One would hope not. Since the experiences of women between those two countries are so vastly different.
Perhaps you view it as a matter of semantics, but a person does not "dictate" without influence, so the charge that white, western feminists are dictating anything in non-white and non-western regions is inaccurate. I'm just trying to figure if it's what you're actually trying to
say.
Yes, as a person of colour and a woman, believe me, I do understand what white privilege means. The question here though is, do you as a white male understand what it means within the context of this discussion?
I think I do, insofar as it seems to be a boogeyman created by you--or perhaps simply repeated by you--meant to demonize white people. As to context, you haven't provided any. It's been all closed-fisted accusations that smack of rote anti-white, anti-western propaganda. That's just my read. If you wish to share with me what you're actually trying to say, believe me I'm willing to listen.
Who says I am judging feminists? Is discussing an issue within the feminist movement, an issue that has been identified for a few decades now, passing judgement?
But you're not merely discussing it as some outsider with no opinions on the matter. You have specifically characterized western feminism as belonging to "white, privileged women," and characterized their behavior as being in itself a form of oppression. So, yeah, you've passed judgment.
Let me be clear: I'm not criticizing you for having a view on feminism, or western feminists. (Though I admit, your views at first blush strike me as racist) I'm simply pointing out that asking why they have any right to judge other cultures is useless, because we all judge. It's not relevant as to why they do so; the relevant question is whether their assessments are correct or not.
Feminists in the West have often been accused of ignoring non-Western cultures because they often apply their ideology by way of their own experiences and their own culture. So a feminist in Iran, for example, will not have the same experiences and the same ideology as a feminist in China or in the UK.
I don't see how it follows that using one's own experience and culture as a guide amounts to ignoring non-Western cultures. I think I need to read more about this issue, but I don't see how a moral grounding is possible without reference to one's own culture and experience. And I also don't understand why feminists--or anyone else, for that matter--should be expected to have the same concerns from one culture to the next. The plight of women in China isn't exactly the same as it is for women in Iran, right?
Firstly, I am not upset. Secondly, Muslim women often feel left out of the feminism discussions because they are judged by their religion, since Western feminism tends to be very much secular, which is in direct contradiction to a Muslim feminist who happens to be very religious. So applying Western standards to non Western cultures will result in conflict and a portion being left out of the discussion.. Which is exactly what the Muslim women in the UK have reported.
The only thing I would disagree with here is the idea that non-Western
women are being judged. It seems to me that it's their
religion that is judged. If the result is the same, then it's still a bad thing, obviously, but my interpretation would remove the need to make this an issue of race and "privilege," and make it one simply of understanding.
My apologies for misreading what you wrote.
I sincerely appreciate the apology.
What of Muslim women who feel wearing the hijab is liberating and their choice?
I can't fathom how wearing something that by its very nature objectifies you could possibly be considered liberating. I guess I'd suggest that anyone who believes such a thing should reconsider. Now, if it's the
choice that makes the decision liberating, then I'd suggest they choose something else, as this particular garment sends a poor message.
Of course,
I'd be open to hearing why they disagree. If western feminism hasn't been as open, then that's something they need to change.
Would disregarding their voice or not taking them seriously and ignoring them not amount to oppression in and of itself?
I guess it depends on who's not taking their opinions seriously. I mean, the main point of the movement in the UK is that Muslim women don't need any other culture to accept them, that they can strive for and achieve their goals on their own. But I suppose an argument could be made that feminists who ignore or Muslim women who wish to wear the headscarf are aiding their oppressors.
I think the difference between you and me on this is that I don't view this as a racial issue, or one of privilege. I think it's one of principle. I think it's very difficult to reconcile liberation movements with symbols of that oppression. I mean, consider how important symbology is in these situations. From rebel flags in the southern US to the use of the "N" word even without malice, symbols of oppression are considered toxic even if the possibility for reclamation and repurposing exists. At least in the west. So it's easy to see why western feminists would have difficultly understanding.
That doesn't excuse an unwillingness to make the effort, of course, but I'm not trying to make excuses. I'm trying to understand--and help convey understanding of--reasons.
Heh.. Muslim feminists have been around for as long as Western feminists. They just don't fight in the same fashion as Western feminists do. And I think the biggest issue has been that Western feminists and they have been usually white, have tended to ignore the cultural differences and the experiences of non-white feminists. You can ask any feminist of colour in the US what she feels about it.
