#arab supremacy is the ME version of white supremacy | Explore Tumblr posts and blogs

papirouge · 6 months ago

Note

https://www.tumblr.com/researchgate/751723182896054272/funny-how-you-talk-shit-about-al-jazeera-but-then

Example of terfs supporting Israel with the argument of “well Gaza banned abortion” HUH. Also the tags are disgusting “people complain when Jewish people do this but not when Muslims do this” Trump literally banned Muslim immigration, do terfs think Muslims are privileged?

What a weird and ironic connection with terfs and conservatives

Thank you anon but I lowkey resent you bc the ask in the link legit made me lose braincells 💀

"birth control is illegal in Gaza, as is homosexuality"

Saying that "birth control is illegal" is retarded if you don't define what kind of birth control you're talking about. Choosing celibacy or refraining from sex to not get pregnant ARE forms of birth control. Are Palestinian women legally forced to marry/have sex, @/old school butch?? ...oh my bad, you're probably one of those racist uneducated idiots who think of Arab women and immediately thinks they are all forcibly married at 9 y.o.

Also from what leap does she assume not accessing to birth control = female not "owning" their body? This pattern of thinking is a general consensus among radfem and I never understood it. Those women cannot conceptualize women *not* needing fertility control medication to "own" their body.

I assume she's actually talking about medicalized form of birth control, which then reveals in their mind contraception pills/device = birth control = full body autonomy. They admit entirely relying on some medication to own their body. That's VERY ironic because it shows they're not that different from trans identified people (they hate so much) who rely on hormones to be their true self ™️. Apparently women need hormone control medicine to "own" their body 🙃

And same goes with the "homosexuality is illegal" thing. Homosexuality being "legal" doesn't mean gays being safe and vice versa. Palestinians been fighting for DECADES against colonization, deportation and oppression and this sheltered (white?) woman be really like "but what about gay people??? 🥺" ....She's dumber than a door knob.

"bred in captivity to supply martyr for the revolution" this whole sentence reeks fake concern with a sprinkle of whitefem saviorism. Let's make something clear : women like that butch don't care about those women. She's literally projecting some disgusting breeding fantasy scenario from the words of one (1) moid to brush Palestinian women like broodmares deprived from any sense of self to push her dehumanizing agenda against Palestinians.

It would never occur to that white butch that those non white women may actually wanted those big families. Noooo, they are just poor victims of that evil Islamist patriarchy forcing them to pop up the next generation of martyrs!! Also note the typical whitefem eugenicist urge to freak out at the thought of women having 6 children...that would inevitably end up becoming terrorists.... that's why birth control is sooo important to stop them from existing. But yeaaaaah those radfem are totally NOT edging on white supremacy and that's just some stupid TRA conspiracy LMAO

That's why I know OP is White : the whitefem saviorism (homonationalist version) is POPPING out there. Nothing like paternalistic white women distressed at seeing women oversea having lots of children... GOD FORBID non White women have children and reproduce... WITH (SAVAGE NON WHITE) MEN??!!

"this suffering was known and accepted by their leaders" which "leaders"? The Hamas ? That hasn't been voted for for like 10-15 years ? Can't wait ppl start advocate to collectively punish USAmerican voting in war criminals Bush & Obama a few years ago.

What "suffering" is she even talking about?? Who's the actual cause of it, BUTCH?? I ain't no Hamas supporter but the Hamas 1/is not a feminist movement 2/whole point of existence is to defend and free their land. Whining about them not doing enough for women(??) is silly. Someone tell that dummy there won't be Palestinian women to defend if there's no more Palestine..

TL;DR : That butch is the average white woman hiding behind feminist to dismiss entire system of oppression (such as Zionism) that override genders. regardless they're gay, radfem, butch, etc. White feminists are NOT to be trusted when it comes to defend WOC. They will inevitably side with White supremacy and are the dumbest people ever when it comes to geopolitics and womanhood worldwide beside their sheltered western bubble. They should keep seething against TRA to pretend being subversive, and let actual women with a brain talk.

bonus the most stupid tags I seen in a while :

"no one say shit when middle east women suffer" *ME WHEN I LIE*

MIDDLE EAST WOMEN ARE LITERALLY TOKENIZED 24/7 BY WHITE PEOPLE AND FEMINISTS LIKE YOU WITH THE ONLY PURPOSE OF DEMONIZING ARABS AND ISLAM.

"when it's Israeli women their suffering is either denied of justied"

PLEASE TELL FOR WHOM THE #METOOUNLESSYOUREAJEW HASHTAG WAS MADE FOR?? QUICKLY. WHICH ONE BETWEEN PALESTINIAN OR ISRAELI WOMEN HAVE THEIR SEXUAL ABUSE LITERALLY INVISIBILIZED AND DON'T HAVE THE PRIVILEGE OF HAVING A HASHTAG DEDICATED TO IT??

*when Arab do this it doesn't matter"

STOP LYING. THE MISTREATMENT OF WOMEN IN THE MIDDLE EAST HAS TO BE THE MOST COVERED ASPECT OF MISOGYNY WORLDWIDE. OTHERWISE HOW WOULD YOU IMMEDIATELY PULL OUT THE "HONOR KILLING" "STONING" ETC. GOTCHA WHENEVER WE TALK ABOUT MAYYYBE NOT GENOCIDING ARABS??? SHUT UUUUUUUUM

Those women made me lose 35% of my braincells BYE AND GOODNIGHT

#old-school-butch #zionism #radfem #white feminism #whitefem be whitefeming #answered #Palestine #homonationalism

3 notes · View notes

infiniteglitterfall · 1 month ago

Text

those must be some EXTREMELY Confused Jews, because "professing loyalty to Israel" sounds like something from a Jewish AU of the McCarthy Era.

Or else what they're saying is being misunderstood.

Which is what these memes imply to me.

Here. I'm a "Diaspora Zionist." Can you explain to me why you think of Zionism as professing loyalty to Israel?

I fully agree that Israel is a nation-state that does all the things nation-states do. Can you explain to me what that has to do with Zionism?

People seem to have two main definitions of Zionism. One is basically "a specifically Jewish movement in support of genocide."

This is the "Zionism = [Racism/Genocide/White Supremacy]" version.

The other one is basically "the belief that it's okay for Israel to continue to exist."

The second one is effectively what the belief of every Zionist I've ever met boils down to.

For several months last year, I thought that all the vehemently anti-Zionist people were redefining it, from "what people who call themselves Zionists actually believe" to, basically, Jews 4 Genocide.

But the more I heard from the movement, the more people I saw saying that Israel shouldn't exist. In a very immediate, concrete kind of way.

Like, "Jews go back to Poland; all of it is Occupied Palestine; Israel isn't a country, it's a genocidal settler-colonialist project and there are no innocent Israeli civilians; Israel should be wiped off the face of the earth."

The meme above about "a small group of European Jews who explicitly said they were doing colonialism" implies to me that you're talking about the latter.

Personally, as an American citizen, living in a state that wiped out the Yahi people entirely, I find it extremely confusing that we point our fingers at anybody else. And yet, there's no word for the belief that it's okay for the United States to continue to exist.

Maybe that's partly because if we could wave a magic wand and instantly give all the land back to the groups it belonged to 500 years ago, transporting everyone else back to one of their countries of origin, the indigenous groups here no longer have the social infrastructure they used when they were self-governing. Or the number of people that let their societies function. Or the ecosystems that let their societies function. Or, often, their languages and cultural practices. Or their homes. Or a way to maintain the infrastructure that's there now.

Also, that's not what they're asking for, at all. The Palestinians are in a very different situation in a lot of ways, but they're the exact same on this point. Hamas is explicitly fighting for the violent destruction of Israel; its propaganda is why that idea has spread so far here. But the two-state solution is the only one that has any traction in Gaza:

In a June survey across a representative sample of 1,500 randomly selected Palestinians in both the West Bank and Gaza, support for a two-state solution, "side by side with Israel," was MUCH higher in Gaza than in the West Bank. Possibly because Hamas treats the people of Gaza like poisonous garbage.

A specifically anti-Zionist group seems like a bad idea to me, both because it implies Bad Things for two million Arab Israelis and nearly half the Jews on earth, and because it's the opposite of centering and supporting Palestinians.

I assume that your group isn't actually out there demanding that Israel get wiped off the earth, but what is it for? (wait. Unless it's JVP?) (If it's one of the JVP chapters that's like,

then I guess I understand what it's FOR, just not why it's Like That.)

my local Jewish antizionist group keeps getting emails from very confused Jews trying to square the circle of how we can be Jewish without professing loyalty to Israel so i made some educational memes

i also made one for the Christians so they wouldn't feel left out :)

#jewish antizionism #Wall of words #fuck Hamas

2K notes · View notes

eviltothecore13 · 2 years ago

Text

Some aspects of the 60s Addams show have aged really well but some...uh, really haven’t...

There’s some really dubious depictions of non-American/non-white cultures at times but also. It’s really noticeable in the way they talk about evil historical figures at times...like, the 90s films explicitly depict the Addamses as anti-racist, the 60s show *sometimes* seems to be trying to go for that (they often seem to hold people from different cultures in high regard, even if the actual depiction of those people in the show is based in stereotypes), in the musical they’re very explicitly progressive, but the 60s show will sometimes namedrop historical figures who were monstrously racist/bigoted as if this is the kind of crime that can be made funny?

Like, it’s one thing for the Addamses to have ancestors who were pirates and outlaws...them having ancestors who were Confederates (and not being ashamed of those ancestors, even praising them) though is just unfunny imo and goes against the idea that the Addamses are unbiased and welcoming--yet the show seems to treat the latter just as lightly as the former? The same goes for Morticia referring to Ivan the Terrible as “sweet” (i.e. not just being interested in the history around him but expressing approval of him) when...he wasn’t just some kind of cartoon supervillain, he was specifically very antisemitic to the point of murdering huge numbers of Jewish people simply for being Jewish, and yet...this is the same show where Morticia uses Yiddish semi-frequently (and later versions of the characters have Wednesday potentially in a relationship with a Jewish boy and things like “Sunrise, Sunset” or stepping on a lightbulb at a wedding)...

It’s not even consistent with how the Addamses are depicted at other moments in the same show... there’s plenty of moments in the show where they come across as very much NOT the kind of people who’d support Christian religious fanaticism (which is what Ivan the Terrible was, in a particularly twisted way) or white supremacy. (I mean, despite the stereotypes in Mbogo’s depiction, Gomez considers a Black African doctor to be far more qualified and trustworthy than anyone else, and he’s also friends with a Haitian Vodou practitioner who we never meet but who is presumably Black since afaik it’s a closed practice... there’s also the occasional implication that Gomez has Indigenous ancestry in some episodes even though this version of him is played by a white guy and is mostly depicted more as Spanish than Latino.) (For that matter they’re also depicted as anti-monarchy several times which makes calling Ivan the Terrible “sweet” even weirder...like, Wednesday and Pugsley still say things like “down with tyrants!” when it comes to monarchy.)

Also just some of the PHRASES used are really dubious and go against the characterisation... there’s one episode where they mention having Inuit cousins, who they are apparently on fairly good terms with (and in general there seem to be lots of interracial relationships in the family as people all over the world are mentioned as part of the family, with a wide variety of names such as Arabic names, Spanish names, etc--and the films add Black members of the family shown in the background in the party scenes to this) but then it’s used to make an “Indian giver” pun which...yikes.

And it’s a large part of why, despite having plenty of influences from the show on my fics and headcanons, I really can’t ever bring myself to actually write in the show continuity (I write in the films continuity but with a lot of elements from various other versions thrown in--but only the films are canon and unchanged). Aside from more harmless ways in which things like...likes and dislikes of the characters, or how good they are at certain things, will be inconsistent from one episode to the next, which annoys me.

