This is a personal blog. I talk sense and nonsense.
Install Theme

"White feminism" does not mean every white woman, everywhere, who happens to identify as feminist. It also doesn’t mean that every "white feminist" identifies as white. I see "white feminism" as a specific set of single-issue, non-intersectional, superficial feminist practices. It is the feminism we understand as mainstream; the feminism obsessed with body hair, and high heels and makeup, and changing your married name. It is the feminism you probably first learned. "White feminism" is the feminism that doesn’t understand western privilege, or cultural context. It is the feminism that doesn’t consider race as a factor in the struggle for equality.

White feminism is a set of beliefs that allows for the exclusion of issues that specifically affect women of colour. It is “one size-fits all” feminism, where middle class white women are the mould that others must fit. It is a method of practicing feminism, not an indictment of every individual white feminist, everywhere, always.

I think an important thing to understand about Hollywood blockbusters is that they are almost never flukes; they are preordained. Sure, we have the occasional surprise indie hit, but you need a lot of money and marketing behind you to become a blockbuster. Just look at the top ten films in each of the last five years: nearly every single one had a budget of more than $100 million (a lot of them were also sci-fi/fantasy films).

Meanwhile, there hasn’t been a single film released this year starring a person of color with a budget of more than $50 million, let alone a sci-fi film, which is naturally going to be more expensive. The same goes for most of the last decade. So for anyone who might say “people just don’t watch sci-fi movies starring people of color,” or “there’s no evidence that this would work,” the truth is that we have no evidence that it wouldn’t work.

— Imran Siddiquee, Director of Communcations for The Representation Project, on why there’s so little diversity among top-earning sci-fi and fantasy movies. (via leeandlow)

(via racebending)

Trophy Scarves”, a series by performance artist, Nate Hill. Artist’s statement: “I wear white women for status and power.” Read this for some context.

African American is a specific ethnicity. Not everyone who is black is African American.


People need to get that.

I have seen people refer to black Europeans as “African Americans”. It’s embarrassing.

(via wretchedoftheearth)

(Source: trekgate, via questionall)

The thrill of appropriation lies in accessing the perceived authenticity … Transfer to a white body elevates the action. It’s no longer primitive because while nonwhite culture is assumed to be rooted in instinct, white culture is one of intent … White people clamoring to up their cred by appropriating nonwhite culture do so hoping to be rewarded for choices that are falsely seen as inherent in people of color.

Ayesha Siddiqi, on how colonialism and white supremacy frame PoC as lacking agency and intent, and thus inherently lesser; either through ethnocentric assumptions of cultural superiority and lack of choice, or via biological determinism outright

(via nativenews)

(via thusspakekate)

Not only did a Latino actor not play Tony, who clearly in real life looks like a Chicano, but his ethnicity is stolen from the Latino community at a time when Latinos have been demonized. Our real Latino national heroes if acknowledged would dramatize our patriotism and contribution to the United States…

In “Argo” we have yet another instance where the public has been denied of an opportunity for all Americans to learn of an American Latino’s valor, talent and patriotism. This occurs because there has been no consequence to this behavior. It is time for a change.

Moctesuma Esparza on Ben Affleck’s Argo and the White-Washing of the Mexican-American.  Esparza says:

The film actually goes out of its way to obscure Tony Mendez’ ethnicity. His name (Mendez) is mentioned only once and the character says he is from New York (Tony was born in Nevada from a mining family with six generations in Nevada and raised in Colorado). Nowhere in the movie does the viewer get that the hero is Mexican American. 

Ben Affleck’s portrayal of Antonio “Tony” Mendez was very contained and had very little range, I don’t know what Tony personality is like to judge the portrayal but this did not impact the movie’s success or failure. It was an excellent role that would have elevated a Latino actor like Benjamin Bratt or Michael Peña.

