiccrysalis chooses to remain committed to her ignorance. Spiritual Bypassing is an elevated version of 'I don't see colour' - it's a strategy designed to relieve white of their complicity with systematic racism - you cannot see something you refuse to acknowledge. Tone Policing: "Thank you for not coming out swinging". 44 The exchange Saad engages with in the second set of screenshots (fig. 3a-3c) with Instagram user Celestialearthmother at first seems rather innocuous - the comment is praising Saad for her approach, tone, and gentle nature. Saad, however, is quick to draw attention to the practice tone policing. When Celestialearthmother says "thanks for not coming out swinging" this is a reference to 'angry black women' - a stereotype. In 2017, academics Trina Jones and Kimberly Jade Norwood published the paper Aggressive Encounters & White Fragility: Deconstructing the Trope of the Angry Black Woman specifically to deconstruct this stereotype. They describe "the angry black woman" as the "the physical embodiment of some of the worst negative stereotypes of Black women-she is out of control, disagreeable, overly aggressive, physically threatening, loud (even when she speaks softly), and to be feared. She will not stay in her "place." She is not human" (2032). As Jones and Norwood explain, the 'Angry Black Woman' stereotype has contributed to high levels of incarceration, increased instances of police brutality, and an overall dismissal of black women's voices (2032). Tone policing is the practice of discourse correction; it limits how women of colour speak, what they can say, and controls much emotion is deemed acceptable. Cargle introduces this idea by emphasizing the many reasons black women have to be angry, "when women of color begin to cry out about their pain, frustration, and utter outrage with the system that is continuing to allow our men to murdered, our babies to be disregarded, and our livelihood to be dismissed, we are often met with white women who tell us perhaps we should "say things a little nicer" if we want to be respected and heard." 45 With the added context of the damaging history of stereotypes, the comment from Celestialearthmother in fig 3b takes on a new weight. Not only is applauding Saad for her restraint condescending, but she is enforcing the subjugation of black voices. This exchange is significant; Saad invites Celestialearthmother to educate herself on the concept of tone policing and goes as far as to provide her with a resource to assist. The irony of the response in fig 2C is obvious: Celestialearthmother claims that she wants women of colour to educate her - yet when Saad does try to educate her, Celestialearthmother doubles down and insists that since she is coming to the conversation 'curious' with the goal to attain a better understanding of racism, she would prefer a gentle approach, because "when I feel attacked when trying to do better, it creates a discord." So not only does Celestialearthmother feel entitled to be educated by black women, she is diverting the conversation from racism to her own feelings. This is a white feminist strategy known as centering. Centring: "It was a personal experience for me that felt like an attack". As Cargile explains, centring refers to the phenomenon of making issues of racism or intersectionality about themselves and their feelings. "White women get so caught up in how they feel in a moment of black women expressing themselves that they completely vacuum the energy, direction, and point of the conversation to themselves and their feelings" (Cargle). What we see in the comments by Celestialearthmother is a fairly direct example of centring. She seems unwilling to take feedback on what she felt like was a justifiable comment. Instead of doing the work to educate herself - which she claims she is there to do - Celestialearthmother defends herself by explaining that she has felt 'attacked' in the past (presumably by black 46 women), and other black women should speak more like Saad in order to make white women like her feel comfortable and receptive to their ideas. Instead of engaging Saad on the topic of the post (white supremacy in yoga), Celestialearthmother chooses to talk about the ways black women can be more palatable to well-meaning white women. Upon first glance, there may not be anything in Celestialearthmother's initial comment that would seem problematic. That is why this type of racism is so insidious; white people often do not see it. This is why it is of crucial importance to recognize and understand systematic and institutionalized racism. The nuance added with a working knowledge of history, systems, and stereotypes make visible what many are blind to; racism does not exist in a vacuum. Racism and racist behaviour are sometimes not easy to define, but once armed with different ways of knowing, you know it when you see it. These are just a handful of terms that allow us to better code and understand White Feminism. By codifying repetitive behaviours, the strategies of white feminism become easier to identify and articulate. Having vocabulary for these behaviours allows us to disrupt typical discourses and challenge conventional narratives. Is it the task of women of colour to educate white women? Celestialearthmother argues that "having women of color be willing to hear my piece to hold up a mirror for me in a way that I can grasp is important". It might be