Bamboozled: On African Americans and Feminists Casting Their Votes for Hillary Clinton

By Cherise Charleswell

Though the decision should have been an easy one to make, a "no brainer", one that could be made while walking and chewing gum at the same time, African Americans seem to be grappling with the decision of whom they should be casting their vote for during the 2016 Democratic primaries. And, in Southern states such as North Carolina, Virginia, Texas, and Florida, which have large African American populations , they have voted in favor of Hillary Clinton . Clinton's campaign relies heavily on this support from African Americans, and she was able to obtain this support because she carries a name that has a great deal of recognition from voters who jokingly called her husband "the First Black President" during the 1990s, before Hillary ironically ran against the man who would go on to actually become the first elected Black president of the United States.

Name recognition and a variety of other factors, including the following, helped to garner Clinton the Black vote:

• The fact that Clinton's campaign had more money and thus more resources to influence voters.

• Bernie Sanders, although having a long and illustrious career in Washington DC, was an independent Senator from Vermont, a state that does not have a sizable, or notable African American population; and thus he seemed to be an unknown to the community.

• The explicit media bias, that seems to provide Clinton's campaign with far more coverage than Sanders. More about thathere and here.

• Clinton secured the endorsement of visible and prominent African Americans including: Congresswoman Maxine Waters - a super delegate, Kerry Washington, and even Shondra Rhimes.

• Americans, including Black Americans simply have a short-term memory when it comes to historical events and their contemporary consequences; and this includes Clinton's stance (including flip-flopping) and previously advocacy on issues such as the XL pipeline, fracking, the Trans Pacific Trade Agreement (TPP), the Iraq War; as well as the Defense of Marriage Act, Don't Ask Don't Tell, as well as welfare reform, which has contributed to many Americans plummeting into extreme poverty. More on thathere and here .

What makes this extremely disheartening is the fact that Clinton is running against a democratic socialist who speaks about bringing about a political revolution that includes universal healthcare, a living wage, environmental protections, ending rampant Wall Street greed, removing moneyed interest from the political process, and dismantling the prison-industrial complex; some of the very issues that Dr. Martin Luther King Jr. championed at the end of his life when he professed to Harry Belafonte during their last conversation that he had come upon something that disturbed him deeply:

"We have fought hard and long for integration, as I believe we should have, and I know that we will win. But I've come to believe we're integrating into a burning house."

He continued, "I'm afraid that America may be losing what moral vision she may have had," he answered. ….And I'm afraid that even as we integrate, we are walking into a place that does not understand that this nation needs to be deeply concerned with the plight of the poor and disenfranchised. Until we commit ourselves to ensuring that the underclass is given justice and opportunity, we will continue to perpetuate the anger and violence that tears at the soul of this nation."

So, why should have the decision been easy to make?

The first response would be the images of Bernie Sanders marching alongside Dr. Martin Luther King Jr. during the 1965 march in Selma, Alabama. The other would be the image of Sanders handcuffed alongside a Black woman, as they were both taking part in protests for civil and human rights. Despite this history, civil rights activist and longtime Congressman, John Lewis, was quick to comment that he didn't know Bernie Sanders and had never met him, initially diminishing Sanders' credibility. However, Lewis would have to later recant his statement due to that photo at the 1965 March, where a young Bernie Sanders is seen standing just a few feet behind John Lewis.

The contrast between Sanders' activism and Clinton's conservative background as a Young Republican and Goldwater Girl is worth noting. When doing so, we realize that Sanders is the candidate who has a long history of protesting, calling out, and actively fighting against social-racial-injustice and economic inequality. And his political record, including his condemnation of the aggressive actions of Israel against the Palestinian in Gaza, despite himself being Jewish, demonstrates a moral compass that is often missing among mainstream political candidates. Speaking out against issues is not new to him, so it's reasonable to assume that such statements are much more than a form of pandering. There is actually numerous videos and footage of Sanders speaking about these exact same issues and points that he has been raising in the current presidential race many years prior. His principles have not changed over the past 30 years.

Contrast this to Hillary's various changing positions and claims that she has "evolved on a number of social issues," and is indeed a Progressive. In response to this, political pundits have argued that the campaign direction and message of the Sanders campaign simply has forced Clinton to shift her politics to the left, and that she is essentially "parroting" many of Sanders' arguments to gain support from the progressive Left. Saturday Night Live actually aired a skit that depicted actress Kate McKinnon, as Hillary Clinton, showing her morph into Bernie Sanders. Of course the transformation would only be temporary, because the elected candidate Clinton would readily regress back into a Moderate-Conservative politician. One who would expect us to continue to wait for urgently needed social-economic reforms, such as the introduction of Universal HealthCare. While she refers to Sanders' support of single-payer universal healthcare as being "too ambitious," he and other Progressives, activists, public health leaders, and organizations such as Physician for a National Health Program remind us of the following realities:

• Those living in the United States of America pay vastly more in health care expenditures than other countries, particularly post-industrial nations, and receive the poorest or most limited care; or return on their investment. Essentially, Americans are paying more in premiums, copays, direct fees, etc. and getting less.

• This high cost of access to health care services continues to causes Americans to go into bankruptcy, something that is unheard of in other post-industrial nations.

• The barriers to quality health care (as well as nutritious food and other factors) also play a factor in the United States having unusually high infant mortality rates, particularly among African American women.

• Although a step in the right direction, the Affordable Care Act, which Hillary always alludes to, in its current state simply has not gone far enough to ameliorate health care access and quality of care problems in the United States.

When considering all of this, and the fact that marginalized populations (especially African Americans) disproportionately suffer the highest rates of infant mortality and chronic diseases, the position that the country needs to continue to wait, postpone, or not even consider a more economically-sound universal healthcare system should have seemed preposterous to African American voters, as well as feminists who claim to be concerned about reproductive justice, women's health, and so on. Those advocating for social change should not be supporting the candidate who simply says WAIT; and when it comes to that $15 hour national minimum wage, do not forget that Hillary also would like us to WAIT. Consider that and then ponder Malcolm X's statements made during his 1964 "The Ballot or the Bullet" speech:

"So it's the ballot or the bullet. Today our people can see that we're faced with a government conspiracy. This government has failed us. The senators who are filibustering concerning your and my rights, that's the government. Don't say it's Southern senators. This is the government; this is a government filibuster. It's not a segregationist filibuster. It's a government filibuster. Any kind of activity that takes place on the floor of the Congress or the Senate, it's the government. Any kind of dilly-dallying, that's the government. Any kind of pussy-footing, that's the government. Any kind of act that's designed to delay or deprive you and me right now of getting full rights, that's the government that's responsible. And any time you find the government involved in a conspiracy to violate the citizenship or the civil rights of a people, then you are wasting your time going to that government expecting redress."

Thus, those who casted their votes for Clinton during the 2016 Primaries were again bamboozled by these performances and antics, including pandering comments abouthot sauce and trying out Boba ice tea, or "bubble tea." The truth of the matter is that Hillary has had an extensive career in politics, and during this time her record has been consistent with that of a Conservative or Moderate-Conservative. Ultimately, her voting record provides the "receipts" needed to determine whether one should support her candidacy.

While looking up a candidate's voting record, or even given it some thought, does require a small commitment of time, it truly is a responsibility that voters have to bare. Relying on investigative journalists to do this is no longer viable or credible, as they no longer exist to provide information. While candidates like to speak about transparency, most do not provide a complete timeline of their voting record on their official candidacy pages. This is the equivalent of going to a job interview and refusing to provide a resume. Clinton takes this lack of transparency a step further with her unwillingness to release any video or transcripts of the speeches that various corporations paid her millions of dollars to deliver. (More on that here). She claims that these large sums of payment did not influence her vote, advocacy, and decisions in any way. If that is the case, there should be no hesitation in making them public.

Where Hillary Clinton Stands On Pressing Social Issues

During the 1990s, the Clintons made a concerted effort to prove that they were just as tough on crime as Republicans, and in doing so, supported policy changes that drastically increased the rates of incarceration for people of color and the poor. Such attitudes and policies also contributed to the militarization of the police. These issues have been the focus of protest groups such as Black Lives Matters, which was started by three Black, queer feminists. And although mainstream (white, middle class) feminists like to make the claim that Hillary Clinton champions women's rights and feminist's issues, history shows that has actually not been the case. At best, her record has been a mixed bag. For instance, while she advocated for the 1994 Violence Against Women Act, she was unwilling to openly discuss and address the state-sanctioned violence that disproportionately affects women of color and their children. In fact, when Black Lives Matter activists showed up at a Clinton campaign event, they were ignored by the candidate and heckled by a mostly White crowd. Clinton handled their presence notably different than Sanders. Where Sanders stepped back and allowed the activists to speak and openly share their grievances, Clinton waited for the protestors to be removed and then stated that it was time to "get back to the important issues" - because, apparently, the lives of Black people and other people of color are not that important.

