Verwandte Artikel zu Can We All Be Feminists?: New Writing from Brit Bennett,...

Can We All Be Feminists?: New Writing from Brit Bennett, Nicole Dennis-Benn, and 15 Others on Intersectionality, Identity, and the Way Forward f: New ... Identity, and the Way Forward for Feminism - Softcover

 
9780143132370: Can We All Be Feminists?: New Writing from Brit Bennett, Nicole Dennis-Benn, and 15 Others on Intersectionality, Identity, and the Way Forward f: New ... Identity, and the Way Forward for Feminism
Softcover
ISBN 10: 0143132377 ISBN 13: 9780143132370
Verlag: PENGUIN GROUP, 2018

Inhaltsangabe

“As timely as it is well-written, this clear-eyed collection is just what I need right now.”  —Jacqueline Woodson, author of Brown Girl Dreaming

“The intersectional feminist anthology we all need to read” (Bustle), edited by a feminist activist and writer who “calls to mind a young Audre Lorde” (Kirkus)

Why do some women struggle to identify as feminists, despite their commitment to gender equality? How do other aspects of our identities – such as race, religion, sexuality, gender identity, and more – impact how we relate to feminism? Why is intersectionality so important?

In challenging, incisive, and fearless essays – all of which appear here for the first time – seventeen writers from diverse backgrounds wrestle with these questions, and more. A groundbreaking book that elevates underrepresented voices, Can We All Be Feminists? offers the tools and perspective we need to create a 21st century feminism that is truly for all.

Including essays by: Soofiya Andry, Gabrielle Bellot, Caitlin Cruz, Nicole Dennis-Benn, Brit Bennett, Evette Dionne, Aisha Gani, Afua Hirsch, Juliet Jacques, Wei Ming Kam, Mariya Karimjee, Eishar Kaur, Emer O’Toole, Frances Ryan, Zoé Samudzi, Charlotte Shane, and Selina Thompson

Die Inhaltsangabe kann sich auf eine andere Ausgabe dieses Titels beziehen.

Über die Autorin bzw. den Autor

June Eric-Udorie is a twenty-year-old British writer and feminist activist. Named Elle UK’s “Female Activist of the Year” for 2017, she has been included on lists of influential and inspiring women by the BBC, the Guardian, and more. A co-founder of “Youth for Change”, an initiative that works to combat female genital mutilation and forced marriage around the world, her advocacy has taken her to classrooms, the Southbank Centre's Women of the World Festival, the United Nations, and more. In 2015, she spearheaded a successful campaign to overturn the British government’s decision to remove feminism from the nationally mandated A-level (high school) politics syllabus; more recently, she raised funds to take five hundred underprivileged girls and young women of color to see the film Hidden Figures. Her writing has appeared in the Guardian, the Independent, New Statesman, the Telegraph, ESPN The Magazine, and Fusion, among others. She is currently an undergraduate at Duke University, where she is a recipient of the University Scholars merit scholarship, established by Melinda French Gates, and a Human Rights Scholar at the Kenan Institute for Ethics.

Auszug. © Genehmigter Nachdruck. Alle Rechte vorbehalten.

No Wave Feminism

Charlotte Shane

If you feel like feminism is failing you, you are not alone. I sometimes have the impression that I'm as thoroughly feminist as I am thoroughly human, that feminism is as intrinsic to my constitution as my skeleton is to my body. But in my thirty-five years, I've struggled with or outright rejected feminism on several occasions: first, as an ignorant adolescent ("What do women need feminism for if we've already got the vote?"); then, as a sex worker who saw how regularly and even gleefully feminists stoked the public's long-standing antipathy toward professionally sexual women; and now, again, as someone moving ever further into the far left, who cannot abide the forms of feminism that embrace and are complicit with the worst aspects of liberalism.

The more I learn about the intersecting, oppressive forces that continue to shape the Western world-colonialism, patriarchy, capitalism, xenophobia, and racism-and the network of cruel social machinery to which these systems give rise-incarceration, crippling debt, disenfranchisement, deportation, and so on-the less sense it makes to use gender as the primary lens through which to regard human-engineered suffering. Feminism doesn't feel like the sharpest weapon to wield against white supremacy or border policing, for instance, or even the best tool with which to approach basic civic concerns like vibrant schools. That's not because those issues don't impact women; obviously, they directly and indirectly impact many. But they don't necessarily impact women more or in dramatically different ways than they do men. In other words, the most significant challenges those issues present aren't tethered to one's sex. And so prioritizing gender above other aspects of identity limits one's realm of ethical response.

Here's an example. American prisons often keep female prisoners shackled while they give birth. There are variations on the theme: Some women are shackled during labor, some are unshackled during but then shackled again almost immediately afterward, and almost all are shackled while heavily pregnant. There's some variation of what shackling entails, too. It can mean being cuffed at the wrists, or at the ankles, or both-or cuffed to a hospital bed, or chained at the waist. Articulating these details makes the sadism even starker.

