I had fairly negative reactions to all three of the readings. I don’t know if my reaction was due to my inability to relate to the subject matter, or because of the way the authors approached the topic. Each article criticized white privileged women for the racial and somewhat class divisions in the feminist movement. I really don’t buy into the argument that white women in the movement are oppressing the black women, whether unknowingly, like McIntosh suggests, or knowingly, like Lorde argues. Based on what we have read so far, it seems as if white women and black women often fight for different objectives in the feminist movements. So is it fair to demand that the two be strongly unified into one solitary movement? I do agree with Lorde’s suggestion that all women should recognize each other’s strengths and build on that to form the movement. Also her term “racist feminism” is too strong of terminology, I think she is off hand by going as far to suggest that white feminist women are racist and purposely exclude black women from the movement. In McIntosh’s article, I have a problem with her argument that white women’s oblivion is can still be considered oppressive. Is it fair to put the blame on women who were born into the white privileged world? And as we read earlier, oppression can go both ways. Then in Miles’ article, she brings up the issue about one of the white woman’s family donating money to The Rag, and how that caused further racial and class divisions. I think this is a null and petty point. Instead of focusing on the white girl’s suggested increased status among the group, the women should have focused on continuing to spread their messages and appreciate their gained financial support to help facilitate the delivery of their message. Going back to Johnson’s writing, everyone is involved in these type of “oppressive systems,” it is just as much up to the black women as the white women to do something to change what they don’t like about it.
No comments:
Post a Comment