#intersectionality and how racism applies to this

[rubz-loves-you]

"Feminism must be intersectional, or it is not feminism"

True feminism must recognize and address the different forms of oppression that affect women based on not just gender, but also race, class, sexuality, disability, age, religion, immigration status, and more.

The term "intersectionality" was coined by legal scholar Kimberlé Crenshaw in 1989 to describe how systems of oppression are interconnected and cannot be examined separately. For example, the experience of a Black woman is not just shaped by racism or sexism independently — it's a unique intersection of both. The same applies to queer women, disabled women, Indigenous women, trans women, and others who face overlapping systems of discrimination.

A feminism that only advocates for the needs and rights of white, middle-class, cisgender, able-bodied women excludes a vast number of people. Even if its only excluding trans individuals, its still deminishing the struggles women face. That’s not liberation — it’s selective empowerment. True feminism demands justice for all women, especially those most marginalized. It must confront not just sexism but also racism, homophobia, transphobia, ableism, and economic inequality.

[olderthannetfic]

https://olderthannetfic.tumblr.com/post/772134036909047808/tumblrcomolderthannetfic772021907545554944elsa#notes

That's fair. But this is mainly about someone who's completely shitting on any concept of ethnicity, culture, heritage, history and lived reality, and tries to make everything "a human-racial classification" to begin with. Same shit applies to latino and Asian. Do they mean East Asian? South East Asian? South Asian? West Asian? Literally none of them are the same. Even with "white" and "black" you're setting your ass on fire, you mean East, West, South, North White/Black? Do we even wanna start with Latino? Latino is probably even more so straddling a line between all that bullshit.

Hell, RACE doesn't make a lick of fucking sense because it's not actually "race" it's clearly 100% about ethnicity and even then it's more shallow than a puddle during a drought. Because even if we went with ethnicity it lacks any kind of intersectionality between identities. But we're just arguing within whatever the fuck the maker of those lists is doing every year.

Just as a sidenote, I know several Saami. That's why I spoke about them specifically. The one dude I know who used to be in my class, who's Saami has never considered himself anything but Norwegian and never really used Saami about himself, but does that make him any less Saami? He just IS a Saami, but he seems to think more of the location he's living. The other guy, he's like 40 year my senior, thinks of himself as a Saami, but his children are both Saami and ALSO half-Saami because of their mother. His children, slightly older than me, share that view about themselves, if you asked they'd probably just say whatever's more relevant to the question at hand. BUT!!! That's also just the people I know, and I also know that there are more Saami who consider themselves only Saami, regardless of their other parentage. 100% Saami, because it's none of anyone's business what their genetics are, they are Saami so deal with it.

Clearly this is 100% more complicated than whatever the fuck that list is making it, or any arbitrary race thinking, and it's complete bullshit to even include "race" when it's this poorly done and this surface level this crosses borderline offensive into straight up offensive racism.

The list is completely ridiculous because it actually tells us nothing. It's a completely arbitrary label slapped onto random characters, without any care what it'd actually mean in real life. Does a black person stop being black because they're also Latino? Or does a Latino stop being Latino because they're black? According to this list? This isn't a math equation where one cancels the other out, but according to the list it does. That's the problem, because it also perpetuates the idea that you can divide people into neat little boxes, and just ignore any kind of "complicated" intersections of a person's identity.

So for Elsa and Anna. Does their indigenous heritage from the second movie erase that they were/are also Disney Norwegian? Do they have the same view of themselves now? Or does one have stronger feelings towards one heritage than the other? Especially since they were raised completely without the knowledge of said heritage. How complicated is it to find out there's an entire half of your heritage you never knew, and now you're supposed to try and figure out how to handle that? Well who knows, because this is a question about identity that has never been answered, because only the people "living"* that reality can actually answer their own view on who they are and with what they identify as. *living in quotations because obviously they're just fictional. So the real answer would have to come from a creator of them. (Hell, just calling from the side, I'm mixed ethnicities, and I identify with both, but my sibling only identifies as one half, and really doesn't care about the other half/is ambivalent towards it. Does anyone have the right to override my siblings view about their own identity and what they want to be perceived as? Or what I want to be perceived as? That's why that list, and any comparable list or understanding of "race" or ethnicity are complete bullshit that should have been flushed long ago because it never includes the nuance of individual perception and identity.)

--

[thedandelionresistance]

Like, I don't get how "don't be a dick to someone about their identity, especially in cases where a normal privileged identity is marginalized" is controversial.

Worse, I don't get how "this hurts me personally, as a member of your marginalized community. Please keep people like me in mind when keeping your spaces safe" is something to be argued against.

If you don't want your spaces to be safe for your multiply marginalized members, say it with your whole chest. Don't pretend you have some "right" to shit on people because of your marginalization and then pretend like the people you're shitting on are only ever privileged and powerful and never in your spaces and communities, sharing your identities with you alongside others.

This isn't a white vs POC type thing, before someone inevitably racistly compares every type of oppression ever to racism. This is similar to the exorsexism faced by multigender people who have "man" as one of their genders - when you say "all men should die" and a transmasc (an identity with the highest rate of suicide in the trans community) sees it, that's not the same as a (white perisex neurotypical skinny abled) cis man seeing it.

Yes, the parentheses are important, because a privileged man seeing it is not the same as a black man who knows he doesn't even have to leave his house for someone with power to decide to act on "all men should die". It's not the same as a disabled man who can't find a government in the world that is fully safe because genocidal eugenics is ubiquitous globally. It's not the same when a man who already has to fight to survive sees that he should die, versus a man who has survival and thriving on a silver platter because of the circumstances of his birth.

This applies to class, race, gender, sexuality, disability, neurotype, ethnicity, religion, and so much more. THAT is how intersectionality works. It can get more complex when specifically comparing multiple axes of oppression, but even then, it's not a fucking Blizzard oppression calculator equation.

At the end of the day, I'll even be the first to defend manhood (as an identity) regardless of privilege or marginalization. Like, maybe when something is about someone's actions you shouldn't make it about their identity. Maybe when something is about SYSTEMS of oppression and power and subjugation, you should only bring identity into your criticisms when it's directly relevant.

It's one thing to say "(Most) humans do real harm to nonhumans". Or even to have specific, labeled spaces that can be curated to vent about oppression by humans. How and where someone expresses how they feel about their *oppressors* is in fact a discussion full of nuance.

But maybe people should be sure they're punching up, and not make excuses when one of their own comes to them with a bloody face and points out the red on their fist.