 Instead, like with the story of Guy Gabaldon, whose extraordinary achievements in the WWII Battle of Saipan,  capturing, by himself, 1800 enemy soldiers, more than any other  American soldier in the history of our country, was similarly white-washed as Jeffrey Hunter played him in the 1960 film, “Hell to Eternity.”  But that was more than half a century ago, Argo is now

In the closing credits, the photos of the real people portrayed are presented side-b- side with the actors’ photos showing the very close resemblance and care that was taken in the casting process to cast actors who looked like the real people. Yet, for the key role of Tony Mendez, the director/producer Ben Affleck chose a single long shot of Tony with President Carter where his image was not distinct or recognizable, breaking the pattern he had chosen for all the other real people depicted. 

(via racebending)

White privilege is being able to star in a person of color’s life story. See also: Angelina Jolie in A Mighty Heart and almost everyone in 21. Nevemind. I should have made a separate post. Sorry, folks.

(via mardesalinidad-deactivated20130)

I don’t need a ‘What If’ movie scenario for black heroes because history shows they actually existed. Frederick Douglass, Harriet Tubman, MLK—Where the frack are their movies? Do you know Danny Glover has been trying for almost two decades to get a Touissant L’Oeuverture movie made? And every major studio has shut the door in his face. And let’s not talk about how a Nat Turner movie has been unanimously blackballed in Hollyweird. So a studio will give money to a fictionalized spaghetti western, revenge slavery movie but not support our real heroes. Think on that. Then go get your life!

ReBecca Theodore-Vachon, Thinking Critically Because You Refuse To (via sonofbaldwin)

nat turner, for folks who dont understand why his story is so scary.

(via deluxvivens)

(via talesofthestarshipregeneration)

This is how this shit works:


  • When a person of color says that they hate white people, they hate white people as an institution (aka white supremacy/hegemony)
  • When a woman says that they hate men, they hate men as an institution (aka male dominance/patriarchy)
  • When a queer person says that they hate straight people, they hate straight people as an institution  (aka heteronormativity)
  • When a trans* person says that they hate cisgender people, they hate cisgender people as an institution (aka gender essentialism/rigid gender roles)


(Source: popularslutclub, via ladyfabulous)

One of the ancient ploys of the film industry is to make a film about non-white people and find a way, however convoluted, to tell it from the point of view of a white character.

Film critic Roger Ebert on Hollywood in his review of “Flowers of War”

“Can you think of any reason the character John Miller is needed to tell his story? Was any consideration given to the possibility of a Chinese priest? Would that be asking for too much?”

(via racebending)

Terms such as “culturally deprived,” “economically disadvantaged” and “underdeveloped” place the responsibility for their own conditions on those being so described. This is known as “blaming the victim.” It places responsibility for poverty on the victims of poverty. It removes the blame from those in power who benefit from, and continue to permit, poverty.

Still another example involves the use of “non-white,” “minority” or “third world.” While people of color are a minority in the U.S., they are part of the vast majority of the world’s population, in which white people are a distinct minority. Thus, by utilizing the term “minority” to describe people of color in the U.S., we can lose sight of the global majority/minority reality - a fact of some importance in the increasing and interconnected struggles of people of color inside and outside the U.S.

To describe people of color as “non-white” is to use whiteness as the standard and norm against which to measure all others.

Robert B. Moore, “Racism in the English Language”

Why people of color > “minorities” or “non-white”

(via wretchedoftheearth)

(via wretchedoftheearth)


to a white person diversity basically means ‘i have the option of interacting with Black/Brown folks at the time and place of my choosing.’
like they are a resource to be called upon when they want ‘soul food’ or someone to practice their spanish on. but if the Black/Brown presence is readily visible/audible outside of the gentrifiers choosing, then they are an invasive nuisance.
because this is ‘diversity’ not ‘i want to live in an all Black/Brown community’.

They basically want to be cultural tourists, to visit POCLand, not live there.

(via hellosugarmouse)

In this country, ‘American’ means white. Everybody else has to hyphenate.

— Toni Morrison (via mindovermatterzine)

(Source: yaasssblackgirls, via hellosugarmouse)




lucy liu actually is two years older but martin freeman looks about twenty years her senior



Asians don’t raisin?

Yep. Everyone in my family looks at least a decade younger than they are. When white people are being racist, I at least have the comfort of knowing they’ll look like hell much sooner than I will.

Martin Freeman is 41. Lucy Liu is 44.

Melanin: the true fountain of youth.

(Source: jamespmscary)