Environmental degradation is certainly an important social and public health issue, and those who face the most dire consequences of this degradation are the poor, people of color, and children - all of whom are more likely to live in areas having high toxicity, pollution, and in close proximity to highways. What occurred in Flint, Michigan with the water supply is an example of this, and the polluting of the water supply is tied to unchecked industrial practices including fracking. Although trying to move away from her initial position on fracking, Clinton was previously unwilling to condemn the practice, even as early as last year. (Seehere and here). Furthermore, it was revealed that the Clinton Global Initiative actually has ties to a top executive of the agency facing multiple lawsuits for its role in poisoning the children of Flint - children who, again, were mostly African American.

Hillary Clinton's Positions and their Impact on Marginalized People

Mass Incarceration

Currently, the United States has the highest incarcerated population in the world, and the vast majority of those held in prisons in this country are people of color, low-income people, and people with other marginalized identities. Despite this, many African Americans have chosen to overlook Clinton's role in setting up this system that is now incarcerating women (of color)at an ever-increasing rate. In her article, Why Hillary Clinton Doesn't Deserve the Black Vote, Michelle Alexander goes on to explain the Clintons' role:

"We should have seen it coming. Back then, Clinton was the standard-bearer for the New Democrats, a group that firmly believed the only way to win back the millions of white voters in the South who had defected to the Republican Party was to adopt the right-wing narrative that black communities ought to be disciplined with harsh punishment rather than coddled with welfare. Reagan had won the presidency by dog-whistling to poor and working-class whites with coded racial appeals: railing against 'welfare queens' and criminal 'predators' and condemning 'big government.' Clinton aimed to win them back, vowing that he would never permit any Republican to be perceived as tougher on crime than he.

Clinton championed the idea of a federal 'three strikes' law in his 1994 State of the Union address and, months later, signed a $30 billion crime bill that created dozens of new federal capital crimes, mandated life sentences for some three-time offenders, and authorized more than $16 billion for state prison grants and the expansion of police forces. The legislation was hailed by mainstream-media outlets as a victory for the Democrats, who 'were able to wrest the crime issue from the Republicans and make it their own.'"

Clinton actually surpassed Reagan's use of dog-whistle politics and choose to use blatant, racially-charged rhetoric, the most notable of which was said during a speech in support of the 1994 Crime Bill: "They are not just gangs of kids anymore," she said. "They are often the kinds of kids that are called 'super-predators.' No conscience, no empathy. We can talk about why they ended up that way, but first we have to bring them to heel." This statment was widely understood to be in reference to Black children. This is precisely the same rhetoric that former Ferguson police officer Darren Wilson used in his description to justify murdering Mike Brown, an unarmed African American teenager. In his statements, Wilson called on his inner Hillary to make Mike Brown not only sound like a super predator, but a super human…"

Brown approached again and hit Wilson, who fired another bullet. At that point, Brown ran away, with Wilson following on foot. He fired more shots - striking Brown at least once - and stopped. But Brown wasn't down. Instead - like a villain, or perhaps an evil mutant - he appeared stronger than before. Wilson fired again. "At this point it looked like he was almost bulking up to run through the shots, like it was making him mad that I'm shooting at him," Wilson said. "And that face that he had was looking straight through me, like I wasn't even there, I wasn't even anything in his way."

Wilson describes an almost animalistic Brown, who - like the comic book character, Wolverine - had gone into a kind of berserker rage. He made "a grunting, like aggravated sound," Wilson said. "I've never seen anybody look that, for lack of a better word, crazy," he explained. "I've never seen that. I mean, it was very aggravated … aggressive, hostile … You could tell he was looking through you. There was nothing he was seeing."

In response to this criticism, Clinton likes to point out that Sanders also voted for the Crime Bill. But what she fails to disclose is his multiple attempts to weaken it, including eliminating the death penalty provisions and trying to have a separate vote about creating new mandatory minimums. His vote was one made in reluctance, in order to pass the ban on semi-automatic assault weapons and the Violence Against Women Act provisions.

Welfare Reform

In 1996, Bill Clinton, former president and husband of current candidate Hillary Clinton, uttered the words, "The era of big government is over". What he was referring to was his signing of The Personal Responsibility and Work Opportunity Reconciliation Act of 1996 (PRWORA), which dismantled the federal welfare system known as Aid to Families With Dependent Children (AFDC). This is a bill that Hillary Clinton ardently supported, and later in 2008 continued to laud as a great success. Was it successful in reducing the number of people on welfare? Yes. Did it end the need for social safety nets? No. In fact, the legislation resulted in doubling extreme poverty in the decade and a half after it passed.

Corporate Interests and Global Imperialism

Clinton's decades of service on corporate boards and in major policy roles as first lady, senator, and secretary of state give a clear indication of where she stands. She has reaffirmed through her actions, statements, and support of use of military force that the protection of US economic interests (not its citizens, of course) justifies military interventions in other countries. A 2013 Bloomberg Businessweek article entitled "Hillary Clinton's Business Legacy at the State Department: How Hillary Clinton turned the State Department into a machine for promoting U.S. business" underlines this position, noting that she sought "to install herself as the government's highest-ranking business lobbyist," directly negotiating lucrative overseas contracts for US corporations like Boeing, Lockheed, and General Electric. Not surprisingly, "Clinton's corporate cheerleading has won praise from business groups." In 2011, she actually penned an essay on America's Pacific Century for Foreign Policy, where she went on to speak at length about objectives that involved "opening new markets for American business," and with this attitude, she of course initially supported the Trans Pacific Trade Agreement (TPP). Her support of the controversial and damaging TPP again exemplifies that she aligns herself with corporate interests, not the needs and concerns of women, the working class, and other marginalized groups. (More on that here, here, and here).

Clinton actually served on the board of Walmart, an organization that has US taxpayers spending billions to subsidize their low-wage workers , who for the most part go without benefits. While Clinton now wants to cast herself as a champion of the American worker, she served on the Board of this corporation which waged major campaigns against labor unions. And, to make matters worse, she has not cut her ties with the corporation and its executives. In fact, in 2013, Alice Walton donated the maximum amount ($25,000) to her "Ready for Hillary" Super PAC.

Clinton's policies and supported actions have been just as detrimental to marginalized people globally - from Africa, Asia, the Middle East, and Latin America and the Caribbean. In Haiti, Clinton led the State Department in its collaboration with subcontractors for Hanes, Levi's, and Fruit of the Loom who aggressively moved to block mandated minimum wage increase for Haitian assembly zone workers, the lowest paid in the hemisphere. Essentially, the factory owners refused to pay 62 cents per hour, or $5 per day, despite a measure unanimously passed by the Haitian Parliament in June 2009.

The recent and brutal murder of Honduran indigenous environmental activist, Berta Cáceres, provides another example of Clinton's commitment to imperialism and corporate interest over the rights of women, working class people, and disenfranchised groups. In fact, prior to her murder, Berta singled out Clinton for her role in supporting a 2009 coup and illegal ouster of Honduran left-of-center President Manuel Zelaya. Under this new government indigenous leaders have been murdered and tortured, and Honduras is noted for being the most violent country in theworld. Further, indigenous and Garifuna people are being increasingly marginalized and displaced - being pushed away from fishing off the coasts to make way for tourism, and losing access to their farmland and rainforests for the sake of transnational corporate resource-extraction projects.

In the Middle East and Central Asia, Clinton continued to defend the US's right to violate international law and human rights. One needs to look no further than her AIPAC speech to learn more about her promotion of war and violence against women and their communities in the Middle East. In the article " Why these two feminists aren't voting for Hillary", Juliana Britto Schwartz elaborates on this:

"She pledged to 'provide Israel with the most sophisticated defense technology' and invited Israeli Prime Minister [Benjamin Netanyahu] to visit the White House - tying herself in ways even Obama didn't to an Israeli government committed to race-mongering, apartheid policies, and continuing the Occupation of Palestine. She pledged to fight the bedrock of progressive community organizing: boycotts. She expressed pride in 'imposing crippling sanctions' against civilians in Iran - sanctions which have denied access to women's health services and life-saving treatment for hundreds of thousands of Iranians."

