In his novel The Fire Next Time prolific writer James Baldwin wrote “whatever White people do not know about Negroes reveals, precisely and inexorably, what they do not know about themselves.” Replace “White people” and “Negroes” with “Men” and “Women,” and read the statement again. Though the pairing is changed, the phrase is still a powerful illustration of the relationship between historically privileged and underprivileged, oppressive and oppressed groups. But to make it more practical, here’s more contemporary example: As a man, there are issues, problems, etc. that I just will never have to be burdened with. I’ve never…
In his novel The Fire Next Time prolific writer James Baldwin wrote “whatever White people do not know about Negroes reveals, precisely and inexorably, what they do not know about themselves.” Replace “White people” and “Negroes” with “Men” and “Women,” and read the statement again. Though the pairing is changed, the phrase is still a powerful illustration of the relationship between historically privileged and underprivileged, oppressive and oppressed groups. But to make it more practical, here’s more contemporary example:
As a man, there are issues, problems, etc. that I just will never have to be burdened with. I’ve never had to choose clothes without the thought that it may invite sexual harassment. Being sexually assaulted could not be less of a worry for me. But if I do get sexually assaulted in my lifetime, not one person is going to blame the crime on what I was wearing at the time. But for women, these are issues they have to be aware of constantly.
Imagine me telling a woman that the threat of sexual assault is all in her head, or worse, that she’s a feminist because she hates men, then ask her when she is going to quit playing the victim? That’s pretty surreal. It dismisses her experience, privileges the male experience, and regards her very serious everyday dangers as monsters under the bed. It’s an assertion that I understand the problems women are afflicted by better than they do. It would based in the premise that “this issue doesn’t affect me, therefore it cannot not exist to extents beyond my perception.” Most people would condemn that as ridiculous, and call me as sexist, which would be totally understandable.
But think about how many times society collectively does all of these things when discussing the issues affecting Black people.
As a Black person and a Black man, there are things in my life that I go through that others do not. It is already difficult to try to explain my experience to people are genuinely concerned with it but who do not share it. But it is exhausting to do the same for those who assert that my experience is tantamount to the Black Boy Who Cried Wolf.
For example, take my experience with the police. Among my encounters with the police, I’ve had a policeman tell friends and I to “go back to your side of the tracks”, been stopped to make sure I wasn’t “messing with” a white friend, stopped to make sure I (the only black person in our group) wasn’t trying to “sell them drugs”, and had a gun drawn on my frat brother and I as we were flyering in the parking lot outside of a party. I’ve have not done one drug in my entire life, but I have committed the sin of being in the wrong race in wrong place at the wrong time in a Black hoodie (the reason I probably will never wear a Black hoodie again).
Sure someone can argue with me about if those encounters was “about race,” what we “should have done,” etc. but at the end of the day, does he or she share, know, or even acknowledge my general experience? That’s not to say that conversation can’t bear fruit, but I have to decide “is this particular conversation with this particular person worth my time, energy, and peace of mind, knowing that their (mis)understanding is unlikely to change my reality?” For them, that discourse is being waged purely in the realm of the conceptual. For me, we’re basically arguing to whether or not the sky is blue. Even seemingly intellectual conversation can be tantamount to spoon-feeding trolls.
Looking at racism through the analogous len of sexism helps us understand the importance intersectionality. Discrimination or oppression is not equal just because you are a part of the same group. Sexism does affect all women, but it does not affects different women unequally along racial lines. Racism affects all people of color in America, but to act like the racism experienced by a Chinese woman is the same as a Black woman is ridiculous. And all Black people experience some form of racism regardless of sex or gender. Yet there are still drastically divergent histories of oppression between Black men and Black women along sex and gender (and class) lines.
Our social illiteracy can often stem from our allegiance to the social groups we most identify to. This problematically promotes horizontal solidarity along lines of pursuing privilege of some, not eliminating oppression of all. As Black men, we can fight racism, but can still be anti-Black women. If you don’t believe me, go on a Black woman feminist’s Twitter page any day of the week to see members of the Ashy Ashe Association doing the Hotep 2 Step in her mentions; calling each other “god” with the same mouth they call Black women “bitches.”
In the same way women can be a feminist and still be anti-Black people, or at least racially tone deaf. For example, the “women only make 77 cents for every dollar men make” figure is not for all women, just white women. It does not account for women’s wage gap along racial lines, and yet is the figure most feminists usually cite, whether they are Black, white, Asian, rich, poor, students, comedians, businesswomen, bloggers, or Presidential candidates.
The best way to commit to our causes is to understand how they are connected to others. In that way, we realize that our liberations are inseparably linked to the liberation of others. If your advocacy is not rooted in intersectionality, it doesn’t take much for others to surmise that you’re merely pursuing your privilege, not equality.
— This feed and its contents are the property of The Huffington Post, and use is subject to our terms. It may be used for personal consumption, but may not be distributed on a website.
Originally posted here:
