Torn here

So I wasn’t going to write anything because well, I’m white and there are other voices we should all be listening to and reading. But then I’m getting angrier and angrier as time passes. I went to bed last night reading my progressive white friends trying to ignore races impact on all of this, and then I woke up to Mike Brown’s father delivering food in Ferguson for Thanksgiving. I’m having some trouble reconciling those two things. But we will come back to the first. Then the National Bar Association is calling on the Department of Justice to do something because they do not understand how the Grand Jury could reach this conclusion given the evidence. I’m not holding my breath on this one.

Let me come back to this removal of race. You can’t do it. The end. See yes, the militarization of the police is a problem. It was a problem at Occupy. It was a problem before that too, and the images of the police in Ferguson are ridiculous. But Mike Brown was murdered by Darren Wilson for being a black man (boy really), and Tamir Rice was murdered for being a black boy by the Cleveland police. Claiming it doesn’t matter because the real problem is the militarization of the police is willful ignorance and the discounting of the black lived experience. It is unacceptable. I expect this from conservatives claiming Wilson was right, but if you’re on our side, then get with it friends. The US condones and defends the right of the police (and anyone else) to kill black men. This is the underlying problem. Racial oppression was one of the ideas on which our justice system was built. The militarization of the police is one consequence of that idea. The criminal justice system doesn’t work for the oppressed it works to keep the status quo. Keep those with power safe from those without it. I mean come on; most of our laws are rooted in property law, even our rape laws. The system isn’t broken; this is how it was designed to work.

Now for the protesting, I’m not opposed to taking to the streets, but I’m tired. I’m tired of the marches in support of rape survivors and murdered children and against war and capitalism run amok. Our society is built on the patriarchy and patriarchy reinforces classism, sexism, and racism. We’re not going to fix this by protesting for a few days or hours. I think we need a full scale revolt. I know that sounds extreme, and I’m not one for advocating violence, but I don’t know what other options are left. But we will get nowhere by reforming one aspect of the justice system. We will get nowhere is the police turn their tanks back over to the military and continue to shoot children. We won’t get very far if the police agree to stop shooting children, but continue the mass incarceration of the same population.  

Honestly, I don’t feel like writing anymore or trying to continue this thought exercise to the conclusion. I’m going to go back to listening to Tracy Chapman.

Women, Objectification, and Masculinity

Hetero man identified friends this is where you turn back. I’m being upfront this is going to make you uncomfortable (hopefully not angry, but definitely uncomfortable). My awesome, progressive, feminist, hetero, cis, male friends objectify women, like all the time. It is a conditioned response to the patriarchy telling them it is expected and ok. Actually, it is fucking hysterical most of the time. And I’m not saying being sexually attracted to someone is wrong or always objectifying. Additionally, within the context of a relationship power dynamics and sexual interests can encourage objectification within certain contexts.

That said, I have so many stories of guys just being objectifying toward women. So before we get into the examples let’s go over objectification. In the feminist perspective, objectification refers to treating someone (usually a woman) as an object. Martha Nussbaum has identified seven features of objectification and Rae Langton added three more:

1. instrumentality: person is a tool for the objectifier’s purpose
2. denial of autonomy: person is treated as though they lack autonomy and self-determination
3. inertness: person treated as if they lack agency
4. fungibility: person treated as interchangeable with objects
5. violability: person treated as lacking boundary-integrity
6. ownership: person treated as owned by another person
7. denial of subjectivity: person treated as if their experiences and feelings do not need to be taken into account
8. reduction to body: person treated as the sum or parts of their body
9. reduction to appearance: person treated in respect to how they look
10. silencing: person treated as if they have no voice.

Good times right? Obviously, my peers and friends are most likely to be employing 1,7, 8, 9, and 10. Ok, ok I know it sounds bad. But I’m willing to bet most people are guilty of doing this to someone at some point. We're conditioned to be selfish and by extension it is easy to treat others like objects. Now for some examples and why they are particularly troubling.