I really do love the show at its best, but...at its worst it can be truly infuriating.

#the suggestion of 'benito' as a baby name in the films was a bit dubious for me honestly BUT #at least in that case given that they also suggest 'mao'#and those two had pretty opposite views #it can be taken as they don't actually agree with either of them politically #and just wanted a name that would strike fear etc #and also they decided against it #some lines in the 60s show sound like the writers really didn't see the difference #between the characters being OK with Crimes/duels/violence but being unbiased and welcoming #vs them being OK with extreme bigotry?#tw racism #tw antisemitism #the addams family

9 notes · View notes

new-sandrafilter · 5 years ago

Photo

Behold Dune: An Exclusive Look at Timothée Chalamet, Zendaya, Oscar Isaac, and More

Timothée Chalamet remembers the darkness. It was the summer of 2019, and the cast and crew of Dune had ventured deep into the sandstone and granite canyons of southern Jordan, leaving in the middle of the night so they could catch the dawn on camera. The light spilling over the chasms gave the landscape an otherworldly feel. It was what they had come for.

“It was really surreal,” says Chalamet. “There are these Goliath landscapes, which you may imagine existing on planets in our universe, but not on Earth.”

They weren’t on Earth anymore, anyway. They were on a deadly, dust-dry battleground planet called Arrakis. In Frank Herbert’s epic 1965 sci-fi novel, Arrakis is the only known location of the galaxy’s most vital resource, the mind-altering, time-and-space-warping “spice.” In the new film adaptation, directed by Arrival and Blade Runner 2049 filmmaker Denis Villeneuve, Chalamet stars as the young royal Paul Atreides, the proverbial stranger in a very strange land, who’s fighting to protect this hostile new home even as it threatens to destroy him. Humans are the aliens on Arrakis. The dominant species on that world are immense, voracious sandworms that burrow through the barren drifts like subterranean dragons.

For the infinite seas of sand that give the story its title, the production moved to remote regions outside Abu Dhabi in the United Arab Emirates, where the temperatures rivaled the fiction in Herbert’s story. “I remember going out of my room at 2 a.m., and it being probably 100 degrees,” says Chalamet. During the shoot, he and the other actors were costumed in what the world of Dune calls “stillsuits”—thick, rubbery armor that preserves the body’s moisture, even gathering tiny bits from the breath exhaled through the nose. In the story, the suits are life-giving. In real life, they were agony. “The shooting temperature was sometimes 120 degrees,” says Chalamet. “They put a cap on it out there, if it gets too hot. I forget what the exact number is, but you can’t keep working.” The circumstances fed the story they were there to tell: “In a really grounded way, it was helpful to be in the stillsuits and to be at that level of exhaustion.”

It wouldn’t be Dune if it were easy. Herbert’s novel became a sci-fi touchstone in the 1960s, heralded for its world-building and ecological subtext, as well as its intricate (some say impenetrable) plot focusing on two families struggling for supremacy over Arrakis. The book created ripples that many see in everything from Star Wars to Alien to Game of Thrones. Still, for decades, the novel itself has defied adaptation. In the ’70s, the wild man experimental filmmaker Alejandro Jodorowsky mounted a quest to film it, but Hollywood considered the project too risky. David Lynch brought Dune to the big screen in a 1984 feature, but it was derided as an incomprehensible mess and a blight on his filmography. In 2000, a Dune miniseries on what’s now the SyFy channel became a hit for the cable network, but it is now only dimly remembered.

Villeneuve intends to create a Dune that has so far only existed in the imagination of readers. The key, he says, was to break the sprawling narrative in half. When Dune hits theaters on December 18, it will only be half the novel, with Warner Bros. agreeing to tell the story in two films, similar to the studio’s approach with Stephen King’s It and It Chapter Two. “I would not agree to make this adaptation of the book with one single movie,” says Villeneuve. “The world is too complex. It’s a world that takes its power in details.”

For Villeneuve, this 55-year-old story about a planet being mined to death was not merely a space adventure, but a prophecy. “No matter what you believe, Earth is changing, and we will have to adapt,” he says. “That’s why I think that Dune, this book, was written in the 20th century. It was a distant portrait of the reality of the oil and the capitalism and the exploitation—the overexploitation—of Earth. Today, things are just worse. It’s a coming-of-age story, but also a call for action for the youth.”

Chalamet’s character, Paul, thinks he’s just a boy struggling to find a place in the world, but he actually possesses the ability to change it. He has a supernatural gift to harness and unleash energy, lead others, and meld with the heart of his new home world. Think Greta Thunberg, only she’s a Jedi with a degree from Hogwarts. Paul comes from a powerful galactic family with a name that sounds like a constellation—the House Atreides. His father and mother, Duke Leto (played by Oscar Isaac) and Lady Jessica (Rebecca Ferguson), take their son from their lush, Scandinavian-like home world to preside over spice extraction on Arrakis. What follows is a clash with the criminal, politically connected House Harkonnen, led by the monstrous Baron Vladimir (Stellan Skarsgård), a mammoth with merciless appetites. The baron, created with full-body prosthetics, is like a rhino in human form. This version of the character is less of a madman and more of a predator. “As much as I deeply love the book, I felt that the baron was flirting very often with caricature,” says Villeneuve. “And I tried to bring him a bit more dimension. That’s why I brought in Stellan. Stellan has something in the eyes. You feel that there’s someone thinking, thinking, thinking—that has tension and is calculating inside, deep in the eyes. I can testify, it can be quite frightening.”

The director has also expanded the role of Paul’s mother, Lady Jessica. She’s a member of the Bene Gesserit, a sect of women who can read minds, control people with their voice (again, a precursor to the Jedi mind trick), and manipulate the balance of power in the universe. In the script, which Villeneuve wrote with Eric Roth and Jon Spaihts, she is even more fearsome than before. The studio’s plot synopsis describes her as a “warrior priestess.” As Villeneuve jokes, “It’s better than ‘space nun.’ ”

Lady Jessica’s duty is to deliver a savior to the universe—and now she has a greater role in defending and training Paul too. “She’s a mother, she’s a concubine, she’s a soldier,” says Ferguson. “Denis was very respectful of Frank’s work in the book, [but] the quality of the arcs for much of the women have been brought up to a new level. There were some shifts he did, and they are beautifully portrayed now.”

In an intriguing change to the source material, Villeneuve has also updated Dr. Liet Kynes, the leading ecologist on Arrakis and an independent power broker amid the various warring factions. Although always depicted as a white man, the character is now played by Sharon Duncan-Brewster (Rogue One), a black woman. “What Denis had stated to me was there was a lack of female characters in his cast, and he had always been very feminist, pro-women, and wanted to write the role for a woman,” Duncan-Brewster says. “This human being manages to basically keep the peace amongst many people. Women are very good at that, so why can’t Kynes be a woman? Why shouldn’t Kynes be a woman?”

As fans will know, there’s a vast menagerie of other characters populating Dune. There are humans called “mentats,” augmented with computerlike minds. Paul is mentored by two of them. There are also the bravado warriors Duncan Idaho and Gurney Halleck, played by Jason Momoa and Josh Brolin. Dave Bautista plays a sinister Harkonnen enforcer Glossu Rabban, and Charlotte Rampling has a key role as the Bene Gesserit reverend mother. The list goes on. In the seemingly unlivable wilds of Arrakis, Javier Bardem leads the Fremen tribe as Stilgar, and Zendaya costars as a mystery woman named Chani, who haunts Paul in his dreams as a vision with glowing blue eyes.

The breadth of Dune is what has made it so confounding for others to adapt. “It’s a book that tackles politics, religion, ecology, spirituality—and with a lot of characters,” says Villeneuve. “I think that’s why it’s so difficult. Honestly, it’s by far the most difficult thing I’ve done in my life.” After finishing this first movie, he’ll just have to do it all over again.

#timmy #timothee chalamet #dune 2020 #paul atreides #denis villeneuve #zendaya #Rebecca Ferguson #Oscar Isaac #Josh Brolin #my edit

654 notes · View notes

seewetter · 3 months ago

Text

I went into detail on this here. The relevant section starts at "Fair point".

But I'll summarize:

If we want to understand the role reproductive exploitation has played historically (and whether it's the main driving force behind the patriarchy, which is what I understand Talia is saying) then we have to deal with the fact that it originated very early, likely before we even have written records. So it's not like white supremacy, where the architects of white supremacy left a paper trail that explains why they did it and what they were thinking.

And any attempt at understanding what patriarchy is or how to end it will have to grapple with the diversity of social relations, from Assyria and Harappa to Great Fulo and Oyo, where gender may have worked very differently.

Simple narratives like "patriarchy was everywhere and unsolvable and then the Enlightenment toppled it" or "patriarchy is a Western invention and pre-colonial societies were saints when it comes to gender" are unlikely to be true and are definitely not helpful, given the current state of evidence.

Talia and I don't necessarily disagree here, but I think we place emphasis differently. For Talia, it was important to reject the idea of the West as the ultimate villain -- as far as I understand, this is because it serves to excuse other villains -- and for me that rejection felt too one-sided, because there is something strange about the fact that:

In India, the earliest writings (like Bhagavat Gita) come from Indo-European settlers and the society they replaced (Indus Valley civilization) shows no archaeological signs of gender oppression

In China, most of the neolithic shows no signs of gender oppression (to the point that academics have been unsure about what's going on) until at some point someone seems to have invented it

In places like Java and Borneo, the earliest writings come from contact with Indo-European merchants and travelers.

In Africa, all Europeans are able to say about gender comes from contact that happened after Islamic missionaries had been let lose on the region for hundreds of years.

In Europe, most pre-Christian history was deliberately destroyed.

In the Middle East, a lot of pre-Islamic culture was deliberately destroyed (a look at Arab religion prior to Islam for example reveals tremendous blindspots).

In Latin America, there are no pre-colonial sources. We can say that the Popol Vuh is an authentic reflection of Mayan pre-colonial myths, but the fact remains that it was written after colonization. I personally believe it's an authentic reflection and scientifically that's probably more plausible, but it's still stunningly important.

I will summarize this: wherever you look in the world, cultures that either are Western or very strongly influenced the West have had control over our historic records -- with maybe the exception of China.

Now you might argue (and Talia does) that this is immaterial, because there are so many smaller cultures that have engaged in patriarchal practices and lots of indications that they did so prior to Western contact.

But it's important to realize that

the human timeline goes back hundreds of thousands of years, most of which we have no written records for

quite a few societies have records we can't decipher (Indus Valley civilization for example or Inca) and coincidentally (?) were more egalitarian in certain respects than Western societies

sometimes Westerners would show up in places like the Philippines or among the Minangkabau and there had already been heavy cultural influence from successive generations of Islamic missionaries or merchants from Buddhist or Hindu societies, bringing a lot of Indo-European or Abrahamic baggage

So in light of that, the patriarchal practices around the world might come from the way that Indo-Europeans live or think. Or from some other factor that biases us to think that these people are all independently coming up with the same idea.

Now I agree that Talia's version is more likely. I agree that this story of cross-cultural influence bears the burden of proof and is possibly an unhelpful rabbit hole.

But I don't think we can exclude the possibility when we find this widespread censorship. I see this almost less as a research question and more as an opportunity to make people reflect how much we have lost to the censorship efforts of people like Gregory the Illuminator or Charlemagne. The more of the past they destroyed, the less able we are to understand their own role in it. Maybe they were just as patriarchal as the societies they destroyed, but because they destroyed all this evidence, they accidentally created this phantom, this idea that maybe there was something else, something better, that they ruined.

So as you can see Assyria is not really mentioned because of third-sexing. It's mentioned because it goes against certain modern narratives where agricultural revolution = patriarchy. Those narratives are self-congratulatory Western fairy tales that paint the West as saving the non-West from their backwards values.