important, but this is placing an incredible amount of responsibility onto women of colour; why should women of colour hold space for her 'piece', and why is it their responsibility to 'hold up a mirror' and provide her with feedback that is a) easy for her to grasp and b) in a manner which is gentle, non-aggressive, and considerate of her 47 feelings. Rather than take responsibility for her own education, and taking advantage of the many free resources Saad and Cargle make available for white women, Celestialearthmother seems to be suggesting that by showing up and engaging people like Saad, that she's done her part. It is now the job of women of colour to tell her how to be a good white person. Lyla Saad and Rachel Cargle both make it clear that the work they do is not for white women. Despite producing thoughtful and insightful resources, Saad and Cargle tackle white feminism as a strategy of anti-racist work. The resources are available - but it remains the responsibility of white feminists to do the work for themselves. Saad makes this very clear in her communications on social media, and in the Me and White Supremacy Workbook. Rather than taking apart these comments point by point (which I have just done), Saad offers the vocabulary and a link to her workbook - she offers a pathway to anti-racism consciousness raising. A recurring theme in Saad's work is to make clear she is not there to hold anyone's hand or comfort white women as they engage with anti-racist work. Cargle mirrors this attitude in her own work: she makes it explicitly clear that her work is about survival, and not about teaching white feminists how to be 'good white people'. A world with less racists is a safer world for people of colour. The expectation on oppressed people to educate oppressors has existed for decades. We now understand that this expectation is another exercise of bio-political power: if subjugated people would like to no longer be subjugated, it is their responsibility to advocate for themselves and lead through education. But as Lorde notes, when it comes to white feminism, even when education and knowledge is 48 offered, it is met with 'intense resistance.' The intersecting systems of white supremacy, resentment, and fragility that have been discussed in this paper are all designed so that privileged people and oppressors reject any knowledge offered, because it is not the responsibility of whites to be educated. To Lorde, "this is a diversion of energies and a tragic repetition of racist patriarchal thought" (18). What Lorde means by this is that rather than accepting and celebrating our points of difference, the current expectation on women of colour to educate white women only serves to intensify white resentment, as well as reinforcing their allegiance to whiteness. The work that Saad and Cargle are doing is to disrupt this old paradigm by inviting white feminists to claim their own agency and take responsibility for anti-racist work themselves; the only way to disrupt the system is to reject it. The work these women are doing is subversive, nuanced, and critically important to advancing and creating a productive, intersectional, and cohesive feminist practice. 49 Chapter 5 Conclusion: Radicalizing Feminist Consciousness Raising I am a white woman feminist. I differentiate myself from the topic of this work, white feminism, only by virtue of having begun the work to dismantle the internalized white supremacy which all white people raised in western colonial societies are bestowed with. Afterall, up until a few years ago, I would have been a near perfect match for the criteria I set in chapter 1 to identify white feminists: white, middle class, academic, and upholding sexism as the main tenant of my feminism. My only saving grace to keep myself from being the definition of a white feminist I have spent this paper criticising is that I am not a heterosexual. This work is uncomfortable, and I must admit I am guilty of utilizing many of the strategies of white feminism outlined in chapter 4 when I became uncomfortable or unsure of how to participate in conversations of race, let alone considering actions which may have caused harm to friends and colleagues. Marylin Fyre said it best in her 1991 essay White Woman Feminist, when reflecting on her own journey towards deconstructing her own journey towards understand what it means to be a woman, a feminist, to be white. "These were very frustrating experiences: they played out and revealed the way in which the fact that I am white gave unbidden and unwanted meanings to my thought and my actions and poisoned them all with privilege"(Fyre, 147). This frustration is the experience of grappling with white fragility; the emotional reaction to racial confrontations as described by Robin DiAngelo in her book White Fragility: Why It's so Hard for White People to Talk about Racism. As a feminist, I considered myself a progressive white person: someone who understood the systematic problem of racism, but was somehow untouched and unaffected by it. As a white feminist, it was my job to dismantle patriarchy, and 50 decidedly not my place to take on racism. The discomfort I felt was complicated: my understanding of racism up until this point was that racism was intentional, racist people were bad people, who truly believed in white superiority and intended to harm people of colour. By accepting my complicity with further subjugating and oppression women of colour by simply choosing to ignore the issues of racism, particularly within feminism, I experienced the list of emotions DiAngelo lists in her book as symptoms of white fragility: defensiveness, judged, misunderstood, angry, and guilty (143). However, if I have learned anything from my journey though anti-racism work, it's that this work is not actually about me or my feelings. The discomfort of knowing I likely caused pain to people of colour in my life is nowhere near the discomfort of experiencing that racism, inadvertent or not. In context of what drew me to feminism in the first place, the wish to fight injustice and dismantle systems of oppression, my mission had not changed, but it had to be deconstructed in order to acknowledge my own internalized racism and re-centre my feminist practice towards the work of anti-racism. Understanding intersectionality is not enough: it is not enough for white feminists to look at a woman of colour and understand she experiences racism AND sexism. To be a meaningful ally, white women must engage with internal anti-racist work in order to disrupt the pattern of feminist discourse being dominated by the problems of the white, heterosexual, privileged women who are so often at the centre of the conversation. Throughout history, feminism has functioned in a way that always grants rights in an order of subjugation: white women won the right to vote before women of colour; granted access to university education first; went to space first; ran for political offices first (Franceschet et al. 33-44). Allowing women of colour to participate in all of these 51 institutions has always been an afterthought. Kimberlé Crenshaw called out how this approach is problematic in her influential paper Demarginalizing the Intersection between Race and Sex, where she initially identified the problem of white feminism and introduced the concept of intersectional practice. "It is somewhat ironic that those concerned with alleviating the ills of racism and sexism should adopt such a top-down approach to discrimination. If their efforts instead began with addressing the needs and problems of those who are most disadvantaged and with restructuring and remaking the world where necessary, then others who are singularly disadvantaged would also benefit" (167). This statement identifies not only the singular focus of white feminism, but also the inefficiencies of the practice itself. This conversation has been happening for long enough to realize that there is no such thing as trickle down liberation. Why, in a group of oppressed people (women), are the most well off prioritized? The 'top down approach' Crenshaw recognizes is still the practice of white feminism to this day. Writers and teachers Rachel Cargle and Layla Saad are currently challenging this practice, and challenging white feminists to do more than incorporate an overly simplified version of intersectionality into their activism. When Crenshaw first provided us with the concept of intersectionality in 1989, she wrote "It is enough, for now, that such an effort would encourage us to look beneath the prevailing conceptions of discrimination and to challenge the complacency that accompanies belief in the effectiveness of this framework" (170). This was 30 years ago. It is no longer enough to only look beneath prevailing conceptions - we're been looking long enough. Intersectionality is not a theoretical concept - it must be lived. White feminists must go further and engage with the work or radical self-acceptance. Simone de Bouvoir, 52 celebrated French writer, philosopher, feminist, and author of renowned book The Second Sex (1949), wrote in her book The Ethics of Ambiguity, "it is in the knowledge of the genuine conditions of our lives that we must draw our strength to live and our reasons for acting" (7). If white feminists can authentically and honestly do the work to understand the 'genuine conditions of our lives', which is to say, are able to say "I am racist" and accept that as a reality of being white, we soon will learn there is no need to guilt. Guilt is an unproductive emotion, and actions stemming from a desire to elevate that feeling of guilt are equally as inauthentic and unproductive. Radical Disloyalty to Whiteness Frye, through self-reflection, self-education, consultation and conversations with feminist of colour came to the conclusion that in order for white feminists to be truly fighting oppression, we must break the covenant with whiteness we are raised with. She says "for many of us, resistance to white male domination was first, and quite naturally, action simply for our own release from degradation and tyranny we hated in and of itself. but in this racial context, our pursuit of our liberation (I do not say "of equality") is, whether or not we so intend it, disloyal to Whiteness"(165). What Frye is telling us, telling white women, is that it is a misguided hope to think white women can simply gain equality with white men. Equality implies 'sameness,' and a white woman achieving equality with white men would just mean that white women have now become a more powerful oppressor of everyone else. White feminists must extricate themselves from the loyalty expected of white people to protect white supremacy. This is not to suggest that white women somehow become un-white - the level of emotional, spiritual, and intellectual bypassing