To continue on the topic of war, particularly drone warfare, Britto Schwartz's article provides additional insight:

"Her repeating typically pro-war talking points about 'Iranian aggression' being the biggest threat to Middle Eastern stability were also especially rich given that she herself, as US senator and as Secretary of State, advocated for aggression and the invasion of other countries illegally. She fought for the Iraq War when many others, including Bernie Sanders and even current President Obama, opposed it. Clinton's State Department devised the legal reasoning that justified the expansion of American drone attacks which have killed hundreds of civilians, and she pushed to maintain US ties with dictators in Egypt , Tunisia and, and Bahrain. As others have written, Clinton's famous call for women's rights as human rights, or some donation for the Malala Fund, holds little credibility when it is a US-manufactured and Clinton-supported ordinance that is blowing up women in Gaza, Iraq, Afghanistan and Pakistan.

LGBTQ Rights

Clinton comes from the era of Second Wave feminism - a time when feminists excluded and at times participated in discriminating against people who identified as LGBTQ. Essentially, if something didn't relate to or impact the lives of heterosexual, middle class, white women, it was not truly a matter of concern. Thus, Hillary Clinton sat in silent agreement (like she did during her time on the Walmart board) as policies such as 'Don't ask, Don't tell' (DADT) and legislation like The 1996 Defense of Marriage Act (DOMA) were signed into law by her husband. DADT was the official US policy regarding the service of gays and lesbians in the military, which remained in effect until September 20, 2011. DOMA defined marriage as the union of one man and one woman, allowed states to refuse to recognize same-sex marriages, and allowed for other forms of discrimination.

Ironically, Clinton receives praise, and is deemed as being a highly capable candidate, due to her political record and years of experience. This is in spite of the fact that, as a policymaker, she has consistently favored policies devastating to women, people of color, LGBT persons, and working class people. The very record and experience that she flaunts proves that she is not a progressive, doesn't uphold feminist values, and certainly does not deserve the African American vote.

On Hillary, "the Feminist"

Those who are most adamant that Hillary Clinton is indeed a feminist are mostly women who have a few things in common with Clinton - white, older, baby boomers, heterosexual, upper-middle class. They are perhaps correct, in that Clinton is a Second Wave feminists, and this is reflected in the focus on what has been seen as traditional women's rights issues - access to abortion and contraception, and eliminating the gender pay gap (all while ignoring the fact that there is a gender-racial gap as well). With her pant suits and muted femininity, Clinton represents the group of White women who began to work outside the home, and entered male-dominated fields, while largely excluding issues prevelant to women of color who have always had to work outside the home. In short, her form of feminism is not inclusive. The feminists that she identifies with are those who have never experienced forms of oppression, such as war, police profiling and brutality, and thus find it easy to ignore their impact, and do not deem them important enough to prioritize as a voting issue. Instead, they have social justice activists dragged away while declaring that it is "time to get back to the important issues."

As pointed out by Juliana Britto Schwartz in her article "Why these two feminists aren't voting for Hillary", it's been confusing for us to hear feminists insist that Clinton cares deeply about women's rights when her policies have had such a devastating effect on Black and Brown women abroad and in the US.

Ultimately, Hillary is a moderate-conservative centrist who, along with her husband, has managed to become a multimillionaire while working strictly as a "public servant." Her political views, positions, and actions are not that of an intersectional feminist, and ultimately have negatively impacted marginalized people in the United States and globally. Her candidacy and platform do not incorporate needed reforms and radical changes to the status quo. Despite this, she has been able to bamboozle these people into voting for her during the 2016 Primaries. Through speeches where she adopted "progressive" talking points, media bias in her favor that led to "blacking out" her opponent, and opportunities to appeal to those who still get their news solely from American corporate-sponsored media, she was able to convince these voters that she is not a member of the oligarchy, that she does not represent corporate interests, and that she was the only Democratic candidate that could actually beat Donald Trump, and I suppose save America. Polls have shown that this is not the case. Instead, they show that a general election between the two former friends and colleagues (with Trump being a former donor to Clinton's campaigns) would be a close one. Further, Clinton's political career and campaign, and disregard for intersectional issues of race, class, sexuality, and foreigners exemplify the problem with mainstream feminism - in that it continues to be focused on advocating for access for wealthy white women to "lean in" and share in the spoils of capitalism and US imperial power.

Art, Race, and Gender: An Interview with Son of Baldwin

By Devon Bowers

Below is a transcript interview I had with the founder and operator of the Facebook page, Son of Baldwin, where we discuss comic books as a political medium and also as it relates to and in many ways reflects the current racial and gender structures we see in society.

What made you interested in comics? For me, personally, comics were an extension of my interest and enjoyment of animation.

My father bought me my very first comic books when I was four years old and I was hooked instantaneously. At that point, I had already been introduced to super heroes via the 1973 Super Friends cartoon and then the 1975 Wonder Woman television series. I was fascinated with the idea of these larger-than-life characters with incredible powers who used those powers to protect defenseless people from the evil and corrupt. That resonated with me on a primal level. Forty years later, it still does.

Comic books are the reason I'm a writer today. My earliest writings were me attempting to create my own superhero stories. Additionally, two superheroes in particular played a major role in the shaping of the very unsophisticated political consciousness of my childhood:Wonder Woman and her black sister, Nubia. Wonder Woman comics were filled with stories that touched on very basic, elementary feminist principles. And with the introduction of Nubia, a very clumsy race awareness was brought to the fore. Both impacted me in ways that I can't fully articulate, but suffice to say, they were my first child-like understandings of identity.

The fact that these were female characters was quite important. I wasn't drawn to Superman orBatman, or even Black Lightning and Black Panther in the same way. I believe that I was rejecting, on some subconscious level, the narrowness and rigidness of a particular brand of masculinity and the increasing and needless violence that came along with it. Wonder Woman and Nubia-with their bold strength, unabashed femininity, and desire to teach first and punch only if they had no other choice-seemed more balanced and free. The escapist fantasies I had with them allowed me the room to safely explore other, queerer aspects of myself, aspects that I was only beginning to become aware of and understand. At four years old, I couldn't know that this is what was happening, but looking back, it makes a great deal of sense.

Given the fact that so many movies and shows are flourishing due to diversity, why don't you think that companies don't have more diverse characters, if for no other reason than to cash in?

There are a great number of experts, theorists, and thinkers who believe racism, sexism, and other forms of institutional bigotry are tied to economics. The prevailing wisdom goes something like: to rid ourselves of these evils, we must disconnect them from their economic incentive; we must make bigotry unprofitable. But what that class analysis fails to contend with are the psychological benefits of bigotry. Bigoted ideology helps oppressive groups feel good about their actions, beliefs, practices, and thoughts. It warps their perception of reality so that any evidence contrary to their false ideas of supremacy are discarded and discounted. They'll invent flimsy excuses to uphold the status quo in the face of utter ruin. This benefit is separate from economics. It lives in that mental and emotional realm that allows poor white people, for example, to say: "I may be poor, but at least I'm not black!" or straight black people to say, "I may be black, but at least I'm not queer."

So when the research shows that inclusive media is actually more profitable than exclusive media , they regard that data as suspect and reject it. Simultaneously, when the exclusive media they promote fails financially, they behave as though they're baffled in regard to why that might be and continue to make more of the same stuff in the face of utter failures. As a last resort, they might test the research by releasing inclusive media, but that's always a game of gotcha. If the media does well, they say it's a fluke. If it does poorly, then it's a self-fulfilling prophecy.

It doesn't matter if what they thought was inclusive was actually tokenism dressed in offensive stereotypes. It doesn't matter how many inclusive forms of media do well or how many exclusive forms of media fail. The bigot isn't operating from a logical, rational, common-sense perspective. Even the capitalist bigot will choose losing money over allowing marginalized peoples and perspectives centralized locations in the production of media-especially marginalized peoples and perspectives they can't control.

Would you say that comics can be used effectively as a means of political engagement on some level?

Absolutely. I'd be loath to give my nieces and nephews a comic book without first reading it and then reading it with them, though. Many comic books contain really toxic messages about race, gender, gender identity, sexuality, disability, etc. I think comic books politically engage children in ways that I find abhorrent. Most comics teach kids that physical violence is the way to solve most problems; that women should always be subject to the gaze and whims of men; that queer people don't exist, or if they do, it's as the strange punchline or comic relief; that being disabled is the worst thing in the world to be and must be "corrected"; that all races should be subordinate to the white race, and so on. It's very, very rare that I come across comics that I would give to the children in my family (Princeless is a pretty good one). But I do find that my adult friends and family are politically engaged with the comic books they read. Mostly though, they, like me, find themselves in opposition to the overt and covert sociopolitical messages in them. Most mainstream comic books, I'm convinced, are created for white, heterosexual, cisgender, non-disabled men-which makes sense since that demographic, by and large, is the one creating them.