Again: I'm not making a coherent argument, because Talia's argument is (for the most part) my argument. So Assyria is something I felt would bolster that argument, not something I thought would "debunk" Talia's ideas. Because my "aimless rambling" was aimless, I was often changing the direction of what I was discussing without warning the reader. So while I am supplying information about Assyria (for example), it doesn't necessarily contradict anything Talia said or fully support her line of argument.

The reason I was disagreeing with Talia (and discussing the Old Assyrian period) is because while Talia is correct in principle that Westerners often pretend the world revolves around them (even as villains) it is also the case that sometimes Western influence has in fact been pervasive. That successive waves of Western influence have had negative consequences but also been in contradiction with each other. Maybe the first proto-Western (Vedic) wave in India caused the removal of egalitarianism in Indian society, maybe the Mughals were a later wave (Abrahamic and thus also influenced by Indo-European proto-Western traditions) and then the British came and introduced their brand of nastiness and gender politics. If that's the case (and it is hypothetical, not certain) then in a certain sense the conceited Westerners who think they are to blame would (accidentally, not through their own wisdom and intelligence) be correct. And we shouldn't exclude that possibility, because if it's how history played out then it's how history played out. We shouldn't underestimate this possibility, not in order to normalize a pre-colonial pride in pre-Western pre-patriarchal traditions, but in order to understand how and why patriarchal norms and gendered oppression were introduced and what their social function is.

Now all that speculation may be totally outside the scope of what Talia is trying to do and argue. If the main point is to talk about Third Sexing and about modern day identity in non-Western countries then broad philosophical questions like "where did it all come from?" "why did it happen?" might be out of place.

But that's why I must emphasize again that I was not attacking or trying to debunk Talia's ideas. They may be fit for purpose. Just not for every purpose -- and the kind of things I tend to discuss on my blog are often more those broad questions, so that's the direction my response took.

"Racism is inherent to transmisogyny"

So, are white trans women affected by racism?

This is not a gotcha. I've seen a lot of people on here attempt to discuss racism and (trans)misogyny as co-constitutive, but people never show their work. If racism is in fact inseparable from transmisogyny, is everyone who suffers transmisogyny a victim of racism?

If cis women of color are subject to transmisogyny, is there no distinction between cis and trans women of color, either within or outside the West?

How does the inseparability of racism and transmisogyny operate in global south cultures where imperialism has shaped their history and economy, yes, but the extant regime is not one where white people are a present or meaningful demographic?

I know people mean well, but if you're going to make broad, sweeping statements about these topics, you need to be able to think through your arguments, realize what conclusions you are implicitly promulgating, and reason out whether what you're saying makes sense and matches up with history and empirical reality.

Because I've had experience both with Western and non-Western patriarchies, and I'm fairly sure in that regard, I am a minority on this site.

1K notes · View notes

dillydedalus · 4 years ago

Text

march reading

kinda forgot about this i guess. anyway feat. uh, magical ships, dubious mental health institutions (plural) & a parisian building with 99 rooms.

the forever sea, joshua phillip johnson (forever sea #1) i firmly believe that more fantasy lit should be set on ships bc ships are inherently a sexy setting & you could have pirates which are extremely sexy. this has ships (and pirates) and also a sea made of grass? a magical plant sea on which ships sail via magical fires, so conceptually i’m very into it all. the plot is fine, but the protagonist kindred has a very bad case of Main Character Syndrome so prepare for mild annoyance throughout. also while i generally enjoy book magic vs wild magic i wish more works would treat them as two ends of a spectrum rather than ~book magic bad and boring, wild magic cool and *~natural*~. but overall i think this series has potential. 3/5

jagannath: stories, karin tidbeck ([partially?] translated from swedish by the author) really cool collection of sff stories by tidbeck, many of which veer into mild horror and some of which are influenced by swedish folklore and especially swedish fey stories. i enjoyed most of these a lot, especially the existential call centre horror story, the ‘god won’t let me die’ one, and a taxonomy of a cryptid that goes a little off the rails. 4/5

annette, ein heldinnenepos, anne weber a novel in verse about anne beaumanoir, a real person who was a résistance member during world war 2 and later supported the algerian national liberation front, for which she was sentenced to 10 years in prison (she escaped to tunisia and later algeria). she’s clearly a very impressive and interesting person & i conceptually enjoyed the idea of writing a modern hero(ine)’s epic, but i feel like the language could have been a bit more stylized to match the form. 3/5

salvage the bones, jesmyn ward (audio) bleak but ultimately hopeful novel about a black family in the days before and during hurricane katrina, although the focus is on the family dynamics, the 14-year-old narrator discovering that she is pregnant, and the kids trying to keep the puppies their dog china just had alive and well. enjoyed this, altho i did it a bit of a disservice but listening to it a lot of short chunks. 3.5/5

regeneration, pat barker (regeneration trilogy #1) set mostly at a military hospital for soldiers with shell shock during world war 1, this novel explores the existential horror of war, psychological treatment (& the horrible absurdity of treating traumatised men just enough so that you can send them straight back to Trauma Town), and the meeting between siegfried sassoon & wilfred owen. i find i don’t really have much to say about it, but it is very, very good. 4/5

how to pronounce knife, souvankham thammavongsa a short story collection mainly about refugees and migrants from laos to canada, many focusing on parent-child relationships and being forced to work in low-paid jobs, often ones that are damaging to their health. the stories are very well-observed and emotionally nuanced and detailed, but with 14 mostly very short stories, the collection as a whole felt a bit samey, which i guess is something i often experience with short story collections. 3/5

faces in the water, janet frame horrifying semi-autobiographical novel about a young woman stuck in new zealand’s mental health system, moving to different hospitals but mostly from ward to (more depressing) ward in the 40s/50s. while there is a shift in attitudes during her stay that sometimes makes the wards more tolerable, mostly the patients are neglected, abused, and the threat of electric shock therapy and lobotomy always hangs over them. 3/5

the upstairs house, julia fine fuck why did i read so many books about mental health conditions this month??? this is another entry in my casual ‘motherhood as horror’ reading project, in which a new mother develops post-partum psychosis & imagines the modernist children’s book writer she’s writing her dissertation on and her poet sometimes-lover haunting her and her child (margaret wise brown & michael strange, who are real people i was utterly unaware of). this does pretty good on the maternal horror front, but i wasn’t entirely sold on the literary haunting. 2/5

1000 serpentinen angst, olivia wenzel a very interesting novel about a woman struggling with grief over her brother’s suicide, an anxiety disorder, the (non)state of a (non)relationship and discrimination/marginalisation based on her identity as a black, east-german, bi woman (while also being, as she notes, financially privileged). much of the novel is written in a dialogue between the narrator and an unnamed (& probably internal) interlocutor, which was p effective for a novel more focused on introspection than much of a plot. 3/5

atlas: the archaeology of an imaginary city, dung kai-cheung (tr. from chinese by the author, anders hansson, bonnie mcdougall) fictitious theory about a slightly-left-of-reality version of hong kong and how maps (re)construct the city, very heavy on the postmodern poststructuralist postcolonial (and some other posts, i’m sure). in many ways my jam. unfortunately my favourite parts of this were the author’s preface and the first part (fictitious theory of mapping alternate hong kong); the rest felt very repetitive and not particularly interesting, altho i’m sure i was also just missing a lot of cultural context. 2.5/5

under the net, iris murdoch .........i liked the other two murdochs i’ve read (the sea, the sea & a severed head) quite a lot so either i was not in the mood for her very peculiar style of constructing novels and characters or, this being her first novel, she just wasn’t in full command of that peculiar style yet but man this was a slooooooooog. don’t stretch out your modern picaresque with an incredibly annoying narrator over more than 300 pages iris!!!! 2/5 bc this probably has some merit & i just wasn’t into it

the impossible revolution: making sense of the syrian tragedy, yassin al-haj saleh (tr. from arabic by i. rida mahmoud) collection of articles and essays saleh (a syrian intellectual & activist who spent 16 years in a syrian prison) wrote from 2011 to 2015, analysing the reasons for, potential and development of the revolution, as well as some background sociological discussion on the assads’ regime. very interesting, very dense, very depressing. wouldn’t necessarily recommend it as a first read on the topic tho. 3/5

angels in america: millenium approaches & perestroika, tony kushner the page to tumblr darling quote ratio in this is insane (”just mangled guts pretending” and so on) and also it just really slaps on every level. also managed to get me from 0 to crying several times. brilliant work of theatre, would love to see it staged (or filmed). 4/5

life: a user’s manual, georges perec (german tr. by eugen helmlé) 99 chapters, each corresponding with a single room in a parisian apartment block; some chapters are basically ‘here’s the room, here’s a long list of objects in the room, that’s it bye :)’, some are short insights into the lives of the people living there, some (the best, mostly) are long, absolutely wild tales that are sometimes only tangentially connected to the room in question. why are the french like this. 61/99 rooms

sisters in hate: american women on the front lines of white nationalism, seyward darby (audio) nonfiction about women’s role in white nationalist hate movements, mainly based on the stories of three women who are or have been involved with various contemporary american alt-right/racist/neonazi hate groups, while also looking at general social trends and the history of white women’s role in white supremacy. interesting and engaging if you’re interested in this kind of thing. if you’re both politically aware and internet poisoned, it’s probably not much that is completely new to you but still worth reading. 3/5

starting in april i will be Gainfully Employed (ugh) & thus probably not read as much or read even more bc i have no energy for anything else

#the books i read #long post

6 notes · View notes

theletterformallyknownasq · 5 years ago

Text

Miski - October 13th, 2018

Me: October 13th, 2018. Sitting down with Miski Noor. First question is how did you receive your name. Miski: How did I receive my name? It's interesting. When I was cooking in my mom's uterus, the story that she's told me is my father wanted to name me, and he got with his brothers and they wanted him to name me Canab, which is actually the Somali word for "grapes." And my mom was like, "nah, you're not going to name my first born - my first daughter - grapes.” *laughs* So my mom decided to name me Miski. My whole name is actually Arabic. And Miski is the Arabic word for "Scent of Jannah" which is "heaven". And my whole name is actually Miski Ali Noor. So, Miski is scent of heaven. Ali is the masculine version of Aaliyah, which means most exalted one. And Noor is one of Allah's 99 names and means "Light of God." So my full name is ‘Scent of Heaven Most Exalted Light of God.’

Me: That's beautiful. Miski: Somali comes from "Somaal", which means “go milk”; go milk the camels, go milk the goats, etc. We were actually a nomadic people and traveled with herds of animals wherever to get our needs met. That's where we come from. And so even now being immigrant and migrant, we‘re still nomadic, we've always been traveling across fake ass borders that weren't there because that's just how humanity works, you know? Me: Oh my god. *laughs* I'm just thinking of this transcription app and how it’s definitely not going to recognize how to write out your name. It's extremely racist. Not to deviate from your answer, tying this back in. The only accents it recognizes is English - North American English, European English, whatever English. And then the available accents are - and this is incredible - French, German, Russian, and then European Spanish. And that's it. Miski: You're not super surprised right? Me: Nah, but there's no way I can transcribe your full name - Miski: I could probably write it down for you. Me: True! Because it's so beautiful. There's nothing in my set of vocabulary or knowledge that I know that can articulate your name, which is like speaking to the lack of power the english language holds. [It] has “so” much power until it's intimidated by something it doesn't recognize. Miski: I mean, it's so limited and I'm not surprised when we think about white supremacy and how this world fails us. Like, what does it want to know. One of Nayyirah Waheed poems was like "you have one word for love. I have seven in my language." You know what I mean? Your skinny language can't even come close to holding the abundance of people outside of it. So, English is limiting because white supremacy is limiting and can't even possibly come close to encompassing all that we are and all that we have and all that we've even been before it all existed. Even in choosing my tattoos. The first tattoo I wanted was something that was hella Black, hella African, and I got an Adrinka symbol because I wanted Somali, but I didn't want English characters on my skin. So I got an Adrinka symbol, because that's the closest I could come to what I was searching for.