A while ago, I made an off the cuff remark to several male friends and acquaintances about how I’ve never met any of their female friends who were biologically related to one of the group or in a sexual relationship with one of the group. The response was immediate and negative. One swore up and down it wasn’t true for all of three minutes before they started to concede that yeah, they don’t have very many. Then the buck was passed to my friend. It was his fault because he pursued many of the women in the group’s friend category *side eye/eye roll*. But that isn’t the objectifying behavior, well it maybe I don’t know specifics there. But several of the guys started explaining to me how some of the girls my friend hooked up with went crazy and started fighting with one another, and I don’t really know but some kind of stereotypical female behavior that was irrational and problematic for the group. See, we’re looking at number 7 and maybe 10.  The women in question’s feelings and perspective wasn’t relevant to the group; they might as well not have had any at all. If you’ve ever blown someone’s mind you can immediately tell, which I did when I asked if they were sure the girls were ‘crazy and irrational’ or if it was a perfectly rational and emotional response to the situation my friend put them in. *crickets*

This objectification seems harmless enough, but it is clearly indicative of a way of thinking. The women folk are the problem and their feelings aren’t important. Of course, it has to be taken into that group mentalities and the desire to protect the group from outside threats, which these women may have been perceived to be. Additionally, women seem to be placed in these categories, which will sound familiar: respectable and inconsequential. These categorizations then determine whether or not the woman in question’s feelings and perspective is legitimate. Perhaps the most interesting aspect of the story, and why I still find it fascinating is that they were all mortified by my observation and subsequent explanations by each other, which implies they too on some level have an issue with the objectification.

Now for a very different kind of example. In undergrad, I had a peer in several classes who consistently spoke over me and took credit for my ideas in class. This peer was a white dude; I know everyone is shocked. Several times he behaved and implied I should be flattered that he agreed with what I was saying. These were acts of silencing me and taking credit for my ideas. I wanted to use this example because it was about entitlement to my ideas and being heard over me instead of the overt sexualization that objectification usually invokes. Essentially, as a man his ideas were superior and any good ideas from a woman could be co-opted by him. For some reason he was entitled to my ideas. It is by far the most obnoxious thing I’ve ever experienced, particularly when he just spoke right over me. Also, this co-opting of ideas is something being discussed a lot right now by feminists of color on Twitter. 

I juxtapose this experience with a situation where two of my girlfriends and I made a good man friend speak for us. I borderline stalked a university representative for a year. True story. The fours of us were speaking with university representatives about fair trade issues and school licensing. The three white men on representing the university consistently directed questions to my guy friend. He did his best to redirect the question to the appropriate person including C and ME who were the leadership in our school organization. However, it was a cycle, the university reps would rather our guy answer all the questions and as the meeting continued we all were willing to defer to him. After, our guy was pretty angry with all of us for forcing him into that role.

In terms of masculinity, objectification is the right of men in the patriarchy. Women are objects for men, and men are entitled to benefit from all aspects women. This includes our thoughts, actions, and feelings. Being masculine means being able to demonstrate the use of women as objects. I don’t think men always see it that way. They don’t think that they are rendering women as objects and less than them just because they discount our experiences or take credit for our ideas. Some men probably only find rendering women as sexual objects to be objectification, but to me the other forms can be more insidious.This entitlement runs really deep, and I suspect a lot of men don’t even realize that this is going on. Instead, they think if they aren’t openly objectifying women for sexual gratification or objects for their physical use then it is ok. Once we work within the extended framework of objectify then we read infantilization as objectification; rejection of a woman’s ability to self-determine; etc. To expand on this conversation it is frequently happening in respect to ideas and the free exchange of thoughts online. Black Twitter is rightfully outraged that others, including white feminists, are taking their ideas and profiting from them. This is objectification. Dr. Patricia Hill Collins noted this in her talk I saw this spring: intersectionality is profitable now and when something is profitable the white people follow.