this would require is almost laughable. It is simply not possible to 53 no longer be white - in our deeply racialized society, it is impossible to get through a day without benefiting in some small way from white privilege. What Fyre is suggesting, and what activists Layla Saad and Rachel Cargle are asking, is that white women take on the responsibility of dismantling racism. This means speaking up when other white people show racism, be it over the family dinner table, or in your place of work. Even if it is awkward, even if it's uncomfortable. Sitting in silence is a privilege only granted to white people. White feminists must position anti-racism work at the forefront of their practice and discourses. Power to embrace our Difference To return once again to Audre Lorde's powerful words in The Master's Tools, I want to emphasise that the focus on difference, and the fractures racism has caused between feminists - this is the tool of the oppressor. Women and feminists should not be causing harm, silencing, and further oppressing one another. The white feminist commitment to dismantling sexism before all else is an exercise in repetition; over and over, decade after decade, a new generation of women attempt to dismantle the patriarchal system. However, white feminism, which continues to dominate mainstream feminist discourses and conversations, can no longer afford to view systems of oppression as a two-pronged approach. There can be no hierarchy of need when it comes to liberating the oppressed. Racism and sexism go hand in hand, and by denying the power and influence of white supremacy, we doomed to repeat ourselves. This cycle of white women centring the problems of white women, followed by women of colour demanding to be heard has to end. Unless anti-racism work becomes central to the feminist fight, then the progress being made to dismantle the patriarchy is severely 54 limited. Crenshaw tried to tell us that the power of difference is a force of good, one to be embraced and celebrated. "Implicit in certain strands of feminist and racial liberation movements... is the view that the social power in delineating difference need not be the power of domination; it can instead be the source of political empowerment and social reconstruction" (171). What Crenshaw is telling us is that if feminists embrace difference, and stop letting it be the cause of division, the work to dismantle all poles of oppression can begin in a meaningful way and one day the work may lead to the reconstruction of a society based on social justice. Pathways to a Wholistic Feminist Consciousness The most challenging hurdle to a mainstream feminist practice that centres anti-racism is that for many white women who wish to be feminists, the pathway to our education is dominated by the mainstream version of white feminism. While arguably the acknowledgement of Tarana Burke and her work during the #MeToo movement is a step towards inclusivity of subjugated voices, this correction was still reactionary; after the fact. Indeed, why did it take the most elite white women in North America speaking out against systematic sexual abuse for any kind of large-scale conversation to take place? Why do white women need to be told to listen to the voices of activists of colour, why must they always be an afterthought? It is here that I must call upon the gatekeepers of feminism to do the radical work of de-centering their own perspectives from their work in favour of centring the work and voices of women of colour. To the vloggers like Jessica Valentie, editors of influential magazines like Teen Vouge and even Cosmopolitan, university lecture halls and feminist bookstores - the places women seek out the words and advice of other 55 women. These are the places these conversations must begin to take place. It is unacceptable that in 2020, activists like Saad and Cargle are still working so hard to get through to white feminists how much damage the erasure and ignorance to racism can cause women of colour. The emotional and intellectual labour required of these women to engage in this work, to offer white women the opportunity to learn, is incredible. And once again, I return to the most important lesson here: the work they are doing is not for white women. The work they do is part of the larger battle to protect and empower people of colour. Less racism in the world makes for a safer world for women of colour. The sooner this intervention can take place - the less time women of colour must spend trying to convince white feminists to pay attention to the structural role racism plays in the patriarchy, the stronger the movement will get as a whole. Radical White Feminists This work has spent a great deal of time talking about the damage caused by white feminism, but I would like to propose a radical challenge to all feminists who are white: become radical. Be a radical ally. Use the privilege the colour of our skin affords us to lift up and amplify the voices white supremacy tries to silence. Be radically honest: do the work to deprogram yourself, accept that racism is in each of us, and live up to the challenge of accepting this truth as part of the bigger journey to the deconstruction of racism. You cannot dismantle something you cannot see - therefore you must acknowledge it in order to intervein. Remember that the fight against oppression is not only one kind- your oppression as a white woman is valid, but it is not the only oppression in this world. Accept anger. Those who are oppressed are allowed to feel angry at their oppressor. Women as a group can be angry towards men, as a group. 