Reclaiming Lesbian Pride

[Heart]

Originally Posted by Hunter Green

Great post. Just the other day I was thinking about NOW and wondering if there even was a chapter nearby any longer. I happen to think that, globally speaking, there is a war raging against women that almost no one is acknowledging.

Does anyone even know who Gloria Steinem is? Or that ERA has nothing to do with baseball or real estate? Anyone remember the Lesbian Herstory Archives? How about "Sisterhood is Powerful"?

The right has so bastardized the term Feminist that many refuse to ID as a feminist, even though they believe in feminist ideals...as long as you don't call it "feminist". Argh.

Well... I don't want to be oppositional, but NOW is one of those organizations that really had to work through its own homophobia and racism. NOW did not originally consider the voices of lesbians or women of color. In fact, the Lavender Menace was formed in 1970 to protest the exclusion of queer women from the feminist movement. Many feminists of Color are still having to carve out a voice in the feminist movement, especially in relation to issues of poverty. Femininsm is a notoriously white middle/upper-class movement.

I respect Gloria Steinem, but as recently as our last presidential election she wrote an editorial that constructed some problematic comparisons between Clinton and Obama in terms of which is worse - sexism or racism, and totally ignored the existance of women of color who deal with both. (Oppression olympics is a very bad idea.)

Nonetheless, NOW is still active and there is an upcoming PBS special about Steinem that I'm looking forward to seeing.

Don't get me wrong -- I'm a fierce feminist -- it's perhaps the most relevant social movement on the planet, but I feel that its important to keep a critical perspective.

Heart

[Jess]

me in blue, except the excerpt of yours I highlighted in red... I hope this isn't too confusing...

Originally Posted by Heart

Well... I don't want to be oppositional, but NOW is one of those organizations that really had to work through its own homophobia and racism. NOW did not originally consider the voices of lesbians or women of color. In fact, the Lavender Menace was formed in 1970 to protest the exclusion of queer women from the feminist movement. Many feminists of Color are still having to carve out a voice in the feminist movement, especially in relation to issues of poverty. Femininsm is a notoriously white middle/upper-class movement.

It is historically correct that it began from very privileged origins... with a half- joking nod, I think this is because they were the only ones with time and means to begin to organize. They shifted portions of the time devoted to "quilting bees" or their "husband approved" book clubs/etiquette classes/ etc to fighting for their rights and became incredibly visible during the Sufferage/ Prohibition era. The organizing efforts began years before, but they only became truly effectual during this period , approx. 1920- 1933 giving a few years on either end. Their efforts , I can not dismiss, as they made available to women less "advantaged" the time and space to join in the struggle. The old saying , "it doesn't matter how you got here..." comes to mind.

I respect Gloria Steinem, but as recently as our last presidential election she wrote an editorial that constructed some problematic comparisons between Clinton and Obama in terms of which is worse - sexism or racism, and totally ignored the existance of women of color who deal with both. (Oppression olympics is a very bad idea.)

I respect Gloria Steinem also and have to disagree with your take on this article she wrote during Pres. Obama's campaign. I felt very clear that her message in the context of this article was a simple observance of the still very disproportionate ranking of women in the political sphere. It was not at all a dismissal of Women of Color, moreover a statement that a woman ( her example was a woman of mixed ethnicity) of ANY color would not have had the same credence ( based on served/ lived political experience) as a man ( of any color).

Here is the article she wrote: http://www.nytimes.com/2008/01/08/op...=1&oref=slogin


Nonetheless, NOW is still active and there is an upcoming PBS special about Steinem that I'm looking forward to seeing.

HBO is showing " Gloria: In Her Own Words" currently. I believe tonight was the first running. We recorded it and I am looking forward to watching it!

Don't get me wrong -- I'm a fierce feminist -- it's perhaps the most relevant social movement on the planet, but I feel that its important to keep a critical perspective.

I totally agree with the reminder to keep a critical eye on this, OUR movement and any other movement of such magnitude. Most begin from frustration/ agony and are almost always fraught with turmoil in their infancy, like stretching limbs or taking that first breath.

Heart

Thank you, as usual, for your insights. I truly believe that until Women's Rights are fully embodied ( since we are a mere HALF of the world population) then no other "ism" will be fully eradicated. Women, and lesbians in particular, are at the forefront of EVERY human rights movement. I can't imagine a world where lesbians weren't fighting for the next right thing. This , in huge part, is why I become fearful for "lesbians" , to become "passe/ obsolete/ unfashionable".

I am a hair short of a tangent, so I will go read a fluff thread and hopefully drift off to sleep. Pride/ Equality/ Human Rights are words that call to me from my waking slumber, in these "tired" years of struggling. It renews me to read the words of everyone here who seem to really "get it", that it is NOT about a "battle of oppressions" , but a convergence of all oppressed that will rise.

Wonderful conversation! Thank you to all ya'll from the dirty south!

