Tuesday, August 27, 2013

The Theft of Cultural Appropriation

So what is appropriation? To understand this concept, one needs to consider a few things, namely the history of colonization, power, privilege and context. A cultural group swoops in and takes a cultural aspect from a disenfranchised group and claims ownership over it. The cultural aspect is often taken out of context and becomes a further sign of the remnants of colonization and a refusal to respect and acknowledge the validity of cultures different from one’s own.

So what is the difference, you might ask, between a hipster wanting Native American “tribal” patterns all over their pants and a person of color wearing a business suit? Or speaking English? Can there be ‘reverse appropriation’? No. Appropriation is about power and privilege. A person of color is forced to wear a business suit because Western societal values dictate that an individual is not appropriate for work/success without it. People of color are required to conform in this way in order to be hopefully deemed appropriate for work (I could throw in a discussion of natural hair and whether or not it is appropriate for “professional” settings, but that’s a discussion for another time). As for English, it is not one of the ‘dominant’ languages in the world because it is, in some way, a more superior language. Or because it is more beautiful or its use is somehow an inherent sign of intelligence. It is used because of colonization. Because people were killed and cultures were decimated. And these English-speaking colonizers decided to force their language upon them. White/Western culture is seen as the standard. In essence, people of color are required to look as assimilated into White/Western culture as much as humanly possible in order to be seen as appropriate, intelligent, etc. This is not a sharing of culture. This is forced assimilation. On the other hand, the hipster with the Native American “tribal” print pants is seizing a part of another culture that they have no understanding of just because they think it looks cool. This cultural aspect is being taken out of its proper context and morphed into a plaything, an accessory to White America’s desires. Not to mention, Native American artists are not even making money off of this. In most, if not all cases, the designs are literally stolen and put in stores like Urban Outfitters without so much as a thank you card.

Now, so what does this have to do with music? Well, American music is a great place to look for cultural appropriation. Since the days of Elvis and probably before that, mainstream (read: White) artists and record companies have mined black culture. Whether we’re talking about style, actual songs or dances, black culture has provided a very fruitful ground for white artists to come in, take what they want, make money and move on. Black artists are not credited, compensated or respected in the often repeated process of this cultural theft. Black culture becomes something “edgy” to be used when you want to take your music to the next level (See Justin Timberlake and Miley Cyrus). When white people appropriate black culture for music in particular, they are allowed to put on what they think are trappings of the culture for short periods of time. They can do things (like twerking) without anyone really thinking any less of them because everyone knows it is a phase. It is not seen as who the person IS, the way it would be if a black person did it. If a black woman tried to make a career from twerking, she would be slut-shamed, her intelligence would be questioned and no one would take her seriously. It is from a place of privilege that an individual can temporarily put on the things that hold a black person back just to look edgy before moving on to the next venture. Black people cannot move on. In the eyes of mainstream America, every black man is a dangerous thug and every black woman is a hypersexualized twerker. Who we really are as individuals is never taken into account. Not only that, but through appropriation, the history and original ownership of music, for example, is called into question. Mainstream society actually starts to believe its lie that it has created something. White artists are seen as the innovators or the ones who made something popular/important even if it has been practiced and/or celebrated in its original context for years. People of color are then regulated to the sidelines as they watch aspects of their culture warped, manipulated, disrespected, owned and then thrown away when the new cool thing comes around. Their culture and they themselves are seen as disposable.

I could go on for much longer about the many aspects of white cultural appropriation of black culture in particular and the recent examples of Miley, Macklemore and Robin Thicke, but other people have done this beautifully before me so I will use this space to cast more light on them:









Free feel to tweet @SexMiseducation on Twitter or shoot me an email at SexMiseducation@gmail.com regarding your thoughts on appropriation (of any kind) and/or any suggestions for future blog posts.



Tuesday, August 13, 2013

#solidarityisforwhitewomen

What: #solidarityisforwhitewomen is a trending hashtag on Twitter where people of color are pointing out how whitewashed mainstream feminism is and how the experiences of people of color are being ignored, silenced or cast aside by people who identify as allies.

Why: This hashtag was created by Mikki Kendall (@Karnythia on Twitter) during a debate with Hugo Schwyzer, a self-proclaimed feminist who harasses and stalks women of color who criticize him (among other things). This man has been interviewed on feministe.com and has written for The Atlantic, Jezebel and Salon. He confessed to his disgusting behavior (being a fraud, harassing women of color online, sexually harassing his students, etc.) on Twitter on Friday August 9th. And some people had nothing but sympathy for him. Mikki Kendall didn’t pull any punches: “All this concern for @hugoschwyzer's mental health & future prospects, & none for the WOC he attacked online or his students? Wow.”