56 Indigenous people are allowed to be angry towards colonists and settlers. Women of colour are allowed to be angry with white women. Finally, transform your consciousness, and make it your responsibility to raise the consciousness of those around you. As Frye writes in the conclusion of her essay, "seasoned feminists (white feminists along with feminists of other races) know how to transform consciousness. The first break-through is the moment of knowing another way of being is possible. In the matter of a white woman's racedness, the possibility in question is the possibility of disengaging (on some levels, at least) one's own energies and wits from the continuing project of social creation and maintenance of the white race, the possibility of being disloyal to that project by constantly making oneself whitely" (166). Though I wish to mirror Frye's sentiment, I will argue that 30 years later, the up taking of this task is even more urgent. White feminists need other women in this battle. Whiteness is the master's ultimate tool, and we should know by now, after so many years, that it has not even come close to dismantling it. Radical transformational consciousness raising is the only way forward. It is the responsibility for white woman feminists to take up this task in earnest, so that we can stop spending time trying to convince each other of our intersection oppressions and finally work together towards the common goal of racial and sexual liberation. At the beginning of this paper, I described my own journey to becoming a white feminist - and now I hope I can evolve my own definition of white feminists, to become a radical white feminists. The first step in my own journey - the journey which lead me to researching and writing this paper - was to seek out knowledge beyond that offered by the white women who I looked up to. The same feminists who helped guide my feminist 57 consciousness did not have all the answers, and by looking to them and the women around them - more white feminists - I was only reaffirming a singular perspective and way of knowing. This comes back to the notion that it is not the responsibility of women of colour to educate white women. If I continued to stay in my lane, meaning only taking up causes relevant to me and my life, how could I really be dismantling oppression? Once I made the simple effort of seeking out the work of feminists of colour, I realized the incredible wealth of knowledge I had been missing all along - knowledge that is nuanced and important, that offered me a window to perspectives and voices which completely changed how I approach complicated issues of oppression. Something else this exercise made me realize - a realization that was reaffirmed as I researched this paper - is that feminists of colour have been imploring white feminists to listen over, and over, and over again. Despite not having any obligation or responsibility to education white women, many feminists of colour have still taken the time to create resources, hold discussions, and engage with white feminists - even in the face of extreme resistance. Layla Saad explains in the introductory chapter of the Me and White Supremacy Workbook that she does not do this work for white women; she does this work because a less racism makes the world a safer place for people of colour(1). I will also say that Saad's workbook is an invaluable resource - to anyone seeking to dismantle internalized racism on a deeper level, I highly encourage them to take up the 28 day challenge. Before one can begin to challenge external racism, one must have a nuanced and meaningful understanding of internalized racism. In addition to the rather rudimentary choice to seek out the writing and knowledge of feminists of colour, I will be answering Frye's call to be disloyal to whiteness - this is an 58 ongoing project, and an exercise that will require a great deal of humility and accepting that from time to time I will be wrong; my reactions, instincts, and emotions will still be subject to the filter of white privileged and the good/bad binary. However with practice and self-reflection it becomes easier to recognize you own internalized racism. Disloyalty to whiteness also involves speaking to other white people, be they feminists, family, friends, or coworkers about racism, and speaking up when racism occurs. Finally, what I feel will be the most meaningful and impactful strategy to becoming a radical white feminists is to learn how to be an active and committed ally to women of colour. This involves learning the difference between speaking for, and speaking about. It involves amplifying the voices of feminists of colour - who have been there all along - rather than using white privileged to take up space on a platform already full of similar voices. This means sharing, linking, and referencing the work of women like Cargle and Saad, rather than retweeting those like Jessica Valenti and Alyssa Milano. Feminism is not static, and what feminism looks like and how it is practiced can and should evolve. White feminism doesn't have to be the frustrating example of what happens when people with privilege stay committed to that privilege; if enough feminists who are white take on