What are your thoughts on the fact that Scarlett Johansson is playing Major Motoko in an upcoming Ghost in the Shell movie ? Do you think that this is being used as a ploy of sorts to get people from criticizing Marvel for not creating a standalone Black Widow movie?

Scarlett Johansson to be playing an Asian character is blatant racism; it's yellowface. There's just no other way for me to view it. It's bold and proud racism masquerading as a necessary casting choice. Racists will always try to justify their racism and, in the justification, attempt to remove the racism label: "It was an economic decision! And Johansson is popular, so…!" They say that as though either of those plea cops shield them from the racist label. They don't. Racism is racism irrespective of the "justification."

There's just no way in the world I will see Ghost in the Shell without an Asian actor in the lead role. Period. The end. That goes for Doctor Strange, too. Ain't no way I'm supporting that film either. My response to Hollywood racism is to do everything in my power to ensure that their racist products fail. Not that they'd ever learn their lesson: How many Exodus' or Gods of Egypts have to flop before they get it? I learned that they don't want to get it. They dismiss my views by calling me a SJW (social justice warrior)-a term that they seem to think is a slur, which reveals much more about them than it does about me-and whining about how hard it is not to be a bigot.

So instead of trying to persuade bigots why it's wrong to be bigots, I give my money to those who already know why. That's why I make it my business to support ARRAY.

As far as a Black Widow stand-alone film , I don't think there's any way Marvel can protect itself from that criticism. There is no sleight-of-hand they can pull that could distract anyone from something so obviously and egregiously sexist.

Regarding the role of women in the comic book industry, would you say that there is some room for women in the industry in terms of women taking the lead in creating and producing comics?

I wish I could say yes. The industry is so incredibly hostile to women, though. Like openly hostile; so openly that it seems almost built into the industry's design.

For example, there's this situation at DC Entertainment where one of the senior editors has been repeatedly accused of sexual harassment-for years and years, by many women-and only now, after one woman spoke publicly and other survivors of this man's behavior spoke up and social media got a hold of their testimonies-is DC "investigating." And they made sure to use DC Entertainment Diane Nelson to make the public statement about the investigation in an oh-so-cynical Public Relations 101 stunt move. Like that wasn't absolutely transparent. It's almost like if the public never found out about the allegations, DC would have been content with allowing it to continue, like sexual harassment is a normal part of their professional culture.

And it's not just the publishers; it's the audience, too. Women have complained of harassment and worse at comic conventions and other comic-related spaces including comic book retail stores. And don't venture into the comment sections at every comic book news site or message board. Misogyny is a staple. If you were a woman, would you feel welcome in such a vicious environment?

And it's a shame that this is the state of the industry because there are so many talented female creators and eager female readers who could help boost the industry's lagging sales-especially DC's, whose market share continues to shrink.

I find it strange in some ways (though in some ways not), that in many cartoons such as Justice League Unlimited that have strong, well-liked female characters such as Vixen and Hawkgirl and yet people seem to think that movies or shows based on those characters wouldn't succeed. Why would you say that is?

The answer is bigotry. Bigots cannot understanding centering anything outside of their identity sphere. It doesn't matter how many times Batman, Spider-Man, or Superman fail, they will be given multiple chances to succeed. Because they are perceived as having inherent value due to merchandising, etc. But if Vixen was given as many chances to find her stride as Batman, Spider-Man, and Superman have over these many decades, maybe she would eventually find her popularity as well. Though I must say, Vixen comes out of a kind of stereotype about black women's sexuality and womanhood; a white, patriarchal gaze which regards it as animalistic, base, degenerate, evil, and wayward. Vixen needs a black woman writer to redeem and revitalize her, and remove her from the clutches of the white supremacist sensibility that imagined her. There's a dope character in there somewhere, but a black woman's vision is needed to realize it.

How are cartoons used to enforce gender roles? I say this as the show Young Justice was canceled by DC as they thought that women wouldn't purchase toys of the largely male cast. ( http://io9.gizmodo.com/paul-dini-superhero-cartoon-execs-dont-want-largely-f-1483758317 )

It's funny you should ask this. I just wrote an essay about a superhero cartoon called DC Super Hero Girls for The Middle Spaces that explores, in some ways, the function of cartoons.

What I've come to understand is that most American media aimed at children is propaganda designed to enforce very conservative and harmful ideas about class, disability, gender, gender identity, nationality, race, sexuality, and Otherness in general. There are some exceptions ( Steven Universe may be one, though I have some minor issues with that show as well that I hope someone can correct; but that's the topic of another conversation). But for the most part, this media is attempting to indoctrinate children into becoming a very specific kind of citizen, a very specific kind of laborer, a very specific kind of taxpayer, a very specific kind of soldier, to practice a very specific kind of religion, to form a very specific kind of family-and all of those things lean noticeably to the right.

That's why we have toy commercials where only boys play with racing cars and only girls play with dolls. Shit, we even call boys' dolls "action figures" to ensure that the line between genders is solidly drawn. Cartoons, which are little more than 15- and 30-minute commercials for toys and games, are design to reinforce these outdated and limiting notions. And, unfortunately, adults have been indoctrinated far longer than children. So most adults act as the police force ensuring their children absorb these restrictive, reductive ideas.

Why do you think that so many people who are into comics want to keep the entire medium to a small few, denigrating people who are just learning about the comics or who became interests in them via the movies as not being 'true fans?' Doesn't that hurt them in a sense as a major reason comic book movies were/are being made is because of those people who haven't yet/don't read the comics?

People, I've come to understand, are afraid of change. We become anxious when we perceive that something might change because we allowed some other group to be included. The comic book fanatic that denigrates new readers because they think the new readers might cause the industry to alter its priorities and storytelling to accommodate the new reader has much in common with the xenophobe who wants to build a wall at the southern border to keep Mexicans out of the United States because they think the Mexicans will "steal their jobs." Those fears are family. They live together. And they will, thankfully, die together. It's inevitable. They're scared of that, too.

What comics/graphic novels would you say had an impact on you on a personal level and why did they have such a major impact? [For me, I would say Solanin, Blankets, and Not Simple.]

I love this question. There are a few. I tend to like comic books/graphic novels that make me think, that make me question things, that encourage me to envision a better world and a better way of life, and invite me to be a better human being:

Erika Alexander and Tony Puryear's Concrete Park is the very first comic book/graphic novel that I've ever read about people of color that wasn't plagued by the white gaze. It's the very first comic book I've encountered in which people of color are centralized, are the default, belong in the landscape, are the norm. It's the very first comic book that I felt didn't ask permission to exist in this state. It avoids stereotypes. It allows its characters the full realm of humanity and is unapologetic in allowing its Blackness to begin with a capital B. And it's a Blackness that wasn't imagined by white folks who listen to rap music and had a black roommate in college so now they think they're experts on black people even though all they can manage to conjure is black pathology. With beautiful writing and beautiful art, this comic, more than any other, provides a way for me to envision fully realized black characters in my own stories.

Phil Jimenez 's Otherworld was such a smart examination of sociopolitical hierarchy. The backdrop was Celtic myth and science fiction, but the heart of the story was about the lovelessness that defines contemporary conservative ideology and how it can only lead to human extinction. Art wise, every page is a masterpiece. Every detail is rendered meticulously. And the colors were outrageous. The series only lasted seven issues when it was scheduled to go for 12. So I never got to read the conclusion, but what I did read impacted my personal politics in a very profound way.

Kieron Gillen and Jamie McKelvie's Young Avengers broke all of the rules in terms of narrative and visual storytelling, and did so with elegance, grace, and aplomb. They literally broke the boundaries of the panels in their stories-the art often allowed the characters to actually use the white space between panels as weapons! And then they broke one of the biggest boundaries of all: In their final issue, they revealed that every member of the team was queer. Basically, all the things the industry would have said couldn't be done because it would affect sales, they did. Their fearlessness bolstered my own.

Robert Jones, Jr. is a writer from Brooklyn, N.Y. He earned both his B.F.A. in creative writing and M.F.A. in fiction from Brooklyn College. His work has been featured in The New York Times , Gawker , The Grio , and the Feminist Wire . He is the creator of the social justice social media community, Son of Baldwin, which can be found on Facebook , Google Plus , Instagram , Medium , Tumblr , and Twitter . His first novel is in the revision stage and he's currently working on the second.

