Home
Archive
Columnists
Video
Blogs
Discuss
About
Search
Donate
Advertise
Advertisement
Advertisement
Advertisement
Advertisement
Register to Vote: Rock the Vote, powered by Working Assets Wireless
Advertisement
  • AlterNetYour turn

Support AlterNet
Do you value the information you're getting from AlterNet? Please show your support with a tax-deductible donation.


Feedback
Tell us how we're doing.

Gone fishing

Posted by Lakshmi Chaudhry at 5:05 PM on September 18, 2005.


But here's my final thought on white males -- especially the cuddlesome kind.
gaussbully

Share and save this post:
Digg iconDelicious iconReddit iconFark iconYahoo! iconNewsvine! iconFacebook iconNewsTrust icon

Got a tip for a post?:
Email us | Anonymous form

Get The L-Files in your
mailbox!

 

I'll be in Chicago on Monday and will be back blogging on Tuesday. Just to wrap up the whole race/gender and the blogosphere issue, here are some things I learned from the experience.

My sense is that much of the strum and drang was sparked by these two sentences: "Pardon me for saying so, I think we've had plenty of revolutionary movements of change headed by white males. Call me crazy, but I'd like to hold out for one that includes folks who look like me." Looking back, it's clear that there are a number of more helpful ways to frame that opinion -- ways that would encourage someone to consider the issues I raised rather than create an us vs. them atmosphere, which in my view defeats the very purpose of raising the issue in the first place.

I still stick to my original contention, which reworded would read as follows: A progressive movement with a leadership that does not reflect the rich diversity of the people who make up that movement is likely to reproduce the failures of the past. And this is true for the blogosphere in so far as it is being positioned as the engine of a reenergized progressive movement.

(One of the aspects that some of the readers raised and I am mulling over is whether it is useful to think about the "top 30" list as an indication of influence. It's an interesting point and I haven't quite figured it out.)

Finally, I am glad that the two posts generated an important and potentially useful conversation about race and gender. And I appreciate all those who made the effort to express how they feel, including those who agreed and disagreed with me. I strongly believe that it is important to speak openly about these issues, even if it means that all involved don't always hear what they like. We're never going to get to a society where race, sexuality, gender are not markers of our destiny until we do so.

Or so I keep telling the white male who rules my life, but-- as you can see -- he's just a big fat bully.

Digg!

Lakshmi Chaudhry is the former senior editor of AlterNet. You can write to her at lakshmi@alternet.org.


So long, farewell
Sadly, it's time to say goodbye to this blog.
Post by Lakshmi Chaudhry. January 9, 2006.
Happy holidays
Lakshmi Chaudhry is taking a much-needed computer-free vacation. She'll resume blogging sex, life and politics when the new year rolls around.
Post by Lakshmi Chaudhry. December 16, 2005.
Jimmy Carter goes X-Files
The former prez offers up tales of the bizarre.
Post by Lakshmi Chaudhry. December 16, 2005.

Comments Turn comments off sitewide Give us feedback »
Comments closed.
The comments for this story have been closed. Thank you to everyone who participated.
View:
oh! you don't need to back off!
Posted by: Michelle on Sep 18, 2005 7:49 PM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
My sense is that much of the strum and drang was sparked by these two sentences: "Pardon me for saying so, I think we've had plenty of revolutionary movements of change headed by white males. Call me crazy, but I'd like to hold out for one that includes folks who look like me." Looking back, it's clear that there are a number of more helpful ways to frame that opinion -- ways that would encourage someone to consider the issues I raised rather than create an us vs. them atmosphere, which in my view defeats the very purpose of raising the issue in the first place.

Oh, Lakshmi, no. Seriously, no.

It is not your job to word things politely so that white men don't get defensive. It is not your job to prepare the critique on a pretty plate with mild words to protect white men from facing reality.

Please. Speak what you want to say, speak it directly, don't apologize for any of that.

The "us versus them" dynamic is a product of the systems of domination, not a product of you speaking your perspective.

If the white men in the movements can't learn to listen to women of color, if they demand niceness and politeness and service to their egos, that is the problem -- not how you word things.

Sorry, it's just that this post breaks my heart a little. Please please -- speak your truth the way you feel drawn to speak it. White men are not the only ones in the room.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

» What apologies? Posted by: gp
» RE: What apologies? Posted by: Michelle
Gender does not define us
Posted by: Olympiada on Sep 18, 2005 10:11 PM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
On The Huffington Post I was assumed to be a man. I only corrected the person because I wanted to. I do not care to be identified by my race or gender.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

Sexuality does not define us
Posted by: Olympiada on Sep 18, 2005 10:14 PM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
I forgot this one. I am not anti men. I am pro men. I am making a difference joyfully. I used my heterosexuality to make a difference joyfully. But that does not have to do with definition. If one thinks I am a guy, then obviously my sexuality does not define me. This is confusing. Gender is different then sexuality. You mean sexual orientation, and probably sexual minorities. Ok.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

Version three.
Posted by: Kneel on Sep 19, 2005 2:28 AM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
That's quite the rewording.

Maybe you need to reflect just little bit more on this one.

When you gotta pull out the picture of the puppy, well...

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

I don't know how, but it has got to happen!
Posted by: Riverside on Sep 19, 2005 6:13 AM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
It is not just a matter of equal time so-to-speak, it has eventually got to be a matter of joint, shared everything. The day of Me Tarzan, You Jane has been long gone. I am a male, and I have been through the Tarzan stage, and thank heavens I escaped. Now the problem is getting Jane to trust me that I want to do things as partners. Nix, I am talking about ideas, work, not "hooking up" as kids say these days.