this task, and disrupt the pathways to feminist consciousness raising which continue to centre whiteness, then perhaps we can finally answer the calls of Lorde, Davis, and Crenshaw (to name a few). Together, feminists can unite in our difference, and in that difference move together to dismantle the systems of power which seek to oppress the many in order to preserve the power of the few. 59 Works Cited Assembly of First Nations. Coordinated and Urgent Action to End Violence Against Indigenous Women & Girls - Towards a National Action Plan. Assembly of First Nations, 2012. Burke, Tarana. "#MeToo was started for black and brown women and girls. They're still being ignored." The Washington Post, November 2019, https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/post-nation/wp/2017/11/09/the-waitress-who-works-in-the-diner-needs-to-know-that-the-issue-of-sexual-harassment-is-about-her-too/. Accessed 15 October 2019 Capriles, Ruth. Leadership by Resentment: From 'Ressentiment' to Redemption. Cheltenham, Edward Elgar Publishing Limited. 2012. Cargle, Rachel. "When Feminism is White Supremacy in Heels." Harper's Bazaar, August 16 2018, https://www.harpersbazaar.com/culture/politics/a22717725/what-is-toxic-white-feminism/. Accessed 10 November 2019. Crenshaw, Kimberlé. "Demarginalizing the Intersection of Race and Sex: A Black Feminist Critique of Antidiscrimination Doctrine, Feminist Theory and Antiracist Politics." University of Chicago Legal Forum, vol. 1989, Issue 1, 1989, pp 139-167. Davis, Angela Y. Recognizing Racism in the Era of Neoliberalism. Talk at Murdoch University, Perth, March 2018, https://www.omi.wa.gov.au/Resources/Publications/Documents/orations/Recognizing_RRacis_in_the_Era_of_Neoliberalism_davis.pdf. Accessed 8 September, 2019. Devereux, Cecily Margaret. Growing a Race: Nellie L McClung and the Fiction of Eugenic Feminism. Quebec City, McGill-Queen's University Press, 2005. 60 DiAngelo, Robin J. White Fragility: Why It's so Hard for White People to Talk about Racism. London, Allen Lane, 2019. Fossella, Tina. Interview with John Welwood, "Human nature, Buddha Nature." Tricycle Magazine, Spring 2011, https://tricycle.org/magazine/human-nature-buddha-nature/. Accessed 8 September 2019. Franceschet, Susan, Krook Mona Lena, & Tan, Netina, Editors. The Palgrave Handbook of Women's Political Rights. London, Palgrave Macmillan, 2019. Foucault, Michel. The History of Sexuality: Volume I: An Introduction. Translated by Robert Hurley. New York, Pantheon Books, 1978. Foucault, Michel. Society Must be Defended: Lectures at the College De France. Translated by David Macey. New York, Picador, 2003. Frye, Marilyn. "On Being White," Politics of Reality: Essays in Feminist Theory. New York, The Crossing Press, 1983. pp 110-127. Frye, Marilyn. "White Woman Feminist." Willful Virgin: Essays in Feminism, New York, The Crossing Press, 1992. 147-169. Griffin, Penny. "#MeToo, White Feminism and Taking Everyday Politics Seriously in the Global Political Economy." Australian Journal of Political Science, vol 54 Issue 4, 2019. pp 556-572. hooks, bell. Feminism is for Everybody. New York, Routledge, 2015. hooks, bell. "Racism and Feminism." Ain't I a Woman: Black Women and Feminism (Second Edition), New York, Routledge, 2015. hooks, bell. Talking Back: thinking feminist, thinking Black. New York, Routledge, 2014. 61 Jones, Feminista, Interview by Allison Raskin and Gabby Dunn. "When to Murder your Husband, All American's are Stupid, and Tape Worms." Just Between Us Podcast, Philadelphia, August 2019. Jones, T & Norwood, K. J. "Aggressive encounters & white fragility: Deconstructing the trope of the angry black woman." Iowa Law Review vol 102, 2017. pp 2017-2069, http://ezproxy.library.ubc.ca/login?url=https://search-proquest com.ezproxy.library.ubc.ca/docview/2187899065?accountid=14656. Accessed September 9 2020. Lorde, Audre. "The Master's Tools Will Never Dismantle the Master's House." The Master's Tools will Never Dismantle the Master's House. Great Britain, Penguin Random House UK, 2017. pp16-21. McCavitt, Candice M, "Eugenics and Human Rights in Canada: The Sexual Sterilization Act of 1928," Peace and Conflict: journal of Peace Psychology. Vol. 19, No 4. 2013. pp 362-366 Milano, Alyssa (@Alyssa_Milano) "If you've been sexually harassed," October 2017. https://twitter.com/Alyssa_Milano/status/919659438700670976. Murphy, Devon, "Amanda Todd: Bullied to Death." The Huffington Post, October 12, 2012, https://www.huffingtonpost.ca/devon-murphy/amanda-todd_b_1961562.html?utm_hp_ref=ca-amanda-todd. Accessed April 18 2020. Saad, Layla F, Me & White Supremacy Workbook, (S.l.: QUERCUS PUBLISHING, 2020) Sayej, Nadja, "Alyssa Milano on the #MeToo Movement: 'We're not going to stand for it anymore," The Guardian. December 2017, 62 https://www.theguardian.com/culture/2017/dec/01/alyssa-milano-mee-too-sexual-harassment-abuse. Accessed 12 January 2020.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
White feminist fragility : from part of the problem to radical allyship

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
Feminism has a whiteness problem. Feminists of colour such as Audre Lorde, Angela Davis, and Kimberlé Crenshaw have been talking about this problem since the 1970's, and the term 'white feminism' emerged to describe the predominantly white, upper-middle class, academic, heterosexual women who had taken control of mainstream feminist discourses.

