Am I allowed to say that article was dumb?
So many internal contradictions. It all basically boils down to "I get to define what feminism is and anyone who disagrees with me is racist". Intersectional my ass. The world if full of injustices of one kind or another. They are all worthy of being discuss and addressed. To fault someone for not having exactly the same injustices in exactly the same order and priority is stupid. I agree that people outside a culture can be uninformed about the inner details of that culture. But they're already interested in it. The correct response is to inform them, not to call them racist or chastise them for "erasure of experiences" or "erasing racial voices".
[INDENT]White feminism works on the assumption that all women are equally oppressed[/INDENT]
No. A million times no. Emma Watson does not stand up and say there are no women more oppressed than her. She says all people
have an interest in seeing all women treated fairly. The goal is equality. That does not mean the diagnosis is equal oppression.
[INDENT]it’s commonly lamented that women—as in all women—make about 77–82 cents for every dollar that a man makes. But that’s only white women. Black and Hispanic women make even less, 69 cents and 60 cents, respectively, for every dollar that a white man makes. [/INDENT]
I would be very surprised if statisticians went so far as to strip out all the non-white women from their male-female wage comparison stats. Far more likely is that the stats represent men as a whole and women as a whole. Non-white women may make up only a portion of that number but including the numerous white portion of the female population is not an act of racism. For the sake of argument, if you excluded all non-whites then I'm sure there would still be a wage imbalance, and if you included only non-whites you would see a similar wage imbalance, albeit at lower average wage levels.
It's almost like there are other factors that can combine for those people. Race is probably one. Socio-economic background could be another. School quality. Neighbourhood environment. Parental expectation. Lots of factors. Complaining that they are all really part of feminism and need to be included whenever feminism is discussed is stupid. They overlap. Some people will want to discuss their intersection. Some will want to focus on racial equality, or gender equality, or educational equality. It's not intersectional. It is multi-dimensional.
Can you imagine someone chastising MLK because he is erasing the experiences of economically disadvantaged American Indians?
[INDENT]“White feminism dehumanizes racialized women by ignoring and erasing the voice of women of colour,” says Matunda. “It passively reaffirms ideas that whiteness and white opinions are the only ideas that really matter.”[/INDENT]
If a feminist who is white speaks about women from a minority culture, but then she's erasing the voices of others. And if she doesn't then she's ignoring them.
And anytime someone accuses someone else of passively doing anything, there's a very good chance they're doing nothing of the sort. They're just not actively addressing the topic. I didn't address the topic of Ukraine's resistance to Russian interference in this post. That does not mean I have passively reaffirmed Russia's right to interfere.
I get that it's annoying that many of the most prominent feminists are white. Western civilization is currently mostly white. People with power (celebrity or otherwise) get noticed and make good spokeswomen. But there are women with power who aren't white (Michelle Obama, Shonda Rhimes, Oprah, Judge Sotomayor). But if you exclude them from your definition of prominent feminists and then decry the lack of non-white feminists, the problem isn't reality, it's your approach to it.
If someone feels there aren't enough prominent feminists with a particular mix of cultural, economic, regional, orientation, or whatever facets, then speak up. Find such a representative and help them be a better spokeswoman. Organize for them. Fundraise for them. Raise their profile. But if your plan is to criticize the existing spokeswomen for failing to be like you then that's just going to make you look stupid. Anyone who is not like you will feel excluded. They're unlikely to want to listen to you or your spokesperson, or provide funds, or volunteer. You've already told them they are unwelcome. You have deliberately narrowed your focus to one small community. Having done so you cannot then claim to be a victim of mistreatment from the large community you spurned.