Marxism, Intersectionality, and Therapy

By David I. Backer

Intersectionality and marxism are not on great terms, supposedly.[1] While some thinkers and activists recognize the need for intersectional insights in research and organizing, others maintain more negative attitudes and analyses towards such insights. The negative attitudes and analyses combine a new resent with the old tension between feminist and poststructuralist critiques of Marxist theory and the latter, sometimes named "identity politics" or "identarian politics." While intersectionalists claim that race, class, and gender (and other categories and discourses) compound, mingle, and mix in unique ways during particular events and experiences, Marxists allege that class trumps all with respect to oppression. The intersectionalists call for specific and particularized redress of compounded oppressions which sometimes do not include class or, in other cases, are lost when class is the sole focus (or any single category of oppression by itself). The Marxists, on the other hand, call for changing the relations of production, focusing on class. Racism, sexism, homophobia, ableism, and other oppressions will be ameliorated, or at least the conditions for their amelioration can only begin, after that shift in exploitative, alienating, and degrading relations of capitalist production. The debate leaves two conflicting camps on the Left. One with a particularized sensitivity to the complex layers of oppression, and the other with a fervent clarity regarding the link in the chain of domination which, if broken, will release the people from their bonds.

The choice is ultimately a false one, though the divisiveness it inspires is real. The matter deserves special attention, and some have begun to seriously consider it.[2] I want to focus on the term "relations of production," since, for the Marxists, everything comes down to a shift in these relations. Thinkers as diverse as G.A. Cohen and Louis Althusser confirm, in their readings of Marx, that relations of production are what defines a social formation as any given moment: you can have any set of productive forces, but the kind of society you have--the modes of production--is largely defined by the relations of production. Looking at the term "relations of production" again shows that the tension between intersectionality and Marxism is, frankly, dumb.

Marx defines production, at least in the Grundrisse, as tackling nature and making our lives together. [3] A "relation" of production is a kind of dynamic which forms between people when making their lives together, as well as a dynamic which forms between people and nonhuman things (like the means of production).[4] Marx's German word for "relation" in "relation of production" is Verhältnis. In the Grundrisse and the crucial opening chapters of Capital Vol. 1, the term has two meanings which fit with the definition I just gave.[5] The first meaning is in the sense of a mathematical ratio: a relation of production can mean an absolute or relative value of commodities in terms of other commodities, like prices or wages, for example. The second meaning is in the sense of person-to-person interactions like speech, action, and working together.

This division is useful for distinguishing different kinds of Marxist critique that have evolved over the years, one example being the critical theorists' distinction between recognition and redistribution (Nancy Fraser's is the best articulation of this [6]). Take exploitation of labor, for example. Exploitation, in its distributive sense, occurs as a mathematical allotment based on the value of work completed and value received in exchange for that work. It is a mathematical relation between employer and employee. The value of work completed is always greater than the value in wages received, leaving employees bereft of the full value of their work. You can never be paid fully for what you do when you work for a wage, since the wage relation is an exploitative relation of production. Exploitation in its recognitive sense, in contrast (sometimes called alienation), refers to what it's like when people are exploited, both subjectively and intersubjectively (think Hegel's master-slave dialectic). The distributive sense of "relation of production" is mathematical and the recognitive sense of "relation of production" is more subjective, identarian.

Here's my claim. We should read Marx as saying that relations of production are both recognitive and distributive: that a single relation of production has a recognitive and redistributive aspect. There are two meanings of "relation of production," so why shouldn't the term mean both? Making our lives together in production requires both recognition between persons and mathematical ratios in the distribution of resources among persons. Recognition and distribution are two senses of the same notion, two moments of one dynamic, two sides of the same coin: they are simultaneously occasioned in any given relation of production.

If a relation of production is both redistributive and recognitive, then changing the relations of production requires changing both recognition and redistribution. To reverse oppression, in other words, both are necessary and sufficient. Neither on its own is enough for revolution. Making life together justly--an emancipatory production--means having just distributions and just recognitions. The Verhaltnissen in a just society has to have each of these, conjoined, not a disjunction or causal implication. Thinking one is more important than one or the other, or that somehow one must be antecedent to the other, is dumb. Changing relations of production means changing ratios of distribution and changing interative practices so that they are recognitive and not misrecognitive.

Radicals in the past have understood this point clearly. Fred Hampton understood it very clearly, as did many members of the Black Panther Party and others in the Black Power movement of the 1960s. Even Lenin and Marx showed evidence of understanding this point, specifically regarding the United States. Keeanga-Yamahtta Taylor talks about this inclusive tradition in her excellent new book, From #BlackLivesMatter to Black Liberation. [7] Though they may not have put it in these terms, some of the most effective activists and deepest radical thinkers in the leftist tradition understood that relations of production are dynamics composed of recognition and distribution, especially in the United States context.

There are at least two important kinds of oppression which flow from the two senses of "relation of production," whose conceptual relationship has been poorly formulated: distributive oppression and misrecognitive oppression. The dumb question to ask is: What causal role does an exploitative mathematical ratio of distribution play in oppression, generally speaking? How important is the first sense of verhaltnisse to the second?

One position, taken by some Marxists, is that there is a direct causal link between the two, going one way. If the mathematical ratio is evened out, if there are widespread non-exploitative distributions, then oppression's chokehold is broken. All the recognitive problems will collapse, like a body without bones, as soon as the correct ratios are put in place. Another position, taken by critics of the Marxists, is that the two are not causally linked. Other oppressions will survive and thrive (in fact, have survived and thrived) changes in the distributive ratios: women, people of color, marginalized sexualities and genders, and others will face the same recognitive oppressions whether or not they own the means of production together with others.

That these are two opposing positions is dumb. Rather than constituting some kind of crisis for the soul of the Left, they merely delimit two important aspects of liberation that both need to occur in tandem if the goal is changing the relations of production. Recognitive (misrecognitive) oppression must be redressed, and the way in which it is redressed must focus on the complexly layered, compounded experiences and events of those who face it by finding ways to unlearn old recognitive patterns and learn new ones. Distributive oppression must be redressed, and the way it is redressed must focus on securing the right kinds of mathematical ratios in distribution through changes in ownership of the means of production.

Perhaps "dumb" is too dumb a label for this false dichotomy. Given that distribution and recognition are both necessary and sufficient for relations of production, and the point of our work on the Left is changing relations of production, I propose the following. Whenever you start to think that a relation of production is not both recognitive and distributive (or you hear someone else talking like it is more one than the other), this a therapeutic issue, not a political one. By "therapeutic" I mean a kind of problem which is adjacent, but not identical, to the kinds of oppression activist work seeks to change. Therapeutic issues are made of traumas, desires, frustrations, projections, conflicts, and ambivalences. They are social and individual, and they are important for politics, but they are not political. These issues are not rational, but rather unconscious and implicit, and can compel you and others to think that relations of production are either recognitive or distributive, rather than both.

My proposal is that conflict over the hierarchy of distribution over recognition (or vice versa) in relations of production results from therapeutic problems in the relations of activism and not political problems in the relations of production which the activism is trying to change.

I think more people should go to therapy in general, but perhaps Leftists in particular would benefit from examining unconscious ambivalences and conflicts, specifically around this issue. Why would you come to think that redistribution is more important than recognition, or vice versa, rather than part of a singular relation of production? Therapeutic issues create disagreements about the relations of production when left unaddressed, like thinking there is some hierarchy between recognition and redistribution. Most likely, these "hierarchies" are just reified feelings of loss, frustration, or disappointment which neurotic persons have insinuated into the theoretical record.

I have been in therapy for years and I consider it part of my liberation, but not identical to my activism. The therapy helps me distinguish the conjuncture from my own baggage; or, better yet, therapy mobilizes my baggage so it compels me to take a more inquisitive approach to thinking about the conjuncture. These things--baggage and conjuncture--get confused, and the confusion trickles into how we work together to make another society. Too long has activism not been accompanied by liberatory therapy; too long have therapeutic issues been mistaken for political issues; too many political spaces have been hijacked for therapeutic purposes; too many meetings and debates have been spent going in exhausting circles. The confusion can lead to unhelpful splinters, petty fractions, and mismatching views of the conjuncture. Unfortunately, unaddressed therapeutic problems in the relations of activism can ultimately leave oppressive relations of production in place. A unified and inclusive view of relations of production as both recognitive and distributive, while creating access and then going to therapy, might help. It may show that Marxism and intersectionality are on the same side and more powerful when they work together.

David I. Backer is an author, teacher, and activist. For more about him, here is his blog.

Notes

[1] Eve Mitchell, "I am a Woman and Human: A Marxist-Feminist Critique of Intersectionality Theory, Unity and Struggle, http://unityandstruggle.org/2013/09/12/i-am-a-woman-and-a-human-a-marxist-feminist-critique-of-intersectionality-theory/ ; "Is Intersectionality Just Another Form of Identity Politics?" Feminist Fight Back, http://www.feministfightback.org.uk/is-intersectionality-just-another-form-of-identity-politics/ '
Mark Fisher, "Exiting the Vampire Castle," The North Star, http://www.thenorthstar.info/?p=11299, Julie Birchill, "Don't You Dare Tell Me To Check My Privilege," The Spectator, http://www.spectator.co.uk/2014/02/dont-you-dare-tell-me-to-check-my-privilege/ My own thinking about this question was spurred by a tweet passed along by Benjamin Kunkel, which said "let them eat intersectionality."