About that guy who doesn’t want to acknowledge his privilege.

So I wrestled with this one: do I write about him [individual and privilege dudes et.al.] or not? I believe we’ve spent too much time talking about him with the New York Times thinking his piece (which I read) is of enough merit for a larger platform. As I result, I will link to nothing, and just talk about what I want to talk about because that’s how I roll. Come along children, there will be cookies.

The most glaring thing about this kid’s piece is his complete lack of understanding of privilege, which isn’t just him by the way. I’ve noticed an increasing number of posts showing up in my Facebook feed about how hard white dudes have it because “they aren’t allowed to have an opinion” or do any activists activities. I don’t know who is preventing these guys from having opinions or doing things, but I want this power. For reals, I promise to use it on Paul Ryan. Oh, wait, I bet these guys were being hyperbolic. So clever. *sarcasm*

First, privilege is when you are afforded power, status, means, etc. just for being born into the “right” group. It has nothing to do with you, which is part of the problem. The bigger part of the problem is that privilege comes at the expense and oppression of others. This isn’t a secret either because people with privilege tend to see movements like feminism for example as a threat because they see everything in terms of zero-sum-games—meaning if they give up their privilege then they will be relegated to the position held by those they have oppressed. And yes, son, to be privileged is to oppress others because you can oppress people through inaction and compliance with oppressive structures. *rubs hands together over keyboard like a bond villain* I could go on and on about how equity and equality are not zero-sum-games, instead, we can al exist on an equitable playing field. I don’t believe anything short of a revolution will result in equality. I’m also not sure a revolution would be able to undo the damage done by racism, classism, and sexism, but I digress.

But, yeah, it sucks that someone might have preconceived ideas and notions about you just because you happen to belong to a group…which those of us who aren’t white, hetero, Christian, cis men know, all too well and would be happy to explain it to you. And, no it isn’t oppression. You know why? Because they still have all the power and disproportional control over society. But, let me put this in terms of myself as to not just rip on the gents, allow me to show you how to acknowledge your privilege:

 I am white. I benefit from systemic racism. I don’t think I am racist [I’ll defer to the judgment of others on that], but I know by being white within this oppressive structure my actions and thoughts are influenced by racism and can unintentionally oppress others. I try to work to counter racism, and I try to be intersectional in my analysis of everything, but often I fall into class-based discussions because it is what I know.

Holy hell guys, the world isn’t on fire! See, part of recognizing your privilege isn’t just saying the right thing; it about knowing yourself even the ugly parts. It is about understanding what and why you are the way you are. Sometimes, I have to unpack thoughts I have to think them through, where did this come from and why? And to throw back to a conversation I had with my sister M years ago, I will always be more sexist than racist. I have a distrust of men, even men I know, which is learned and conditioned. Women’s behavior is policed in respect to men so yeah, I’ll cross the hypothetical street every time to avoid a dude at night regardless of race. Congratulations patriarchy.

At the end of the day, I give zero fucks if you check your privilege, know why? Because unless you’re going to follow up checking your privilege with assisting in the dismantling of the patriarchy (which as I reminder I believe enables and is intrinsically liked with racism, classism, etc.) then I have no use for you. And, superficial feminist men, if you aren’t working to dismantle the patriarchy, racism, and classism, then I have no use for you either. Come to think about it, anyone, anyone no actively working to dismantle the systemic oppression within our society, I have no use for you.

Of course, I think the people really opposed to recognizing their privilege don’t want to admit the advantages they have had that others might not have. That is what I hear every time a dude complains to me that it is unfair people say he’s privileged when he didn’t do anything…that is the point. You didn’t do anything, but you get these advantages the rest of us don’t.

Because I know the menz want a cookie.

Music post while I get things done.