# data[].attributes.body
A common theme throughout the readings and authors is how patriarchy is viewed in our society today and as a whole, we need a different approach and outlook toward breaking down the systemic patriarchy whilst changing the social system. Johnson’s main idea was looking at the relationship between people and society. Pascoe‘s main idea was themes of masculinity and intersecting practices that constitute masculinity. Smith’s idea was how we should reshape our society and Gilio-Whitaker’s ideas was about feminism in multiculturalism.

One of Johnson’s quotes that stood out to me was about the confusion around how patriarchy is viewed in societies where people partake in it, “because blaming the system (presumably society) for our problems doesn’t take the next step to understanding what that might mean” (26). To me, this means that although the system might be broken, it’s the people that partake in the system who are broken. It’s about individual downfalls and failings as Johnson would’ve put it. Blaming the system misses the point when it’s the people who are at fault within the system. I also really liked what Gilio-Whitaker mentioned, “ not all American Indian women, however, agreed that feminism was an appropriate framework, claiming that it opposed traditional practices in forms of social organization”. In one of my other classes we are learning about Ethnicity and the revelation behind multiculturalism, which I think ties in very nicely to this subject of discussion. I think that as a community it’s important to be more inclusive and recognize that there are different genders, ethnicities, and sexualities which is what makes up these cultures. I thought this was a very interesting perspective to read about because women have already been recognized in Native American communities and culture and was an impact in history until “settlement” and “colonization” of white Europeans, which is viewed and seen the same as patriarchy.

I especially liked Alan Johnson’s piece on patriarchy and how people view patriarchy. This was definitely something that I thought was blamed because of the systemic history and patterns that society presented itself. I never really thought about blaming patriarchy because of the people that were absorbed within it. I especially like the example that was given about comparing women’s rights to workers and laborers in a capitalistic setting, which gave me more perspective. In a capitalistic setting, workers are not equal to the capitalist, and they certainly don’t create their own terms but without the workers capitalism wouldn’t be able to function. Which is true with women and women’s rights.

I think this topic was a very educational turning point for me and I think it is in a imperative way to think about the social system and the people who dominate it and oppress others in doing so. I think if we educate more people about patriarchy as a kind of society filled with same thinking people, I think that the response would be different, and could potentially  create an even more impactful difference.

# data[].attributes.body
The main ideas in the first chapter of mapping the field was bringing attention to what feminism means and the oppression that women and women of color and people of different gender and sexualities have endured over time. In Feminist Politics: Where we stand by bell hooks, the main ideas the author made was defining feminism in a more broad sense and bringing attention to the feminist movement and all it stands for, for women.

I really appreciated the concept that the text brought to light regarding intersectionality, “To fully understand intersectionality, its important to acknowledge that whiteness is a racial category but one that had unearned privileges and therefore can remain unmarked '' (p18). Intersectionality is still a newly profound term in academia and is important to understand since no one is solely responsible for their privilege, but accountability shifts by the way we think. If no effort is being made to create a more equal and just change to the systemic patriarchy, then there will never be change or transformation of inequality. Similarly, in bell hooks’s piece, “Most women, especially privileged white women, ceased even to consider revolutionary feminist visions, once they began to gain economic power within the existing social structure” (25). Here, hooks describes the exact problem with privilege and feminism. It is like once white people find the justice they are looking for, they stop seeking justice for those who are in a lesser position which is  not what feminists are about. It’s about never giving up the fight for equality and justice.