[Dean Thoreau]

As I read these posts, I could not help but recall a long number of years when my activity level in feminism/women's rights was high and it seemed every waking moment was somehow devoted to the cause or earning money so I could work for the cause.....then due to life circumstances my enthusism died down and the more my involvement in the Butch Femme community grew the further i strolled from feminism, women;s rights and thought it was my Identity, their lack of my identity acceptance or some such thing...
It has been a long road and I must confess at times a lonely one....No organization is without warts, or callusses nor are they deemed perfect after all mere humans are what keep them going.
Over the past year or so, I reentered society in many ways and rekindled and built my alliances with the women's movement, the hunger projects and a few other socio political organizations that I feel very strongly about. I must confess I am better able to see myself in the mirror after recommitting energy to the women's movement;

Until all women in the world young and old alike receive education, healthcare and the right to control their bodies no woman on earth will be free nor equal.
Maternal health, fistule repair, education things we take for granted must be granted to all woman in the world, for as long as there is a place on the earth where it is ok to beat a woman, rape a woman, not educate a woman, use her only as a male producing machine without regard for her as a human or her body....no woman in the world is equal. We are all still second class citizens and we as a group do not have human rights...

dean

[Heart]

Good points all around Jess, however one of the things I've learned to do as a white feminist is listen to the voices of women of color about their experiences with racist constructs. Since you linked to the Steinhem article, I am providiing some links to responses written by WOC:

http://www.racialicious.com/2008/01/...gainst-gender/

http://www.imdiversity.com/villages/...inton_0108.asp

And because I can't link to it, I'm posting the full text of a blog post by
"AngryBlackBitch." You can find her blog here: http://angryblackbitch.blogspot.com/

Jan 8th, 2008
I’m worried too, Ms. Steinem…
This isn’t an easy post to write. I am a proud black feminist who holds a deep respect for feminist leaders and has done a lot of inner work to come to terms with feminism’s history with race and class. Yeah, this is not an easy post to write…but a sistah’s got to do what a sistah’s got to do.

Gloria Steinem has an Op-Ed in the New York Times titled Women Are Never Front-Runners. I read the Op-Ed and I feel compelled to address it here. I highly recommend that you read the piece before you go on reading this post.
After reading Steinem’s Op-Ed I felt invisible…as if black and woman can’t exist in the same body. I felt undocumented…as if the history of blacks and the history of women have nothing to do with the history of black women.

When I read “Black men were given the vote a half-century before women of any race were allowed to mark a ballot, and generally have ascended to positions of power, from the military to the boardroom, before any women (with the possible exception of obedient family members in the latter).” I felt both attacked and ignored at the same time.

I think of the women and men in my family who were not extended the protected vote until 1965. I wince at the lack of acknowledgment for the black women of Birmingham, Selma and Montgomery who had to march with their brothers in the 1960s to attain the vote because the suffrage movement abandoned them in a Southern strategy to get the vote in 1920.

And there it is again…that invisibility; like a brutal weight that I am so bloody tired of carrying. When I consider Steinem's “So why is the sex barrier not taken as seriously as the racial one?” I’m left confused. What country does Gloria live in where race barriers are taken seriously? I’d love to know…shit, maybe I’ll move there. But I’m a black woman and this is America where none of my barriers are given more than a token consideration and I’ll present this Op-Ed as exhibit A in that argument.

Steinem goes on to say, “I’m not advocating a competition for who has it toughest. The caste systems of sex and race are interdependent and can only be uprooted together. That’s why Senators Clinton and Obama have to be careful not to let a healthy debate turn into the kind of hostility that the news media love. Both will need a coalition of outsiders to win a general election. The abolition and suffrage movements progressed when united and were damaged by division; we should remember that.”

But this article is soaked in the fluid of competition. It reeks of frustration that I fear is born from a place of entitlement even though it is dressed in the language of the oppressed. And I’ll point out again, the suffrage movement progressed without racial or true class unity and many a sister were damaged by that division.
We should remember that, but first we have to know it.

What worries me is that Gloria bought that bullshit about Obama’s race being a unifying factor. C’mon now, these are early dates yet and campaign operatives have already taken a dip in the race baiting pool. Not for one second do I believe that the unifying power of Senator Obama’s blackness will not eventually collide with the same elegant condescension contained in Steinem's Op-Ed.

What worries me is that this is kind of article that makes some black women wary of feminism…wary of the sisterhood…because eventually, just give it time, it will all come down to black and white or women and men with black women vanished from the equation.

What worries me is the ease with which Ms. Steinem tossed out the insult of implying that Iowans, when faced with a black male candidate, went with that candidate because they are somehow more comfortable with black male leadership than female leadership. It begs the question how John Edwards failed to win by a landslide.

What worries me is that the author is frustrated that Obama hasn’t been accused of playing the race card for his civil rights references and feels that Hillary is getting a raw deal when she gets accused of playing the gender card. Let’s keep it real…Steinem is just frustrated about that race card because a black man is supposed to get called on that shit and she didn’t give permission for any rule change.

