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.

On Prisons, Borders, Safety, and Privilege: An Open Letter to White Feminists

By Jessica Hoffmann, make/shift. Posted April 4, 2008.


It's time for white feminists to challenge their own privilege, listen to all voices and take on the issues that matter.

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

More stories by Jessica Hoffmann

Get AlterNet in
your mailbox!

 
Advertisement

There is no role for the white liberal [in social change]; he is our affliction. -James Baldwin, 1963.

In 1983, when I was in kindergarten, white (Jewish) lesbian feminist Adrienne Rich implored a white-led feminist movement: "Without addressing the whiteness of white feminism, our movement will turn in on itself and collapse." Twenty-five years later, I'm dubious about a movement -- "ours" or otherwise -- that has not only failed to honestly and consistently address its whiteness but has also, in so doing, become something far less than a movement for social change.[1]

My comments here are hugely influenced by critiques of white feminism put forth over generations by women of color,[2] critiques I'm guessing you're familiar with. Maybe you're even nodding because you feel like you've reckoned with them. Maybe it bums you out that past generations of white feminists had such a white-supremacy/class-privilege problem. Maybe This Bridge Called My Back was required reading in your first women's studies class and you know all about "intersectionality," making a point in your feminist projects to "include" the voices and issues of women of color, working-class and poor white women, and maybe even trans folks and members of other groups historically marginalized by dominant feminisms. I'm pretty sure about all this because many of you have told me so -- in personal conversations and workshops, in your books and blogs and …

Yet it doesn't look to me like you've really reckoned with those critiques. It looks more like you appropriate or tokenize them, using their language while continuing to center white, class-privileged women's experiences in your "feminism" and engaging in political work that upholds and strengthens white supremacy and economic exploitation -- sometimes directly undermining the social-change work of feminists of color.

And, yes, you deserve some concrete examples of that, which is why I'm writing. My intention isn't to repeat the critiques of feminists of color, but to offer some specific instances in which I, a white, class-privileged feminist who is often privy to your conversations and who can identify with the experiences and perspectives of privilege, have recently seen this playing out. At this particular historical moment, it seems to happen frequently around the disconnect between white feminists' notions of "safety" as an ideal we should organize around, and, on the other side of the not-so-fun funhouse mirror, organizing by feminists of color around policing/prisons and immigration/borders -- issues that expose the fantasy of "safety" as a product of privilege; issues that feminists of color have increasingly centered in their activism while white feminists seem to be struggling to understand whether they are feminist issues at all.

Prisons (or, Safety for Whom?)

In recent years, members of INCITE! Women of Color Against Violence have incisively and repeatedly critiqued the white-feminist-led antiviolence movement for its reliance on (and, thus, complicity with) the U.S. criminal-legal system, which uses the rhetoric of "safety" to destroy communities of color, squash dissent, and create profit for private corporations. Yet the primary macro-level strategies of the white-feminist-led movement against domestic violence and sexual assault continue to rely on this system, with a major focus on legislation such as the Violence Against Women Act and the push for hate-crimes laws to include gender and sexual orientation.[3] On the micro/personal level, I have repeatedly seen white, class-privileged feminists unhesitatingly call upon police to protect and serve them; have listened to white feminists advise each other on which "authorities" to go to for protection from stalkers and other abusers; and so on.[4]

At both the macro level of feminist movement strategy and the micro/personal level of individual actions, I'm struck by the apparent lack of awareness of the prominent critiques made by feminists of color of law-and-order approaches to ending (or, even, finding "safety" from) violence. To be a self-identified feminist activist apparently unaware of (or, worse, deliberately skirting) the current work of not only INCITE! but also feminist icons like Angela Davis and numerous other voices calling for abolition of the prison industrial complex as a key element of social change seems to me to be part of a movement that is not only disconnected from but also damaging to some of the most vibrant and potentially liberating social-justice organizing happening today.

Yet … I know, I know.

One night in the summer of 1996, when I was eighteen, my (white, female, ex-gutter-punk) roommate and I rushed together to call the police when we were startled by a Peeping Tom outside her bedroom window. It was like a reflex, just what you do. We didn't pause to consider other possible responses -- and, after two LAPD officers promised to put our apartment on their regular patrol for the next few weeks, we gave no thought to what that added police presence might mean to our mostly Black neighbors. I was interning with the Feminist Majority that summer, working to defeat an anti-affirmative action state ballot initiative. By the night of the Peeping Tom incident, I had been confused for weeks about why the multiracial coalition of feminist and racial-justice groups that started out working together to save affirmative action "for women and people of color" in the spring had split into two, the (mostly white) feminists in one camp and the racial-justice groups in the other. One of my co-interns had overheard a prominent leftist civil-rights attorney, a woman of color who was working with a former coalition organization, say, "The road to hell is paved with feminists." I thought our work at the Feminist Majority was good and just and concerned with racial as well as gender equality; I didn't understand.


Digg!

See more stories tagged with: gender, capitalism, race, feminism, immigration, incarceration, prisons, white feminism, womanism, radical feminism

Liked this story? Get top stories in your inbox each week from AlterNet! Sign up now »


Advertisement

 

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:
Missing the point, especially with trans women
Posted by: war_on_tara on Apr 4, 2008 8:27 AM   
Current rating: 1    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
When a couple of these journalists did eventually mention Arellano's story on their blogs, the focus was on violence against trans women of color (framed as perpetual victims), with no analysis connecting the story to movements to abolish the prison system or defy the legitimacy of national borders.

Missing the point - the analysis would more properly be on white feminists' tendency to dismiss trans women entirely because they weren't born women. Compare to how trans issues have become "gay" issues in a general sense, even to the point of it becoming the "LGBT community." There may be some dissension among mainstream lesbians & gay men about tactics, ENDA coverage & such, but transpeople are generally accepted as part of the community. Not so organized white-led feminism because in general they refuse to accept transwomen as "real" women. They write about it often and nasty quotes about it would be easy to find.

"Defy the legitimacy of national borders?" We've been assured many times that AlterNet never prints anything like that, and even that there wouldn't be anything like that to print if they wanted to, because no one is saying that. Guess this is a first, huh?

Not reform, not cut back but "abolish the prison system"? Wow. What would happen to those Peeping Toms after that?

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

Feminism Needs to Be Freed From Academia
Posted by: fratricide08 on Apr 4, 2008 5:18 PM   
Current rating: 5    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
It seems to me that the problem with today's feminism whether it be espoused by whites or women of color is that it lacks any real heart and soul. The message, if there even is one, is muddled by academic social theories, navel gazing, infighting, and attaching "feminism" to each and every cause that comes along. Granted, there is a connection to progressive movements but it seems to me that all of the prominent groups are more concerned about other causes i.e. feminists for the environment, against the Iraq war, for social justice, for whatever/insert cause. It's as though feminism is a throwaway descriptor for groups that really should say, women against the war, women for the environment etc.

Feminism in my view is a victim of academia no matter what color, ethnicity, or orientation, the feminist leveling the critique. You can't spawn change and social progress from something so complex and weighted down. Explain it to the people in terms the people can understand otherwise feminists no matter their background or persuasion are merely asserting their own hegemony by occulting the dialogue and insuring that needed changes never come.

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

I really appreciate the painful honest struggle.
Posted by: Sojourner on Apr 4, 2008 11:13 PM   
Current rating: 5    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
Thank you for the information about the truly radical views explored by committed persons. And thank you for the personal messages.

It is not safe to be angry, even for a righteous cause. So the controlled and deliberate expression of the honest reasons that justify anger is necessary--especially for us white-privileged people.

When Louis Farakahn condemns white privilege, he is accused of opportunism, just as was the case with Malcolm X. Like the example of the current flap over Obama's minister's indignation.

The article is so extraordinary, I have to share it. If I send it to my white feminist friends, they may end up no longer being my friends. I hope I succeed with my painful honest struggle as well as you have.

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

So white feminists tend to be a self-interested group?
Posted by: Q30 on Apr 5, 2008 7:23 AM   
Current rating: 5    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
And they're not particularly interested in the well-being of other groups despite all their nice-sounding rhetoric to the contrary?

Wow, that's a shocking idea. Knock me over with a feather.

I mean, it's not as if white feminists are always insisting that their worldview is the only legitimate one, right?

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

Prison Industrial Complex
Posted by: meeneecat on Apr 5, 2008 8:19 AM   
Current rating: 5    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
You can't address the prison system with out addressing the racist, disastrous war on drugs.

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

Thank You For This
Posted by: EKSwitaj on Apr 5, 2008 10:00 PM   
Current rating: 5    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
White (and otherwise privileged) feminists essentially face the choice of opting for junior membership in the Patriarchy or Oligarchy or whatever you want to call it or of struggling for radical change. Those who fight within the hierarchy for a larger piece of the pie because privilege blinds them to other possibilities will inevitably be frustrated as they find themselves unable to achieve an equal share.

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

Thank you
Posted by: jenlight on Apr 6, 2008 9:14 PM   
Current rating: 5    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
Thank you for this. We need more discussion of white privilege. Many people I know are not even familiar with the term.

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

Since when
Posted by: Andrew_S on Apr 6, 2008 11:09 PM   
Current rating: 1    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
Since when have white middle class racist lesbians represented women at all. All I do see is a whole class of special individuals affecting policy, funding and results. All for a few taxpayer dollars and employment, and not without the implicit consent of the legal profession who have taken over the implemetation of social and economic welfare. I doubt whether a male in a skirt is still discernable as a sexual predator for the gullible. What should the slogan be, lets omit procreation and implement creation.

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

On Prisons, Borders, Safety, and Privilege
Posted by: DaisyDeadhead on Apr 7, 2008 8:20 AM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
I recently received an email from another feminist blogger, asking me why I cover issues of law enforcement abuse on my blog. I was pretty dumbfounded by the question, since one of the incidents I had just covered involved an innocent African American woman handcuffed to her car by SC state troopers, as she endured considerable hostility.

Apparently, that was not considered a feminist issue. (!)

All I could think was, no wonder our movement is in trouble.

Excellent article.

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

What was HOPE STEFFEY's CRIME?
Posted by: BlueBerry PickN on Apr 7, 2008 9:27 AM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
... that found her violently handcuffed & STRIPPED NAKED by both MALE & FEMALE officers?
...& found herself 'raped without penetration' while she screamed for help.

"Woman who is a crime victim brutally strip searched by police. Hope Steffey's cousin called 911 to report that Hope had been assaulted.

When the police arrived, Hope accidentally turned over her dead sister's driver's license, which she keeps in her wallet as a memento. After being arrested & brutally strip searched, she is made to spend six hours in a cell, naked.

Warning: the video of the incident is disturbing."


"ON YOUR KNEES, Citizen!!!"


Be afraid: strong female police officer 'feminists' are really into playing prisoner compliance games with their male compatriots.


Naked Truth: Civil Rights & CNN coverage of "FBI biometric database - 'Server in The Sky'"


~~~
Spread Love...

BlueBerry Pick'n
can be found @
ThisCanadian com
~~~
"We, two, form a Multitude" ~ Ovid.
~~~
"Silent Freedom is Freedom Silenced"
"do no harm"

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

A little knowledge is a dangerous thing
Posted by: sweet_byrd on Apr 7, 2008 5:02 PM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
This is an extraordinary article. It has given me a lot to think about.

Perhaps at least part (I certainly won't claim that it is the only reason, or even a predominant one) of the reason for the "white feminist blinkers" is that a little knowledge can be a dangerous thing. Feminists know from experience how little people in a position of power understand of the lives of the powerless. And so we hesitate to speak up for fear of being patronizing -- insulting through our well-meaning ignorance. After all, the patronizing, belittling figure of the rich, white Lady Bountiful is hardly one that a person of progressive mindset would want to embody.

But because of this hesitation and discomfort, we shun situations in which the topic will come up, leading to the absenteeism explored in this article, as well as the concurrent lack of instructive experience. It is a vicious cycle, and one that (it seems to me) should serve as a kick in the pants for us to step out of our comfort zones.

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

rapists, spouse abusers, etc belong in prison, no matter their color
Posted by: pablo1 on Apr 9, 2008 1:58 PM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
Jessica Hoffman,

I am of Latin American ancestry and I am telling you that you are NOT helping the African-American or Latino community by insisting that we not arrest VIOLENT African-American or Latino criminals!

Martin Luther King Jr says we should judge people by their character.

Therefore, if a person is a rapist, we should judge that person as a bad character! That means we put that person in prison, regardless of their ancestry.

People shouldn't be getting away with rape, robberry, aggravated assault, murder, etc. just because they have non-white ancestors! Otherwise, people like me could get away with anything!

Do you think that AFrican-Americans and Latinos want to live next door to a sex offender, or a serial killer of the same race? Do you really believe that an African-American or a Latino whose daughter's been sexually or physically abused want to keep the abuser out of jail, if the abuser is also an African-American or Latino?

Those who have to fear most from African-American or Latino sex offenders are African-Americans and Latinos! And most European-American women who have been raped were raped by European-American men! Most crime involves the predator and victim of the same race!

White Republicans are probably not even 1% of the victims violated by non-white criminals, yet any attempts to put violent criminals in jail is seen as a racist atrocity committed by White Republicans!

Yes, our criminal justice system wastes prison space on non-violent criminals! We ought to legalize all immigration, marijuana, gambling, prostitution, and other non-violent vices!

But violent bullies ought to be in prison. Anything less is naive!

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

There's oppression and then there's oppression
Posted by: fanny666 on Apr 11, 2008 3:16 PM   
Current rating: 5    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
This is a much needed perspective, in my humble opinion. It's been bothering me for some time about the apparent priorities of "mainstream" American feminism. No oppression should be tolerated. Any system of subjugation should be challenged. American/ white women certainly do face oppression, and often violent oppression. But there's oppression and then there's oppression. I'm frequently disappointed by the type of oppression American feminists choose to focus on.

Oppression of women in America and then there's Oppression of women in the Congo

Oppression of women in America and then there's Oppression of women in Sierra Leone

Oppression of women in America and then there's Oppression of women in Afghanistan

Oppression of women in America and then there's Oppression of women in Burma/Myanmar

Oppression of women in America and then there's Oppression of women in Saudi Arabia

Obviously, I have chosen these examples to make a point.

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

What are other possible responses?
Posted by: sofia soledad on May 2, 2008 1:32 PM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
This article brings up a lot of questions, stuff I've definitely been thinking about.
I definitely see the reasons for stopping the prison/industrial complex and other forms of institutional and systematic violence.
But ARE there other possible responses to violence against women, and what are they?
I would like to know because I would like to put this thinking to work immediately. I've been sexually harassed by random, strange men just a few times in my city, and I'd like to know what to do about it if it ever happens again.
Most of the time I have not called the police because I don't believe in the police, but I did on 2 occasions because I didn't know what else to do. The harassment was not violent, it didn't actually physically harm me, but I didn't know if I let it go, if the men would then go on to do worse things to someone else because they got away with what they did to me. I just really didn't know what else to do. I would have preferred not to call the cops and handle it differently. Is this part of the problem? That we don't have another way of dealing with sexual harrassment? What would the author have done in hindsight instead of calling the cops on the peeping tom?

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