Reading these pieces, I never really thought about privilege in the way that it was written about in the text. A quote that especially resonated with me was from hooks’ piece, “…thinking has made feminism more acceptable because its underlying assumption is that women can be feminists without fundamentally challenging and changing themselves or the culture” (25). She used the example of abortion. You cannot be anti abortion and still consider yourself a feminist. I liked the way that she described this, because I think this is something that I see a lot when people protest Planned Parenthood. If you are pro choice, you are still validating the woman’s choice of aborting her baby, and you are also validating her choice to extend the baby’s growth into pregnancy if she chooses to do so. Sometimes, I think we forget that. The idea behind legalizing and fighting for pro choice is being able to have a choice, not having a choice made for you. Which, when it comes down to it, is one of the exercises of feminist belief! I also really liked what hooks had to say about sexism, and that it going both ways. I think when we think of sexism, we automatically associate it with men, but that is not always the case. Women can be sexist too, which is why it's important to understand the concept of feminist. I think that it’s really important to realize that being a feminist is not equivalent to hating men, but patriarchal mass media is not interested in the revolutionary vision that feminist have set.

# data[].attributes.body
Both Audre Lorde’s Age ,Race, Class and Sex: Women Redefining Differences and Robin DiAngelo’s Nothing to Add: A Challenge to White Silence in Racial Discussions both discuss the topics of systematic and patriarchal approaches that widens the gap of inequality and touches on topics of white fragility, all which relays a message of bringing attention to those who have suffered enough from the hands of their oppressors.

Lorde wrote, “We find ourselves having to repeat and re-learn the same old lessons over and over that our mothers did because we do not pass on what we have learned, or because we are unable to listen” (117). I really liked the way that she phrased this because if you think about this, people of color and women have been fighting for their rights for well over 100 plus years. Yes, women are allowed to vote, and yes, Jim Crow and other cockamamie laws have since been abolished, but that in no way translates to equality, but yet somehow we keep looping back to the beginning of fighting for equality.

Another quote from Lorde that stuck with me was, “Refusing to recognize differences makes it impossible to see the different problems and pitfalls facing us as women” (118).  It’s okay to be different. I know that’s a cliche that’s been well overused, but it still speaks truth. There is no rule that you have to check every box or adhere to a specific format that society thinks you should be.  Lorde made an excellent comparison when she compared her life as a Black Lesbian to a white woman. They are not the same and that is okay! It’s okay to be different, it should be encouraged. But, when society projects its views of different being bad, differences like race, age, sex (etc). It makes it even harder to acknowledge and embrace differences.

I’m not going to lie, it’s hard and makes my body cringe up when I hear the words ignorant and tone deaf, which is what I kept defining Robin DiAngelos’ infamous word of White Silence. But that’s the point right?! To make people uncomfortable. I am a true believer in if it doesn’t make you uncomfortable to talk about, then it is never possible for you to grow and be a better learner. I’ve read some of DiAngelos’ work before like “Why I’m not a racist” is only half the story which similarly discusses the unreasonable or intolerable maintenance of patriarchal and systemic approaches to society. I certainly don’t have an answer to the injustice that has been wrongfully sentenced to many, but  I do know that the power is in the people. We should be asking the question of what kind of society we want to live in, and prioritize humanity over financialization. We simply must do more.

I often get a lot of criticism from people that stereotype my major as selfish, money grabbing, bred pro-capitalist, (etc.) but I still love what I do (and what I will do). I am a woman in economics, political science and business. Rare, but not unheard of. Of course I hear comments from both sides of the peanut gallery on which “side” I’m supposed to be on, but similar to Lorde’s ideals, it’s ok to be different. Though different is good, it is not equal. My field(s) of study has been underwhelmingly underrepresented, and at times discouraging, I know that my gender nor race will stop me from having a conversation/discussion about women and fight for poc that have been failed by systemic and patriarchal ideals.