What worries me is the patronizing tone with which Steinem dismisses the choices of young women voters. Is it any wonder that young women pause before embracing the feminist movement? Steinem concludes that young women are not radical yet. Will she conclude the same of black women should Clinton lose South Carolina?

I agree with Ms. Steinem that we have to be able to say that we are supporting her, a woman candidate, "because she would be a great president and because she is a woman." But we also have to be able to say I’m not supporting her because I’ve evaluated her and examined her resume without being labeled a victim or self hating or not radical enough or not feminist enough or easily dazzled by great oratory skills or more black than woman or just too darn stupid to do what Ms. Steinem thinks we should do.


Here's where it's at for me: If we are going to talk about feminism and the erasure of women, (butch women in the case of the recent BV/BN split), and if we are white, we must develop conscious around the erasure of women of color and actively seek to reverse it. Frankly, If women of color are saying that Steinhem's article is problematic, then even if I don't see it myself, it's not my role to "disagree," it's my role to listen. Just as we want BV to listen to the voices of butch women when it comes to misogyny and sexism.

Heart

[Jess]

Originally Posted by Heart

Here's where it's at for me: If we are going to talk about feminism and the erasure of women, (butch women in the case of the recent BV/BN split), and if we are white, we must develop conscious around the erasure of women of color and actively seek to reverse it. Frankly, If women of color are saying that Steinhem's article is problematic, then even if I don't see it myself, it's not my role to "disagree," it's my role to listen. Just as we want BV to listen to the voices of butch women when it comes to misogyny and sexism.

Heart

I get this. Thank you. I had not previously read the article, so when you mentioned it, I made a point of looking it up. Likewise, I had not read responses to that article. I can understand that frustration much better having read their actual words. I realize that when I read an article, I read it with different filters ( those being created by my life experience).

I am glad you posted those links and the last response. It gave me a chance to look at it a different way. I do not think it changes at all the overall point Ms. Steinem was making. I do, however, see how women of color can feel invisible in what has been seen historically ( by many) the "white heterosexual financially advantaged" feminist movement. I can certainly understand the anger that accompanies those feelings ( as expressed in the response that was fully posted).

I have had difficulty at times in being able to "hear" all of the nuances of white privilege. I think a great deal of this, for me, was in my questioning of much of the source material for this new "wave" of racism awareness coming from a white heterosexual male. It is much easier for me to hear the reality of life in America for People(s) of Color FROM People of Color. It rings crystal clear to me then. This is not me asking for someone else to do my work for me. This is me saying, I can hear what Shark-Fu ( the author of the last response) said far easier than I can hear Tim Wise saying it or something similar. I have been extremely bothered for a couple of years now that the most often quoted person in this country addressing white privilege is a white man. I ran across an article that at least allowed me to see I am not completely off base in this feeling. While some folks will probably want to rip my head off for what they may see is me besmearing Tim Wise, I would ask that they have a look at it first.:

http://www.peopleofcolororganize.com...lege-tim-wise/

I don't mean to derail or veer too far off topic, but I guess for me a huge part of my life as a lesbian has been wrapped in my feminism. My feminism tells me to listen ( I agree with your statement above, Heart, completely) to the voices of all women. I can not affect change if I don't understand completely what needs changed.

Thank you sincerely for sharing those responses as that act is the difference between saying "Steinem dismissed WOC" and "women of color felt dismissed by her and here is what they said". Too often I find the position of many white anti-racists to be so adamant they forget to "allow" someone else to really hear the feelings, thoughts, ideas of our women of color sisters. Their actual words are very important to me. I need to hear them. I do not need to be told to "go do my own work" when my work IS listening.

This is how feminism and my lesbian feminism works for me. I am equal to engage and that is a very powerful and freeing thing.

[Chazz]

Originally Posted by Jess

....Thank you sincerely for sharing those responses as that act is the difference between saying "Steinem dismissed WOC" and "women of color felt dismissed by her and here is what they said". Too often I find the position of many white anti-racists to be so adamant they forget to "allow" someone else to really hear the feelings, thoughts, ideas of our women of color sisters. Their actual words are very important to me. I need to hear them. I do not need to be told to "go do my own work" when my work IS listening.

This is how feminism and my lesbian feminism works for me. I am equal to engage and that is a very powerful and freeing thing.

Well said, Jess....

There are times when, for good reason, women cannot "hear" one another. It may be because a woman cannot witness another woman's unearned privilege and listen to her at the same time. Hurt, anger, a need for healing is occupying the foreground.... This needs to be okay.

These are the times when women need to be afforded the intrinsic right to separate and coalesce around a common experience of pain or their particular experience of oppression. This should be okay, too.

Not everything can be resolved on command, or in one sitting, especially when the source of the pain and oppression is a day to day, lived experience.

That WOC (or lesbian women, for that matter) are asked to sideline their needs/imperatives for the greater good, or the benefit of others, or in the service of a "big tent" metaphor, it NOT okay.

That said, not everything can be resolved in one sitting or conversation, especially when the source of pain and oppression is ongoing.