[fruitsofhell]

People shit on Elemental for its race/culture allegory looking even more reductive and rigid than Zootopia's on the service, but I think it actually used it super well. It feels a lot more like a very broad and fable-ish metaphor than the sort of hard world-building with direct racial parallels found in Zootopia. Zootopia aged poorly cause it was so fucking direct in its parallel imagery to real world oppression with the police angle, whereas Elemental is just generally about the experience of being an immigrant. The way it uses the infrastructure of the city being actively built for some and harmful to others is really clever, I adored how they used that.

It also helps greatly that Elemental was written by a POC from the perspective of the marginalized because it helps make the metaphors feel more cohesive. The choice to make Judy the main focus as a perpetrator of the systemic predator oppression that greatly mirrors real world anti-blackness aged like milk to me, it screams white guilt complex. And the fact it spends a lot of time not engaging with forms of prejudice besides the bunny oppression until it gets to that feels very flat. Elemental immedietly explains its main allegory very strongly and from the perspective of those it affects, so there's no fluff or time spent ignoring the issues from the privileged perspective.

Literally the thing that will instantly kill your fantasy oppression metaphor is being white guilty about it or not thinking super hard about what you're paralleling if you're going to be as blunt as Zootopia. Stuff like accidentally giving the oppressed group a reason to be oppressed as you do with the predator-prey dynamic. It's just the biggest fucking red flag and shows little understanding of why these systems exist irl. In Elemental the metaphor obviously uses a lot of imagery to show that the fire people are meant to be east asian-coded, but beyond that its content just being a story about class and immigrant families. About being from different worlds and feeling like they're impossible to combine, because of experiences and backgrounds, which is expressed as being fire and water.

Unlike being a bunny and fox, that imagery is a bit less loaded and can be turned into a sort of mutual harm as it is in the film with Wade being at risk of evaporating as muxh as Ember is at risk of being put out. And, in the end, it's found that water can just bubble a bit as the metaphor for a compromise. Which is fine enough and where the more fable-ish approach to the allegory became clear to me.

It's also used very cutely for their personalities too in a way that comes back to the background divide - Ember being fiery, anxious, and high-strung from pressures of supporting her community, and Wade being all blubbery and emotional but mellower because he lives in a supportive upper-class family. Its just a lot cleverer on a couple of levels than the bumbling between 'predators are black and brown people but also their oppression is bad but also they are dangerous but also its cause of a conspiracy, and also small prey are kinda like white woman and theres intersectionality but its shown horribly'.

Despite Ember's racial coding, no matter how you code Wade's family it doesn't matter because it is simply about - 'you live in a city that has integrated for you, and I don't' - which could apply to an upper-class family of any background, cause it's more of a class thing now. Even if he was black-coded (which Ive seen from fans likely because of his VA, I dont remember if he was in the films text), it still works cause their ARE affluent black families whom by nature of having been here and integrated are in that privileged role over a poorer immigrant family of any other race.

Allegories for class or upbringing usually age better, the systems that create those are a lot more basic and less loaded to parallel on a surface level than racism or misogyny. Not that they CANT go really deep, but it's easier to not come off as blatantly offensive as long as you're not like a eugenicist about it.

[xx-k4nd1-1n-cyb3rsp4c3-xx]

I think it's really weird how I'm seeing a lot of people try to push the idea that eastern europeans aren't white. I'm half russian, can you imagine me pale as a sheet with green eyes and straight hair and a button nose being like "yeah I'm mixed race, and as a person of colour..." like I should be rightfully laughed out of the building for talking like that. we are white. that doesn't negate the suffering of our people, or our conditional inclusion as part of the west, or the horrible stereotypes people spread about us, or even our historical exclusion from whiteness, because it's just that; historical. it doesn't apply the way it used to. I really think this is born out of the black and white thinking present in a lot of leftist thought, like privilege = evil, oppressed = good, and since eastern europe is demonised by other western countries that must mean they're oppressed and good, so they can't be white of course! I wish people understood intersectionality beyond "oppression stacks, and I have more points than you so I win!" if we're going to follow this logic then Irish and Itialian people are also POC now, since we want to revert to old definitions of race. That makes me fully a person of colour then, even though I've literally never been discriminated against based on my race. We're literally famously blonde haired and blue eyed, we are white and benefit from white privilege. Sorry I guess.

and race IS different in europe, but I guarantee you as a european myself, whatever a white person discriminated against for their heritage faces in europe, a POC has faced equal and worse. it doesn't erase your suffering, you just need to keep in mind you are not bottom of the hierarchy. europe isn't just "oh we just hate every person we see as non white equally <3 even the pale skin straight haired people <3 we're more progressive when you think about it <3" we have base level anti blackness, colourism and featurism and ON TOP OF THAT shrimp colour racism too, targeting white people of certain ethnicities, and the groups targeted changes by region. I feel like just yesterday we were making fun of the idea that Italians aren't white and now we're literally doing the thing we used to make fun of.

[ariellagad]

Afrofuturism, Space Traders, and Sociology Themes

Up until taking this course, I had never heard of the phrase Afrofuturism, although I had seen elements and examples of it so frequently. During our first lecture, it really clicked in my head what Afrofuturism is, and I was able to make the connection and understanding based on the fact that I had seen the film Black Panther in 2018. It all started to make sense. At the time I first watched the movie, I wasn’t entirely aware that it was Afrofuturism or that the concept of the Black Panther had been an integral part of Black history. I just thought it was a cool Marvel movie and that it was a positive and empowering representation of Black people. Now, years later, I see the deeper meaning and intent behind the film and the story it tells, within the context of Afrofuturism and all the knowledge I’ve acquired as a sociology major about racial disparities. Additionally, I think that being a sociology major is helping me grasp the significance of the class material a lot better than I would have had I not been a sociology student. As a sociology student, I’ve learned a lot about systemic racism, intersectionality, and how Black people specifically can and have been discriminated against in our society. One of my favorite topics in the realm of sociology is intersectionality, which was coined by Kimberle Crenshaw, a Black woman who is a civil rights activist, critical race theorist, and law professor. Insanely impressive and inspiring, Crenshaw coined intersectionality to describe how Black women are not solely discriminated against by their race but also by their gender, and how the two simultaneously are factors that are prejudiced against. This week, I picked up a theme of intersectionality while discussing and analyzing the film Space Traders. I thought that Golightly’s situation among the all-white cabinet echoed aspects of the glass ceiling effect, ultimately symbolizing intersectionality. The glass ceiling effect refers to an invisible barrier that prevents women and other minority groups from advancing to higher positions of power of leadership, despite the fact that they may be qualified and capable of doing so. In Space Traders, Golightly is included in discussions of the trade, but his opinions are not valued to the degree of the other white cabinet members. In the movie, Golightly is invited into the room but isn’t truly heard or respected. Ultimately, he is physically visible, but his opinions and voice are invisible to the rest of the cabinet, despite his being just as qualified as the rest of them to make a valid argument. This is tied to themes of intersectionality to me because of how it resembles the glass ceiling effect, which is typically applied to women. It also contrasted with the fact that so many aspects of what constitutes intersectionality are what Golightly and the cabinet shared, yet his race is what the cabinet used to uphold the barrier in front of him.