Sharing means Tarzan has to step back and let the light shine on Jane. Other times, both Tarzan and Jane take bows together. Yeah, yeah I know it is much deeper than this, but we first need to get where we can begin to work at it without it becoming a trainwreck. Hey my last three bosses were all women, all three are now corporate chief executives, I am proud as hell of each of them. Yes, they were tough, yes they were fair, and yes they really inspired creativity in all of us (men and women) and rewarded it accordingly.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

» I am pro men Posted by: Olympiada
Bravo
Posted by: esactun on Sep 19, 2005 7:59 AM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
As one of the posters you had taken to task via quote in your second piece re: white guys, I just want to say that I'm glad you clarified things in this post. It is, indeed, what I thought you were trying to get across the first time, but perhaps worded unfortunately. (I have that problem myself! Methinks my original post was a bit overly-strong looking back. Such are the perils of writing immediately upon being annoyed. :) )

Plus, I don't think your clarification above in any way undercuts the points of your original post, which were totally valid and with which I agree. You are dead-on in pointing to two of your sentences as being the entire cause of the Sturm und Drang (at least as far as I'm concerned).

I do enjoy this blog and, regardless of whether something like this post was ever posted, was not about let one thing I disagree with from hindering my future enjoyment of this blog. :)

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

The Stupid White Male US history book.
Posted by: jreinhart1 on Sep 19, 2005 9:17 AM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
It is amazing to me, and part of the problem, that history books that are used to teach our children always start out with Jamestown, VA. Farther along, Lewis and Clark practically discovered America west of the Mississippi. From the beginning, what is not talked about is the people they ran into and it wasn’t just Native Americans. It is rarely mentioned that the English brought all kinds of products to trade with the people they would run into. At the time of the Lewis and Clark expedition, much of the west was already settled. The dates of the old Spanish, Hispanic and French towns are as old as the towns and cities in the east. People may have been sparse in the area of the Louisiana Purchase and the west, but they were there trading in food, furs and other items that were needed to live, as well as building homes in the towns and cities they lived in. The culture mix of French, African, Native American, English, Spanish and others, were well mixed and ran from New Orleans up into the middle of the Canadian plains and out to the Pacific.

In all, our history books are an extremely racist, simple minded way of thinking about the history of this country and completely misses the diversity of people that have been part of the US for the last 500 years. This tunnel vision of the great white conqueror has only served to segregate the people of this country.

America's history is obvious to this second generation Red French-German and Danish mix male. I find it funny that Bill Murry in the movie Stripes had it right when shouted out, what America is made of is mutts. It's what makes America not only great, but unique, and as any biologist can tell you, it's what keeps a species (in this case people), strong.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

Devil's Advocate II: "Strumming"
Posted by: Gorpa on Sep 19, 2005 4:29 PM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
RE: Devil's Advocate: Is it wrong, etc. that Alternet's bloggers are predominately women?
Posted by: Lakshmi Chaudhry
Not sure what you mean by being a devil's advocate -- unless you were wondering if AlterNet is representative of the industry or the blogosphere. AlterNet has always been a real anomaly in journalism, progressive or otherwise, in terms of diversity, be it race or gender. Maybe that's the secret of its tremendous success;-)


Without a doubt, the U.S. is a racist, sexist, classist society with a hierarchy (governmental and otherwise) determined by a combination of these and other factors. The problem with "identity politics", to trot out an old saw, is that part of the argument is that criticism or solutions to the above can have no meaning unless it comes from someone who "looks like me".
By this logic, Alternet (with its female-dominated stable of bloggers) or Lakshmi (as an owner of a dog with congenital sinus problems and a beautiful brown-skinned woman) cannot speak for or to me, a "white" man, in any meaningful way. I reject this.
As Lakshmi's response and many other commenters have pointed out, the problem is one of opportunity. Let's all work to provide opportunity and break down privilege, and this nation will become truly multivalent.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

Who fucking cares?
Posted by: Ashington on Sep 19, 2005 11:20 PM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
there is not a white male conspiracy. sure, white males are dicks, but is it because they are white or male? plenty of african dictators are just as bad as the corporate ceo's who fuck everything up. focus on things such as racial pride are the same as Nationalism, and are the signs of those who are too weak to create thier own identities, and muster up thier ancestors to create one of thier own. you are not a race, you are not a country, you are not a job, you are another human being amongst billions, so try and act like it for once, and not a member of some evolutonarily ..bad spelling so fuck me, divergent group.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

Where are the "PC police" cries?
Posted by: philame on Sep 20, 2005 5:07 AM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
I agree with Michelle that Lakshmi should not have buckled under pressure to be a "polite lady" for the men that couldn't handle her honest opinion. How many white men claim to be anti-PC, but would have no problem with the PC demands just put on Lakshmi? This is actually the first time I have seen a PC police act go by without much notice on Alternet. Speaks volumes about the power dynamics in the US.

It blows my mind that the men in question did not even notice they made this demand on her because it comes all too naturally (read entitlement). To be sure, this is not just a male-female dynamic. More accurately, it is the dynamic between the dominant and subordinant.

Good that you stood your ground anyway Lakshmi - as best you could - despite some readers doing a thorough guilt job on you. It's tough out there.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]