Me: And that helps with leading up to the next question. How do you identify? Pronouns et al? Miski: The way I like to move through the world is I like to use They/Them primarily and She/Her occasionally. I like a 70/30 split, and if people can't hold that, I ask them to just use They. But for the last three to six months, no matter what space I'm in, whether it's random strangers on the street or all Black intentional movement space, I'm hearing way too much “She.” And so I've been in this space of feeling like people can't hold the distinction that I want, so I'm just going to force them to just use They. I identify as a Queer, gender nonconforming femme. I identified as a woman for a long time because I didn't know I could identify as anything different. Like, I came into my Queerness later in my life and I think part of it is being a Virgo and not even imagining how anything could be different or seeing anything different.And then when I would think ‘I don't have to own this title of woman, of womanhood, I don't have to,’ it was a freedom that I hadn't known or experienced before. I could just be femme. For me, "woman" isn't just encompassing who I am. Most days, I just think of my gender as "Miski". Sometimes I'm like a fairy, you know? I don't prescribe to gender. It's also limiting to how it feels to me. I associate womanhood with suffering in a way. And it's just this identity of having to serve everybody else, having to be subjugated, having to fit into this particular role, and I've seen how people have reclaimed womanhood, especially Black womanhood. And I love and respect that. But still, even then, it's not me. So yeah. So gender nonconforming femme is where I'm at. Me: Yeah. How does it make you feel when people over-call you "she" pronouns? Miski: There is a pain that I associate with it and erasure and invisibility. And it's painful because my conditioned tendencies, the ways I've learned to move through the world in order to protect myself, are to be invisible. If you can't see me, you can't hurt me. But I'm naming that I don't want to be invisible. I'm naming my gender identity to you and you're still not honoring that. So even when I break out of the ways that I've learned to protect myself, when I say I want to be seen, you're still refusing to see me. There's pain associated with that. Me: Do you share those sentiments with...I don't like this word, or the words used to describe this. Do you feel that way or do people assume you're Black American or assume you're only African? I talked a little bit about that with another subject. Miski: We all get our Blackness questioned, right? Your Blackness is always questioned. Everybody's blackness is questioned. Are you Black enough? Are you too Black? And even questioning where your Blackness comes from. It's just another way of Othering. And another way of being placed into a particular box because Antiblackness is the fabric of this world. But in every single culture, every single nation, religion, people, anti-blackness exists. So I can't get away from my Blackness. And I think, like most Black people in figuring out my identity, that's something I tried to do as a young kid. I remember in the second grade not wanting to go out into the sun in the summer time or on breaks because I didn't want my skin to get any darker. Me: Wow. Yeah. So now we've gotten to the heart of the interview finally. I was gonna incorporate this comment that Charlene [Carruthers] made last week around Blackness being essentially Queer. Queerness being about expansiveness, about talking to the multifaceted elements of Blackness and how it isn't casted as a Beyonce on Rihanna whatever the fuck people think in their heads. So, how do you define Queer and how does that coincide with your definition of your own Blackness and your identity? Miski: For me, I took up Queer because it is all-encompassing. Lesbian feels like a box. Gay feels like a box. Queerness is like whatever the fuck it is to me in this moment and it could shift in the next moment. And I agree with Charlene in that Blackness is Queerness, like Blackness is something that everybody is trying to quantify or qualify or categorize in some sort of a way. Blackness is always being policed. "This is what Black is" and "This is what Black isn't." And to even be able to claim my own Blackness is a way for me to validate myself and my own existence. And for me to say that I'm here and that I'm real and you can't tell me what I am or what I'm going to be. And that my potential and the impossibility of me is not actually not impossible - that it is possible and here I am - here is the manifestation of me. The same way you're saying about the language we are using; English is so limiting. I think Queerness could even be expanded upon. You can't say what Queer is or isn't because I say what it is for me and somebody else's Queerness can be different and that's totally fine because that's what it is. Me: Wow. Now I don’t wanna ask you the other questions because I'm loving the organic conversation we're having right now. Talking to the old way of understanding this umbrella. I thought of Queerness as a prism, where we are just beams of power, casted through this one thing that doesn't really change but consequentially changes us, every time we own who we are. So, what do you like or don't like about the mainstream definition of Queer identity, if there is such a thing?

Miski: Yeah. Even when I say Queer or think about it, there is a particular brand of white Queerness. Who gets to decide what your identity is and how you move through the world? There is a privilege in that. Right? So there's a part of it that we have to come up against, and because of that whiteness, a part of it is reclaiming what Queerness actually is. It's limited. Politically, you have to change what that definition is. There's also us embracing our own power, moving in it where it's not just being in opposition to whatever white Queerness is or how white folks are expressing it. But how we get to stand in our power and own it. That admitting your Queerness is limited because you don't have more of a gender/racial/global analysis on what power is and how it functions in this world. Because Blackness is Queerness, and you're not fulfilling your understanding of it if you don't know how to hold the humanity of Black folks, of immigrant folks, of folks whose humanity isn't honored When this country was founded, you had to be white, male, moneyed and a landowner to be considered a citizen. What are the qualifications for Queerness? How are we dismantling and destroying [the term] so how Black and Brown folks express Queerness is actually the standard? It's not a full Queerness if you're not actually holding us in our humanity. That's just more white supremacy, except you move a little differently than other white supremacists. And you want to be held by the world, but don't want to hold the rest of the world. It's actually us standing in our power and deciding that we get to name this, we get to say what it is, and we get to offer this fuller definition based on the fact that we just fucking exist, we're here and we're real and you have to actually contend with that. Me: Can you expand on how important it is that the world understands us, what Queer identity and culture means? We have all these different things like LGBT. Or LG, at this point. It ends where Trans & Queer folks aren't included. How important is this expansiveness in the way you define ‘Queer’? Not just to liberation of folks like us but for other folks who are at the margins or the fringes of society? Miski: So I feel like when this current iteration of the Black Freedom Movement first popped off, it felt like somebody pressed the GO button for Black liberation. Part of the reason I signed up is because of the analysis of this current movement. The Civil Rights Movement was limited in its ideology in some ways - needing a charismatic male leader, and only one or two, deeming that we can't have a movement without that. This expansion on what it means to be a leader, what it means to be Black, what it means to be a Black Queer feminist, and having the framework of intersectionality that Kimberly Crenshaw has provided has folks finally in practice of that, and that is so incredibly important. One of the things that I heard that has always stuck with me is 'nobody is free until Black Trans women get free'. So when Black Trans women have their full humanity honored, then we are all actually free. And I think that's what is important for people to understand. Folks who currently benefit from this system - from the systems of capitalism, transphobia, white supremacy- their humanity is also tied up in this relic. They might think they might be benefiting but they've lost so much of their souls. You have so much of your humanity to reclaim because you can't even see my humanity. There is no freedom or liberation without my freedom or liberation, and your full humanity can't be realized and honored truly if I can't be free or liberated in this world. Adrienne Marie Brown said something around like "One of the most fucked up things about this current world is that we're not even able to imagine the impossible." We just don't question what's possible and we just live with what has already been created.So folks who prescribe to the current systems or just move inside of them don't even know how free they could be. They don't even know how much of their humanity is inaccessible to them. Even scientifically we only have access to only 10% of our brains - what is going on with that other 90 percent? What is the magic that we could reclaim? We have more than enough resources, more than enough food, more than enough water to take care of every single human. But instead we put resources into killing people, into exterminating life and so on. And I feel like that's what's at stake. Actual life. What is left for those coming after us? What is the possibility of us? That's what's at stake.

Miski: Everybody's humanity and life and the possibility of life and existing, breathing, loving one another. Having the freedom and self-determination to make those decisions for ourselves socially and politically and emotionally and physically and so on. Me: Seriously. Thank you for that. I've enjoyed my conversations with the other subjects thus far, I'm still learning, so I'm grateful for you and the others for sharing such intimate and personal perspectives on these topics. But on the other side of the politic - what gives you joy? Miski: Our joy is so fucking important, like, our resilience is actually in our joy. If we can't be joyful, we can't be resilient, we can't live. We wouldn't be here if it wasn't for the joy and the love that our ancestors had been able to cultivate to even bring us here to be able to be alive. Without joy, we can’t live. And there is a difference between being alive and living. I get joy from the life of my people. Just seeing Black folks existing and loving. You being able to do this project, this brings me joy. I get joy from the success of our folks. I get joy from ratchet music, twerking. I get joy from Afrofuturism and reading dope Black poets and Black people visioning a different future. I get joy from us eating good food and taking care of ourselves and learning how to take better care of ourselves. I get joy when I see us in community with each other because the ways that capitalism wins is by isolating us into individualism and us thinking we don't need each other. When we come against these systems. Even in our movement building, our relationships are our greatest infrastructure. Us building great infrastructure and building great relationships and knowing that I can go to my community to get what I need and don't have to lean on these systems.That brings me joy. All of that makes us resilient so that we can continue to build different worlds for our people, Me: How do you define safe, not safety. Safety feels like an -ism. Miski: So this question feels scary because like when do I actually feel safe Me: Well, that's kind of ironic. Miski: It's hard because I don't feel safe that often. You know? Like at any given moment, especially doing Black liberation work, the state could come banging on my door and, as an immigrant, they can take that shit away. It's so fleeting and it's not guaranteed. So I feel like I'm like in this perpetual state of fear and not knowing I'm scared all the time but I know as a nomad - with borders and nationalism - this shit could be taken away from me at any given moment. But I know at my back, there's all the skills and experiences I have but then also my ancestors are at my back and are flowing through me. So it's actually really arrogant to think I go through anything by myself. I'm never by myself. My community, my people, my ancestors, my skills and my experiences are always with me. And I think when I'm grounded in that, when I'm centered in it, where I come from, where I'm going and where I'm at and who I come from, that is when I feel the most powerful and that is when I feel the most safe - if I ever feel safe. I am not alone. It’s then when I remember that is when I feel safe. I think that's why it feels fleeting, because it depends on me being centered in that knowledge and proclaiming that I am the protagonist of my own story and I'm here - slaying dragons with my people. Me: Last question. If you could address the most influential figures and decision-makers in the state right now, what would you say about improving the standard of living for someone like yourself living in Minnesota? Miski: Get the fuck out of the way. Just get the fuck out of the way. We need the resources. We have the vision. And we will get freer so much quicker if you just let us do the thing. The world has not set you up because of your positionality to be able to get us free. And you have a lot of listening to do, a lot of learning to do, and a lot of power to hand over. You've got the same people running the same organizations for 20 years. It's stagnant because it's the passing of the baton to the same types of people for the most part. Like, it doesn't make any sort of sense and you're not going to get me free. You can't get me free. I can get you free, but you can't get me free unless you are a Black/Queer/Immigrant/Muslim/Femme/Trans person. Most times, you can't even comprehend my existence, so how could you ever validate or make it any easier for me to exist unless you are in conversation with me and you're handing over your power? Yeah, there are folks who are our allies and who are doing work, but it's a constant state of work. As somebody who holds all of these different identities, I have anti-blackness and white supremacy inside of me that I constantly have to work at. As somebody with power and privilege, how much work do you think you have to do? How much of your humanity do you still have to reclaim? How much personal transformation work do you have to do? ‘It is our duty to be transformed in the service of this work,’ like Mary Hooks says. And so you have a lot of work to do and a lot of power to just hand the fuck over if you are actually interested in a world that is capable of holding me. And if you want to play a role in actually getting us to that place. Move, Bitch! Get Out The Way, Bitch, Get Out The Way! Me: Thank you. So much.

