all 13 comments

[–]GConly 6 insightful - 1 fun6 insightful - 0 fun7 insightful - 1 fun -  (2 children)

Basically because white feminists are at the forefront of anti trans crap, the woke are desperate to find some way to link white feminists and the alt right.

[–]BEB[S] 7 insightful - 1 fun7 insightful - 0 fun8 insightful - 1 fun -  (0 children)

The whole "white feminism" and the Karen-meme are the gender lobby's desperate attempt to shut down push back.

The genderists know that older women of all races, who were witness to 2nd Wave feminism(which had black women leaders) and who were not indoctrinated into Queer Theory, are going to be the ones to scream, "STOP."

So the gender lobby tries desperately to divide women, including older feminists, by race.

[–]MarkTwainiac 4 insightful - 1 fun4 insightful - 0 fun5 insightful - 1 fun -  (0 children)

I can't read the article coz of paywall. Since the Canadian populace close to 75% white and white people are the dominant group there, wouldn't it make sense that most Canadian feminists opposing trans ideology would be white as well?

Also, many of the feminists at the forefront of challenging trans ideology in the UK are not white. In the US, the pushback against trans ideology is just beginning to become publicly visible - and it seems to me that not all feminists and other women at the forefront or in the ranks of it are white.

[–]MarkTwainiac 3 insightful - 1 fun3 insightful - 0 fun4 insightful - 1 fun -  (0 children)

Article blocked by paywall. Can someone C&P the text or provide archive link? Thanks

[–]uwushallnotpass 3 insightful - 1 fun3 insightful - 0 fun4 insightful - 1 fun -  (6 children)

Full text:

Koa Beck is the author of White Feminism: From the Suffragettes to Influencers and Who They Leave Behind. In 2019, she was awarded the Joan Shorenstein Fellowship at the Harvard Kennedy School to research white feminism.

As the 2017 Women’s March approached in the United States, contentions between white women and women of colour were documented extensively in the press and on social media. As calls for literacy across race, class, orientation and immigration status accelerated going into the march, a cohort of attendees reportedly cancelled trips and reconsidered their participation. The growing demand to incorporate the realities of women and non-binary people who were not white, straight, cisgendered, able-bodied, citizens and middle to upper-class signalled to some self-identified feminists and march attendees that the event would not centralize their issues. This resulted in some women writing Facebook posts that read, “I’m starting to not feel very welcome in this endeavour.” What this division ultimately put on national display was their true ideology: white feminism.

White feminism is a very specific ideology and practice toward achieving gender equality, which pulls considerably from colonialism, imperialism, labour exploitation, and – its biggest signature – advocating individual ascension and accumulation of wealth and power as the foremost path to gender progress. It can be practised by anyone of any gender identity, racial background, or class. The hallmark is not necessarily the identity of the people who practise it, but how the paths to “feminism” are envisioned.

Equal rights for low-income women, Muslim women, queer women, immigrant women, Indigenous women and non-binary people, among others, are not considered. White feminism’s origins in the United States run as deep as the organized movement for women’s rights itself, with prominent middle to upper-class suffragists such as Alice Paul refusing to structurally address the concerns of Black American women – yet proudly proclaiming that “votes for women” had been secured. (Racist barriers such as Jim Crow laws and poll taxes would successfully keep Black women from the polls for years.)

But the white feminist strategy is not accidental in its omission of virtually everybody else. Its keen omission of structural critique – focusing instead on very personalized solutions and individual pursuits against sexism – maintains its other ancestral ideology: white supremacy. Maintaining racial dominance, particularly through exporting a white feminist ideology to other marginalized groups and asking that they essentially aspire to whiteness in their feminist practice, preserves a certain superiority even as certain societal orders are being reconsidered.

A common trade-off white feminists make in lieu of structural critiques is maintaining a platform of “niceties” toward BIPOC, specifically in feminist-sanctioned spaces, and deeming those niceties on par with racial, class, or queer literacy. A good example of this was documented on the Women’s March Facebook page, in which one woman wrote, “We all have our own fears and our own reasons for marching. I don’t have to understand everyone’s reasons to know right from wrong and to be kind to people.”