I have to ask: are feelings necessarily the best way to establish the validity of truth claims? I mean, it's not to say that a woman of color doesn't have the right to feel marginalized, but I don't think those feelings should simply be deferred to. Just as there should be more of an effort to reconcile Islam and feminism in the West, feminists of color and other cultures should make an attempt to understand the actual motivations of the people they're criticizing. It seems like, just from talking to you, that you're not willing to do what you demand of your white, Western counterparts.
Perhaps that is a discussion you should have with a Muslim woman who chooses to wear it?
I agree. I would love to have that discussion. With more than one Muslim woman, of course, because just asking one isn't really going to give me feel for the culture.
Why should her religious choices be spoken down to in such a fashion? In short, who are you to make that determination about their religious choices?
Remember what I said earlier about it being part of the human condition? We all make value judgments, and they're all subjective.
I don't see why you characterize criticism as "being spoken down to." If you criticize the actions and beliefs of a conservative Republican, I don't imagine you'd want your words to be considered insults and therefore dismissed. You'd want them viewed as valid and constructive. At least when you mean them to be, lol. Right? I mean, it seems like religious belief has this bubble around it where everyone is expected to respect it and be respectful of it in a way that no other ideology or system of belief is, and I don't understand why. Religion should be just as open to discussion and criticism as anything else. If I think the headscarf is an item that should be left in the past, I shouldn't be told that it's an opinion I have no right to hold, let alone express.
Remember what happened in France when they banned religious garments and jewelry? Muslim women there felt they were being oppressed because they are being denied the choice and the right to make personal decisions about their religious choices. Personally, I found the ban in France to be as oppressive as the strict dress rules in Iran.
I wouldn't go
that far, since failure to adhere to the rules in Iran could lead to your death. whereas covering your face in France would have gotten you a small fine. (It wasn't a strictly a ban on religious garments, by the way; it also applied to anything that covered your face, even helmets and masks, though I know the impetus for the law was Islamic headdresses) And I think the law came from a good place. They were trying to prevent women from being forced to wear the things, and I can appreciate that. It's a difficult subject, obviously, with no easy solution.
And yet, the definition of beauty is all around you. In every magazine, tv shows, news papers, movies..
Not
every magazine or TV show. I think improving. The conversation is finally being had publicly, by influential people, so we're on the right track. It's certainly easier to be a woman with curves without being characterized as "fat" nowadays. Then again, we still refer to models who aren't petite as "plus-sized," so we're still in the Stone Age, at least in some respects.
Anyway, trust me, you're preaching to the choir on this one. I despise the way women are depicted by our media. And I've never understood why women are expected to wear high heels and makeup. That's always been an alien concept to me. I don't see why men and women aren't held to similar standards.
As a quick aside, it's worth noting that it's not all about women here. We have a very big problem with how masculinity is defined in the West. That gets overlooked because men tend to be the ones steering the conversation, but it's something that also needs to be addressed. And I think it will be, especially now that homosexuality is being more readily accepted in society.
The argument is that of hypocrisy.
To claim, for example, 'you are being oppressed by your religion' and then to ignore their choices and their voices because of their religion is just as oppressive.
I feel like that's a weaker position for you. You're better off, in my opinion, sticking to your principles than worrying about consistency. I mean, it makes it sound like you'd be in favor of these evil feminists also being oppressive towards Amish and other cultures. That's obviously not what you want.
A feminist would find it sexist. You know, a bunch of guys and women conditioned to find it acceptable, going through and making wardrobe choices about what they find attractive in women - ie - what women should wear and how they should wear it.. It isn't just about clothing, but about what one finds acceptable for a woman to wear or to have on her body.
Show that thread to feminists and ask them if they think men and a couple of women going through and debating what women wear and don't wear to turn men on is sexist or not..
Well, you're going to have to explain why what a feminist thinks is sexist is automatically relevant. You seem to think that a significant branch of feminism--perhaps the entire Western movement--is fundamentally flawed, so I wouldn't think I'd have much trouble convincing you that they shouldn't be deferred to simply because they're feminists.
I don't believe the thread is sexist because sexism is not about preference, but about power. I mean, consider what you're condemning here. You're effectively saying that if I find a certain hairstyle unflattering, I'm a sexist. You're saying that if I like it when a woman wears a tight dress, I'm a sexist. This is
patently ridiculous. The men in that thread aren't exercising control, they're simply expressing opinion. Likewise, they're not saying that a woman
shouldn't wear a certain garment, they're saying that they don't find that garment attractive. These are key differences that you're overlooking, and they make
all the difference.
