AfroLez®femcentric Perspectives: DSK AND JUSTICE: THE POLITICS OF GETTING OFF IN A RAPE CULTUR

afrolez:

DSK (Dominique Strauss Kahn) AND JUSTICE: THE POLITICS OF GETTING OFF IN A RAPE CULTURE

CONNECT NYC and Columbia Law School’s Center for Intersectionality and Social Policy Studies and their Center for Gender and Sexuality Law are hosting an Open Forum on Thursday, Oct. 13, 2011 at…

Source: afrolez

AfroLez®femcentric Perspectives: "Am I Troy Davis? A Slut?; or, What’s Troubling Me about the Absence of Reflexivity in Movements that Proclaim...

afrolez:

Sister/Comrade Stephanie Gilmore, who spoke at SlutWalk Philadelphia, is, to the best of my knowledge, one of the ONLY anti-racist White Feminists who has PUBLICLY SUPPORTED the IDEA/PREMISE of SlutWalk while PUBLICLY CHALLENGING its CURRENT RACIST REALITY.

With her FULL PERMISSION, I have…

Source: afrolez

…I do not dig debating with young white feminists late into the night about white privilege and having other Black women in the thread have to call out the supposed anti-racist feminists for not speaking up, for yet again forcing Black women to do the exhausting work of teaching. I do not dig being told on the interwebs, –tumblr, other blogs, the Slutwalk NYC FB page–that Black women are being hyper-sensitive and divisive. I do not dig being intellectually insulted with the assertion that I simply didn’t understand “Yoko and John’s intent.” As if.

Y’all know that saying about intentions and well, perhaps you should also recognize that we are long past the point of talking about intent when we talk about racism. We should be talking about impact. (Rest in Power to the venerable Dr. Derrick Bell, father of Critical Race Theory, whom we have to thank for that little insight.) Intent is about individual relationships and hurt feelings; impact is about systems of power and their impact on material realities…”
~ Crunk Feminist Collective “I Saw the Sign but Did We Really Need a Sign?: SlutWalk and Racism” ~

READ IN ITS ENTIRETY HERE

http://bit.ly/qRf9kK

(via afrolez)

Source: afrolez

“The Amazon archetype appears to be highly mutable, and easily interpreted according to the whims of subjective taste. The Amazon was an antisexual man hater, or she was an aggressive, demanding sex object. She served the system by emulating men, or she was a rebel expanding the meaning of femininity, a threat to patriarchy. She was a demeaning, impossible fabrication, or she was an upraising, revelatory reality. She was objectified as fearful and repellent, glamorous and appealing; a destructive and negative role model, or one that was ideal and suitable for all young girls. For many, the Amazon was a fascination, a fixation, a flirtation, to hate or to admire. As I see it, there must be a reason why the typical textbook overlooks the woman warrior ninety-nine percent of the time, and creates instead a corrupt history, whether of samurai society or castle life in medieval Europe, that is grotesquely false in its portrait of absent or subservient women. This oversight indicates that the Amazon is indeed perceived as dangerous to the status quo, or her history would not be shunted aside so completely. But if even feminists are divided for and against her, it may well be that the Amazon thrives in a shadowy area that neither serves nor entirely destroys the patriarchal order. She exists apart from the conventionality of humdrum politics and theories. Whatever her meaning, purpose, or effect, the Amazon’s history should be more easily accessible, whether theorists choose, according to their own prejudices and personalities, to use her as proof of women’s infamy or valor and greatness.” -www.moonwarrior.com
Pop-upView Separately

“The Amazon archetype appears to be highly mutable, and easily interpreted according to the whims of subjective taste. The Amazon was an antisexual man hater, or she was an aggressive, demanding sex object. She served the system by emulating men, or she was a rebel expanding the meaning of femininity, a threat to patriarchy. She was a demeaning, impossible fabrication, or she was an upraising, revelatory reality. She was objectified as fearful and repellent, glamorous and appealing; a destructive and negative role model, or one that was ideal and suitable for all young girls. For many, the Amazon was a fascination, a fixation, a flirtation, to hate or to admire.

As I see it, there must be a reason why the typical textbook overlooks the woman warrior ninety-nine percent of the time, and creates instead a corrupt history, whether of samurai society or castle life in medieval Europe, that is grotesquely false in its portrait of absent or subservient women. This oversight indicates that the Amazon is indeed perceived as dangerous to the status quo, or her history would not be shunted aside so completely. But if even feminists are divided for and against her, it may well be that the Amazon thrives in a shadowy area that neither serves nor entirely destroys the patriarchal order. She exists apart from the conventionality of humdrum politics and theories. Whatever her meaning, purpose, or effect, the Amazon’s history should be more easily accessible, whether theorists choose, according to their own prejudices and personalities, to use her as proof of women’s infamy or valor and greatness.” -www.moonwarrior.com