#interviews

1 note · View note

wellesleyunderground · 6 years ago

Text

Wellesley Writes It: Interview with Dr. Crystal M. Fleming ‘04 (@alwaystheself ) on her new book, HOW TO BE LESS STUPID ABOUT RACE

Crystal Marie Fleming, PhD, is a writer and sociologist who researches racism in the United States and abroad. She earned degrees from Wellesley College and Harvard University and is associate professor of sociology and Africana studies at Stony Brook University. Fleming writes about race, sexuality, and politics for publications including The Root, Black Agenda Report, Vox, and Everyday Feminism, among others, and she has tens of thousands of followers on social media. She is the author of Resurrecting Slavery: Racial Legacies and White Supremacy in France, which was published by Temple University Press in 2017, and How To Be Less Stupid About Race: On Racism, White Supremacy, and the Racial Divide, which was published this past fall by Beacon Press. Dr. Fleming is also writing a children’s book Rise Up! How You Can Join the Fight Against Racism, to be published by Henry Holt in fall 2020.

Wellesley Underground Founder and Editor-in-Chief, Shelly Anand, and Wellesley Underground’s Wellesley Writes It Series Editor, E.B. Bartels, had the opportunity to speak with Crystal about her new book, her evolving education around race and racism at Wellesley and Harvard, and her thoughts on the state of race and racism in the U.S., France, and the world.

Crystal: Thank you so much for taking the time to check out my book and to feature it on Wellesley Underground.

Shelly: We saw people talking about it on Twitter and both E.B. and I had a chance to read it over the holidays.

Crystal: Thank you for reading it!

E.B.: Of course! I am always excited to read a book by a fellow Wellesley alum.

Shelly: We were both interested in hearing about your process for how this book came about and when you realized that you wanted to write it. How did you make this book become a reality? What sparked the idea of I need to write a book about how people need to be less stupid about race?

Crystal: The short version is after the 2016 election I was feeling a lot of things: disbelief, despair, and anger, but also really motivated to write a book for the general public. My first book, Resurrecting Slavery, was an academic book, which was based on my dissertation. That came out in 2017. And while I was really happy with that professional milestone, I didn’t want to restrict my writing to a small group of academic specialists. So, I wanted to write something for a broader audience but I wasn’t sure what it was going to be. Then, finally, the idea for How to Be Less Stupid About Race crystallized in the aftermath of the 2016 election. As you can tell from the title, it was really about me being fed up with a lot of the racial ignorance I saw across the political spectrum. After I came up with the title and the pitch, I found a literary agent (Michael Bourret of Dystel, Goderich & Bourret), wrote a chapter that spring, and then really completed the bulk of the writing between summer 2017 and early 2018.

Shelly: E.B. and I loved the book’s blend of your personal experiences, pop cultural references, and citations to academic works in sociology and critical race theory. How did you find the balance in what voice to use, as both an academic and a younger black woman on social media?

Crystal: That’s a good question. I would say that blogging and social media really helped me bring together the academic topics with language that could, hopefully, reach more people. I’ve spent a lot of time learning how to write clearly about my scholarly work and interests on social media, where millions of people have read my writing over the years. I wanted to write beyond an academic context so my blog was a space for me to reactivate my creative writing and to share some of my thinking in public and that was very different from strictly academic manuscripts. Once I started writing on my blog, and then eventually on Twitter, I developed a new way of distilling and explaining really complex ideas.

The great thing with social media is that people will tell you what they think about what you are writing. Sometimes folks will ask you: “What do you mean by that?” That helps with that distilling and clarifying. I started getting feedback from people and what I found was that a lot of people understood what I was saying, which was pretty reassuring.

Academics usually don’t receive any special training for writing in an accessible manner, so it took me a long time to develop that skill and find my own voice. I really wish graduate schools and doctoral programs included more opportunities to learn to write clearly so that academics can broaden our teaching and impact, but instead we typically learn to write with a lot of jargon.

E.B.: Shelly and I also were hoping you could talk more about your academic work, before you started writing for a broader audience.

Shelly: Yeah, we were both also really interested in your dissertation and your research on white supremacy in France.

Crystal: Really?

Shelly: Yes! I’ve been to Europe and have experienced racism there as a brown woman. In France, people have always assumed that I am of North African descent. When I was reading Ta-Nehisi Coates’s book, Between the World and Me, and read all his glowing passages about the “lack of racism” in France, I got really annoyed.

Crystal: Me too!

Shelly: Coates didn’t touch on what Algerian French, Moroccan French folks have gone through. What Muslim French have gone through.

Crystal: Or black French people, right?

Shelly: Right, absolutely. You touched on this topic in your book a bit, but we wanted to hear your thoughts about this widely lauded writer, particularly on topics of race, glossing over the black French experience in his book.

Crystal: I found that part of Coates’s book annoying as well, but also pretty typical. I also understand it as a genre of African-American expat writing that fits well into the narrative white French people want to tell about their country. Coates is far from the first first black American writer to go to France or some European country and feel that they are experiencing some personal liberation from U.S.-style racism. That’s a long history.

Shelly: Yes, he definitely adopted from Baldwin. That was another question I had.

Crystal: Baldwin though was more sophisticated in many ways in terms of his racial analysis and his analysis of racism in France. I don’t agree with everything he says about racism in France. One of the things he said that was that the Arab or North African is “the n****r of France,” which is problematic because it erases black French people and France’s history of enslaving Africans and their descendants and building the world’s largest plantation economy and what would later become Haiti. But, nevertheless, Baldwin did have analysis of French racism. I know that Ta-Nehisi Coates has some awareness of it, but, in his book, I didn’t see any rigorous engagement with the work and experience of French people of color or prominent black French writers, for example, with Franz Fanon, to just name one black French intellectual, activist, and anti-imperialist who has been widely ignored in France but is well known in Francophone studies outside of France. So I was disappointed, but I was not surprised. It’s part of a long tradition. It’s understandable for me, but it’s lamentable, this tradition of black U.S. citizens myopically focusing on how well they are being treated and not paying attention to the racialized minorities, most of whom are there in Europe because of a colonial and racist relationship.

E.B.: So, while we are criticizing Coates, another critique of Between the World and Me is that he was writing it for a white liberal audience. I know a lot of black people who have read his book felt like he wasn’t writing anything new, and clearly he was pandering to and writing for this white liberal crowd. You said that with your newest book you were trying to write for the general public, but who was the intended audience of your book?

Crystal: That’s a great question, thank you. I wanted to shift from a strictly academic audience to a broader audience to help educate and inspire people to mobilize against racism. But the way that I write, the tone that I take, the nature of my critique, the fact that I am wig-snatching people across the political spectrum, I thought, Wow, I am going to alienate a lot of people. I have no idea what kind of reader is going to be ready for this. I wanted to write the book for myself first and foremost, and I wanted to express what I had to say about racism and white supremacy and what I know about the topic from studying it in a way that was authentic to my style and that was reflective of my values and knowledge. I wanted to be uncompromising in that. But I also knew because my style includes occasional cursing and sentiments like fuck the New York Times, all of that presents a certain kind of challenge in figuring out who your readership is going to be. Although I wasn’t exactly sure what kind of reader could roll with my punches, I had some reason to believe there was an audience for this book. One was my community of enthusiastic readers on social media. Having tens of thousands of followers, as well as millions of readers, engaging and supporting my writing has been very powerful for me as an author. And I also had a lot of brilliant academic colleagues, scholars and experts on race and racism, who encouraged me to write the book and told me it was necessary. My girlfriend also encouraged me throughout the process, when I worried about how the book would land with audiences. To tell the truth, I’ve pleasantly surprised––throughout the book tour, and seeing people react to the book online––that it has indeed resonated with quite a few people. And that has been surprising to me, because I didn’t know who those people would be and I was sort of hoping they would exist! The response has been incredibly positive. The book has only been out a few months and it’s already sold thousands of copies!

To answer your question: It was not my intention to write to only a white liberal audience. The book explores my own reflexivity and my own difficulties dealing with and understanding these issues as a black woman, so my imagined audience included people like me: black folks and people of color, because we have a learning process, too. As I say in the book, no one is born woke, and no one is except from internalization of racial ignorance. We all have work to do. And for those reasons, I didn’t want to just write this for white people.

E.B.: Thanks for explaining that, Crystal. I always feel like you can tell the best writing is when the writer is writing for themselves, and people who get it, will get it.

Crystal: It’s tough though! Part of me wants to find the widest possible readership. Everyone wants to have a bestselling book, of course. But, ultimately, I am committed to saying what I have to say and in the way I need to say it. If you can hang with me and engage with what I have to share, that’s great. If not, it is what it is. I’m not religious, but I did grow up in a Pentecostal church, so, to paraphrase Jesus: “Whoever has ears to hear me, let them hear.” What’s really paramount is knowing that I have my integrity, which for any writer or artist or creative is really the most important thing.

Shelly: You were very self-reflective in your book about on your education in critical race theory. We were wondering about your education at Wellesley. You talked about coming into your own in terms of critical race theory in your 30s, ten years after your graduation from Wellesley. So how did your education at Wellesley start or not start that process for you? And what should Wellesley be doing to help students learn about these issues sooner rather than a decade after graduating?

Crystal: My time at Wellesley laid the foundation in very important ways, for my understanding critical race theory years down the line. When I write and speak about my education, I often say some pretty critical things about my experience at Harvard. Comparatively, I have much fonder memories about my undergrad education, though I can’t say I was particularly happy socially at Wellesley. But I learned about systemic racism for the first time at a sociology class at Wellesley and that was life changing for me. I took a course on African-American Sociology with Professor (emeritus) Judith Rollins, a black woman sociologist, and the course introduced me to the works of W.E.B. Dubois and other black sociologists and critical thinkers. At the time, I did not have the historical and political literacy to understand the significance of all that work at the time, but it was an opening for me and it paved the way for me to eventually deepen my knowledge of race, racism, and white supremacy. For example, we had to read to read a book in Dr. Rollins’s class entitled The Death of White Sociology, an anthology that came out in the ’70s and, it appeared to me, I was twenty-one at the time, to be a super radical text. I didn’t understand why black sociologists had to write a book challenging “white sociology”. I didn’t realize the extent to which white scholars imposed their epistemological frames and practices to the exclusion and marginalization of black people and people of color. It would really take me a number of years to really understand what occurred in the United States in the aftermath of the Civil Rights Movement. It was an era where it became increasingly difficult to discuss white supremacy because of the rise of empty rhetoric around diversity and inclusion, the myth that we have already arrived in post-racial america. As I learned much later, this was exactly the problem that critical race theorists were dealing with when the legal system and political culture pretends to be color blind.

The Death of White Sociology is really not taught widely outside of Black Studies and African-American Sociology courses that very few people take in school. I am one of just a handful of professional sociologist who have taken a course like that because it is not required. So indeed, Wellesley really laid the foundation and opened my eyes.

What can Wellesley do to improve? That is really good question as I imagine the context has changed somewhat since I graduated in 2004. I am not sure what courses are being taught now in Africana Studies and Sociology. We’d also need to know more about what the institution is currently doing to meet the needs of students and faculty of color. They can always do things to diversify, not just the faculty but also the administration. We can see that now with President Johnson, but frankly, it shouldn’t have taken so many years for us to have an African-American president. But diversity is not enough. We also need to make sure our institutions, our educational institutions included, are centering perspectives of people of color. It is not always a guarantee that just because you have brown black faces that you have radically different pedagogy, curriculum and institutional practices. This is all ongoing work.

E.B.: Great points. Thank you.

Shelly: There were two things I wanted to ask for our Wellesley Underground readership. I really appreciated your discussion of being a woke black woman in a biracial relationship. I know there are a number of alums, myself included, who are folks of color and are in social justice and racial justice circles and are partnered with white folks. I know personally people who are surprised when they learn that my husband is white. What advice do you have for people when they encounter that? And my other question is for people who are dating: what are the signs that you would look for in a white partner, that this person shares the same values as you? I know for me one moment was when I was in a mostly white space with my now-husband and a white person referred to another white person using the n-word and my husband called out that person. I was like ok I can be with this guy.