Never read much feminist literature, have you?
I haven't, actually. That's something I should remedy.
Come now. You expect me to believe you don't find certain styles of dress flattering or unflattering? You don't find anything about the way a man dresses more or less attractive than some other way they dress? I'm sorry, that's not going to fly.
A man can wear whatever he so chooses. It's actually none of my business. I am not a fan of tattoos, for example, but for myself. If someone gets them, then meh, it's their skin..
See, whether they have a right to wear something or not isn't the question. That's not what the thread is about, and it's not what I'm asking you. It's a discussion about
preference. And you just expressed some here, by saying you aren't a fan of tattoos. So, I guess we have our answer to what turns Bells off about men!
Trust me, I don't feel oppressed. And I
have tattoos!
Eating disorders and the way women are portrayed in the media is to fit the stereotype.
It's a
perpetuation of a stereotype. The portrayal of women in the media is different than Joe Schmoe talking about his unrealistic ideals of beauty are two different things. Joe Schmoe has no ability to define beauty beyond himself; he likely has friends who disagree with him completely. The media, meanwhile, has an unparalleled sphere of influence, and thus can define societal perception.
Ever play a computer game? Ever notice how the women in those games have tiny waists, big thrusting boobs and pert butts? Whose ideal is that?
I'm really not sure what point you're trying to make here. Do you think it's wrong for men to like thrusting boobs and pert butts?
Let's look at WoW as a prime example. The majority of people who play female night-elves are male.
Again, I don't follow you.
Well if a thread with a lot of men determining what women should and should not wear for them to be turned on or not has a Muslim male say he gets turned on by a woman in a hijab, would it be any less sexist or oppressive than a guy who says he gets turned on by a woman in a short animal print dress?
I'm sorry, maybe it's because I'm tired, but I can't parse the meaning out of that.
You still don't see it, do you? A Muslim guy saying he expects his wife to be covered up from head to toe is just as oppressive as a guy who says he expects his wife to be dressed sexily for him.
Here's the thing: Expectation and preference are two disparate concepts. Preference is the estimation that one thing is better or of greater value than another; Expectation is the belief or anticipation that one thing
will be. In the context of female fashion, to prefer one style over another is harmless, because it is nothing more than an opinion, whereas expecting a certain style to be adhered to is potentially harmful because one could perceive a threat of consequences implied if those expectations are not met.
Because one of the major issues with feminism around the world is that it has been dominated by privileged and usually very wealthy white women. Ask an African American feminist if you don't believe me.
Again, perception is not always reality. The feelings of a black feminist shouldn't wholly shape my view of the subject.
And preference in women's fashion? So you don't think men discussing what women should and should not wear to turn them on or off is oppression? But you think a society or men determining that women should dress modestly is oppression?
I think I've covered this pretty well above, but I'll take one final stab at it: Preference is not power. There is no "should" in conservative Islamic cultures.
Many Muslim feminists find their religion to be what liberates them and all of them have used their religion and religious history to liberate them from the confines their society has placed on them.
I'd have to disagree with the bold part. The concept of women's equality is not found in Islamic texts or tradition. The influence of feminism on that culture is secular in nature, whether Muslim women want to admit it or not. That isn't to say, of course, that one can't be a Muslim feminist, it's merely to point out that Islam cannot be sighted as cause to remove the yolk of patriarchy.
Within the context of this discussion, yes, I am talking about white feminists in the West. Why are you uncomfortable with discussing history and white history in regards to this subject? Do you think discussing white oppression to be racist?
I'm certainly comfortable discussing the subject. What makes me uncomfortable is your preoccupation with the race. In this context, you equate privilege with whiteness itself, which is unnecessary and unhelpful, not to mention inaccurate.
What you're railing against is a cultural problem, not a racial one. There's nothing inherently white about trivializing Muslim feminists. There's nothing inherently white about racism. You may even agree with me, but it isn't apparent in your language.
Do you think what a white feminist in America considers important in regards to her rights is going to be the same as what a Muslim woman living in Saudi Arabia is going to consider a priority in regards to her rights?
Not entirely. But then what makes a Muslim woman in London think she knows what's best for a Muslim woman in Saudi Arabia? If one is presumptive, then so is the other.
