image

kyriarchy replied to your post:apparently dresden codaks response to getting fucking trashed on the internet is to stay quiet for a month and then open up a patreon starting monday

didn’t he make $500,000 off Kickstarter a year and a half ago

yes he did which brings me to my next point, that by his own metric of “successful means made a lot of money via kickstarter” aaron dresdencodak diaz still has not read and then drawn fanart for the 2million dollar webcomic homestuck, as he promised despite it also being superior to his

Psychologists have found that people’s belief in a just world helps explain how they react to innocent victims of negative life circumstances. People become cognitively frustrated when presented with stories of victims who suffer through little fault of their own. They can deal with this frustration in two ways: they can conclude that the world is an unjust place, or they can decide that the victim is somehow to blame. Most people reconcile their psychological distress by blaming the victim. Even when we know that suffering is undeserved, it is psychologically easier to blame the victim rather than give up the idea that the world is basically fair.
— 

Melissa Harris-Perry

This is also referred to as The Just World Fallacy. If the world is “good and just,” then bad things must only happen to people who “deserved it or caused it.” Except the world is not good and just. And despite individual people choosing to be good and/or just, structures, institutions and systems remain corrupt overall. Primarily through the media is the idea that bad only happens to those who deserve suffering conveyed. Add this to the manifestations of oppression based on gender, race, class, nationality, citizenship, sexual orientation, size, etc. and things like rape culture for example, thrive. And even ideologies that appear “harmless” to some people like prosperity gospel, positivity culture, the law of attraction and American exceptionalism are based on ignoring systemic inequality and focusing on exceptional cases. They stand firm in this particular fallacy.

See, it requires quite a bit from a person to be willing to challenge the world as is. It is psychologically, emotionally and intellectually easier to victim blame. It also helps people protect their psyches from the thought that something bad could happen to them or worse, that they are the causes of those bad things happening to others.

Still…it’s unacceptable. Victim blaming = unacceptable. The right thing to do is listen and support victims/survivors of anything and the oppressed of any form of oppression and work to deconstruct the structures, institutions and systems that make it possible. On an individual level, it requires accountability.

You guys know about vampires? … You know, vampires have no reflections in a mirror? There’s this idea that monsters don’t have reflections in a mirror. And what I’ve always thought isn’t that monsters don’t have reflections in a mirror. It’s that if you want to make a human being into a monster, deny them, at the cultural level, any reflection of themselves. And growing up, I felt like a monster in some ways. I didn’t see myself reflected at all. I was like, “Yo, is something wrong with me? That the whole society seems to think that people like me don’t exist?” And part of what inspired me, was this deep desire that before I died, I would make a couple of mirrors. That I would make some mirrors so that kids like me might see themselves reflected back and might not feel so monstrous for it.
—  Junot Díaz (x
When the path of a man and woman are going to cross, it’s always the woman who’s expected to alter her path to avoid a collision. In addition, women restrict their stride as compared to men, and tend to hunch their shoulders and not initiate or maintain eye contact.
So I did this research my friends and I started messing around with this. We found that if you don’t alter your path when walking toward a man, a lot of men will almost run right into you, or bump their shoulder against yours, and then turn and give you this weird look. The weird looks you get are increased if you stand up straight with squared shoulders and take longer strides. I habitually walk this way now, and I continue to get puzzled looks by men who turn around after I pass them and watch me with an uncertain look.
Imagine living in a world where there is no domination, where females and males are not alike or even always equal, but where a vision of mutuality is the ethos shaping our interaction. Imagine living in a world where we can all be who we are, a world of peace and possibility. Feminist revolution alone will not create such a world; we need to end racism, class elitism, imperialism. But it will make it possible for us to be fully self-actualized females and males able to create beloved community, to live together, realizing our dreams of freedom and justice, living the truth that we are all “created equal.” Come closer. See how feminism can touch and change your life and all our lives. Come closer and know firsthand what feminist movement is all about. Come closer and you will see: feminism is for everybody.
—  bell hooks, Feminism is for Everybody

wetmattos said:

Dear, can you help me a bit? I'm trying to find your posts on respectability politics to send to a friend with whom I'm arguing about the measure of offensiveness in power dynamics, with no avail... Which tag do you use to mark them? Thanks in advance for the help!

The politics of respectability originated as cultural, sexual, domestic, employment and artistic “guidelines” or “rules” for racially marginalized groups to follow in the effort to be viewed as “human” in a White supremacist society and by individual Whites. Some of the most noticeable manifestations of the politics of respectability occurs among Black people because of the history dehumanization because of slavery. 