I have a final tonight, a paper due on Friday, and I was out sick two days last week so I'm playing I HAVE TO GET SHIT DONE TODAY! So no real post, however, I did come across this country song that discusses rape culture in a critical way. I'm fairly impressed, and yeah, I know everyone doesn't like country music, but it sounds like pop music. The song is called "Quarterback," and it appears to be from a really new artist, Kira Isabella, which is impressive too. Nothing like challenging the patriarchy right out of the gate in a particularly patriarchal genre of music.

John Green and the patriarchy.

I was going to skip today because stuff, but then I was listening to John Green's Crash Course on Literature because I'm a nerd. He has an open letter to the patriarchy, which is pretty great.  This one is on Odyssey.

It is the mean girls, guys, they are to blame for everything.

Lily Allen, shut the fuck up. Look a blog post in a sentence.

Allen is that girl who wants all the benefits of being the “cool girl” within the patriarchy. This really just means she gets to be the exception, talk about how we’ve achieved equality, while making racist shallow pro equality anthems. The piece on her for the ShortList demonstrates that.

Some of the lowlights:

“I’m not an archetypal woman. All my best friends are boys.”

I’ve written about this statement or variations of it so much! The subtext here is “I value the opinion of men and all things masculine over women and the feminine.” This is what happens to young women in the patriarchy; we all want to distance ourselves from other women within the expectations set by men. So men conversations and thoughts are prioritized over feminine one’s as long as the woman isn’t considered a threat. I have so many examples of this, particularly centering around my own “one of the guys” history’s interaction with progressive feminist thought. I’m cool with the guys as long as I’m talking football and owning at darts, but ain’t no one got time to listen to me bitch about rape culture during beer pong. You’re not in, you’re not one of the boys, you’re still a cis woman, and you will be treated as such, usually when it matters, like safety matters. You become hysterical, dramatic, and untrustworthy pretty fast when you challenge the patriarchy even inadvertently.

“But I don’t think men are the enemy, I think women are the enemy. I know that when I’m sitting in a restaurant and a really beautiful woman walks in, who’s skinny, I instinctively think, ‘Oh she’s really skinny and beautiful and I’m really fat and ugly.’ Every man I speak to always say they find that kind of woman gross, and they prefer a bit more meat on their ladies. So it’s more of a competitive thing. It’s weird. It’s just really unhealthy and we’re our own worst enemy. We should stop being so horrible to each other.”

So to summarize, men aren’t competitive at all. Judging other women harshly totally isn’t a manifestation of the patriarchy, and it’s ok anyway because men prefer women who look like her so she wins regarding the male gaze. This reaction to other women isn’t instinctual; it is a conditioned response.

“Feminism. I hate that word because it shouldn’t even be a thing any more. We’re all equal, everyone is equal so why is there even a conversation about feminism? What’s the man version of feminism? There isn’t even a word for it. There’s no reason for it. Menanism. Male-ism. It doesn’t exist.”

But Allen, there are so many words for the men’s version of feminism, starting with patriarchy, men’s rights, rape culture. Should I go on?

I probably should have begun with the statement, women, men, and other genders aren’t equal. Allen is reinforcing the gender binary and conflates gender and biological sex because she doesn’t know any better, nor does she know shit about feminism. Additionally, equality probably isn’t ever going to be a thing because as a society we refuse to give up social constructs like race and gender. As a result the expectation has to shift to equity. Allen going say things are equitable? Probably not, it would be hard (out there) given the economic divide that is so influenced by race, gender, and obviously class. *side eye*

I’m using Allen as an example here, but I’m really over famous people claiming to be above things when they are clearly engaging in the same petty politicking. Allen’s video for “Hard Out Here” mocks Miley Cyrus, because women need to stop being mean to other women. All the while this video using black women’s bodies the same way Cyrus has been. Both are examples of racism, classism, and sexism as sanctioned by the patriarchy.

Allen comes off as ignorant and a Men’s Rights Activists in training. Feminism is about gender equity and equality. It isn’t about women’s superiority or domination of men. People who promote these sort of thinking are fearful of losing their privilege. They view power as a zero sum game where in order for some to advance others must retreat. This isn’t true.