Crystal: Did this happen this during the trial period [of your relationship]?

Shelly: Yes we were still dating. We were at this party and a white woman called out to her friend hey my n-word and my husband was like woah woah woah you don’t get to say that! The woman said, haven’t you ever heard of reappropriating? And my now-husband said, you don’t get to reappropriate shit!

Crystal: So she was appropriating reappropriating?! Oh my god!

Shelly: After that, I realized that I could be with this guy. I didn’t need to do anything. So my questions kind of dovetails into two areas: dating white folx but also how white folks need to call out other white folks, both of which are topics you address in your book.

Crystal: Well, first, I definitely identify with people acting surprised when they learn you are in an interracial relationship. I was recently on C-SPAN and some ignorant woman called in to say your message is that you are hating on white people and I want to know what you think about interracial relationships, I would guess that you would hate that kind of thing. I told her I had a whole chapter of my book just for her--the chapter on interracial intimacy and love, where I actually discuss being in an interracial and interethnic relationship and share scholarship on the subject as well. There are people who have a really warped, racist understanding of anti-racist activism, who assume that people of color who want racial justice and human rights hate white people. It’s a deeply racist perspective and a typical racist trope. It’s absurd, offensive and it is gas-lighting. But you know, it’s also not particularly surprising, because racist whites accused peace-loving Martin Luther King of being a hateful terrorist. The FBI treated him like an enemy of the state. So we have to be mindful of that. I also think there’s a general problem, that your question is getting at, about white people being unaccustomed to calling out white racism. So when whites who are used to ignoring and tolerating racism encounter a black person or a person of color who opposes racism, many assume that person hates them personally. It’s a sad commentary on the poverty of their understanding of love––which seems to require keeping quiet about oppression. People with good sense and a functioning moral compass understand that being anti-white supremacy is not the same thing as being “anti-white”.

Shelly: I go through this with my children who are biracial––people say, how can you talk about white people when your children are half white? When I talk about white people, I’m not talking about specific individuals, I am talking about a system. And when white people get defensive, I always say, don’t make it about you.

Crystal: Very few people would ask women who partner with men, well, if you are dating a man, how can you talk about sexism? How can you talk about gender inequality if you are dating a man? Since when does forming a relationship with a member of a majority group mean that you can’t address power dynamics and critique the behavior of the majority group?

In terms of things to look out for when you are dating, I mean, I think it’s important to assess whether the people you let into your life have a moral and political commitment to standing up against all forms of injustice, including racism. There are very obvious things, right? Does the person you are dating or partnered with make racist comments? I mean, if they do, and you keep dating them, what does that say about you? I mean, that’s a pretty low bar. I recommend a higher standard. What are they actively doing to build a better, more just society? What are they doing to learn more about the experiences of marginalized groups? How willing are they are be self-reflective and check their own privilege? What are they doing to address discriminatory policies and practices in their community or workplace? How do they handle uncomfortable conversations about race, gender and other forms of difference? If they aren’t even willing to have the conversation, then what are you doing with this person?

Shelly: That is really good advice. I always tell my friends who are dating that they need to bring up something [about racism, sexism, homophobia, etc.] so they know what this person is about.

Crystal: Exactly. You need to know someone’s politics. You don’t want to waste time dating someone who is a committed racist or a transphobe. That’s pretty bad. At the same time, you know, I think we all have blind spots and problematic politics. We’re all learning. So being willing to get called out by--and learn from--the people we love and the people who love us is critically important.

Shelly: But POC are often burdened with having to be the person to bring up these issues, talk about these issues, explain these issues, in addition to experiencing daily micro- and macro-aggressions. So what are some self-care things that you do for yourself, and self-care tips you would recommend to POC, especially women of color?

Crystal: Self-care and community care is such a complicated conversation because it has to do with resources. My access to resources has changed over time. I remember what it was like trying to practice “self-care” when I was broke, and it’s a challenge. Of course, over the years, I’ve progressed in my career, and now have access to the more resources. But when recommending self-care we have to remember that we don’t all have the same access. That’s important to acknowledge, and the self-care conversation can get really annoying when that is not addressed. Therapy, for example, is a really important part of self-care, and I am grateful to have excellent insurance that allows me to access that, but not everyone does. Another part of my self-care is making time for my spiritual practice, which includes mindfulness and meditation. And also making time for fun and pleasure! I love to laugh. When some people read my book they may be surprised to find humor woven into a very painful and serious topic, but that’s because of the kind of person I am. I use humor constantly, my partner and I crack each other up every day, and taking time to laugh is really part of my self-care. I also love really good massages. I get a massage as often as I can afford.

Shelly: That’s actually what I am off to do right now!

Crystal: Good!

E.B.: Now I want to schedule a massage.

Shelly: Thank you so much for taking the time to talk to us, Crystal!

If you enjoyed this conversation with Dr. Fleming and you live in the Boston area, be sure to come to her talk at Framingham State University at 4:30pm on Monday, February 4, 2019! E.B. will be there!

#crystal fleming #crystal marie fleming #crystal m fleming #eb bartels #e.b. bartels #shelly anand #wellesley #wellesley college #wellesley underground #wellesley writes it #wellesley writes it series #harvard #boston #massachusetts #how to be less stupid about race

2 notes · View notes

edenfenixblogs · 11 months ago

Text

The start of this post might come off as hostile. Please understand that I do not mean it in this way, but I need to be blunt about a few things. Bear with me.

The goal of Zionism is not an ethnostate. Which you would know if you had any understanding of the broad meaning and historical implications of Zionism. The only goal that all forms of Zionism is a place where Jews are guaranteed safety and legal protection: location, supremacy, and oppression of other is not inherent to any form of Zionism except for, arguably, revisionist Zionism and definitely revisionist Zionism as practiced by the Likud party.

It is in no way paranoid for me to be extremely cautious and distrustful of people taking my posts in the worst possible faith when people have been doing that to me for months now. It is neither insane nor paranoid of me to consider the possibility that you gave yourself a fake “deactivated” username to avoid facing repercussions for spreading information likely to get Jews harmed.

I am a pro-Palestine diaspora Jew who does not identify with any version of Zionism, and I am telling you that in the few months since 10/7 I have experienced more hatred and violence and threats than I have in the entirety of the rest of my life. Jewish people, Muslim People, and Arab people living in diaspora are all living under intense stochastic threat right now. And the words we all use in public spaces are extremely important to the safety of all of these groups.

You don’t have to like me, agree with me, or even have sympathy for me specifically.

Since you’re so concerned about Ethnostates (which is a topic I’ve written on extensively and won’t go into in detail in this post, but would love to discuss with you further in a separate thread), I will do you the courtesy of assuming that you don’t believe you are antisemitic. In fact, I would assume that you happen to think people of all religions and cultures should live in peace and without constant threats and fear. On that, at the very least, I think we can agree.

However, your addendum to my post is antisemitic, whether you intend it to be or not. (and before you say “anti-Zionism isn’t antisemitism,” you’re right. It’s not. But anti-Zionism as a blanket stance while demonstrating a clear lack of understanding about Zionism as a concept and a multifaceted history of conflicting viewpoints absolutely is. Again, I’m happy to discuss this with you further and to provide sources).

I mean this in the best possible faith. Please do not take this as me dismissing you or your views, but as trying to help you to be sensitive to a people who is suffering right now. Not at the exclusion of Palestinian suffering, but in acknowledgement of Jewish people as an inextricable part of the narrative right now—and not as villains who desire the death of Palestinians:

Have you ever done an honest self reflection to evaluate yourself and whether or not you have antisemitic views? Believe it or not, if you haven’t reflected and actually dismantled these beliefs, then you likely still have them. Antisemitism is old and it is insidious, and unless you actually learn how it works you are likely to spread extremely harmful dog whistles, stereotypes, and conspiracy theories without being aware of it.

It is entirely possible to support Palestinian self determination (I do it constantly!) without being antisemitic in the process. But you have to actually try to avoid antisemitism rather than assume that your good intentions make you immune from spreading antisemitism.

Antisemitism, like all forms of bigotry borne of privilege, must be dismantled both on an institutional level as well as by individuals internally. The same way we’ve had a reckoning about anti-black racism and white privilege, we must have one about antisemitism and gentile privilege.

Even setting the specifics of Zionism aside as I know I’m unlikely to reach you on this topic (although I will always try to foster understanding if given the chance), there were several other antisemitic triggers in this post that would stop a very pro-Palestine diaspora Jewish person from thinking of you as a trustworthy ally.

Some examples include:

Reflexively doubting a Jewish person’s knowledge and understanding of a deeply personal cultural topic and assuming you know better

The characterization of a large group of Jews as motivated by a unifying, hateful, and violent ideology of any kind, especially in order to dismiss them

Assuming, under any circumstance, that Jewish cultural goals in any way advocate for the replacement, control, and subjugation of any other people. This is a fundamental aspect of most forms of antisemitism and is likely why you are so sure of your belief in what Zionism is. Wherever you got that idea and whatever drove you to believe it to be true is deeply tied to how much you trust/distrust Jewish people. It is something you must examine in order to be safe to Jewish people.

General suspicion of Jewish people and their motives is inherently antisemitic—as it reinforces old tropes that Jews are manipulative liars

The extremely antisemitic (and, tbh, ableist) act of seeing a Jewish person expressing distress and immediately accusing them of being “insane” or “paranoid.” If you had any concept of Jewish history at all, you would be horrified that you used either of those words to describe a Jewish person — especially one in distress, and especially when that distress is caused by antisemitism, and even more especially in direct response to a comment about antisemitism.

There are many other examples in your post, but until and unless you are willing to truthfully self reflect and examine these first five and how you engaged in and developed these antisemitic ideas, I doubt you would be willing to learn more.

I’m not asking you or anyone to stop supporting Palestine. I’m asking you to do so while consciously avoiding antisemitism in the process. This should not be a big ask, and if you are actually committed to peace and safety for all you should 1) care enough to try 2) apologize to me (not because you like me or agree with me about Zionism, but because you have been antisemitic in the course of disagreeing with me and that’s not cool) 3) ask me more about Zionism or any other relevant topic to this conflict and the Jewish experience of it all.

You should care about how all of this affects Jews. Our pain and suffering is not an acceptable cost for the safety of Palestinians. Palestinian pain and suffering is not an acceptable cost for Jewish safety. Nobody’s pain should be subject to how much is or is not allowed in relation to anyone else’s.

I am a cultural educator and communicator. I have set aside my own emotional needs in order to have good faith discussions during this time and to provide as much data and evidence and context and help to everyone as I can. If you do want to know how many Jews are feeling, what many of us are thinking, or how this is all affecting us, you should ask me. Not because I speak for all Jews—certainly not! And I’d never claim to.

No, you should ask me because I am one of a few Jewish people right now who have volunteered for the extremely difficult process of opening themselves up to antisemitism in order to have some small chance at reducing antisemitism overall. And because I have a proven track record of advocating for Palestine, Palestinians, and backing that up with actual activism in the form of both education and donation.

You, right now, have an opportunity to grow and be better and cause less harm to people you claim not to hate. You should take it.

Because, here’s the thing, antisemitism is inherently hateful. But being an antisemitic person isn’t. It’s very often just ignorance. The exact same way that being unaware of white privilege or having never dismantled systemically engrained racism is fundamentally racist but also based in ignorance.