[2] Kevin B. Anderson, "Karl Marx and Intersectionality," Logos, http://logosjournal.com/2015/anderson-marx/

[3] Karl Marx, Grundrisse, Penguin: New York, 1993, p. 85-90. We might reasonably stipulate that most mentions of "relation" (85, 99, 108, 109, 159, 165) are occasions of communicative recognition, though more study of the German could reveal otherwise. Marx appears to write the word Verhältnis for "relation," which can mean "ratio" as well as "relationship." The former sense is a correlation between ideas while the latter implies a correspondence between speakers.

[4] G.A. Cohen distinguishes the term like this in Karl Marx's Theory of History: A Defense.

[5] Karl Marx, Capital, Vol. 1, Penguin International, 1996, pp. 45-50.

[6] Fraser, N., & Honneth, A. (2003). Redistribution or recognition?: a political-philosophical exchange. Verso.

[7] Taylor, K. (2015). From #BlackLivesMatter to Black Liberation. New York: Haymarket, 2015, see chapter 7 pp. 205-209.

Interdisciplinary Feminism: Why Building Alliances is Critical

By Cherise Charleswell

In a previous article entitled Feminism is Not Just for Academics: Overcoming Disconnect and Division , I explained that the roots of feminism are not grounded in academia and theory, but through the collective action of working-class women; concluding with:

To be fair, it needs to be reiterated that academic feminism serves it purpose and is simply one avenue of feminism which one may choose to travel down. Overall, feminism is an empowering framework from which a person may understand, critique, and change the world, while defining their place in it. Central to the tenets of feminism is the matter of choice. Feminists should be free to self-identify as feminists, and should also be allowed to carve out their own path within feminism, whether it is in an academic career in women's studies or working within the realm of social justice activism and women's rights organizing. Feminism must remain inclusive and should not be dominated by any sub-group.

An oversimplification of the words of Antonio Gramsci, an Italian writer, politician, political theorist, philosopher, sociologist, linguist, and founding member of the Communist Party of Italy, in which he called for "traditional intellectuals," who are representative of today's academics, to join with the "organic intellectuals" from the working class to effect social change, best describes the path forward that feminism should choose.

In the 2014 article, If We Want Feminism to Have a Real Impact, Then Let's Stop Teaching So Much Theory , Elizabeth Sergan echoed my critiques:

For three years, I taught feminist theory to undergraduates while working on my Ph.D. at the University of California, Berkeley. There was a time when Berkeley was the epicenter of radical feminism: In the 1970s, women's rights activists regularly stormed campus buildings , demanding birth control, abortion, self-defense classes, and childcare. But when I started teaching in 2007, nothing particularly radical was happening anymore.

Far from being sites of activism and empowerment, Berkeley's Women's Studies classes were weighed down by theory and jargon. Using departmental guidelines, I crafted a syllabus that was meant to help my students think critically about gender, but what that really meant is that we spent our days wrestling with dense and difficult texts, parsing the works of Gayatri Spivak, Monique Wittig, and Judith Butler. We devoted inordinate amounts of time to asking whether gender and sexuality were social constructs, rather than biological facts. We casually threw around words like "subalterneity," "essentialism," and "phallogocentrism" as if they really meant something.

In keeping with these sentiments, I would like to further explain why interdisciplinary feminism, organizing and coalition-building outside of the halls of academia are imperative to identifying, calling out, and combatting gender-racial-sexuality-based discrimination; and working towards more inclusive and equal societies.

In order to be Intersectional, feminism must be Interdisciplinary

The case for intersectionality, what it is, how it can be applied in practice, and so on, has been discussed in women's studies and in feminist circles for almost three decades. Therefore, it should be well understood, but unfortunately that is not always the case. There are constant examples where it is not even considered, particularly when it comes to Western/white feminists. The backlash to Viola Davis's statements about women of color and opportunities in film and television, made during her win at the 2015 Emmy Award, is a recent example of this.

However, having intersectional approaches to feminism and women's rights activism is not enough. These approaches should also be interdisciplinary--and actually do more than just theorize and debate what issues are of importance to women; and actually include women working outside of academia in these conversations. Women do not live our lives in a bubble, and many continue to primarily work outside of the home (because being a stay-at-home mother is actually a class-based privilege for many who depend on two household incomes), and it is outside of the home that they are bombarded with various types of discrimination and prejudice. Discrimination and prejudice that feminist should be aware of and finding ways to mitigate. Thus, engaging women across multiple disciplines, and realizing that the vast majority of disciplines remain male-dominated; is critical.

For example, in the fashion industry, which has been problematic for many reasons-- including racial and cultural insensitivity, appropriation, and representation-- the majority of the prestigious or well known fashion houses were begun and continue to be led by men, and truth be told white men. Just consider: Versace, Gucci, Isaac Mizhari, Ralph Lauren, Zac Posen, Roberto Cavalli, Alexander McQueen, and so on.

The same can be seen in education, where women often hit a glass ceiling. For instance, university presidents in the United States continue to be overwhelmingly white men over age 60. The American Council on Education released a 2012 report on this, and it continues to be an issue discussed by others (see here and here). However, it is not just at the university level. Globally, while women are the overwhelming majority of those who work in education at the primary and secondary level, men continue to dominate positions as school principals. (For examples of these discussions see here -UK, and here- South Africa).

Although women are continuing to make strides in government, with a number of women having served as heads of state. Unfortunately, women continue to be underrepresented in governments around the world, with only 21.9% of national parliamentarians were female as of December 1, 2014. In the article Disproportionate Representation: A Look at Women Leadership in Congress, I discussed this disproportionate representation in great detail. The issue is extremely dire in the United States, where there has never been a woman head of state, and when looking at the 2015 Congress women held only 19.4% of the 535 seats.

Still, the issue of underrepresentation, glass ceilings, and other discriminatory issues have become well known and thoroughly discussed in fields such as: STEM, film and television--both behind the scenes and in front of the camera, radio and broadcast media--where male (and conservative) voices such as Rush Limbaugh and Michael Savage continue to dominate, and also the construction and automotive industries, as well as in corporate America. Consider the sad sick reality that major news outlets---whether print or television--continue to turn mainly to male sources for their take on the economy, politics, the criminal justice system, the military, as well as topics that are deemed to be women's issues (abortion, birth control, Planned parenthood, etc). When you look at the majority of those who work in these industries, particularly in positions of leadership, it truly seems like "It's a man's world". And a closer look will reveal that there is a representation of women of color in the news media, and the highly public departure of Melissa Harris-Perry from her show on MSNBC, exemplifies that problem.

Women who experience marginalization and discrimination in these different sectors do not have the time, or perhaps the desire to think about theory, nor are they readily able to reach across disciplines to uncover and discuss these common themes of oppression; but this shouldn't discredit them as feminists or experts on gender relations. They have an intimate understanding of workplace sexism, disproportionate representation in leadership, and other ways in which women are discriminated against in their fields. Who else would be better qualified to discuss these issues, and offer solutions and strategies to address them, than those who have a clear understanding of and experience dealing with the various problems?

Further, why is it often only academic "feminist" who are brought in as political pundits and commentators, regardless of the issue or field that is being discussed? Why are there not more women who are clinicians and biomedical researchers asked to discuss underrepresentation in the STEM field? I have actually attended conferences where speakers have presented their research on the topic, but (1) they have never worked in the STEM field or (2) none of their co-panelist/presenters had work in the STEM field either.

Also, why are women working in fields where men greatly dominate, like the automotive industry, called upon to discuss not only workplace discrimination, but other labor issues?

Then there are those instances where women who did not major in gender studies (or attended any university for that matter) are marginalized or silenced, by other feminists, as if their observations and experiences, are lacking legitimacy. These are the women who may not know about the various waves of (Western) feminism, but understand the need for women's health research funding, have been subjected to police profiling and/or brutality, are screenwriters who may be coping with having their scripts rejected, because they refuse to develop stereotypical characters (damsel in distress, loud & crude Black woman, sassy Latina, submissive and unopinionated Asian), and are actively joining protest movements to counteract it, or are mothers living in food-insecure communities. These women are no less feminist than those who can readily quote bell hooks or Gloria Steinham, and they should be provided spaces and platforms to speak as "experts".

Practicing an intersectional and multidisciplinary feminism requires being inclusive, and recognizing that the experts are often those who have lived experiences and insights to share.