Ok, so why is this so important?

Allies must be held accountable. Being a feminist does not give one a pass to be racist (or transphobic, homophobic, ageist, ableist, etc.). Mainstream feminism has always been dominated by white cis middle/upper-class voices, leaving the rest of us in the shadows. And whenever someone tries to call out our so-called “allies,” they are chastised and accused of being divisive or being mean. White feminists can say the word “intersectionality,” but many of them seem to have a hard time applying this theory in the real world. I have come across so many white liberal feminists who say they are my allies, who say they understand, but then they argue with me over my real life experiences or the real life experiences of other marginalized groups. They suddenly want to play devil’s advocate and hypothesize.

No. Stop it. This might be a fascinating thought experiment for you, but this is my life. These issues have real (sometimes, life or death) consequences for me and I don’t feel like debating with you whether or not my feelings/views are valid. If I, as a person of color, tell you something offends me, I don’t want to have to prove to you, white feminist, that I have a right to be offended. You wonder where all the people of color are, why some women of color reject feminism. We have been here this entire time and we have been watching you. You have been so tied up in theory and in issues that mainly benefit you that you have been unable (unwilling?) to see us, but we have always been here, right in front of you.

White feminists: Think twice before you respond to this hashtag, whether it’s to agree or disagree. We don’t need you to talk. You have been talking all this time. We need you to finally listen. Stop in your tracks. Be quiet. And listen. Oh, don’t forget to acknowledge and check your privilege.


Tuesday, July 30, 2013

Texas, State-Level Anti-Abortions Legislation and Why You Should Care

I started writing this post to document the major push in anti-abortion laws in 2013. I have run into people who are totally unaware this is all happening, which blows my mind, so I decided to make this my first post after my hiatus. I was going to include 2012 state-level anti-abortion bills and laws in this post, but there were so many that I was quickly becoming overwhelmed and decided to just stick to 2013. Then, as I continued my research, it seemed as if new state-level anti-abortion legislation was being announced every single day. As a result, I decided to narrow the frame of this post. Otherwise, this entry would be never-ending and I would end up never posting anything. This post will focus mainly on the timeline of the highly publicized SB5 battle in Texas. I will then reference and link to other anti-abortion laws in other states around the country at the end of the post.

Note: Check out my abortion 101 blog post for basic information on abortion procedures and rights.

Why These Laws Matter:

The recent surge in anti-abortion legislation is incredibly troubling. From a purely logical perspective, it does not make sense on face value. Why would individual states (namely states where Republicans have control over the state legislatures) propose and pass anti-abortion legislation when abortions are clearly legal thanks to Roe v. Wade? It’s actually pretty simple. These laws are decided to create so many limitations and restrictions on an individual’s right to an abortion that Roe v. Wade becomes inconsequential. They claim that all they care about is protecting life, but remember, these are some of the same people who support the death penalty and still think the wars in Iraq and Afghanistan were brilliant ideas. I do not know whether it’s more laughable or vomit-inducing to watch Texas governor Rick Perry talk about the sanctity of life in one moment while ordering the deaths of more inmates than any other state in the country in the next. Apparently, life is only sacred when one is a fetus. Weirdly enough, it seems as if the fetus is held up on a pedestal, deemed to be oh so pure and perfect, but several months later, if/when that fetus is born, it no longer matters. It is as if the event of birth somehow corrupts it. Oh, person that was once a fetus, do you have a preexisting condition and need healthcare? Did you want to go to preschool? Would you like your voting rights not trampled on? Would you like your higher education to not be so painfully expensive? Well, too bad. You are not a perfect little fetus anymore. You are a person who might demand rights, who might be a minority, who might be poor or worse, who might not vote Republican. You’re on your own.

The lives of adults and, namely, the lives of the adults who seek abortions are unimportant and these state Republicans are determined to effectively ban and/or make safe abortions impossible to access in their states. Honestly, I am at a loss as to what they expect. If someone wants an abortion, they are going to get it. These laws only limit poor disenfranchised individuals who cannot afford to take days off of work and travel to places where they can access safe abortions. When an individual wants an abortion and cannot receive a safe legal one, they do not shrug their shoulders, go back home and give birth. Instead they try to find other means (usually, unsafe means) to have the procedure. Maybe these state Republicans just don’t care. They don’t care about the suffering these laws will potentially cause as long as they can pat themselves on the back (and as long as they could potentially have their abortions on the sly).