You can change this. You can choose to grow. And you should, because if you don’t, it won’t be a matter of ignorance anymore. It will be a matter of willful ignorance and refusal to question yourself or hear a Jewish person who is as kind and willing to engage as you are likely to ever encounter. And that’s not being an antisemitic person being an antisemitic person is something you can change. You can become a non-antisemitic person. But if you refuse to change, then you just ARE an antisemite. It will become part of who you are. It will forever mark you as unsafe to the Jewish community at large (yes, even if you have Jewish friends). You will be choosing to allow your actions to continue to harm Jewish people without making any care for the cost.

You say you want peace. You say you want equality. So do I. Take this chance. Grow. Do better. Please.

Let’s put some numbers to Jewish fear right now.

In news that I’m sure will thrill all antisemites, it would take startlingly little effort to foment widespread violence against us and cause another genocide of the Jewish people.

I have had many fellow Jews express to me how overwhelming it is to see the rising antisemitism. I have seen many Jews express fear at being drowned out of public, online, and IRL spaces due to dangerously violent vitriol.

I have also seen people who claim to advocate for Palestine—especially western leftists—openly mock Jews who express this fear.

Finally, I and my fellow Jews have often expressed that, while we wholeheartedly support Palestinian freedom and self determination, it is exhausting to have to say so repeatedly, especially when we are trying to advocate for ourselves. This is not due to any latent or widespread hatred of Muslims, Arabs, or Palestinians. It is because we are an extremely maligned and marginalized minority that is fighting to be heard against strong, hostile forces that at best wish we’d shut up and at worst want us eradicated from the planet.

There is a disconnect about how much harm people can do to Jews by spreading antisemitism and refusing to dismantle their own internalized antisemitism—and everyone has internalized antisemitism. It is one of the oldest forms of prejudice in the world and is found in almost every single culture. It is as, if not more, pervasive than white privilege. Yes. You read that right. And if asked to elaborate, I will provide numbers on that to the best of my ability. For the purposes of this post, however, I want to focus on the global distribution of religious groups only.

Specifically, this disconnect is between Jews who are fully aware and feel the affects of this damage and goyim who simply do not comprehend our marginalization.

To help, let’s put some numbers to this. In this post, I’ll be using the Pew Research Center’s survey and findings on the Global Religious Landscape. This is the most recent data from a reputable source that I could find which surveyed every world religion at the same time. While the Jewish population has grown slightly in the intervening years, so have most (if not all) other religious populations around the globe. I wanted to use figures measured at the same time to avoid bias for or against any religious group.

For the purposes of this post, I will not be discussing folk religions or other religions. This is not because they are not important. This is because they are not a monolith and individual folk religions and other religions may have even fewer adherents per religion than Judaism. I am currently only focusing on religions and religious groups who have more adherents than Judaism.

In descending order of adherents, there number of people in the world belonging to these groups:

2,200,000,000 (2.2 Billion) Christians

1,600,000,000 (1.6 Billion) Muslims

1,100,000,000 (1.1 Billion) Religiously unaffiliated people

1,000,000,000 (1 Billion) Hindus

500,000,000 (500 Million) Buddhists

14,000,000 (14 Million) Jews

Reduced to the simplest fractions there are:

1100 Christians for every 7 Jews

800 Muslims for every 7 Jews

550 Religiously unaffiliated people for every 7 Jews

500 Hindus for every 7 Jews

250 Buddhists for every 7 Jews

Combined, there are 6,400,000,000 non-Jewish people in religions or religious groups (including religiously unaffiliated people).

This means that for every 7 Jews there are 3200 people in religious groups who outnumber us.

Jews are 0.2 % of the global population.

When we tell you that hate is dangerous, it is because…

It would only take 0.21% of 6.4 Billion people to hate us in order to completely overwhelm and outnumber every single Jewish person on the planet.

And given how violent and aggressive people have become toward us in recent weeks, that doesn’t seem far off.

No, most Christians, Muslims, Atheists/Agnostics, Hindus, and Buddhists do NOT hate Jews.

But if even 0.21% of them do hate us, Jews are at a legitimate and terrifying risk of ethnic cleansing and genocide.

It is not possible for Jews alone to fight this rising tide of hate. There simply aren’t enough of us. And many of us are too scared to tell you the truth: if you don’t vocally and repeatedly stand up for Jews (and not just the ones you agree with) you will be complicit in the genocide that follows. Police your own communities.

Nobody acting in good faith is asking you to abandon Palestinians or their fight for self determination and equality in their homeland. All we are asking is for you to learn about antisemitism, deconstruct it in yourself, and loudly condemn it when it occurs in front of you. We are asking you to comfort us and not run away when we are scared or even angry at you. Because a lot of us are angry with you, because we are extremely scared right now and many of you are not helping us. Many of you are actively and carelessly spreading dogwhistles that further the global rise in hatred against us.

You can support Palestine AND avoid Islamophobia WITHOUT making antisemitism worse. But you can’t stop antisemitism by staying silent in the face of it. And if you don’t speak up, you will get us killed. Silence, in this case, is quite literally violence.

Many of us have armed guards posted at our synagogues and schools and community centers because of this. I certainly had times where my synagogue and school had to have armed security for our safety.

The only reason more of us haven’t died already is because we have millennia of experience in confronting this kind of hatred and guarding against it.

But in pure numbers, if you don’t speak up for us now, we don’t have a chance at survival without support.

So, what can you do, specifically?:

* Make a stand or public statement about condemning antisemitism without mentioning another group. Acknowledge Jewish fear, pain, and current danger without contextualizing it in someone else’s. It could literally be something as simple as “Antisemitism is bad. There’s never a reason for it. I won’t tolerate it in presence in real life or online.” If you cannot bring yourself to publicly make this statement, you should have a serious look at yourself to understand why you can’t.

* Learn about the six universal features of antisemitism and the many, various dog whistles affecting the global Jewish community

* Do not welcome people who espouse rhetoric that includes any features from the above bullet point in your community unless you are able to educate them and eliminate that behavior.

* Check in on your Jewish friends, regularly and repeatedly. Do not wait for them to reach out to you. They are scared of you. Even if you don’t have the emotional space to have conversations about antisemitism. Just send a message once in a while, unprompted, “Jfyi, antisemitism still sucks. I support you.”

* Redirect conversations about which “side” is “right” to how to attain peace. Do this by saying that this line of argument is not conducive to peace, and link to a well-respected organization not widely accused of either antisemitism or Islamophobia that is devoted to achieving a peaceful resolution, increasing education, or providing humanitarian aid to relevant affected groups—including Jews, Israelis, Palestinians, Muslims, and Arabs. You can find over 160 such organizations at the Alliance for Middle East Peace https://www.allmep.org/

* Look to support experienced groups without widespread and verifiable claims of prejudice against either Jews or Muslims or Arabs or Palestinians. Many of these organizations can also be found at the AllMEP link above. Avoid groups on the shit list as well as unproductive and harmful movements.

* Do not default to western methods of political demonstration. Specifically, protests are not useful in attaining peace in western nations at this time. Israelis and Palestinians can and should protest to the beat of their abilities in Israel and Palestine so as to pressure their own governments. However, protests in western nations have proven to be poorly regulated and to further the spread of bigoted rhetoric and violence against Jews, Muslims, Arabs, and Palestinians. Furthermore, there are nearly as many Palestinians in the world as there are Jews. It is extremely easy and common for the voices of bad actors and bigots on all sides to completely drown out Jewish and Palestinian voices and concerns at these events.

* Spend more time listening and learning than speaking and acting. Anyone who tells you this conflict is simple is someone who is lying to you. Take the time to learn the ways in which your actions and words can get people hurt before joining the fray.

* Stop demonizing Zionism as a concept, even if you disagree with it. Understand that it is a philosophy with many different movements that often conflict with each other. The Zionism practiced by Netanyahu and the Likud party is NOT representative of most Zionists or interpretations of Zionism. It is an extremist form of Zionism known as Revisionist Zionism.

* Don’t deny Jewish indigeneity to the levant. It doesn’t help Palestine and hurts Jews by erasing our physical and cultural history as well as erasing the Jews who remained in Israel even through widespread diaspora.

* KEEP THE HOLOCAUST OUT OF YOUR MOUTH

Things That Are Always OK

* Denouncing Antisemitism loudly and publicly

* Denouncing Islamophobia loudly and publicly

* Telling your Jewish and Muslim and Arab friends you support them and won't abandon them

* Elevating the work of respected, widely accepted people and organizations devoted to attaining peace for all, rather than just one group of people.

* Develop media literacy

* Understand what aspects of the current western leftist movements Jews are criticizing, rather than assuming our criticisms are motivated by hatred for Palestine or Palestinians.

* Expressing sorrow for civilian deaths regardless of religion or nationality.

* When you are not Jewish and you share a post about antisemitism from a Jewish person, please say you’re a goy. This isn’t because you’re not welcome to share. This is because it is indescribably comforting to know we aren’t just talking amongst ourselves and screaming into the void. Let us know you are supportive of us. It doesn’t mean that you or we hate Palestine or Palestinians or that we oppose their full and equal rights in our shared homeland.

#antisemitism #antisemites to remember #Zionism #anti-Zionism #jumblr #Judaism

2K notes · View notes

hotgirlbiz · 7 years ago

Text

Between the world and me

Theology Of hope

““ If you like someone, wait.  Give lots of compliments, even if you’re shy. Everyone else is too.  

Change. Get a haircut, try new perfume, get new sheets. Become better than you were before.

Eat healthier. Learn to cook something fancy.  Get up earlier and watch the sun come up.  Wear soft clothes, take a bath, drink something warm.  

Meet someone new, even just a friend.  Become closer with your friends and your family. Call your mother. Cry with your best friend. Tell everyone how much you appreciate them.  

Keep your room clean. Buy some candles. Let the natural light in.   Make a list of reasons why you’ll be better off without them. Believe they are true, because they are.   Listen to new music.   Write everything you’re thinking and feeling. Write letters. Write happy letters, sad letters, and angry letters, even if you’re never going to send them.  It’s okay to be sad, but not forever. Sadness is not as beautiful as music makes it seem. Lack of sleep makes your eyes droopy, not deep. Wake up every morning and tell yourself you’re going to have a good day.  Go to the library. Don’t forget to look in the music section.   Remove them from your life. Get rid of the things they gave you if they make you sad. They’re not worth it. You will never be happy if you continue to hold on to the things that make you sad.  Make new memories.  Try to find something to appreciate in everything you do or experience.  Being alone is okay, you don’t have to surround yourself with people.   Become your own best friend. Buy yourself coffee and drink it alone in a cafe. Take your time.   Learn to love every bit of yourself."

““your eyes do not twinkle like stars, nor does your kiss light sparks upon my lips.

your touch doesn’t set my skin ablaze, nor does your hair shine like woven gold.

your words are not like song to my ears, nor does your smile make my knees weak.

but your eyes do look into mine with love, and your kiss makes my heart beat faster.

your touch brings a smile to my lips, and your hair is soft as my fingers run through it.

your words make me smile and sometimes make me blush, and your smile brings me joy, and makes me smile as well.

you may not be perfect, you may not be the angel of my fantasy, but you are the angel of my reality, and i love you.”

“The meanings of a few names that people would typically think are ghetto and meaningless

LAKEISHA: a swahili name meaning “favorite one”

LATEEFAH: a north african name meaning “gentle and pleasant”

LATONIA: a latin name. latonia was the mother of diana in roman mythology

LATISHA: means “happiness”

TAKIYA: a north african name meaning “righteous”

ESHE. African Swahili name meaning “immortal”

KALISHA. Probably from the Galla word kalisha “sorcerer, wizard, witch doctor, magician”

LEENA (لينا). Another spelling of Arabic Lina (q.v.), meaning “softness.” In use in Africa.

MAKENA. African Kikuyu name meaning “the happy one.”

NIA. African Swahili name meaning “intention, life purpose, mind.”