[horsethoughts]

Blog Post #9! Due 4/17/25

What are some pros and cons that can come from creating a "formulated" community such as asianavenue.com, blackplanet.com, and migente.com? (Question based on Steven McLaine’s “Ethnic Online Communities: Between Profit and Purpose”)

The creation of curated online spaces for ethnicities, such as the websites created by Community Connect Inc., provides a place for a mutual connection built on this aspect of identity. Spaces such as these directly contradict the digital divide myth, carving out a space on the internet when it is widely perceived as white. However, these communities aren’t perfect and oftentimes may (intentionally or unintentionally) exclude certain members from feeling like they belong to these curated spaces. In this piece, Mclaine discusses how each website has different information that can be filled out; for example, he discusses how only migente.com has the option to select a religion. Ethnicity/race is only one aspect of a person’s identity, and limiting specific identifying options from certain races ignores that fact. It limits those with multiple aspects of their identity from freely expressing themselves. This concept applies both to these online communities and in-person spaces/meetings. With the creation of these spaces, there needs to be a recognition of intersectionality within them.

What is a virtual homeplace? What importance does this concept play for Black women on the internet? (Question based on Latoya Lee’s “Virtual Homeplace: (Re)Constructing the Body through Social Media”)

In her piece, Latoya Lee discusses the concept of a homeplace, a concept coined by Bell Hooks. In her original meaning, Hooks explains a homeplace as a physical safe haven where Black women are provided shelter, protection, and care. Lee applies this term to the digital sphere and the internet, discussing how online blogs of Black hair care that Black women post on have become their own type of homeplace. These virtual homeplaces, as discussed by Lee, become a place for Black women to discuss and heal from racism and structural injustices and how those issues impact discussions or regulations on their natural hair.

How does misogyny and sexism manifest in online gaming spheres? (Question based on Jay Hathaway’s “What Is Gamergate, and Why? An Explainer for Non-Geeks”)

The most common form of sexism I see in gaming online communities is a separation of female gamers into a “bad” category; this is usually done by men who practice toxic masculinity. Women are assumed to be lesser when it comes to the skills needed to play video games, and this manifests in belittling and bullying of female gamers. A prevalent example can be seen in how games that are popular among female gamers, such as Sims 4 and Animal Crossing, are made fun of for being less complicated. It all circles back to the thinking that if women like “cozy” games that aren’t ridiculously difficult and filled with boss fights, they aren’t “real” gamers. There is also often the assumption from these toxic men that women play video games for male attention (which is NOT true). Women are ridiculed and sexualized in gaming spheres. However, this does lead to separate gaming communities created by women and queer individuals—these communities are formed directly to avoid harassment from toxic men and are often very supportive and dedicated to helping each other out and forming bonds.

Do we have the option to “opt in” or “opt out” to digital surveillance? (Question based on HBO’s “Surveilled” documentary)

In today’s digital world, it is impossible to opt out of surveillance. We have the illusion of being allowed to opt out by accepting terms and conditions or editing settings about data collection. However, there is always some undisclosed surveillance. As discussed at the end of the documentary, the only way to entirely avoid digital surveillance would be to go on without our phones/technology. This isn’t easy, especially considering how interconnected our lives are with technology. There is a tradeoff that happens; we use the convenience of technology, but we are also at risk of being surveilled.

References:

Lee, L. (2015). Virtual Homeplace: (Re)Constructing the Body through Social Media.

McLaine, S. (2001). Ethnic Online Communities: Between Profit and Purpose. In D. Gauntlett (Ed.), Web.Studies: Rewiring Media Studies for the Digital Age. Arnold Publishers.

Hathaway, J. (2014, October 10). What is Gamergate, and why? An explainer for non-geeks. Gawker.

O'Neill, M., & Peltz, P. (Directors). (2020). Surveilled [Film]. HBO Documentary Films.

[alex-richey]

Blog Post #4 (Due 9/19)

Why is the perceived lack of culture in White America an integral part of racism?

In Race After Technology, the author explains how whiteness plays just as large of a role in racism as any other race. She explains that by assuming white American culture is "plain" or "bland," we take it to be a blank slate to compare to all other cultures. In other words, she argues that "invisibility, with regard to Whiteness, offers immunity" (Benjamin, 2019). Additionally, she discusses the importance of names regarding culture. Because many cultures offer names to children as a way of celebrating and continuing that culture, it's not uncommon for us to hear someone's name and make assumptions about their culture or ethnicity. In turn, our names carry a lot of privilege based simply on their associations. All in all, to have a "unique" name (meaning one that doesn't automatically "sound white") often means others may take it to be an indication of your race, and therefore subject you to prejudice.

How are algorithms so biased and flawed?

Although we often assume the internet and its algorithms to be objective and unbiased, this is painfully far from the truth. As discussed in Race After Technology, algorithms are ultimately designed and coded by people, who are notoriously flawed and inherently biased! While the internet can be a great tool for educating yourself on cultures apart from your own, an important aspect of media literacy is to remember that everyone, and everything, is biased and should be questioned.

Why is intersectionality a critical part of understanding discrimination?

As defined by Kimberlé Crenshaw, intersectionality refers to the idea that people are affected by multiple forces when it comes to discrimination. It's important to recognize how these forces work together because they can work differently independently than they do in collaboration. For example, it means one thing to be a woman, and it means another thing to be a person of color, but it means an entirely different thing to be a woman of color. This same pattern applies to discrimination. One may not be discriminatory against women or people of color, but they may in fact discriminate against women of color. Crenshaw argues that simply calling out this pattern is crucial to understanding the way discrimination functions because if we can't recognize a problem, we can't see it, and if we can't see it, it's quite difficult to solve it.