I'll give you an example of the
Black feminist movement in the US:
I think it would be difficult to say that racial attitudes in 1960s America are representative of anything other than racial attitudes in 1960s America. The difficulty black women found in feminism at that time are quite similar to the problems that black women--and men--found in most aspects of multicultural life at the time.
It stems from the belief of superiority.. Of being the standard and the norm..
Wiki has a really good definition which you may find helpful in this discussion:
The concept of white privilege also implies the right to assume the universality of one's own experiences, marking others as different or exceptional while perceiving oneself as normal.
Unfortunately, the neutrality of the article you linked to is rightfully in question, and I find the whole notion of "white privilege" to be a racist buzzphrase. I have no patience for it, sorry.
Some more reading that you might find.. ermm.. helpful in understanding the history behind this subject matter and so you might see where I am coming from when I say 'white female privilege':
"
Why Modern Feminism is White Women's Privilege"
"
What's all this talk about whiteness?"
"
This is what I mean when I say white feminism"
To summarise those articles, the feminist movement has been dominated by white western women historically. Their voices have drowned out all others who are not white and from the middle income to wealthy white women who sought to gain more rights within their sphere.
Actually, that's not what any of those articles are saying. They seem to be saying that Western feminism was specific to white women because the culture in which Western white women lived in was unique to white women. And that's a perfectly valid assessment. What isn't clear is how this translates to "privilege." I see nothing in any of this literature supporting the implication that "white feminism" is in any way wrong, or misaligned. In fact, the article from the Return of Kings website goes so far as to insinuate that the founders of the American feminist movement should have kept their mouths shut because they had it pretty good.
What I'm finding here is a double-standard. Feminists of color are free to fight for their own, culturally-specific benefits, while white feminists are not. If a white woman speaks out against issues facing her, she's exhibiting a sense of superiority, whereas non-white women who do the same are simply doing what's right. This is racism, plain and simple.
I mean, one of the articles used a classic racist tactic by insisting that using "white privilege" pejoratively is okay, because:
groupthink.jezebel.com said:
"If it doesn't apply to you, then it's not about you. If it's not about you, then don't take it personally."
Could you
imagine how this woman would react if the same rationale were applied to, well,
anything else? No, I'm sorry, this is just racism wrapped in lame excuses for why the racism is totally acceptable--which is shorthand for saying, "It's acceptable because it's about whiteness."
You seem intent to try to raise conflict. This is just a discussion Balerion. If you are going to be this emotional and angry about it, perhaps you should cool down a bit so you can think a bit more rationally.
Don't pull that shit on me, Bells. This discussion has remained civil only because I have chosen to engage the subtext of your post rather than focus on your inflammatory language. But I'm sorry, I'm not going to let racism slide. Mind you, I asked for context to your words, and it quickly became clear that your words are rooted in racial hatred, and I have no patience for it. I'm still here, I'm still talking, mostly because I don't think you actually realize what you're saying is racist, but I won't put up with it. I'm always going to condemn it, because it deserves to be condemned.
You have expressed opinions about Islam in this thread, while disregarding that Muslim feminists use Islam as a way to fight for their rights. And I think ignoring this very fact is where you are possibly going wrong. What you see as a tool of oppression is exactly what Muslim women are using to free themselves from the confines of the roles set for them by their culture.
I'm open to the idea that I'm wrong about that, trust me. Like I said, I can't imagine how, just in terms of logic, how the hell anyone could make a case for gender equality using Islam as a source. I mean, there was a time when Islam was a cultural boon to the world, so I'm not saying Islam can't be a tool for cultural advancement...but I don't see it
today, in the way it is taught and practiced in that region. But again, I'd love to hear that one explained.
Yes, to provide a platform in an area that was usually dominated by Western and usually white women.
What platform? Where is it? I mean, you've argued that white women in the West have no idea what's right for non-whites and non-Westerners, so why do you then demand that they pretend that they do? I honestly don't understand what you want.
Minority women are now making their voices heard after being excluded from the women's rights debate.. It even says that in the article.
No, it doesn't. And the articles you linked to don't talk about exclusion, but a difference in
interests. It seems to be that non-white women don't
want to be a part of that brand of feminism because it doesn't represent their needs. Well, you've said you don't think white women have any business representing the needs of non-white women...
so what do you want?
