big fat feminist

Scroll to Info & Navigation

Tag Results

69 posts tagged racism

Cannot believe how salty the White Women populace is right now for trying to get the trending topic #whitegirlsrock going.

contentkiller:

Really? Just because Black women have an outlet to celebrate how awesome we are, and ya’ll get irked and say that this is unfair to White women and you want on on it.  First off..hell no. White women get validation everywhere in media and are told constantly how wonderful you all are. Black women? Not so much. When Black women are openly enjoying our achievements, here you guys come complaining that this is racist and you want to be included. No. No, no, no. It’s just like Paul Mooney said, “everyone wants to be a nigga, but no one wants to be a nigga.”

So everyone that thinks the #whitegirlsrock tag is valid? You all can go rot as far as I’m concerned. Black Girls Rock. Deal with that shit and keep your butthurt feelings to your fucking selves as us Black women continue being the people you blatantly emulate ht can never truly duplicate.

Yo, I don’t want part of any feminism that doesn’t allow for women to choose what the hell they wanna call themselves. You can go ahead and do that without me.

Men are not the enemy, friends. Patriarchy is. It’s important to understand the difference.

Pro tip: if you don’t shut up on occasion, you wind up talking over everyone around you, and then you don’t learn a goddamn thing.

Repeat after me: My feminism will be intersectional or it will be bullshit.
This means shutting the fuck up and listening when your Black peers start talking about their experiences. Work on that, please.
Rebloggable by request, with some additions:
ave-atque-vale said: we should also note that Jay-Z changed his name upon marriage too: their last name is Knowles-Carter. So their choice in married names is progressive even by Anon’s obnoxiously narrow definition of progressive.
Anonymous asked: I find the previous anon’s “act of subservience” B.S. highly offensive. Feminism is about women having freedom of choice, and trashing a woman’s choice to use her husband’s name is venomous tripe. In a world after the wave of feminism that taught us that all ‘traditional’ trappings of femininity were oppressive tools of the patriarchy to be rejected, yes, it IS radical to embrace those trappings AND still stand up for equality.

Repeat after me: My feminism will be intersectional or it will be bullshit.

This means shutting the fuck up and listening when your Black peers start talking about their experiences. Work on that, please.

Rebloggable by request, with some additions:

ave-atque-vale said: we should also note that Jay-Z changed his name upon marriage too: their last name is Knowles-Carter. So their choice in married names is progressive even by Anon’s obnoxiously narrow definition of progressive.

Anonymous asked: I find the previous anon’s “act of subservience” B.S. highly offensive. Feminism is about women having freedom of choice, and trashing a woman’s choice to use her husband’s name is venomous tripe. In a world after the wave of feminism that taught us that all ‘traditional’ trappings of femininity were oppressive tools of the patriarchy to be rejected, yes, it IS radical to embrace those trappings AND still stand up for equality.

marfmellow:

The first thing you really need to understand is that the definition of racism that you probably have (which is the colloquial definition: “racism is prejudice against someone based on their skin color or ethnicity”) is NOT the definition that’s commonly used in anti-racist circles.The definition used in anti-racist circles is the accepted sociological definition (which is commonly used in academic research, and has been used for more than a decade now): “racism is prejudice plus power”. What this means, in easy language:A. Anyone can hold “racial prejudice” — that is, they can carry positive or negative stereotypes of others based on racial characteristics. For example, a white person thinking all Asians are smart, or all black people are criminals; or a Chinese person thinking Japanese people are untrustworthy; or what-have-you. ANYONE, of any race, can have racial prejudices.
B. People of any race can commit acts of violence, mistreatment, ostracizing, etc., based on their racial prejudices. A black kid can beat up a white kid because he doesn’t like white kids. An Indian person can refuse to associate with Asians. Whatever, you get the idea.C. However, to be racist (rather than simply prejudiced) requires havinginstitutional power. In North America, white people have the institutional power. In large part we head the corporations; we make up the largest proportion of lawmakers and judges; we have the money; we make the decisions. In short, we control the systems that matter. “White” is presented as normal, the default. Because we have institutional power, when we think differently about people based on their race or act on our racial prejudices, we are being racist. Only white people can be racist, because only white people have institutional power.
D. People of color can be prejudiced, but they cannot be racist, because they don’t have the institutional power. (However, some people refer to intra-PoC prejudice as “lateral racism”. You may also hear the term “colorism”, which refers to lighter-skinned PoC being prejudiced toward darker-skinned PoC.) However, that situation can be different in other countries; for example, a Japanese person in Japan can be racist against others, because the Japanese have the institutional power there. But in North America, Japanese peoplecan’t be racist because they don’t hold the institutional power.E. If you’re in an area of your city/state/province that is predominantly populated by PoC and, as a white person, you get harassed because of your skin color, it’s still not racism, even though you’re in a PoC-dominated area. The fact is, even though they’re the majority population in that area, they still lack the institutional power. They don’t have their own special PoC-dominated police force for that area. They don’t have their own special PoC-dominated courts in that area. The state/province and national media are still not dominated by PoC. Even though they have a large population in that particular area, they still lack the institutional power overall.F. So that’s the definition of racism that you’re likely to encounter. If you start talking about “reverse racism” you’re going to either get insulted or laughed at, because it isn’t possible under that definition; PoC don’t have the power in North America, so by definition, they can’t be racist. Crying “reverse racism!” is like waving a Clueless White Person Badge around.

marfmellow:

The first thing you really need to understand is that the definition of racism that you probably have (which is the colloquial definition: “racism is prejudice against someone based on their skin color or ethnicity”) is NOT the definition that’s commonly used in anti-racist circles.