What is algorithmic oppression and why is it important?

Algorithmic oppression refers to the fundamental, structural sexism and racism present in algorithm-driven data. In Algorithms of Oppression, the author provides the example of porn sites as a result of various Google searches. They explain that in 2011, if you searched "Black girls," one of the first sites to come up was a porn site. Over the years, this remained true for other groups, like Latina or Asian women. Regardless of how appropriate the search was, porn was always one of the first search results. This automatic association of women with porn (and sexuality in general, for that matter), further perpetuates many sexist ideals about women.

Benjamin, R. (2019). Race after technology.

Crenshaw, K. (2016). The urgency of intersectionality | Kimberlé Crenshaw | TED. Youtube.com. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=akOe5-UsQ2o&t=3s

Noble, S. U. (2018). Algorithms of oppression: How search engines reinforce racism. NYU Press.

[rebellum]

How do you know youre upper middle class? Isn't class related to race so like only white people are truly considered to be middle class to upper class. Intersectionality or whateva. We can be billionaires but since were POC we will never be seen as one of them because of our bloodline/descent/color etc

That's not really how that works. While someone who is white (or, of the most privileged race of the culture) has more social power than someone of colour who makes the same income, they still make enough money that they count as that class.

Intergenerational wealth also counts for something, which is why there are eg more white rich people than rich poc in the west.

Class relates to race in that different factors of oppression or privilege affect individuals differently, but class terminology is a useful tool for understanding how social power relates to wealth.

For example, I, a mixed race black person living in canada, absolutely have more power than a poor white person in certain situations. Other upper middle class people subconsciously recognise me as being of the same class, because of the way I dress (I have cool glasses, I wear gold jewelery with precious (semi-precious?) gems, the way I speak (which I would describe as "upper middle class canadian academic English"), and more. That class connection of "ah yes, we are both upper middle class and therefore are similar", that in-group affiliation, benefits me in many situations. It also doesn't benefit me...enough, I guess? in many situations.

I'm thinking now of the "cowboy church" incident. I won't get into the whole details, but this story includes me, my brother (mixed black), my friend (black), my dad (black), and my dad's girlfriend (white) walking into a small rural Texan church full of only white people. EVERYONE turned and stared. It was honestly so unnerving. You ever see the look in someone's eyes and just KNOW they're thinking the n word? It was like that.

In that case, people saw my skin colour. These were not upper middle class city folk, there was no group affiliation except for assumed Christianity. They did not see my outfit, and the way I spoke and carried myself. They saw my skin colour.

But could you imagine how horribly that would have gone had we appeared to be low income? If we walked in with idk sweat pants and a hoodie and no jewelery and speaking in AAVE? We would have absolutely been received in a much harsher way. So while there was not the benefit of in-group affiliation, my class still benefitted me because they saw my class as "neutral" kind of, rather than "poor person".

You're totally correct in that there will always be the dynamics of racism within same group class dynamics, that never goes away.

As for how I know I'm actually upper middle class, if that was a real question and not just a lead up for your ask that really meant "but are you really upper middle class if you aren't white?" Well, I haven't looked at class income demographics in canada recently, but I just kinda... know?

Guessing based on parental income (I have no income)(also yes that complicates class! I'm applying for welfare despite being upper middle class.)

Not the first generation to attend university

My parents and grandparents paid for my entire undergrad (to be fair, keep in mind I'm canadian, it was like $2000 a semester. We aren't talking american uni costs.)

We live in a house we own that has 3 floors, a front yard, a backyard, and a pool

I travel every year at least to other parts of Canada

My various family members and I have all been on international trips

I say things like "one must question the validity of their own argument" or whatever. Like, I use the pronoun "one". I also use more words of French and latin origin in everyday speech, like "ameliorate" or.. idk, other ones, it's like midnight here.

Almost all of my clothes I buy new, thrift shopping is a fun activity for me and not a necessity

My glasses are designed in France and the frames alone cost $300

Idk, I just know man. Insert Japanese shrug emoji here.

I hope this makes sense, it's late here and my brain has been a little funky today, so feel free to ask for clarification if needed

[skateebrat]

Blog Post Due 3/6

How can we prevent hate groups from spreading misinformation about other cultures ?

Preventing misinformation by staying aware and open minded/curious and doing your own research! Heavy fact checking on the sources you encounter whether that’s hearing a professor saying it in a classroom or reading it online, reporting false information, learning to recognize AI news, be aware of clickbait headlines, and most importantly educating yourself. For many years there has been an epidemic of misinformation being put online and not everyone can notice the signs of it. For example: Back when X was Twitter, there was a fact checking tool that they implemented. 

How can privilege be weaponized? 

Privilege can be weaponized in so many aspects; Education, jobs, social groups, the internet. For example, for education I want to bring back what I wrote a couple blogs ago about how wealthy families bribed officials at USC to have their kids admitted. For jobs, there was an article about intersectionality; a black woman who applied to a job got denied and she believed it was because she was a black woman. They gaslight her saying 'oh we have black employees’ but they were mainly men. Then, ‘oh we have women workers’ but they were all white. For social groups it reminds me of the black mirror episode Nosedive. Lacie desperately wants to boost her social score by attending her friend Naomi’s wedding because they’re high 5 ratings. Naomi had invited her when Lacie was a 4.2 but when she dropped to a 1.8. There even was a ‘rating manager’ at Naomi’s dressing room, showing her how it can potentially tank Naomi’s rating if a 1.8 shows up. “Not a good look”. 

Is there a difference between experiencing racism online opposed to real life ?

I feel like there are micro differences but they all have the same feeling. For online I think anonymity is a major tool people use; it’s easier hiding behind a screen saying the most hateful crap instead of saying it face to face. How fast information moves for example: when someone makes a racist comment or video online, it can attract thousands to millions of views as to just in person it wouldn’t spread as fast. There was a viral photo that I had seen of a woman leaving a nasty racist remark on a receipt to their waiter who was Mexican. The note was “Hope Trump deports you” There were thousands of people attacking her for saying this. They would say why are you eating at a Mexican restaurant if you hate Mexicans. 

How can we utilize AI in a way that helps prevent hate, prejudice, and or cyber racism? 

There are so many ways we can utilize AI to prevent hate/cyber racism. On some social media platfroms there is a fact checking tool and community notes. They are platforms who don’t have this option so we should help advocate for these tools. We should also include attaching resources to corrections and have AI direct you to the right information to get you educated and share with others easily.

