Peggy McIntosh’s article discussed the advantages and privileges of white society that are so engrained and deeply imbedded in our culture that people do not even seem to realize that this disparity exists. She compares this to male privilege as men are not taught to distinguish their natural superiority and hierarchy in society. Just like men, white people are instructed to believe they are ‘morally neutral, normative, and average, and also ideal, so that when we work to benefit others, this is seen as work that will allow ‘them’ to be more like ‘us.’ McIntosh realizes in order to address and hopefully fix the situation, white privilege must be described and understood. Where does it come into play? Why do we not realize it’s there? She makes a list of the results of white privilege of her own life. Some of her realizations include knowing that she can turn on a TV and see people of her own race to knowing she was pulled over by a cop for reasons other than her race. The list numbers fifty and could easily go on and on. McIntosh continues with discussion on how facing this list, knowing that white privilege does exist, is difficult for many people. It is hard to give up the ‘myth of meritocracy.’ Some of the effects of white privilege should be universal to all races yet are blatantly not so. She questions whether society in dealing with this dilemma will act like men in a male privilege scenario where they are infuriated to be accused with undeserved race benefits and supremacy. It is hard to see oneself as a racist because it has been engrained on us that racism is an act of an individual. It is not; it is part of a system and similar to Johnson’s argument, we must rebel against the system and take the paths of most resistance to make changes. Until that point, we are being racist by going along with this racist system. McIntosh ends the article with a question: “will we use unearned advantage…[or] whether we will use any of our arbitrarily awarded power to try to reconstruct power systems on a broader base.”
Lorde’s article also deals with racism; however she concentrates on racism within feminism. At the Crossing Press Feminist Series in 1984, only two speakers were black. As a Black lesbian feminist, it was hard for her to see the lack of her race and her sexual preference being represented. Lorde believes that in order for feminism to advance, women need to be interdependent upon each other. This will lead to the unraveling of the patriarchal system. However, in order to be inter-reliant, dissimilarities and diversity must be celebrated and used as to spark creativity and power. She says “only within that interdependency of different strengths, acknowledged and equal, can the power to seek new ways of being in the world generate.” Academic feminists fail to realize and identify difference. They disregard differences or see them as reason for division. They really need to instead instruct and inform themselves on Black women and their differences. It is paramount to the survival and the voice of women.
Miles writes about her experience on the magazine staff of The Rag; a publication of Harvard-Radcliffe University. It was the first feminist periodical on the campus. At their first meeting, there was excitement, enthusiasm and pride. The women running the magazine felt ‘formidable.’ However, after only two semesters, the atmosphere surrounding the magazine had done a 180. The periodical had illuminated problems between the women that hadn’t been apparent before. Racial and class problems had arisen and discussions about these issues only led to conflict and discord. Some women felt left out of managerial aspect of the magazine as well which led to problems with power and control. The racial tension really developed with an idea presented by a member of ABRW (Association of Black Radcliffe Women). The organization had spoken up against images and media portrayals representing black women’s bodies and sexuality in negative and stereotypical manners. These women were obviously interested in fighting for women’s issues yet they did not want to join a group that labeled them as ‘feminists.’ They thought this to be a white, racist movement. The suggestion to change the name of the Rag to a womanist group led to more conflict and racial strife. Class conflicts followed, creating disorder and chaos. Miles realizes that all of this could have potentially been avoided. Feminist groups in the past had similar problems. The Harvard women’s unawareness of feminist history had been their downfall. Also Black women, such as the ladies in ABRW, were unaware that their race had a longstanding feminist practice and belief. They had ‘deep roots’ in the movement of which they were not aware of. The Rag members may have been successful if they had been knowledgeable of each other’s pasts and learned about each other’s monumental life experiences and beliefs.
No comments:
Post a Comment