The politics of respectability implies that recognition of Black humanity has to be “earned” by Black people by engaging in puritanical behavior as approved by White supremacy…behaviors that Whites themselves don’t have to engage in to “prove” humanity because of White privilege; they’re always viewed as “the default human.”

During the post-Civil War era and early-mid 20th century, the politics of respectability was viewed as a source of power or galvanization of Black middle class society, and a way to combat White supremacist myths of automatic Black inferiority associated with poverty and degradation. (There are arguments to be made that this helped the women’s club movement among Black women’s anti-racism, womanist work in the early 20th century). However, what it ended up doing in many cases was fragmenting the Black working class/poor from the Black middle class, who despite performing respectability to spec, were often still alienated from the Whites they sought approval from. (Where do you think “uppity Negro” comes from? This.) And Black people regardless of class were (and still are) targets of racism.

Today, the politics of respectability is forcefully injected into any conversation about race by both Black and White people. Bill Cosby and Don Lemon are examples. And anytime they shame and scold fellow Black people (as the President has done sometimes too) Whites applaud because once again, they have ZERO accountability for racism.

This myth that White-approved performance (versus actually living) will eradicate racism because Whites will finally “like” Black people is ludicrous and is pushed by those who engage in victim blaming, since it’s easier than admitting the truth about racism.

Black people are human and shouldn’t have to “audition” for humanity based on clothing, speech style, neighborhood lived in, educational level etc. These rules are meant to dehumanize and justify oppression. And if the President of the United States was asked “papers please?" then obviously resume, grooming, education, and even power is irrelevant in a Black body; obviously the politics of respectability won’t save.

Here’s some of my posts that address the politics of respectability:

Quotes on Gradient Lair from others and includes some notes by me:

  • @FeministGriote on the politics of respectability and Rachel Jeantel [X]
  • Angela Davis on early 20th century Black women, working class and middle class [X]
  • Alice Walker; describing the White Gaze [X]

External links from one of my favorite blogs, Still Furious and Still Brave:

Other good external posts:

And since this post will inevitably be derailed (*sigh*) let’s clarify one thing. The way that sexism impacts White women’s lives differs from the politics of respectability. While sexism and misogyny in general includes domination and objectification for gender, it is not the same thing as the politics of respectability. Further, Black women also have to deal with sexism and misogyny, in addition to racism, misogynoir and the politics of respectability, which is one of the offspring of White supremacy just as colourism is. In fact, all of the “respectable” standards that Black women are supposed to adhere to come from White supremacist notions of womanhood where White women are placed as the ideal. This is why there is specific anti-Black misogyny, or misogynoir that Black women deal with. 

Hope this helps! Take care. 

Privilege is like a knife

It can be a tool. It can be a weapon. It gives power. You’re probably going to be at least somewhat scared of the person who carries around a big ass knife until you figure out if they are an okay person or not. And it isn’t their fault that they have this big ass knife, but they still have it. And that still makes them scary until they prove themselves. 

You know what, I’m going to take hormones, have surgery, lose ‘friends’ and ‘family’, increase my risk of homelessness, joblessness, physical and sexual violence, and spend thousands of hours and dollars navigating a hostile medical bureacracy; because that way I’ll be able to finally infiltrate the super-secret radical feminist clubhouse and rape them all.
Oh, and as a nice side bonus maybe I’ll absorb some of their ‘feminine energy’ to use for my nefarious patriarchal plot for female subjugation.
—  No trans woman ever

I confront [white guilt] every year, about a month into my course on racism, among [white] students who come to me in tears because they cannot deal with the racism that goes on in their families or their home towns or their student residences. Their tears are the result of genuine anguish, care, and a desire to learn and to change. I confront similar attitudes among my colleagues, and I am similarly gratified by their concern. But those who experience white guilt need to learn three things:

1. People of colour are generally not moved by their tears, and may even see those tears as a self-indulgent expression of white privilege. It is after all a great privilege to be able to express one’s emotion openly and to be confident that one is in a cultural context where one’s feelings will be understood.

2. Guilt is paralysing. It serves no purposes; it does no good. It is not a substitute for activism.

3. White guilt is often patronizing if it leads to pity for those of colour. Pity gets in the way of sincere and meaningful human relationships, and it forestalls the frankness that meaningful relationships demand. White guilt will not change the racialized environment; it will only make the guilty feel better.