Perhaps you should stop being so defensive and study some history of white privilege and do some reading on the very fact that it has been white western women who have dominated the discourse about feminism. Which is why black feminists had to start their own movement in the 60's, because they were so excluded and it is because of this that minority women in the UK have started their own organisation to tackle the problem since they have historically been excluded from the discussion because of their religious beliefs and because they did not fit into the little square set by white feminists historically.
I think you--and probably black feminists from that era--are conflating simple racism with this "white privilege" nonsense. I mean, again, you said yourself that white women don't have any business speaking on behalf of non-white women (a point which I don't agree with, by the way).
I just don't see why when white feminists fight for things specific to their situation and their culture, they're doing something evil. Non-white feminists are doing the same thing, aren't they? So why is it right for one but not the other?
I think you are in dire need of some historical perspective on this issue instead of reacting to something that is solely imaginary on your part. Do you think examining the fact that feminism has been dominated by white western women over the last few decades is racist and hate speech? I think it's racist to declare that it does not exist and to discount the voices of non-whites who have identified it and are now having to buck the system and form their own organisations and groups to make their voices heard at the feminism discussion table.
I think what's racist is the insistence upon whiteness as a cause of a problem. To quote from the racist piece of crap you linked to earlier (well, one of them):
groupthink said:
Western gender feminism as we know it today is a middle/upper-class white, western female phenomenon. Its focus on minimizing the value of traditional gender roles and on the promotion of unrealistic gender equalism is founded on the status those women have historically enjoyed as the most well-protected, pampered, adored, and privileged women in history, and it is designed largely to serve problems that resonate with that experience. Other women can have “feminisms” of their own to address problems they face, but they would be fundamentally different from the kind of feminism we most commonly see here in the west.
So it's a combination of dismissing white concerns as unimportant, classifying white goals as unrealistic, and generalizing that white women have it good. This isn't a call for equality among feminists, it's a call for white women to shut the fuck up. See, they're
actually doing what they accuse white feminists of doing.
It's bullshit, and you should be ashamed to be a part of it.
A feminist drew this as an explanation of just how much white feminism has
dominated the discourse and continues to do so:
This is the historical reality and current reality of feminist discourse Balerion. I think accusing me of racism for pointing it out is a reaction against reality.
No, this is one racists' drawing, not a historical reality.
And I am disappointed that you are so reactionary to the experiences of what non-white feminists have had to deal with in the past and present.
I don't think I'm reactionary at all. I'm trying to be objective, but I'm also unfortunately having to swim through racial literature and learning new racial epithets.
And I think perhaps you may need a crash course in the "
reality of Islamic feminism" and understand why it is so important and why traditional white feminist dialogue should not try to shut it down.
I don't see anyone trying to shut it down. Even the literature you provided only argues that white feminism fails to represent them, not that it shuts them down.
You seem very defensive in light of a historical discussion about the feminist movement and you seem overly offended that I pointed out that feminism has been dominated by white feminists. This is historical fact. It's not hating white people. It's stating and identifying a very real problem and issue. Feminists have been discussing this for many many years. Perhaps you should feel less offended at perceived racism and actually look at this from a historical perspective and understand what minority women in the UK have ahead of them?
What I'm offended by is your racism. And I'm offended by the racist literature I've had to read in an effort to better understand your position.
This "history" you keep referring to doesn't even match the arguments being made by the people you're apparently sourcing this debate from. You talk about white women "shutting out" and "shutting down" and "dismissing," whereas the women you link to are all talking about a lack of representation, not active trivialization.
Bells said:
Balerion said:
Bells said:
]Your purpose appears to disregard them if they don't dress like you expect them to or if they belong to a religion you don't happen to like.
Please show me where I do that. Go on, take your time.
No, seriously. I want you to support this fucking absurd accusation with a citation.
Here you disregard what Muslim feminists are actually fighting for and apply Western standards about what you believe they want or should want and that they would have all of these great things if it wasn't for Islam (meanwhile, on this site is a thread with men discussing what women should and should not wear to turn said men on):
You're just restating the accusation. I asked you for a citation.
I didn't failt o acknowledge it, I simply said I didn't understand how it was possible. I appreciate the link you provide here, and I wish you had offered it sooner. I would still disagree that the Quran considers men and women as equals in all things--it's a fact that it doesn't, and even the example provided requires a very, uh,
generous interpretation of the text--but at least now I know what they're citing.