Brooker, C. & Wright, J. (2016). Nosedive (Season 3, Ep.1) In C. Brooker, Black Mirror, House of Tomorrow; Netflix

[emxly-elxzabeth]

Blog Post #3 Week 4

How does your name contribute to everyday racist coding? 

I thought this was a very interesting part of Race after technology by R.Benjamin when he was elaborating on naming a child. While my initial thought was a bit confused the more he went on about how firstly everyone's name was at one point the first. Meaning that there was a time when once everyone’s name was a new name. He addressed the idea that others judge quickly and gave an example, giving a child a “more arabic name” he would be flagged every time at the airport. He goes on to say, “Just as in naming a child, there are many day contexts- such as applying to a job, or shopping- that employ emerging technologies, often to the detriment of those who are racially marked” (R.Benjamin 2019). I never realized how much a name could impact one’s social and everyday life. This could be harder for those with more of an “unique name.” Companies may look at these and decide whether or not the position would be good not based on personality but solely on their name. In which they could discriminate based on biases and assumptions. 

How do the digital world’s algorithms contribute to biased bots?

Biased bots are also addressed in R. Benjamins’ Race after Technology in which he discusses how modern algorithms upon the digital world make racist assumptions. He claims, “In some cases technology sees racial differences” (R.Benjamin 2019). Technology could automatically filter out certain job application candidates based on their ethnicity or even gender. We talked in class about how applying for insurance, credit card, or anything in those terms that uses technology can determine your “risk” and how biased towards people of color. It does connect to his other statements about how names could be seen as a tool to filter out people of color based on their “unique” names. The biased bots are the ones in control of the algorithms and can determine the outcome of certain ideals.

Google discriminates based on race?

S. Nobel addressed her concerns about how google creates suggested searches about uncalled for negative comments about people of color.  We have talked about this alot in class and covered it in our readings. Technology does in fact negatively view a certain race based on the color of people. In Nobels’ work algorithms of Oppressions we learn about how when putting into google “white house” when President Barack Obama was elected. Google had a very disgusting and plain out rude comment come up suggesting towards the president's skin color.  Another example Nobel provides is when searching Michelle Obama, it was associated with Apes. This honestly shocked me more and I couldn’t believe it the more I read it it felt as though we had gone back in time years prior.

 How does gender play a role in algorithms?

In Kimberle Creshaw’s Ted Talk performance she does a survey where she asks the audience to stand up. The room is filled with many different races, genders, and a huge diversity. She said she was gonna announce names and to sit down when you don’t know them.  She began to list names of male african americans and a couple people sat down but not everyone. Then she began to start listing the names of female african americans, and immediately more than half the room sat down. What all the names had in common were they were african americans who were killed by the police. She showed however that the women were less known compared to the men based on social media or press algorithms. This is so concerning as a woman, that women are hidden in the shadows. We talked in class about Intersectionality in which racism, gender, religion, disability, and sexuality overlapped creating multiple diversity. This is huge in my opinion and plays a role for so many women who unfortunately have more than one minority upon them.  

Benjamin, R. (2019). Race after Technology: Abolitionist Tools for the New Jim Code. Polity.

Noble, Safiya Umoja. Algorithms of Oppression: How Search Engines Reinforce Racism. New York, New York University Press, 2018.

National Association of Independent Schools (NAIS). “Kimberlé Crenshaw: What Is Intersectionality?” YouTube, 22 June 2018, www.youtube.com/watch?v=ViDtnfQ9FHc.

[amnyatas]

Hello, i tried looking up what transandrophobia means and i feel confused about it since it seems to rabbit hole to a lot of terms I don't understand well, is it bad because of the terminology? I like how the term seems since i like seeing people talk about really unique aspects of transphobia for mascs, is there something i'm missing and is there a better word?

the short answer: basic intersectionality. basic feminism. reverse oppression doesn't exist.

the normal answer: transandrophobia(or more aptly, transmisandry) as a "boys version" of transmisogyny doesn't exist. because misandry doesn't exist.

because reverse oppression does not exist, the marginalized fighting back or even just being 'mean' does not equate oppression towards their oppressor.

smarter people have worded it better, but trans mascs' "unique aspects of transphobia" aren't unique, they're just transphobia and/or misogyny. even homophobia in some cases.

trans mascs are not exempt from being misogynist , nor transmisogynists. being called on your shit doesn't make you specially oppressed.

granted this is something that seems to be predominantly in the tumblrsphere but shit always spreads. i don't entirely fault you for having trouble looking it up, but it sounds like you only heard one side of it.

the long version:

transandrophobia stems from the same kind of mentality as misandry(hence why transmisandry is an interchangable term), from the same broader strokes as 'anti-white racism' and cisphobia and heterophobia and all those nonsensical, nonexistant terms for oppression that simply does not exist.

the issues unique to trans masc experiences aren't from specifically anti trans masc bigotry, they're from misogyny and transphobia. transmisogyny is the intersection between transphobia and misogyny, because as transgender people and women trans fems have to face both at once. (a further example would be transmisogynoir, the intersection of transphobia, misogyny, and antiblack racism, this applies only to black trans women, which is a step up from misogynoir…which hopefully isn't too hard to conclude what that's terminology for!). even white transgender people can be racist, there's no such thing as reverse trans racism bc it doesn't exist.

so to pull apart transadrophobia and transmisandry…transmisandry fell out of use because we already went through the big ol reddit men's rights activist era, misandry is not a concept that exists outside of theory and conceptualization, women cannot reverse oppress men. 'androphobia' refers to a fear of men, and as part of transandrophobia is being implied as a term of oppression in the same vein of 'phobia' as transphobia and homophobia. it's being used more as a boys version of misogyny since misandry has 'negative connotations'.

honestly i've run out of steam, i'll just link some posts by people who word the actual issues of 'why's it bad?' better than i ever could.

https://www.tumblr.com/ashenmind/771308971444322304/but-thats-exactly-my-point-transmisogyny-isnt

https://www.tumblr.com/princessefemmelesbian/766621117492396032/yes-thank-you-and-im-glad-you-mentioned

https://www.tumblr.com/discodyke-dogthing/771627811296493568/isnt-it-so-fucked-up-that-trans-women-have-made

[olderthannetfic]

Kimberlé Crenshaw, who invented the concept of intersectionality largely to discuss the specific experiences of black women, would have nooooooo patience for the suggestion that black men don’t still benefit from male privilege in their own ways, lol. I think a lot of people in your anons need to understand the difference between suggesting that cis het white women don’t overall have it better on most metrics than black or trans or gay men, and pointing out that even marginalized men still benefit in *some* way from male privilege, and even very privileged women still experience misogyny. You’re not measuring them against each other by doing that; reduction of this discussion to a mathematics game of “who is the most/least oppressed” shows the person doing that, in fact, has not understood the point of intersectionality and therefore needs to stop smugly throwing that word at people who just give the definition of male privilege. What illustrates the point of “male privilege still benefits marginalized men, misogyny still hurts privileged women” is not comparing them against each other, but against people of similar levels of overall privilege/marginalization who are the other binary gender. Black men still generally benefit in some ways from being male in ways that black women don’t — if you need details on what that is, actually READ black feminists like Crenshaw and Lorde and hooks rather than just appropriate their arguments that you don’t understand, and lol, most black feminists would have WORDS for this bizarre idea that their femaleness somehow shields them from police and other institutional violence, and the numerous cases of black women being murdered by police put hard evidence to their critiques, too (the “innocence” granted to femaleness in white women just does not apply to black women in a white supremacist society) — and likewise, wealthy cishet white women still experience misogyny that wealthy cishet white MEN do not. (For evidence of that, just see… any cishet white female celebrity who has had any negative media attention ever.) I really don’t understand how people can do this same calculus with other forms of oppression — relatively privileged white cis gay men like Pete Buttigieg still experience homophobia, this is extremely obvious when comparing them with similarly-privileged straight people; and a poor person of color who is cis and straight still benefits from being cis and straight and their life would very likely be even worse if they were not cis or not straight, and cis and straight people in poor communities of color often perpetuate homophobia/transphobia to non-cis/straight people just like cis and straight people do in any other community — and yet not recognize that gender privilege vs. oppression works similarly. And there’s no excuse for men just deciding that’s not a conversation they want to have: not because it’s bad for cis het white women when they refuse to do that, but because it’s bad for women in their own communities who are similar levels of overall social privilege and marginalization to them. It does black WOMEN a disservice when black men decide that that’s something they can just opt out of entirely because they don’t like the way some white women have historically talked about it. And in general, white people and black men need to stop appropriating black women’s writing about feminism and racism without actually engaging with what they actually wrote, ESPECIALLY when it’s in service of ideas that those black women would very much not agree with at all.

--

[tianshiisdead]

People who are accused of sinophobia for accusing random Chinese diaspora with 0 connection to China of being a gov shill (in this case despite 23049685908 evidence to the contrary), and told this rhetoric is not only racist but has caused direct violence to the Chinese person recently: stop making this about you! this is about your GOV (goes on a tangent about what the gov which has nothing to do with OP is doing) WHICH MEANS YOUR POINT IS INVALID!

like you are just proving the diaspo's point... they've provided you the proof your accusations are unjustified... and now you're doubling down and starting to talk about the gov... which proves you conflate them with the gov they have 0 connection to and do not benefit from, as are actively facing racist violence tied to this. If you didn't think all Chinese = gov, then why would you continue bringing up gov actions after this Chinese diaspo proved they were not connected to it? What do they have to do with it? Why is this relevant at all, if you don't in fact support the conflation?

Finally, you can't get out of racism charges by saying they live in America, or that their people (not them) are also racist against yours, or that their parents' country holds economic power over yours. All POC can internalize racist rhetoric, racism is not a thing more inherent to some groups, it's a structural issue based on not only international power dynamics but local power dynamics as well, and those on different rungs of that ladder under the top level can and do internalize racist rhetoric against each other, and that is not justified through being on a lower rung *in general*. Spreading racist rhetoric online, in an anglophone space, means your rhetoric is simply going to be taken the way all faceless online anglophone rhetoric is and feed into irl racism in the west. Online, you are not limited by region but by language.

This isn't getting into how diaspora face more racism in their day-to-day lives, and how for some of the people targeted, we also face islamophobia and persecution/racism both abroad as diaspora and at home as minorities, as Muslims.

In this case *we are not more privileged than you in a way that is meaningful or manifests irl where this matters*, full stop. Privilege isn't an abstract that always manifests the same way, and intersectionality must be taken into account. Class, location, and relationship to the state you are living in, all of that matters, which is why different groups/ethnicities can have WILDLY differing levels of privilege in different regions. This applies to Asians in the West VS Asians who are the majority race at home, migrant workers and rich gentrifiers who are the same race and from the same country entering the same country, etc. Both historical colonialism and economic imperialism notwithstanding.

Also, weaponizing Japanese imperialism against a Korean through framing it as Easian colonialism vs SEA colonized, therefore conflating Easians (in this case Koreans) as the perpetrators, victimizing yourself vis a vis Korea, is fucking *vile*. Korea was arguably one of the most and longest brutalized, some of the main victims, the country pieced together their freedom after decades of colonial violence and suppression.

Downplaying and even mocking/denying colonialism and racism faced by other POC is racist no matter what. It feeds into violent rhetoric that affects us as diaspora IRL.

Finally, how hard is it to accept you've said something racist and move on, or changing your angle of attack at least? Doubling down is crazy. I've absolutely said unacceptable things before because I as a part of society have also internalized many racist ideas, we ALL do, that's how racism WORKS. And sometimes those things are against people who are more privileged than me! Who's gov or people have/are perpetuating this or that against mine! And I fix my thinking, retract my comment, and move tf on, because NONE of that justifies feeding into racism that oppresses them under the white supremacist world and societal order. Do you think I'm new to this, as an ethnic minority of a racialized group?

[religion-is-a-mental-illness]

By: Neil Shenvi and Pat Sawyer

Published: Feb 13, 2024

On October 7th, 2023, most Americans watched in horror as Israel experienced the deadliest terrorist attacks in its history. In the days and weeks that followed, some of that horror mingled with confusion.

For example, on Oct. 8th—before an Israeli counteroffensive was launched—BLM Grassroots issued a “Statement in Solidarity with the Palestinian People,” writing that they “stand unwaveringly on the side of the oppressed” and “see clear parallels between Black and Palestinian people.” Two days later, BLM Chicago posted a graphic featuring a paraglider with a Palestinian flag and the text “I stand with Palestine” (terrorists had used paraglides to attack a Music festival on Oct. 7th, killing over three hundred civilians). Even more bizarre posts began turning up on social media. The Slow Factory, a progressive group with over 600k followers on Instagram, posted a graphic stating “Free Palestine is a Feminist issue. It’s a reproductive rights issue. It’s an Indigenous Rights issue. It’s a Climate Justice issue, it’s a Queer Rights issue, it’s an Abolitionist Issue.” The group “Queers for Palestine” began showing up with signs at various demonstrations. A banner hanging from a building at the University of British Columbia announced, “Trans liberation cannot happen without Palestinian Liberation.”

What explains these signs and sentiments, which seem to be springing up organically around the country and other parts of the world? How is the Hamas-Israel war connected to climate change? Why is it a feminist issue? Why are “queers” standing in solidarity with Palestine when Israel’s government is far more permissive than Palestine’s (for example, same-sex activity is criminalized in Gaza)? What has inspired an outpouring of egregious and unconscionable antisemitic rhetoric and behavior in various cities and on a number of college campuses?

The answer is, in a word, intersectionality. In this article, we’ll explain the intersectional framework that undergirds these phenomena and will then offer a brief reflection on how it can be resisted.

* * *

Intersectionality was a term coined by critical race theorist Kimberlé Crenshaw in 1989. She used it to describe the discrimination faced by Black women, whose social location (that is, their relationship to power within U.S. society) was predicated on both their race and their sex simultaneously. In other words, a Black woman’s experience cannot be reduced to merely the sum of her race and sex experiences. Instead, she occupies a unique (and uniquely marginalized) category that is shaped by both her Blackness and femininity.

Although Crenshaw’s first examples focused on race and gender, intersectionality was rapidly applied to other categories like sexuality, class, and disability, just as Crenshaw intended. Indeed, precursors to Crenshaw’s conception of intersectionality can be found in other Black feminist writings. For example, the Combahee River Collective Statement insisted in 1977 that it is “difficult to separate race from class from sex oppression because... they are most often experienced simultaneously” and feminist Beverly Lindsay argued in 1979 that sexism, racism, and classism exposed poor Black women to “triple jeopardy” (see Collins and Bilge, Intersectionality, p. 76).

So in what ways does intersectionality shape progressive views on the Israel-Hamas War?

First, through its embrace of the social binary; second, through its implicit adoption of the category of “whiteness,” and finally through its commitment to solidarity in liberation.

The Social Binary

While the concept of intersectionality can be understood narrowly to refer to the trivial claim that our identities are complex and multifaceted, Crenshaw intended a far more robust understanding rooted in a prominent feature of critical social theory, what we call the “social binary.” The social binary refers to the belief that society is divided into oppressed groups and oppressor groups along lines of race, class, gender, sexuality, physical ability, religion, and a host of other identity markers. Crenshaw did not merely believe that Black women (and White men, and Hispanic lesbians) all had different social locations, but that they had differently-valued social locations.

In a 1989 paper, Crenshaw asked the reader to “[imagine] a basement which contains all people who are disadvantaged on the basis of race, sex, class, sexual preference, age and/or physical ability” and who were then literally stacked “feet standing on shoulders with the multiply-disadvantaged at the bottom and the fully privilege at the very top.” This understanding of intersectionality necessarily assumes a hierarchy of oppression and privilege such that people can be ranked in order from most to least oppressed.

Although Crenshaw didn’t discuss “colonial status” in the body of her paper, she did state in a footnote that Third World feminism is inevitably subordinated to the fight against “international domination” and “imperialism.” It is at precisely this point that intersectionality affects progressive understanding of Israel-Palestinian relationships.

Later critical social theorists, and especially postcolonial scholars, believe that colonialism—like white supremacy, the patriarchy, and heterosexism—divides society into oppressed and oppressor groups. Because the Israeli government is positioned as a “colonizing foreign power,” it is therefore necessarily oppressive. Conversely, Palestinians are then necessarily positioned as a colonized, oppressed group. Never mind the spurious assessment of both. Note here that critical theorists make these judgments not on the basis of the actual history of the region (which is complex) or a careful analysis of particular Israeli policies (which are certainly open to debate). Rather, the mere identification of Israel as a “colonial power” is all that is needed to set up a social binary between the Israelis and Palestinians.

The social binary then explains why some progressives make such a quick, simplistic analysis: intersectionality deceptively primes them to see the world in these black-and-white terms.

Whiteness

A second factor that contributes to a reflexive pro-Palestinian perspective by some in the U.S. is the ascendance of critical race theory and an attendant understanding of “whiteness.”

CRT, which was birthed concurrently with intersectionality in the late 1980s, conceptualizes whiteness not as a skin color or even as an ethnicity, but as a social construct that provides tangible and intangible benefits to those raced as “White.” (Notwithstanding that white skin and whiteness are often conflated when it serves the interests of progressives). Whiteness as a social construct signals that “whiteness” is fluid and malleable and need not only include people traditionally understood as White. For example, in his important 2003 book Racism Without Racists, sociologist Eduardo Bonilla-Silva hypothesized that America could develop a “triracial order” consisting of “Whites,” “Honorary Whites,” and “Collective Black.” On Bonilla-Silva’s reading, Whites would include not just Anglo-Saxons, but also “Assimilated white Latinos,” “Some multiracials,” “Assimilated (urban) Native Americans,” and “A few Asian-origin people.” On the other hand, the “Collective Black” category would include “Vietnamese Americans,” “Dark-skinned Latinos,” and “Reservation-bound Native Americans” (see Bonilla-Silva, Racism Without Racists, 228).

Critical race theorists have long wrestled with the place of Jewish people within their racial hierarchy. On the one hand, Americans did not traditionally consider Jews “White” and the U.S. has explicitly discriminated against Jews in the recent past (Jewish admission quotas at Ivy League Schools being one glaring example). On the other hand, many critical race theorists today believe that most Jews have assimilated to whiteness and benefit from “White privilege” and therefore should be classified as White. In her chapter “Whiteness, Intersectionality, and the Contradictions of White Jewish Identity,” Jewish psychologist Jodie Kliman writes that,

As European Jews have slowly ‘become’ white over the last three generations (Brodkin, 1998), we have internalized White supremacy in general and anti-Black prejudice in particular...Immigrant Jews and their descendants assimilated into US society, becoming white, or sort of white...

Unfortunately, to the extent that American Jews are viewed as “White adjacent” while Palestinians are viewed as “Brown,” the former are members of an oppressor group and the latter of an oppressed group. This categorization adds another layer to knee-jerk progressive support for Palestinians.