—  Audrey Kobayashi, Women of Colour in Canadian Academia
Why Whites Call People Of Colour "Racist"

I have been called “racist” by White people whenever I specifically reject a legislative, political, media/film/art, or cultural manifestation of White supremacy. I’ve also been called “racist” for recounting any experience that I have had with racism. The actual act of naming what I heard or experienced is deemed “racist.” The naming, deconstruction and discussion of experiences of this nature is important, however. As Black feminist scholar Patricia Hill Collins notes:

Naming daily life by applying language to everyday experience infuses it with the new meaning of a womanist consciousness. Naming becomes a way of transcending the limitations of intersecting oppressions.

Apparently, what I actually heard or experienced is of no concern or consequence to Whites seeking to call Black people or other people of colour racist.

There’s two reasons why Whites call people of colour (especially Black people) “racist.” First of all, it comes from a lack of understanding of the term (through ignorance or willful ignorance and hatred), its history and its consequences. As long as “racism” is viewed solely as “one person being mean to another person because of their race” or basically solely as an individual and arbitrary instance of prejudice with equal social capital between the individuals, Whites can obscure or ignore the ramifications of the historical (whether implied, microaggressions or overt racism), institutional, structural and systemic manifestations of White supremacy (which does NOT require extremism to exist) and racism.

A Black person being insulted based on slurs that facilitate(d)(s) oppression and genocide for centuries and that same sentiment behind that slur facilitates the denial of a plethora of opportunities as well as supports a plethora of types of discrimination and punishment represents a different magnitude and scope of an insult versus a Black person “hurting” a White person’s feelings, even if the former is rude. Oppression is about more than hurt feelings. The latter doesn’t even begin to encapsulate what the former is. Further, individual acts of harm from a person of colour to a White person may be an insult, a tort or a crime—but it does not connect to violence (which is more than just physical) used to facilitate the oppression of an entire people. (Even so, because the criminal justice system is about punishing Blacks and “protecting” Whites, a White person wouldn’t have to have the expectation that a Black person would go unpunished for harming them. More convictions and harsher sentences are factors. Even Black adolescents face more punishment than White adolescents. In fact, Whites should fear Whites, in regards to the criminal justice system.)

Many times an insult is not occurring—it’s just a Black person adamantly rejecting White supremacy. The rejection of White supremacy and racism themselves is not “reverse racism.” Rejecting White supremacy is not then telling Whites to be “ashamed” of Whiteness, as they should be able to live and thrive without the lie that is the claim of inherent superiority. For example, I’ve had White women suggest to me that any rejection of Eurocentric beauty, including considering myself beautiful as a Black woman who looks nothing like them, and having a blog where Black women are celebrated visually, is being “racist.” By not making yet another space (since apparently, having their images dominate commercials, films, television shows, magazines, fashion blogs, print ads, books, stock photography and more is not enough), my personal space, dedicated to White women, I am then deemed ”racist” and “oppressing” White women. This is only a smidgen of the nonsense that I face when Whites choose to call me “racist.”

“Reverse racism,” as well as “misandry” and “heterophobia” are not forms of oppression. The oppressed deconstructing, rejecting and fighting oppression does not then make the privileged become oppressed. The privileged have no “right” to oppress, so losing the opportunity to oppress does not make the privileged become oppressed. If the privileged measure their freedom based on how much they can oppress or not, the know nothing of actual freedom. Nothing.

Whites ignore how White privilege protects them from racial oppression but does not for people of colour, especially Black people. They retreat to examining intersections where they may be oppressed (if they aren’t cisgender, heterosexual, White men in the socioeconomic 1% and living in the Western world)—intersections based on gender, class, sexual orientation, being trans*, weight and ability, while not realizing that despite any or all of these areas where oppression can manifest, they STILL have White privilege. Some Whites will ignore the experiences of people of colour who are women, poor, LGBTQ, considered overweight or have a challenge with a particular ability and by doing so, they can focus on how they themselves experience oppression while ignoring White privilege and matters of race. No country for nuance and intersectionality?