And given the accusatory nature of your above quote, I feel I need to remind you again that I personally do not find any conflict in being a Muslim and a feminist. I think religion can be practiced in any way one sees fit, and I don't begrudge anyone their desire to embrace Islam as a way to achieve equality. I wish them all the best, and I hope they succeed. That
should go without saying, but apparently I have to say it.
Just because you view it as a tool of oppression does not mean that Muslim women who choose to wear it view it the same way.
They'd be wrong.
Why am I obliged to respect a view that is fundamentally inaccurate? Because it concerns their religion?
And this is one of the main issues that non-white feminists have with the feminist movement. The historically WASP movement that correctly drew on their own experiences in forming their dialogue for what affected them but sadly, then attempted to apply said policies to women who do not live as they do and cannot relate to their experiences because they are not white middle class and upper middle women. Look at the black feminist movement in the US as a prime example of this. Black feminists were excluded wholly from the feminist discussion and they had to form their own movement, just as the minority women in the UK are forming their own movement. Because the current feminist movement is dominated by things that do not apply to them.
Again, the plight of black feminists in the 60s seems to be a problem with 1960s America, not feminism. Notice that you keep referring to this decade as being problematic, but can't cite anything more recent in terms of overt racism or bigotry. That's because the attitudes expressed at that time were
of that time.
Do you understand what I mean now? Or are you going to react and claim it is racist to look at this from a historical standpoint and apply as such?
Your argument strikes me as racist firstly because it asserts whiteness as the cause of problems. If I said to you that blackness was the cause of discontent, you'd rightly call me a racist. Then I learned that you not only view whiteness as a problem, but you also support the notion that the plight of white feminists is basically a joke, and that they have no business speaking out. I mean,
you haven't said that outright, but you've cited articles that do in support of your argument, so you can't escape the connection.
Again, I really don't think you realize that your views are racist. Or maybe you do, and I'm just giving you the benefit of the doubt because I never learn my lesson. But I think you don't quite understand the implications of your words. That's not a knock on you, of course; I've been there, too. The only reason I'm still engaging you after all the gross things that you've said and racist articles you've linked to is some probably-misplaced hope to make you realize what you're actually saying.
I am not demonizing white people Balerion, so please calm down.
Yes, you are. The whiteness of these women is one of your chief arguments against them, and you've gone further than even some of the literature you've linked to by suggesting that they're actively shutting out other views, rather than simply not being broad enough in scope to appeal to non-white women.
You are approaching this from such a racially defensive standpoint that you missed the point entirely.
Um, Bells, you've defined an entire movement by the race of its participants. I had no idea this was going to have anything to do with race until you insisted upon it.
The feminist movement has historically been written about and by white middle to upper middle income women who fought to relieve their pain and suffering and oppression. To do so, they applied and relied on their own experiences and they fought tooth and nail for what was naturally theirs. What they achieved is amazing. But how they fought for said rights is not one size fits all. And what they failed to recognise was that their experiences and what they were fighting for could not be applied to all and so, any group that did not fit into their experiences were excluded.
You said yourself that Islamic feminism is as old as Western feminism, so who is responsible for the lack of voice of Muslim women? How are white women to blame, exactly? I keep hearing words like "dominate" and "exclude," but how is this achieved, exactly?
If there is a "problem" with modern feminism, it appears to be that not enough people are involved in it. But since the problems and solutions tend to be unique to each culture, it's up to the men and women of each culture to make their voices heard.
I'm not bashing white feminism or white people. So calm down. It is a genuine and valid critique of the feminist movement and how it has been applied historically and continues to be applied.
No, it isn't. It appears to be a confused mess of ideas held in loose relation by a commonality of racism.
From the article:
The people excluding them from the discussion have been the historical white feminist movement.[/quote]
it seems they're also having trouble within their own culture. But I guess we're going to ignore than and create a white boogeyman instead.
I understand if you find this subject offensive because it is a critique of your race's history,
Oh fuck off. If this were an actual critique, my voice would among those in support of it. This is plain, ignorant racism, nothing more.
but this is no more racist than discussing white male privilege in regards to slavery, for example.
If you're going to argue that slavery was the result of the whiteness of European slaver owners, then it would be every bit as racist as this garbage.
And you can't seem to settle on a definition for "privilege," I notice.
White female privilege does exist within the feminist movement and groups such as this in the UK is in response to having been excluded from the feminist debate historically.
Yes, I'll take the word of a group of racists over the historical record.
Black feminists went through the same thing in the 60's in America.
Already debunked the claim of correlation.