The definition used in anti-racist circles is the accepted sociological definition (which is commonly used in academic research, and has been used for more than a decade now): “racism is prejudice plus power”. What this means, in easy language:

A. Anyone can hold “racial prejudice” — that is, they can carry positive or negative stereotypes of others based on racial characteristics. For example, a white person thinking all Asians are smart, or all black people are criminals; or a Chinese person thinking Japanese people are untrustworthy; or what-have-you. ANYONE, of any race, can have racial prejudices.


B. People of any race can commit acts of violence, mistreatment, ostracizing, etc., based on their racial prejudices. A black kid can beat up a white kid because he doesn’t like white kids. An Indian person can refuse to associate with Asians. Whatever, you get the idea.

C. However, to be racist (rather than simply prejudiced) requires havinginstitutional power. In North America, white people have the institutional power. In large part we head the corporations; we make up the largest proportion of lawmakers and judges; we have the money; we make the decisions. In short, we control the systems that matter. “White” is presented as normal, the default. Because we have institutional power, when we think differently about people based on their race or act on our racial prejudices, we are being racist. Only white people can be racist, because only white people have institutional power.

D. People of color can be prejudiced, but they cannot be racist, because they don’t have the institutional power. (However, some people refer to intra-PoC prejudice as “lateral racism”. You may also hear the term “colorism”, which refers to lighter-skinned PoC being prejudiced toward darker-skinned PoC.) However, that situation can be different in other countries; for example, a Japanese person in Japan can be racist against others, because the Japanese have the institutional power there. But in North America, Japanese peoplecan’t be racist because they don’t hold the institutional power.

E. If you’re in an area of your city/state/province that is predominantly populated by PoC and, as a white person, you get harassed because of your skin color, it’s still not racism, even though you’re in a PoC-dominated area. The fact is, even though they’re the majority population in that area, they still lack the institutional power. They don’t have their own special PoC-dominated police force for that area. They don’t have their own special PoC-dominated courts in that area. The state/province and national media are still not dominated by PoC. Even though they have a large population in that particular area, they still lack the institutional power overall.

F. So that’s the definition of racism that you’re likely to encounter. If you start talking about “reverse racism” you’re going to either get insulted or laughed at, because it isn’t possible under that definition; PoC don’t have the power in North America, so by definition, they can’t be racist. Crying “reverse racism!” is like waving a Clueless White Person Badge around.

(via friendswaffleswerq)

I guess all I have to say about the topic is that, because TV is such a popular medium, HBO has a responsibility to represent its subjects accurately, especially when the network is selling a show as a representation of young New York. There’s no obligation to be kaleidoscopic, but there is a difference between writing a short story or essay about a bunch of white people that only a handful of people will read and creating another show about white people that millions of people will watch, especially when you’ve chosen to set that show in one of the most culturally mixed cities in the world.

- James Franco, about the lack of diversity on the show Girls [x] (via lettersintheampersand)

James Franco?

image

(via likestepsonthemoon)

My two other favorite parts:

“I’m not saying I have to struggle to pay the rent like Lena Dunham’s character, Hannah, but there was a point, right before Judd cast me in Freaks and Geeks, when my parents cut me off because I wanted to go to acting school instead of UCLA. I worked at McDonalds, and my first suggestion to Hannah would be this: get a fucking job. If you really want to have experiences to write about, go to work; and if you really want to be an artist, take responsibility for yourself and wait some tables. You might mature a little in the process.”

[…]

Lena is the ultimate creator, so no matter what she puts the girls through, she is always in control. Her name is always at the end, where it says “Created by.” They say living well is the best revenge, but sometimes writing well is even better.”

(via theodore-lawrence)

Well, shit. It got even better. 

(via kyssthis16)

James Franco reads well

(via blackgirlsquee)

Oh dear :)

Yo when I have to give props to James Franco , you know I’m angry

(via blackamazon)

(via therotund)

swamphorcydes:

things you can mad at instead of the ~*obesity epidemic*~

  • the poverty epidemic
  • the unemployment epidemic
  • the racism epidemic
  • the white man epidemic
  • the transmisogyny epidemic
  • the u.s. drone epidemic
  • the expensive education epidemic
  • the rapist epidemic
  • the colonialist epidemic
  • the victim blaming epidemic
  • the bootstraps epidemic
  • the condescending yuppie epidemic

(via redefiningbodyimage)