The second reason why Whites call people of colour “racist” is quite different. I’ve been in several graduate-level psychology classes where White students stated that being called “racist” is the absolute worse thing that could happen to them. I always wondered why saying or doing a racist thing didn’t scare them more than being called “racist.” What I realized is that some Whites will call a person of colour who called out their racism “racist” in an “I know you are but what am I” reductionist retreat. The defense mechanisms of projection and denial are to protect their egos. If there’s nothing they fear more than being called “racist,” then the best thing to do is to get that label “away” from them as soon as possible. By deciding that a person of colour rejecting racism is the “real” “racist” act, not the racist act that they or another White person was called out on, they can deflect and derail. A common derailment tactic is to assert in a whiny voice “all Whites aren’t like this.” Who said they are? Again, racism is not solely about individual to individual relationships; even when the discussion or action is between two people, it speaks to a greater experience impacted by institutional, systemic and structural factors. Further, an individual White person does not have to be racist in any way to benefit from White privilege living in a White supremacist society. As Mychal Denzel Smith writes In White People Have To Give Up Racism:

Not every white person is a racist, but the genius of racism is that you don’t have to participate to enjoy the spoils. If you’re white, you can be completely oblivious, passively accepting the status quo, and reap the rewards.

A lack of understanding regarding what racism actually is, the belief that White supremacy is “normal” in society, the inability to see the manifestations of racism because they do not experience them and are shielded by White privilege, as well as self-protection from the label that they fear most is why Whites call people of colour “racist” and from my experience, seem to take great pleasure in doing so when that person of colour is Black.

Related Essay List: On Race…

princesspills said:

how do you feel about people who say that trying to eradicate things like dress codes is pointless because it's "not oppressive enough"? people have told me that theres no point in trying to fix these issues because there are bigger issues to worry about (such as acid attacks on women in Pakistan).

I think people who say that shit need to remember the pyramid of oppression and do some reading into how even microaggressions contribute to a kyriarchal system of oppression and privilege.

image

A lot of people seem to implicitly think that racism, misogyny, and homophobia are fairly rare things in our society. The corollary to this is that racist beliefs are only held by racists, and racists are the sort of extreme aberrations from mainstream society who burn crosses on people’s lawns. So when you say that what person X said is offensive, they think “No way! Person X wouldn’t burn a cross.” I think this is where “it wasn’t intended to be offensive, so it must not be offensive” comes from.

This worldview presents a double whammy, because even if you can convince them something is technically problematic, it’s not related to any systematic problems in our society, so it’s still no big deal.

— 

A comment by Autumn Harvest on No Cookies For Me: Blatant Sexism *Isn’t* Benign, Thank You…

I’ve experienced some of this from friends recently—not that what they say can’t be offensive, but they don’t understand that sexist, racist, heterocentrist, ciscentrist, ableist, etc. beliefs are actually widely held, by people who may or may not be otherwise fairly decent human beings (although how decent one can be while supporting the continued disenfranchisement of an already oppressed class is debatable.)

Both men and women…knew exactly how to respond to female nudes: women had internalized their object status and men had internalized their subject status.

….

Interestingly, both men and women felt uncomfortable looking at male nudes.

Men responded by either expressing extreme disinterest, re-asserting their heterosexuality, or both.  They did not compare themselves to the male nudes (like women did with female nudes), except to say that they were both male and, therefore, there was “nothing to see.”  Meanwhile, because men have been trained to be a lustful sexual subject, seeing male nudity tended to raise the specter of homosexuality. They couldn’t see the bodies as anything but sexual objects for them to gaze upon.

In contrast, the specter of homosexuality didn’t arise for women because they weren’t used to being positioned as lustful.  Eck explains:

"When women view the seductive pose of the female nude, they do not believe she is ‘coming on to’ them.  They know she is there to arouse men.  Thus, they do not have to work at rejecting an unwanted advance.  It is not for them."

Many women also did not feel lustful when looking at male nudes and those that did often experienced lust mixed with guilt or shame.  Eck suggest that this may be, in part, a reaction to taking on the active, consuming, masculine role, something they’re not supposed to do.

….[Eck] writes:

"Men, over and over again, reject the seductive advance [of a male nude].  While some women welcome the advance, most feel a combination of shame, guilt, or repulsion in interacting with the image…"

This is what it means to live in a world in which desire is structured by a gendered sexual subject/object binary.  It’s not just “out there,” it’s “in us” too.

Racism Isn't Only American. White Supremacy Isn't Only Western.

A common comment, tweet, or email that I receive on a weekly basis from someone White (and occasionally people of colour who deny racism’s existence in attempt to protect their psyches) involve two assertions. (This is not hyperbole; it’s already happened twice this week.) One is that racism is primarily an American problem. The second is that White supremacy is a construct that only applies in certain places. 