Now, let’s specifically talk about the Texas SB5 bill (now law). Here is some of what the bill actually says:

The physician, on the day of an abortion, must have “active admitting privileges at a hospital that is located not further than 30 miles from the location at which the abortion is performed or induced…” A physician in violation of this section of the bill will be fined up to $4,000. [Chapter 171.0031, sec. 1, subsection A and sec.2, subsection b]

Any doctor performing an abortion must have “active admitting privileges at a hospital” that is 30 miles or less away from the clinic. This section of the bill is not necessary because hospitals are already federally required and able to take in a patient if an emergency were to occur. So if this section is basically redundant, why was it included in this bill? Requiring doctors who want to perform abortions to have hospital admitting privileges gives power to those running the hospitals in question. These individuals have the power to deny doctors admitting privileges and, as a result, have the power to effectively shut down clinics. Also, any physician who performs an abortion without local hospital admitting privileges will be heavily fined.

“On and after September 1, 2014, the minimum standards for an abortion facility must be equivalent to the minimum standards adopted under Section 243.010 for ambulatory surgical centers” [Sec. 171.044, sec.3, subsection a]

Proponents of this bill (now law) claim that forcing abortion clinics to follow the standards of ambulatory surgical centers would increase the level of safety for patients. The American Congress of Obstretricians and Gynecologists released a statement disagreeing with this claim. The ACOG reaffirms that abortions are safe procedures and “the risk of complications from abortion is minimal, with less than 0.5% of abortions involving major complications”. The ACOG also states further that decisions supposedly made for the safety and medical care of patients should be based on science and made by medical professionals, not legislators. Forcing abortion clinics to conform to the same standards of ambulatory surgical centers (e.g. buying various unnecessary equipment) would be a crippling financial blow to the clinics and cause many to close.

“If  some or all of the provisions of this Act are ever temporarily or permanently restrained or enjoined by judicial order, all other provisions of Texas law regulating or restricting abortion shall be enforced as though the restrained or enjoined provisions had not been adopted; provided, however, that whenever the temporary or permanent restraining order or injunction is stayed or dissolved, or otherwise ceases to have effect, the provisions shall have full force and effect.” [Sec. 171.044, sec. 6a]

If any sections of the bill are stuck down for being unconstitutional, for example, the rest of the bill will remain unaffected and continue on as if nothing ever happened.

To give a bit more perspective, this bill (now law) would close 42 clinics across the state, leaving only 5 clinics open to fulfill the needs of Texas women.

To just highlight how absurd and aggressive Texas State Republicans have been in their efforts to pass this anti-abortion legislation, I’ve set up this timeline:
  • May 27th: Texas’s regular 140-day legislative session ended.
  • June 11th: After Rick Perry called a special 30-day legislative session, he added the abortion legislation to the bills that could potentially be passed during this special additional session.
  • Thursday June 13th: The Texas Senate committee has its first hearing on SB5. 42 people showed up for public testimony: 20 for the bill, 22 against.
  • June 18th: The Texas Senate passed (20-10) SB5.
  • June 24th: The Texas State House of Representatives passed a version (95-34) of SB5 this time including the 20-week abortion ban. Although the ban is considered unconstitutional and will probably be forcibly removed, this potential removal does not affect the rest of the bill. 
  • June 25th: Wendy Davis led an 11 hour filibuster against this bill. The rules for filibustering in the Texas State Senate are incredibly strict. Eating, drinking, sitting, leaning on anything, going to the bathroom and speaking "off-topic" are not allowed.
  • Rick Perry announced that a second special session lasting 30 days would be held the following Monday to try to pass the bill again.
  • July 10th: The Texas State House passed the bill and sent it to the Senate (96-49).
  • July 12th: The Senate passed the bill (19-11). 
  • July 18th: Rick Perry signed the bill into law. 


Guess what? Texas Republicans didn't want to rest on their laurels: Thursday July 18th (The same day Rick Perry signed a version of SB5 into law), the senate introduces a new anti-abortion bill, a fetal heart bill

The second special session ends on the 31st so the Texas GOP proposed 7 other bills presumably to try to pass before the deadline.

And Texas isn’t the only state on a recent anti-abortion kick:


Well, now you're all updated...until an hour from now when another new anti-abortion bill is announced. 


Monday, July 29, 2013

I'm Back!

Sorry for the incredibly long hiatus. I'm finally able to start up the blog again and I'm really excited! If you have any topic ideas/suggestions that you would be interested in seeing on SexMiseducation, feel free to leave a comment at the bottom of this post or send a tweet to SexMiseducation on Twitter!