MONIFA. African Yoruba name, meaning “I am luck,” from mo “I,” and ifa “profit, luck.”

NUBIA. Unisex. African. From the name of the country Nubia, meaning “land of gold,” from the Coptic word for gold.

AYANA : Ethiopian female name meaning “beautiful flower.”

SHANIKA. Unisex. African Bantu name, probably meaning “young one from the wilderness.”

SALINA. African. A name in use in Kenya. It may mean “merciful.”

TAMEKA. Another spelling of the African Congo name Tamika (q.v.), meaning “a twin,”

TAMELA. African Zulu name meaning “she who basks in the sun,”

AMARA. f. African. From the Swahili word amara, meaning “urgent business.”  Hindu. name meaning “immortal.” African. Ethiopian. Amharic amari, meaning “agreeable, pleasing.”

CHICHI f Western African, Igbo Diminutive of Igbo names beginning with the element Chi meaning “God”.

IMANI f & m Eastern African, Swahili, African American Means “faith” in Swahili, ultimately of Arabic origin.

AZIZA f means “Respected. Darling.” Muslim,African, Egyptian, Arabic, Somali name meaning “gorgeous.

DALIA/DALILA f means “Gentle.” African, Arabic, American, Egyptian, Spanish, African, Hebrew

BIBI : An East African female name meaning “daughter of a king.” Also a Kiswahili word meaning “lady” or “grandmother.”

ADA : Ibo of Nigeria name for firstborn females.

ZENA : Ethiopian name meaning “news” or “fame.”

JAMILAH f means “Beautiful.” Arabic, Muslim, African

KALIFA f means “Chaste; holy.” African

RASHIDI/RASHIDA f means “Wise.” Egyptian African Swahili name meaning “righteous.”

TAJ means “Crown.” Indian,Sanskrit, African

FATUMA : Popular Swahili and Somali versions of the name Muslim name, FATIMA, meaning “weaned.”

NANA : Ghanaian name meaning “mother of the Earth.”

AJA : High Priestess of Mecca.

ADINA : Amharic of Ethiopia word sometimes used as a female name, meaning “she has saved.”

BALINDA : A Rutooro of Uganda name meaning “patience, endurance, fortitude.” (Balinda is also used as a male name in Uganda.)

FANTA : Guinea and Cote D’Ivoire name meaning “beautiful day.”

KAYA : Ghanaian name meaning “stay and don’t go back.”

LAYLA , LAILA , LEYLA , LEILA : Swahili and Muslim name meaning “born at night.”

SHANI : Swahili name meaning “marvelous.”

ANAYA : Ibo of Eastern Nigeria name meaning “look up to God.”

TANISHA , TANI : Hausa of W. Africa name meaning “born on Monday.”

ZAKIYA : Swahili name meaning “smart, intelligent.”

TITI : Nigerian name meaning “flower.”

SAFIA , SAFIYA , SAFIYEH , SAFIYYAH : Swahili and Arabic name meaning “pure and wise” or “lion’s share.”

LULU : Swahili and Muslim name meaning “pearl” or “precious.”

KADIJA , KHADIJA : Swahili name meaning “born prematurely.”

AMINA : Somali and Muslim female name meaning “trustful, honest” and referring to Muhammed’s mother. This name is popular with the Hausa of West Africa.

Correction on Khadijah it’s actually of Arabic/Islamic origin in relation to Mohammed (peace be upon hims) first wife and also meaning born prematurely. It important to note children born prematurely were often seen as special or ‘golden child’ in many cultures. Correction also on Nana which comes from Akan tradition in Ghana it is used to refer to royalty and give a gender neutral indication of King/queen it’s also used in reference elderly members of the family ie grandparents.

o_O so my best friend’s name means “pure and wise” or “lion’s share”

cool

No name is actually ghetto.

To a white person or a POC with a heavy anti-black complexity due to white supremacy, it is not the actual name of the person or the way it is spelled which they consider ghetto, it is the person themselves whole. What makes the name ghetto is not how it sounds or it place of origin, but the black body it is attached to.

Which also Attributes to why white people can name their children “Haley/Haleigh/Hailey/Halley/Hallie” or “Megan/Meagan/Meghan/Meaghan/Maygan”; even the not so ordinary names like ‘Lakelyn’ ‘Ashlyn’ etc etc without batting an eye, because it is attached to a white woman’s body.

It’s why a black child named ‘Asia’ is considered an extreme, but a white child can be named ‘Montana’, the name of a southern state, it’s perfectly normal.

Where as if this woman was BLACK and her name is “Ashleigh”, people would make commentary often about how ‘unique’ the spelling of her name is or how black people are always making up new names of spellings of words.

Love the names your parents gave you. If someone says it’s “ghetto”, I guess you just found out who is racist and who you won’t need or respect later in life.

If you are foreign to a country, DO NOT take a nickname some lazy, ignorant, bigot white person tries to give you. MAKE THEM learn your name, no names are actually that difficult, it’s the mentality that stops a person from learning the correct pronunciation of a name.

Can we stop using “ghetto” as an adjective, it’s a fucking noun. It’s a PLACE, not a characteristic. “

☺️ All summer in a day ☺️

#me

2 notes · View notes

hollywoodjuliorivas · 7 years ago

Link

Charlottesville, ISIS and Us Thomas L. Friedman AUG. 16, 2017 Continue reading the main storyShare This Page Share Tweet Email More Save 125 Photo An American Army helicopter in Kabul, Afghanistan, in April. Credit Pool photo by Jonathan Ernst AL UDEID, Qatar — I’ve been on the road since the Charlottesville killing. I am traveling around the Arab world and Afghanistan with the chief of the U.S. Air Force, Gen. David Goldfein; his civilian boss, the Air Force secretary, Heather Wilson; and their aides. We’re currently at the giant Al Udeid Air Base, from which America’s entire ISIS-Syria-Iraq-Afghanistan air war is run. With all the news from Charlottesville, I was feeling in the wrong place at the wrong time. And then I looked around me here, and the connection with Charlottesville became obvious. Just one glance at our traveling party and the crews at this base and you realize immediately why we are the most powerful country in the world. It’s not because we own F-22s. And it surely isn’t that we embrace white supremacy. It’s because we embrace pluralism. It’s because we can still make out of many, one. I am a pluralism supremacist. How could I not be? I look around me and see our Air Force chief, who is of Eastern European Jewish descent, reporting to a woman Air Force secretary, who was among the early women graduates of the Air Force Academy and whose senior aide is an African-American woman lieutenant colonel. The base commander here in Qatar, overseeing the whole air war, is of Armenian descent, and his top deputy is of Lebanese descent. In the control center I’m introduced to the two Russian-speaking U.S. servicemen who 10 to 12 times a day get on the local “hotline” with the Russian command post in Syria to make sure Russian planes don’t collide with ours. One of the servicemen was born in Russia and the other left Kiev, Ukraine, just five years ago, in part, he told me, because he dreamed of joining the U.S. Air Force: “This is the country of opportunity.” Continue reading the main story ADVERTISEMENT Continue reading the main story Then we get a briefing from the combat innovation team, which is designing a new algorithm for dynamic targeting with colleagues in Silicon Valley. I ask their commander about his last name — Ito — and he explains, “My dad is from Cuba and my mother is from Mexico.” The intelligence briefing was delivered by “Captain Yang.” The very reason America is the supreme power in this region is that the U.S. military can take all of those different people and make them into a fist. And the very reason we are stuck in this region and can’t get out is that so many of the nation-states and people here are fighting only for their exclusivist dreams of supremacy — Shiite supremacy, Sunni supremacy, Alawite supremacy, Taliban supremacy, Turkish supremacy and Persian supremacy. With a few exceptions, they can’t generate self-sustaining power-sharing. Which is why we keep defeating the worst of them and they keep losing the peace, because the best of them can never share power long enough and deep enough to build lasting stability. None of the U.S. military people here talk U.S. politics. But I do. As a citizen, I say they deserve a commander in chief who does not need three tries to grudgingly denounce violent white supremacists. Pluralism is our true source of strength at home and abroad. It has to be nurtured, celebrated and protected from its enemies everywhere and always. Newsletter Sign UpContinue reading the main story Sign Up for the Opinion Today Newsletter Every weekday, get thought-provoking commentary from Op-Ed columnists, the Times editorial board and contributing writers from around the world. Sign Up You agree to receive occasional updates and special offers for The New York Times's products and services. SEE SAMPLE MANAGE EMAIL PREFERENCES PRIVACY POLICY OPT OUT OR CONTACT US ANYTIME Now that I got that off my chest, let’s talk strategy. We toured the command center here with its wall-size screens that take the data from satellites, drones, manned aircraft, cyber, sensors, human intelligence and aerial refueling tankers and meld them into a series of strategic targeting decisions. Watching the choreography of all this is both chilling and mesmerizing. We are moving “from wars of attrition to wars of cognition,” explained General Goldfein. These new integrated systems are simultaneously “state of the art, unparalleled — and too slow for the future.” On one recent day you could look up at those screens and find a Syrian fighter jet preparing to drop bombs near U.S. special forces in Syria. The Syrian jet is about to be blown out of the sky by a U.S. fighter jet, while two Russian fighters watch from a higher altitude and a stealth U.S. F-22 watches the Russians watching the U.S. plane watching the Syrian. ADVERTISEMENT Continue reading the main story While that is all happening, the coastal Syrian surface-to-air system lights up as Turkish, Jordanian and Israeli jets buzz in and out of theater. And almost daily an Iranian-made drone being directed from the back of an R.V. by Iranian Revolutionary Guards members in the desert of eastern Syria is hunting for U.S. special forces. We’ve shot down a couple of those, too. If you tried to sell this very real drama to a video game company, it would be rejected as unrealistic. Just one U.S. fighter jet over Syria — and we have them in the air now 24/7 — has to be aerially refueled eight or nine times during its eight-hour mission. Add in Iraq and Afghanistan, and on any given day the Air Force is coordinating as many as 60 KC-135 tankers (aerial gas stations) operating over these three countries. Meanwhile, ISIS is buying drones from online shopping sites, jury-rigging them with GoPro cameras and grenades and dropping them on U.S. and Iraqi troops, or it’s armor-plating S.U.V.s, loading them with explosives and a suicide bomber and turning them into Mad Max vehicles driven right into our troops or our allies. The good news? ISIS, having been largely defeated in Iraq, will most likely be defeated in Syria, too, by Americans, Kurds, Russians, Syrians, Iranians and pro-Iranian militias. The bad news? There is a good chance that ISIS’ territory will ultimately fall under Iran’s sway. Preventing that would require the Arab-Sunni Muslim world to get its act together, but it is as weak and divided as ever. That’s why Iran now indirectly controls four Arab capitals: Beirut, Baghdad, Sana and Damascus. And what is really scary is that it controls them at a pretty cheap price through proxies. We can defeat ISIS extremism, with our pluralistic fighting machine, but the one thing we can’t do is create Sunni-Shiite pluralism and power-sharing to replace it. Which is why we keep getting dragged back — not to make things better but, as always, to prevent the bad from becoming the awful. 125 COMMENTS I wanted it to be otherwise, but it’s not. We tried. So, do we just keep trying? You can’t visit one of these huge U.S. bases built since 9/11, see the dedication of the young men and women, and the sophistication of the systems they have built, and not wonder: What if all of this talent and energy and idealism and pluralism were applied not to propping up a decrepit Arab state system against Iran, but instead fixing the worst neighborhoods of Baltimore, Chicago and Detroit? We need to have a national discussion about this. Follow The New York Times Opinion section on Facebook and Twitter (@NYTopinion), and sign up for the Opinion Today newsletter. A version of this op-ed appears in print on August 16, 2017, on Page A22 of the New York edition with the headline: Charlottesville, ISIS and Us. Today's Paper|Subscribe Continue reading the main story

1 note · View note