Both assertions are false. These assertions are based on the presumptions that: 1) White people can determine where racism is. White people are not in the position to make this assertion as Whites do not experience racism. Just because they don’t feel that racism exists in a place doesn’t mean that it is not there. Further, they are not going to “see” it because White privilege obscures their perceptions in terms of noticing it. I am used to White men Whitesplaining and mansplaining this. But the fact that White women also make this assertion is rather comical, and not ha ha funny but please get out of my face with the nonsense funny. White women would flip tables if White men dared to tell them where sexism and misogyny are or are not (which White men actually do). Yet magically they think they are in the position to determine where racism is or is not. 2) Varying population densities where Whites are a numerical minority erases racism and White supremacy. This is also false. Whites do not have to have a numerical majority for White supremacy to exist. Because Whiteness impacts the entire globe—you know the globe where over 80% of it has been impacted by colonialism and White supremacy—yet of course actual White people are a numerical minority globally, clearly it can be seen that this is not a numbers issue. Power, platform, and money lie in the hands of small groups that are often White (and usually cis hetero male) lead. Governments, global corporations, and more are concentrated in power and regardless of the race of the person “in charge” reflect the whims of imperialist White supremacist capitalist cisheteropatriarchy. 

On an Ask that I replied to in regards to why I capitalize “Black” and “White” this comment was left by amyleona

I usually use White, but there are some times when I don’t think it should be capitalised. By capitalising White, you absolutely are forcing the reader to think about White supremacy in every context. This is a very Western thing*, so there are some cases were White supremacy is not a factor or were there is a difference between White and white. e.g. In Syria, there are many white people. Those of European descent I would describe as White, since they carry that world-wide privilege (especially Westerners). But there are also white Arabs. Though they carry privilege in a lot of the world, the racial dynamics within the region are very different. *White supremacy is a Western concept, based on the actions of Western nations around the world. Much of it is based in the racial dynamics of the US. These principles cannot be applied across the board, to every culture.

False. White supremacy is a global issue. Now, this does not mean that intersectionality and understanding kyriarchy in terms of intersections and matrices gets ignored. White supremacy is only a part of the picture, hence the term “imperialist White supremacist capitalist cisheteropatriarchy.” Thus, while “ethnic” Whites (i.e. see How The Irish Became White, the racial differences among Jews [not all Jews are White in terms of race], or how certain Europeans are still deemed not “White enough” [i.e. some Eastern Europeans]) and Whiteness itself, (while the latter is not a culture) is hierarchical by ethnicity, nationality, class, and other intersections, this does not mean that White supremacy as a factor evaporates. It complicates, not evaporates.  While one particular culture may have some Whites who dominate other Whites, this does not mean that the existence of the latter Whites then erases White supremacy as ideology, construct or oppression. To think of White supremacy in terms of American dynamics alone eschews the fact that much of the racism, the legacy of slavery in sheer size actually occurred outside of the United States (i.e. Brazil). Much of the colonialism globally impacts America (in terms of capitalism and trade) yet didn’t occur here. The idea that White supremacy evaporates when White people are not present or when some Whites are oppressed for other facets of identity beyond their race is simply untrue.

While cultural facets and country/culture-specific histories have elaborate nuances that diverge from American history or even Western concepts of history, the notion that White supremacy doesn’t apply because of elaborate intersectional facets is untrue. For example, the Arab Slave Trade of Africans or the fact that even some Indigenous people in America owned Black slaves doesn’t mean that White supremacy was no longer a factor. In fact, it complicated what was already complicated. Oppression is intersectional and hierarchical. Vertical and horizontal. And when I mention White supremacy, it is not to imply White = oppressor, anyone else = oppressed as the entire picture of oppression. It’s more complex.

There’s actually a third assertion that I receive almost weekly as well. It is an admission that sure, racism is in America and White supremacy is a problem, but it is “worse” in America. Again, this is not an assertion that Whites are at liberty to make. Even within America, there are Northerners who cling to the notion that all Southern racism was “worse.” (Some stick to that today. Meanwhile Black trans women are regularly murdered in Northern cities…). This worse/better perception within America reminds me of something that James Baldwin wrote:

Northerners indulge in an extremely dangerously luxury. They seem to feel that because they fought on the right side during The Civil War, and won, they have earned the right to merely deplore what is going on in the South, without taking any responsibility for it; and that they can ignore what is happening in Northern cities because what is happening in Little Rock or Birmingham is worse. Well, in the first place, it is not possible for anyone who has not endured both to know which is ‘worse.’ I know Negroes who prefer the South and white Southerners, because ‘At least there, you haven’t got to play any guessing games!’ The guessing games referred to have driven more than one Negro into the narcotics ward, the madhouse or the river.

