My bodyguard? Uh, no thanks.
Like Eric mentioned below, I tend to miss even major blowups in the lefty blogosphere, as paying attention to the world outside my little bubble is obviously outside of my core competencies as well. And with four little Indians, a lame-assed generator and thus no heat at night, I admit I've been rather distracted.
Thus, I was only reminded of the burkha tempest in Chris' recent post on the vunerability of activists' pets. I'd seen the initial dust-up at Pandagon, and frankly, felt that Amanda adequately apologized and figured that was, well, it. Obviously, I was wrong. (Not about Amanda apologizing - I'm still fine with that.)
So, let me just say one thing for future reference. As an American Indian woman, I reserve the right to find whatever I deem offensive in regards to dominant-culture/Indian relations in fact, offensive. You can rail all you like about how your doing the Tomahawk Chop at a Braves game, or sitting on a Sunday afternoon rootin' for the 'Skins is "honoring" Indians - I'm never, evah going to buy it. But, in the end, it's your perogative, and you have all the right to make your defense. I'll defend your right to do just that.
The one thing I will take exception to is for those in the dominant culture, whether male or female (or even transgendered) to inform me as to what I should find offensive, and, as an extension, whether an offending party, once educated, is in fact appropriately apologetic. In fact, I find it even more patronizing, yes, racist, to have a member of the dominant culture think I am too stupid to understand when I'm being dissed.
I also find it somewhat grating that my would-be saviors in the dominant culture feel they should decide what issues deserve the energy and diatribe awarded burkha-gate; if you were to ask me, I'd be requesting such a witchhunt among Progressives be directed at, well, maybe those Redskin-rooting reprobates. I fall into the the camp there are degrees of racist behavior. I'd put burkha-gate way down the ladder, with something like, well, blackface, much closer to the top.
And leave people's pets out of it. Until at least they can type in their own defense.
VastLeft @ Corente offers you a tee that fails to be bipartisan and alarms the Villagers ...
Comments
yes...missing the blowups puts ya ahead of the game. :)
liked this one.
Posted by: nezua limn xolagrafik-jones | October 26, 2006 11:17 PM
"Hi, I'm from the Left and I'm here to help you."
Posted by: Chris Clarke | October 27, 2006 12:42 AM
Thanks for the post. And frankly, to join in the ritual condemnation (TM Chris Clarke), I find the Redskins chop to be up there with pet threats in terms of WTF-ness.
Posted by: Amanda Marcotte | October 27, 2006 07:14 AM
Amanda undermined her own apology by letting surrogates say that she shouldn't have apologized in the first place and insulting POC for days at her place without a single peep from her. Her excuse is that she had to work and couldn't moderate comments, for days on end. She also egged on Lindsay and Marc when they went to do the same at their own blogs. She also went on to say that POC have no agency and were only sent to gang up on her by two or three white women. Being told that I am too stupid to recognize racism unless directed by a white woman or two leads me to believe that her apology is insincere and was simply meant to shut down discussion.
Marc's own words in that thread were all meant to deny that liberals can be racist and to deny white privilege. Go back and read that very first post that started the thread instead of starting at what R Mildred said. Then when POC and others who support our position tried to explain how insidious racism is and how it works, that's when he said that POC can't decide what is or isn't racism and that he is qualified to do so, and that we must agree to disagree, that all opinions are valid, etc. That's b.s.
When our opinions, and our truth, are dismissed it's very painful. It's also wrong. R Mildred created the same pain in Marc by dismissing his opinions and his truth. It's still wrong but I see why she did it.
Posted by: Donna | October 28, 2006 03:37 PM
Donna, I read as much as I could, and didn't see the Amanda as puppetmaster over these "surrogates", as well as the stuff over at Lindsey's (I'm sure LB is nice, but I hold a grudge over her "thimerosal is completely safe, but I'll forget the disclaimer that I work for BigPharma", so I don't visit her site.) Personally, I got the feeling that R. Mildred and others were in fact attempting to manipulate the whole affair, whether to beef up their own PC credentials, I can't say. But I have priorities, and frankly, if I have to chose the position of one white person over another, I'll go with someone 1) willing to take the real life crap by using their own name, and 2) someone with a record, at least one of which I'm aware.
I know what it's like to be an Eastern, non-land-titled Indian. I can empathize with other women of color from different backgrounds and ethnicities, but I can't determine either their priorities or speak for them. But I do feel that just being a person of color doesn't give one carte blanche in all matters regarding racism. A few years back, MacDiva of Macaronies, when after being called on some seriously Firedoglakish behavior, cried "racism", being a woman of African-American and Lumbee heritage, and you know, it just didn't fly. But who gets to decide? That's a valid question, and one to which I honestly don't have the answer. But I won't agree that it's always 100% in the eyes of the PoC, because even some PoCs act in bad faith. Granted very few, but there still has to be that small amount of good-faith debate.
Posted by: MB | October 28, 2006 05:23 PM
I hear ya, MB. I followed this one closely though and for the most part all the POC were on the same side and backed up their claims with quotes from RAWA and there were at least 4 muslim women who also spoke out. If you only followed that one thread over at Punkass you would have seen me ask Marc twice who were the muslims he claims to have on his side. He ignored the question because there was only two, one was a woman claiming to be "part" muslim. As a native woman you know how far that one goes with the "part" Indian people, they are always white until it's convenient to be Indian, I felt the same about this partial person. And the other was some guy named Alon who emailed a male muslim friend and then came back and said, "my friend says this...". Sorry, that doesn't fly either, would have been better to have the guy show up because there is no telling how Alon framed the issue or whether he even asked him at all. I don't know this Alon guy or how reliable his information is. I could have just as easily made up 1 or 2 muslim friends to agree with me as well, but didn't have to. They were already there speaking out for themselves.
I'll give you this much: R.Mildred was giving Marc a taste of his own medicine. Since what Marc was doing was wrong in the first place, then two wrongs don't make a right. But I won't bash her for being as disingenous and hurtful as Marc was also being.
Posted by: Donna | October 28, 2006 09:09 PM
Donna, we definitely seem to be on the same page with most of this. But while I don't know Marc, so am not defending him, Amanda's been around for a long time, and actions mean more than words at times. She was the first top blogger I can remember to bring on as an equal a woman of color, and that was after Jesse handed over the reigns to her. And, you know, Jesse thought highly enough of Amanda to bring her on as a full equal.
People make mistakes. Gluskabe makes sure they do, neh? I don't see Amanda's flaws here as fatal, and her history allows for a lot more before I start to really worry.
Take care, nidobaskwa.
Posted by: MB | October 28, 2006 09:26 PM