Conclusion

Grassroots feminism across disciplines is critical, not only in post-colonial nations working to remove the yoke colonialism and deeply-embedded patriarchy, but even in the West; particularly in the US where extremist religious, sexist, and bigoted attitudes are prevailing. There are the constant attacks on rights to abortion and other reproductive rights, attacks on voting rights, environmental justice issues--such as lead poisoning of the water supply in Flint Michigan and the gas leak in Porter Ranch California, located in Los Angeles country-- that directly impact women and families, as well as the threat of environmental degradation brought along by the XL keystone pipeline or fracking; which is actually supported by Hillary Clinton, the DNC's front runner, who we---women, feminist---are told that we should vote for, simply because she is a woman. To truly understand the problem with that line of thinking, I would suggest reading my article Disproportionate Representation, andHillary's Woman Problem, as well as Why Hillary Clinton Doesn't Deserve the Black Vote: From the crime bill to welfare reform, policies Bill Clinton enacted-and Hillary Clinton supported-decimated black America.

There are even questions about what constitutes legitimate rape, as well as as seething epidemic of campus rape. Additionally, there continues to be an issue of the exploitation and devaluing of the lives of women of color, which is seen with the case of Daniel Holtzclaw and his predatory rape and molestation of only Black women, the unlawful arrest and untimely death of Sandra Bland, the need for campaigns such as #WhatAboutOurDaughters and #SayHerName to highlight state sanctioned violence against Black women and other women of color, and the continued media silence on an epidemic in indigenous communities--of rape and disappearance of Native American women.

Ensuring that these issues and others that impact the lives, health, and wellbeing of women and girl are raised and addressed will require not only an intersectional approach to feminism, but one that is interdisciplinary. One that calls on the testimonies and expertise of women from across various disciplines, who can coalesce around their shared and varied experiences with sexism, misogyny, misogynoir, colorism, racism, homophobia, ableism, ageism.

Gentrification is a Feminist Issue: A Discussion on the Intersection of Class, Race, Gender, and Housing

By Cherise Charleswell

An Overview: What is Gentrification?

From a socioeconomic standpoint, gentrification may be defined as a gradual process of renewal and rebuilding that involves the influx of upper-income or affluent - usually white people - into existing urban districts that are often viewed as being deteriorating areas. This process causes the displacement of the low-middle income working-class, and often long-time, residents due to the increase in rents and property values and changes in the district's overall character and culture. The "rent gap" is often noted as the underlying mechanism of gentrification. The following is an overview of the cyclic nature of this rent gap put into historical perspective:

• By the close of the Second World War there was a movement of capital to the suburbs. This movement was fueled by greater amount of open land, lower cost of land, little existing development, and opportunities for profit.

• Capital and resources left the city - and followed urban migration (white flight) to the suburbs

• Racist housing practices, including legislation that forbid selling homes and renting to non-White residents helped to uphold de facto segregation.

• By the 1960s many of these urban areas, with the loss of capital, jobs, and so on; began to deteriorate, and property values fell.

• Currently with the higher costs of property in the suburbs and other communities, there are fewer and fewer opportunities to invest small and gain a big profit; thus making the once "undesirable" urban properties with their low property values and costs, more "desirable."

• By the 1980s gentrification was in full-swing.

• Reinvestment in the urban communities causes the cost of property to rise quickly and long-standing residents who were once able to afford to live in these once "undesirable" areas, find themselves unable to afford the higher cost of rent and home mortgages. Further, they are unable to afford to patronize the new and costly stores that have replaced the shops that they used to frequent.

This rent gap is facilitated by a number of agents and practices, and "retenanting" is a professional euphemism given to the commercial real estate agents whose job is to study a community and help to make change -- gentrification -- happen quickly. Their work involves helping to kick out commercial tenants who are paying extremely low rent, and then finding tenants who will pay higher rates for the same spaces. The following expose was released discussing the work of one of these agents working in Highland Park, a hilly area northeast of downtown Los Angeles that has been a target for gentrification for residents fleeing even higher home prices and rents in neighboring Hollywood, Silver Lake, and Echo Park. Then there was the 2012 release of the documentary film "My Brooklyn," directed by Kelly Anderson and produced by Allison Lirish Dean, which offers detailed examples of this rent gap and an even broader analysis of the many factors behind gentrification. Brooklyn itself is home to some of the most rapidly gentrifying areas in the United States, and is among the most expensive cities to reside in.

Viewing the complex matter of gentrification through a feminist lens helps to uncover how multifaceted it is; in that gentrification involves the oppression, marginalization, displacement of vulnerable populations, particularly women and children who are often already negatively impacted by the effects of classism, sexism, and racism. Gentrification threatens to erode the communities and livelihood maintained by these women because their displacement becomes a precondition for the total transformation of the area.

When considering the complex definition and various factors involved in this process, one thing must remain clear -- it is driven by the private sector and is the result of capitalism's relentless pursuit of profit. The very sector of society that has control and influence over all levels of government in the United States, and is thus able to create policies that help to facilitate and increase gentrification in communities around the country --- as well as those outside the United States. This far-flung reach is due to the nature of multinational corporations which wield their power and influence globally. I was reminded of this while on vacation in Portugal this past Spring. As I was walking along a typically narrow, winding street in Vila Nova de Gaia, which is just South of Porto, a resident of the city pointed out how many of the original homeowners and families that lived along the street for many, many years, were becoming displaced. Their homes and shops were being bought up and replaced with hotels. Already, I could begin to see how the character of the community was changing. These new hotels used color schemes and architectural design styles that seemed completely out of place with the homes in the area, which were decorated with world-renowned, intricate and vibrant Portuguese ceramic tiles. I asked where these families went, and the response was that they were relocated to areas much further away from the city center.

And this seems to be a common theme on both sides of the Atlantic -- the lack of consideration that goes to displaced residents. Truly considering these residents would mean that factors which led them to these areas, which were previously viewed as being undesirable, should be taken into account. Thus, the argument can be put forth that gentrification may be viewed as new-wave colonialism, having economic, social, and public health repercussions for women, communities of color, and the poor. In this sense, it is a feminist issue, and should be interrogated, at least partly, as such.

Feminization of Poverty & the Cost of Housing

In the most simplistic terms, the feminization of poverty refers to the fact that women represent a disproportionate share of the world's poor. Further, the feminization of poverty is not only a consequence of lack of income, but is also the result of the deprivation of opportunities and gender biases present in both society and government. For women of color, the loss of opportunities are also a result of institutional-level racism and discriminatory practices. It is these biases that have helped to create the gender-wage gap and all of the socioeconomic consequences of inequity.

So what does the gender-wage gap look like?

So, how does the feminization of poverty relate to the discussion of gentrification?

For more than 30 years, women in the United States have had to deal with not only stagnant wages , where average wages have barely kept pace with inflation since 1979, but also with the persisting gender-wage gap. Even more troublesome is that these wages have remained stagnant despite an exponential growth in worker productivity.

For myself, and those born the generation after me, the 80s and 90s babies, this means that our overall standard of living is probably reduced by 50% in comparison to previous generations; and this includes college educated women who may also find it difficult to afford the loftier rental prices in gentrified neighborhoods. Salaries are simply not keeping up with the cost of living; especially the cost of housing.

Further, the gender-pay gap helps to ensure that those who are more likely to be impoverished and coping with issues of food insecurity, homelessness, etc. are women and children. Working-class and low-income women are the group who are most vulnerable to gentrification in that they live in the areas that are being targeted by this process. In essence, the sexist, racist, discriminatory and biased practices, beliefs, and policies that have helped to create the gender-pay gap also help to facilitate their removal from areas that they were once able to afford.

Having lower wages means that these working-class women will be unable to resist or withstand the process of gentrification and remain in their homes and neighborhoods. This is due to the fact that lower wages means that an increase in the amount on rent or mortgage costs is extremely difficult for women who are already dealing with wage deficits. To put this into perspective, a Latina woman who on average makes only $0.56 to a white man's $1.00 hourly, would be least likely to be able cope with a marked increase in rent, as well as the higher cost of groceries and other goods which occur when an area undergoes gentrification. In comparison, a white man, who make higher wages on average, would be more capable of remaining in a neighborhood that is undergoing gentrification.

Intersections: Communities of Color

When taking a look at the definition of gentrify, the root word of gentrification, one can readily discern what is implied, especially when considering the change in demographics of these neighborhoods:

" To change (a place, such as an old neighborhood) by improving it and making it more appealing to people who have money ."