A class action federal lawsuit in 2017 alleged more than forty women at the Milwaukee County Jail suffered this horror. It was preceded by lawsuits in 2014 and 2016 against the same jail for similar practices. But the appalling practice is hardly confined to one city or even one state. In 2015, New York prisons were found to be shackling prisoners in labor in spite of a state law that made it illegal to do so. And according to a 2016 report by the Prison Birth Project and Prisoners' Legal Services of Massachusetts, jails and prisons in Massachusetts were guilty of similar violations.

Most feminists probably agree that this is a feminist issue; the topic accordingly receives coverage on feminist websites and sometimes in women's magazines. But does a feminist obligation to attend to the rights of the imprisoned extend only as far as pregnancy and labor? Is it a feminist issue when a nonpregnant woman is shackled? Or when she is caged for years and exploited for her labor, denied face-to-face visits from loved ones, held captive in a compound in the name of "justice"? If the answer to these questions is yes, then is it also a feminist issue when men are shackled during various health emergencies-seizures, say? (In 2014, a male inmate in Colorado died after undergoing several seizures while in restraints and receiving no medical treatment.) Is it a feminist issue when incarcerated men are denied the right to visit with family, or exploited for their labor? Is it a feminist issue that so many men are raped while in prison? Or does feminism's responsibility begin and end with gender-based mistreatment?

The feminists hired by prominent media outlets often advocate for measures that would result in higher levels of incarceration. They write op-eds in favor of further criminalization around sex work, and call for longer prison sentences for men convicted of assault-which we've known for decades is not necessarily synonymous with "men who've committed the crime." They also, disturbingly, relish the theater of sentencing like that enacted by Judge Rosemarie Aquilina, who told serial sexual abuser Larry Nassar that if she could, she would "allow some or many people to do to him what he did to others." (So, sexual violation is an atrocity . . . unless it happens to the right person?) They capitalize on women's justified fear and anger around mistreatment by men to shore up the status quo, to suggest that our current problems are not the result of fundamentally unjust institutions, but rather institutions that are only incidentally sexist. That means those same institutions could become less so with the right adjustments, like more draconian sentencing for crimes against women, or more female judges.

But the prison system is racist and brutal by design, not by accident or mismanagement, just as the court system regularly fails the most vulnerable because it was built to protect the powerful. "The challenge of the twenty-first century is not to demand equal opportunity to participate in the machinery of oppression," revolutionary thinker Angela Davis has written. "Rather, it is to identify and dismantle those structures." Yet leveraging our existing legal system for criminalization remains the go-to strategy for most feminists when it comes to dealing with objectionable behavior. Criminalization entails fines and incarceration; it does not meaningfully concern itself with rehabilitation, education, victim care, or prevention. Its ability to deter other potential offenders is unproven-or, arguably, proven to be nonexistent, as is especially demonstrable with laws against drug use and possession-and the recidivism rate is astronomical. Moreover, the legal system is not accessible to everyone. Undocumented people cannot use it. People leading already criminalized lives, like sex workers, often cannot use it, and marginalized people are also discouraged from or outright prevented from using it by a slew of means. (The most obvious of which is usually time and money.)

This instinct to turn to the state is not unfamiliar to me. I, too, learned from a young age that laws and courts and police are the way to deal with almost everything: You notice something is wrong, you get a law passed or use an existing law to stop it, and the problem is solved. This is not how our current laws work in practice, and it is incumbent upon us to face that fact with honesty and creativity. When activists speak out against police and prisons, people immediately demand that they offer a replacement apparatus, but it is an impossible demand. The transformation needs to be more profound than a simple swap. Prison abolitionist Mariame Kaba speaks on this point with great eloquence: "We have to transform the relationships we have with each other so we can really create new forms of safety and justice in our communities. [The work of abolition] insists that it is necessary that you change everything." [emphasis added.]

Many feminists, though, have lost their foremother's radical vision of changing everything. Instead, they are ready to work within the tight confines of an ineffective system, and they endorse and invest in a de facto police state. The "feminist" modifier itself is useless for indicating a stance on this issue, as it is for many others: protecting the rights of trans women, for instance, or even the legality of abortion.

This tension is long-standing and perhaps inevitable given that feminism is assumed to galvanize people under a banner of gender rather than shared ideological and moral...

„Über diesen Titel“ kann sich auf eine andere Ausgabe dieses Titels beziehen.

Verlag
PENGUIN GROUP
Erscheinungsdatum
2018
Sprache
Englisch
ISBN 10 
0143132377
ISBN 13 
9780143132370
Einband
Taschenbuch
Anzahl der Seiten
288
Herausgeber
Eric-Udorie June
Kontakt zum Hersteller
Nicht verfügbar
Verantwortliche Person
Purmerul LTD
https://strengholt.nl/en/

22 Liuleburgaz Str., floor 4, app. 9
Plovdiv
Bulgarien