The more I read, the more I doubt

by Jennell Strong 3 Comments

Every time that I read some text or work about history my most visceral response is this doesn’t make sense. The things that I am reading about, usually some ideological system implemented for the purpose of oppression (sexism, racism, queerphobia, etc) strikes me as being utterly illogical, irrational and unnecessary. Maybe I’m just too lazy and uncreative that I can’t fathom investing time and energy into making up ideas and forcing people to believe that just because. I say all this because that was my reaction when reading Becky Thompson’s work on Multirracial Feminism. She writes there is a widely held belief that “women of color feminists emerged in reaction to (and therefore later than) white feminism (338). This belief she attributes to hegemonic feminism telling a specific, narrow story about feminism. My response was there is enough evidence to effortlessly debunk this myth of a white, middle class feminist origin. Furthermore, common sense tells me that white people can’t do anything independently (I mean slavery) so why would I believe that white women could pioneer any liberation movement? Just makes no sense.

I have to constantly remind myself that people choose to not think practically. Hegemony functions within a collectively agreed upon state of impracticality. If you claim to want to free all women why wouldn’t you include all women? If you know that different feminisms coexisted why would you deliberately ignore those histories? I feel these are very basic questions. Most time I need to take breaks from reading discourse of any theoretical or historical nature because at the very foundation of it all is nonsense.

This text motivates me to learn more about feminisms of other cultures and time periods. I feel like there is so much about the social issues and activism of non black and non white women and non US women! Does that mean I am influenced by hegemonic feminism?

A key point I found in the text is that not only must the personal be political, but the political must also be personal (347). In the age of “I am (insert identities)” it’s easy to focus on what impacts you as an individual. However, freedom isn’t an individual state of being. Everyone must be free for freedom to be. Therefore, it’s necessary to think about another’s suffering and to ride for their causes as well. It’s just what makes sense.

Comments ( 3 )

  1. Makaria Yami
    I had the same reactions when I read Thompson's work. I became angry and I started wondering if there are any parts of history that haven't been taught to me through a white lens. As to some of your questions in the second paragraph, maybe white feminists don't want to free all women because they benefit from the system of racism we have. In the reading, Thompson talks about how white women are in the unique position of being oppressed and oppressors. I'm starting to see that the work of white feminists is centered around maintaining their position as an oppressor and losing their status as an oppressed group. I also want to learn more about feminism in other areas of the world in different time periods. However, after reading Thompon's work, I am determined to make sure that what I am learning about the history of feminism is all-encompassing and doesn't leave out the important work of women of color. It was really nice reading your post because I felt like the emotions I had when I read Thomposn's work was reflected in what you wrote! Thank you for sharing your thoughts/emotions.
  2. Nadia
    Thank you for sharing your critique of Thompson's work Jannell. Also, thank you Makaria for sharing how Thompson's work has motivated you to approach your study of feminism in a more holistic way!
  3. Nadia
    Jennell, I am very intrigued by your notion of what is logical, practical or makes sense. You would think that if inclusivity of all women's experiences in a liberation movement was common sense then we would see more intersectional feminist discourse and practice! Therefore I ask, is this solely an issue of impracticality or could it have something to do with the way womanhood is defined (race, class, gender identity)? What role does language play in how women of color have been marginalized within feminism? If we properly defined our terms, would the "common sense" to be more inclusive be easier for white feminists to grasp?

Leave a reply