The currency of white or white-passing women being nice – or, in this particular woman’s case, “kind” – carries a distinct cultural value that originates in white supremacy, primarily because their kindness is ranked a premium; it’s also potent. Traditionally, in the United States, white women acting “nice” to advocate for segregated schools, marches and drinking fountains, among other endeavours, has proved very successful in maintaining white supremacy.

Nice white women have been key to maintaining grassroots racism, whether it’s writing newsletters, holding bake sales, or coalitions of mothers organizing against Black and brown families moving into neighbourhoods or accessing community resources. And it’s a legacy that is rooted in white feminism – like in the 1910s, when activist and journalist Martha Gruening asked National American Woman Suffrage Association president Anna Howard Shaw to denounce white supremacy within the organization. Shaw reportedly told her that she would not, but that she was personally “in favour of coloured people voting” – a suffragist-era way of essentially saying what the woman on Facebook had posted.

White or white-passing women being “kind” does not carry the same significance as understanding the economic needs of domestic workers, comprehending the urgency for affordable housing for trans people, or learning about how the wage gap has disenfranchised Latinas.

But, in white feminism, it does.

[–]teacherterf 6 insightful - 1 fun6 insightful - 0 fun7 insightful - 1 fun -  (1 child)

White or white-passing women being “kind” does not carry the same significance as understanding the economic needs of domestic workers, comprehending the urgency for affordable housing for trans people, or learning about how the wage gap has disenfranchised Latinas.

All true! I'd like to know why this all falls on white and white-passing women. Are white and white-passing men working hard to solve these problems and we're not hearing about it, or is this demographic exempt from collective responsibility?

[–]BEB[S] 5 insightful - 1 fun5 insightful - 0 fun6 insightful - 1 fun -  (0 children)

What a fucking misogynistic article - as if any woman had the power to do much in terms of changing laws during most of US history. In my own lifetime, US women, white, black, brown, purple, puce, didn't have some of the same rights as men.

And why is this self-hating woman, or whatever the author is, pontificating about US feminism in a Canadian paper?

[–]Femaleisnthateful 6 insightful - 1 fun6 insightful - 0 fun7 insightful - 1 fun -  (1 child)

Thanks for posting this.

The Globe and Mail is almost as shitty as the CBC for catering to the Woke agenda.

There's not a shred of substantiating evidence in any of this article to support any of the author's claims. She just makes these statements as though they are self-evident. White women use 'niceness' as 'currency'? Has this author not heard of the Karen meme?

[–]BEB[S] 3 insightful - 1 fun3 insightful - 0 fun4 insightful - 1 fun -  (0 children)

This article was a whole huge serving of misogynistic, divisive, gobbledygook with a helping of "Damned if you do, damned if you don't, you're never going to win, woman" on top.

[–]eddyelric 3 insightful - 1 fun3 insightful - 0 fun4 insightful - 1 fun -  (0 children)

Thanks for posting the article! Sadly, it's a mangled mess. Also, they speak of kindness as a cultural token that "white" women abuse, when we have evidence of that same kindness being used towards women as a way to get us to lower our guards and deny reality. When women put niceness above safety and reason, we suffer for it.

[–]MarkTwainiac 3 insightful - 1 fun3 insightful - 0 fun4 insightful - 1 fun -  (0 children)

Thank you for posting the text!

[–]hfxB0oyA 3 insightful - 1 fun3 insightful - 0 fun4 insightful - 1 fun -  (1 child)

The author of this opinion puff piece in a Canadian newspaper a former editor of Jezebel who lives in LA. http://www.koabeck.com/

[–]BEB[S] 3 insightful - 1 fun3 insightful - 0 fun4 insightful - 1 fun -  (0 children)

Jezebel editor, what a shock /s

But the fact that the Harvard Kennedy School is involved in abetting this race-baiting misogyny is a shock. Or maybe not, because, after-all, Harvard is the establishment, and the establishment wants us divided & conquered.