Liberation

Finally, the glue that binds together pro-Palestinian, pro-LGBTQ, and feminist activists is a shared commitment to mutual liberation. Again, this commitment is not new; it is found in the earliest texts of critical race theory, including those authored by Crenshaw herself. For instance, in the 1993 anthology Words that Wound, she and other co-founders of CRT wrote that a “defining element” of CRT is the commitment to ending all forms of oppression: They write: 

Critical race theory works toward the end of eliminating racial oppression as part of the broader goal of ending all forms of oppression. Racial oppression is experienced by many in tandem with oppressions on grounds of gender, class, or sexual orientation. Critical race theory measures progress by a yardstick that looks to fundamental social transformation. The interests of all people of color necessarily require not just adjustments within the established hierarchies, but a challenge to hierarchy itself (Matusda et al., Words that Wound, 6-7).

This last point is crucial to understanding the automatic solidarity between, say, LGBTQ activists and decolonial activists. One could, in principle, accept that both LGBTQ people and Palestinians are oppressed groups and still conclude that their goals are mutually exclusive. For example, most Palestinians are Muslim and traditional Islam rejects the sexual autonomy demanded by LGBTQ activists. Yet an intersectional framework insists that homophobia, transphobia, Islamophobia, and colonialism are all “interlocking systems of oppression” that can and must be overturned simultaneously—never mind the details.

Lest anyone worry that we’re misinterpreting or overstating the degree to which popular progressive sentiments surrounding this issue are shaped by a fundamental commitment to intersectionality, consider the article “Palestine is a Feminist Issue” from the U.S. Campaign for Palestinian Rights. It begins with a quotation from Mariam Barghouti “Fundamentally speaking, feminism cannot support racism, supremacy and oppressive domination in any form” and immediately explains intersectionality in its opening paragraph: 

Intersectional feminism is a framework that holds that women’s overlapping, or intersecting, identities impact the way they experience oppression and discrimination. Intersectionality rejects the idea that a woman’s experience can be reduced to only her gender, and insists that we look at the multiple factors shaping her life: race, class, ethnicity, disability, citizenship status, sexual orientation, and others, as well as how systems of oppression are connected... When we look at the world through an intersectional feminist lens, it becomes clear that Palestine is a feminist issue.

Conclusions

While the reaction of some progressives to the Hamas-Israel war took many people, especially Jewish people, by surprise, it was largely predictable given the powerful influence that intersectionality exerts on our culture. Intersectionality can lead to a grotesque moral calculus that justifies Hamas’ rape of Israeli girls as an understandable response of the oppressed lashing out at their oppressor. It has caused university presidents at our elite institutions to shamefully equivocate and prevaricate when given opportunity to unapologetically condemn antisemitism. Unfortunately, these examples are natural outworkings of the intersectional worldview.

For those who are alarmed by what seems to be growing acceptance of anti-Semitism within some segments of the left, we offer the following action items.

First, we should resist critical theory’s simplistic moral categories of Oppressor vs. Oppressed. To the extent that we see every conflict as a battle between innocent victims and cruel victimizers, we will gloss over the moral complexities of reality.

Second, we need to see people primarily as individuals rather than as avatars of their demographic groups. It’s much easier to dehumanize abstract categories than the nervous old woman across the street or the energetic cashier at the grocery store. Personal connection is an antidote to demonization.

Finally, we need to be realistic about the perniciousness of “woke” ideology, which has been infiltrating our institutions, universities, businesses, and places of worship for decades. Many social movements have waved the banner of progress and justice while slaughtering tens of millions. If we don’t learn from history, we very well may repeat it.

[faloverfae]

I've seen some people use the "Gaza doesn't support LGBTQ+ people" as an argument for why they don't deserve our support and it's such a scary reason. The demographic arguing this is the same one that doesn't "agree with our lifestyle" and they seem to believe that we think anyone who doesn't support us deserves to die.

Obviously, this is fucking bullshit.

But the clear lack of empathy is INSANE, and it is honestly terrifying to see what their beliefs truly are. Bear with me here.

People approach life through the lense of their own experiences. They can agree with others, and understand them to a degree, but they will never have the experiences that another person has. Because we can only see things through our own lense, it is even more important to listen to other people, to learn and educate ourselves on topics and experiences we do not and will never have.

However, this is a realisation that is unfortunately not super commonly occurring (at least in my experience this far) as most people are content to simply believe that everyone sees things the same way they do instead of looking inward and grappling with their own experiences and resulting prejudices. The group that makes this argument, that we should not support Gaza because they don't have LGBTQ+ rights, is the same group of people that do not do this inward reflection.

They believe we think like they do. They believe that we, like them, are unwilling to show empathy in situations where it is very important to show empathy, simply because we disagree on a certain point. They think we don't believe that people are complex and ever changing, that countries can grow and progress and improve given time. They believe we can be convinced (tricked) to agree with a fucking GENOCIDE because the Palestinian people don't have LGBTQ+ rights yet.

They already believe that there are some people in the world who are less human than themselves, so it can't be a surprise that the same logic applies here. The people of Palestine are far away, therefore whatever comes of this "conflict" (genocide) will not affect their own lives. To them, the children in Gaza are not human. They do not have complex lives, they do not have hopes or dreams, they simply exist as shells. And as such, they are not real people, and therefore they are not important.

So the argument then is not that we should not support Palestine because they don't support the LGBTQ+ community. It is that we should not support the people of Palestine because they are not actually people.

And then we have to grapple with the implicit racism that is contained in that statement; how this dehumanising is not at all new and the people on the recieving end of this treatment are nearly always people of colour; how there can be parallels drawn from the current genocide through every genocide in history, and how it all traces back to colonialism, but that is far more intersectionality than most people are ready for in a Tumblr post, and honestly I am too tired to try and write that essay right now.

Anyways.

Do your daily clicks!!! It literally takes 14 seconds (I counted)

Here is the link to the Palestinian Children's Relief Fund!

https://www.pcrf.net/

That one vice article in case anyone doesn't know about the TLOU shitshow yet

A link to a website that lists resistance rallys for Palestine! It has days, times and places so if you are interested in attending the ones in your area but don't know how to find them this is a wonderful source!

A resource on intersectionality! I suggest listening to this series, it is very informative and although they don't talk about Gaza directly, much of what is said about other situations (or simply the ways things are spoken about) can be applied here too!!! I wish I had more resources to add about intersectionality but I'm just starting out in the activism world, so please feel free to suggest any you know of!

Free Palestine. We will not stand by as the Palestinian people are slaughtered. Do research. Inform yourself.