Whites cannot be so desperate to escape culpability from the fact that they benefit from White supremacy (which racism and colourism are directly tied to and are global problems) that they seek to make it a “problem” that is “over there” and that has nothing to do with them. And this is a consistent stance from Whites looking from the outside into America. Ironically, often during the same weeks that I receive these "nope, your country is more racist" emails from Whites, people of colour from the same places (especially if Canada or U.K.) have another story for me. Literally in the same week many times. This is White privilege…the idea that Whites are in the position to dictate what people of colour experience from a system of oppression that they benefit from.  

While it is important to recognize the multiple faces and facets of oppression, trying to remove the global albeit varying impact of White supremacy is a futile exercise that is often less about recognizing intersectionality and kyriarchy and more about removing the culpability of Whites and discomfort that discussions on Whiteness evokes. 

Related Essay Lists: On Race…, On Race II

aceofmoxes said:

Can you recommend any education resources, please?

With regards to what, specifically? Intersectionality is a complex, branched thing. I’m literally always learning. A personal favorite is always medievalpoc. I can probably find a specific resource for anything your looking, but I won’t vouch for it since I’m not on first-term basis with most if any moderators of these blogs.

Below are a list of resources. Assume trigger warnings. I do not vouch any of them as being non-problematic or intersectional in their approach. None of these are necessarily 101 blogs; in fact, many explicitly aren’t. READ their FAQs, ‘About’s and ‘Bio’s. This not at all exhaustive or complete or balanced.

Honestly, just search a tag and look at the blogs that come up. Just searching ‘intersectionality’ in any search engine is super helpful. Do not fucking harass these blogs, people.

Avoid anything that’s ‘trans-‘/’gender-critical’ or radical feminist ‘radfem’ if you want to avoid learning how to be a hateful bigot and transmisogynist.

Check Your Able-Bodied Privilege

Several months ago I was at a library reading quietly to myself. I saw a middle-aged White man in a motorized wheelchair trying to remove a chair from a table so that he could scoot himself in and use a computer, but the chair seemed practically stuck to the rug (the feet of the chair to the carpet) so it was taking him longer to do so versus an able-bodied person. Like a complete fucking idiot, I went over to help him by starting to move the desk chair out of his way (though I did not and would NEVER touch his actual wheelchair). Did he ask for my help? No.

He calmly said to me, "I got it, thank you." As soon as he said that, I realized what I had done. I felt truly awful and ashamed of myself. I apologized and he knowingly smiled, as if he realized what I realized about myself.

Other able-bodied people have admitted to me that they’ve done the same. Why do able-bodied people do this? Not thinking. Assuming that the world will end if it takes one person 2 or 3 minutes to move a chair versus 10 seconds is ridiculous. It also is about an able-bodied person feeling discomfort with seeing a person having a more time-consuming experience doing something that we take for granted because of able-bodied privilege. Further, it comes from a place of presumed superiority. Being in a place of privilege at any intersection means that the status quo aligns with your experiences, not the oppressed’s experiences. Not only does it align, every morsel of culture continues to subtly and overtly imply the superiority of the person with privilege over the oppressed person. White privilege and racism. Male privilege and sexism. Heterosexual privilege and homophobia. Cis privilege and transphobia. Thin privilege and fatphobia. Class privilege and classism/poverty. Able-bodied privilege and ableism. The list goes on. This is why consistent checking and deconstruction is necessary. This is why womanist/feminist thinking is a journey; no one reaches “perfection” where they no longer make mistakes, but accountability for those mistakes is CRITICAL. Back-peddling, denial and other nonsense is unacceptable.

People with disabilities face a variety of things from microaggressions to discrimination to oppression. Even if I did not engage in overt ableism and shaming of disabilities, my benevolent ableism—assuming I was being “nice” by placing his disability in the forefront and trying to play hero, versus recognizing his own agency—contributed to the problem of ableism in our society, and it’s something that I definitely never want to do. I truly wish re-realizing this did not have to come at the expense of another human being as to why I apologized, but I am definitely working to do better.

Related Post: On The Fear Of Being Different: Childhood, Audism and Able-Bodied Privilege

Text
Photo
Quote
Link
Chat
Audio
Video