The term "appealing" harkens back to the language used by banks, realtors, and others who wanted to ensure that certain neighborhoods would remain devoid of people of color. The American suburbs were actually built out due to this phenomenon of White flight from urban centers which, without resources and investment, were left to decay. In fact, post-New Deal communities actually received federal subsidies for home ownership, while others, that had Black residents or other people of color, did not. This process was called "red-lining", and it often barred any neighborhood with more than 5% of Black people/people of color from receiving subsidies for home ownership and wealth building. This process helped to keep Compton, California, the birthplace of gangster rap, completely White up until the early 1950s. This process led half a million whites to move out of Brooklyn in the 1970s.

The following statements shared by Zach Behrens in his essay , Before the 1950s, the Whiteness of Compton was Defended Vehemently, explains why these covenants manifested.

"Covenants across the country began in the late 1910s and early 1920s in response to the increasing black population in American cities, namely Northern and Western ones that saw the rise during World War I during the so-called great migration from the South. In Los Angeles, however, the move of African Americans was slow until World War II. Still, that slow growth in the 1920s was enough for white homeowners to become concerned about declining property values because of the black influx."

These discriminatory housing practices were - or continue to be -- used against other people of color around the US, and one can argue that at its roots, and according to the terminology used in its definition, gentrification is a racist practice that seeks to make a neighborhood more appealing to those who are deemed desirable - in other words, white people, or more specifically, wealthy white people. Women of color, particularly those who are working class and thus subjected to oppressive systems of racism, classism, ableism, and sexism, are deemed the most undesirable and are consequently marginalized. The rising cost of living, escalating rents and mortgages, stagnant wages, and gender wage-gap literally force them out of their neighborhoods, despite many having community ties for multiple generations.

Ultimately, the process of gentrification sits on a historical legacy of oppression and discrimination, and has only worsened with the shrinking of the middle class and transfer of wealth to the smallest percentage of the US population over the past 40 years. Furthermore, it has left women, especially women of color, as the most vulnerable in this process of systematic displacement. It is a matter where race, class, and gender intersect. And, for this reason, gentrification must be recognized as a feminist issue.

Disproportionate Minority Contact & Criminological Theory

By Miah Register

It has been recently discovered that lesbian, gay, bisexual, transgender (trans*), queer, and questioning (LGBTQ) youth are disproportionately represented in the juvenile justice system (Holsinger & Hodge 2014; Hunt & Moodie-Mills 2012; Craziano & Wagner 2011). Hunt and Moodie-Mills (2014) also report that 60 percent of these youth are Black, Latino/a,. Further, despite the overrepresentation of LGBTQ youth in the juvenile justice system, the legal system's response has been lackluster, at best. In 1988, the Office of Juvenile Justice and Delinquency Prevention (OJJDP) have responded with the Disproportionate Minority Contact (DMC) mandate, which was an amendment to the 1974 Juvenile Justice and Delinquency Prevention (JJDP) Act (U.S. Department of Justice OJJDP DMC Factsheet 2012). This act was intended to reduce the contact of minority youth in the juvenile justice system. Moreover, most research involving minority youth has denied the impact or intersecting identities and the oppression and lack of safe spaces for these young people to exist in society, in general, and in the juvenile justice system. Although feminist criminology has emerged and enhanced the narrow ideologies of classical criminological theory, many intersections have been left uncrossed in juvenile justice theory, research and practice. Since the inception of criminological theory, significant elements of the human identity have been overlooked as primary factors of disproportionate minority contact with the juvenile justice system. For example, Hirschi's (1969) model of social control argues that race and ethnicity are factors that are invariant. Further, this false sense of equality and inclusion encourages exclusion and erasure of the identities of minority groups: i.e. the focus of the current research-lesbians, bisexual, transgender, and gender nonconforming black girls.

History of DMC

The DMC mandate originally intended to reduce the confinement of minority youth in the juvenile justice corrections facilities. Moreover, it required states receiving certain federal funding for juvenile justice programming to follow this mandate and its several components. In 1992, the JJDP Act "elevated the efforts" of the DMC mandate, and allocated 25 percent of the funding to state compliance. Further, the OJJDP proclaim that through the DMC mandate, they learned that minorities were overrepresented in all components of the juvenile justice system, as opposed to earlier beliefs that minorities were only disproportionately institutionalized. As a result, the mandate was amended in 2002 and renamed to Disproportionate Minority Contact for state municipalities to understand the necessity to address overrepresentation of minorities at every point of the justice system.

Further, at the inception of DMC, the OJJDP developed a model for states to emulate in their efforts to reduce minority contact. Their reduction model calls for state agencies to identify, assess, intervene, evaluate, and monitor DMC. The OJJDP claims that their efforts, while not complete, have catalyzed some institutional change. While they quote some positive changes in arrest statistics and in detention facilities, criminological scholars must approach this perceived change from a critical, intersectional lens to understand and asses the positive changes, if any, after the DMC mandate. While each state has implemented the DMC model to some extent, most states have monitored their programming, but they have failed to methodically evaluate the program's effectiveness. Thus, in this paper, I will critically examine the effectiveness of the DMC mandate in serving all minorities-not just Black boys. This evaluation will be conducted through a comprehensive literature review, as well as a theoretical analysis of the potential origins of this deeply rooted issue.

Theoretical Approach

This paper will utilize Blalock's (1967) racial threat theory as a basis to expand upon. In essence, primary ideology of racial threat theory will be expanded to encompass and explain the matrix of oppression for all minorities. This theory asserts that competition (for jobs, economic superiority, etc.) between Black and White people in the US causes an intensified level of social control exerted on Black people. An example of racial threat theory applied to the current plight of the juvenile justice system is the disproportionate involvement of Black youth at every contact point of the system. On the other hand, Black people, in general, represent a minority of less than 15 percent of the country. Thus, the representation of Black youth in the justice system is unjustifiable through realistic, critical approaches to criminological theory.

Moreover, in this paper, some literature is reviewed that deals with Hirschi's contrasting model of social control, which completely denies that racism, prejudice, bias, and corruption are real. These two theories of social control are purposely compared in this paper to illustrate the historic failure of the justice system to understand the "matrix of power" (Potter 2013). The next section of this paper discusses the literature and research studies conducted to understand the complexities of race, gender, sexual orientation, gender expression, social control, and the juvenile justice system.

Literature Review

Although little research has been conducted regarding DMC, the mandate was analyzed in Leiber et al.'s (2011) study. The purpose of their research was to evaluate the effectiveness of the DMC mandate in decreasing racial disparities in the juvenile justice system. The researchers approached this topic through Durkheim's (1964) consensus theory and conflict (symbolic threat) view in relation to racial stereotyping. The consensus model argues that tradition, law, punishment, and treatment derive from a broad consensus of societal norms (Durkheim 1964). According to this criminological theory, racial disparities in crime are attributed to differential involvement in crime, gender, age, dysfunctional family structures and school misbehavior. (Tracy 2005). The conflict model alleges that minority youth possess feelings of fear and jealousy, which makes them pose a greater threat to society and public safety. Moreover, this studies draws from these theories to understand racial bias and stereotyping by practitioners in the juvenile justice system, particularly at intake (court referrals) and at judicial disposition. The researchers hypothesized that the race of the offender would have no influence on intake or judicial disposition before and after the DMC mandate, and that DMC would reduce decision-making outcomes.

The researchers utilized data from a county in Iowa, which was chosen by Congress in 1989 as one of five model states for the DMC mandate. The researchers reviewed about 5,700 cases ten years before and ten years after the DMC mandate, 60 percent being White offenders and 40 percent being Black offenders. They reviewed how both groups were treated in intake and during judicial disposition. Thus, the researchers found that their hypotheses, grounded in criminological theories that do not explain oppression and discrimination, were unsupported. They found that even after the DMC mandate, cases involving Black youth were referred to court more often than that of White youth, especially when Black youth derived from single-parent families. Moreover, the researchers also found that the effects of race become much more covert and indirect, but they were apparent under a critical lens. The researchers found decision-making was most impacted by race when the there is "no procedure for review;" i.e. when discretion is at its highest.

The researchers acknowledged that the data and sample were pulled from a single jurisdiction, which makes the ability to generalize based on their research questionable. Nonetheless, they urge for more research to be conducted on the effectiveness of the DMC mandate, as it has been in place for over 20 years.

Myers and Raymond (2010) studied the effect of heternormativity on the perspectives of elementary-aged girls. The researchers hypothesized that heteronormativity is not just the result of pubescent transformation; instead, it is intertwined within everyday life and interactions, even as young as five years old. Because there has been a gap in previous research (Renold 2006; Casper and Moore(2009), the authors prioritized the focus of heteronormativity and gender performance to a young population, as opposed to the middle and high school population. The authors examined how heteronormativity governs elementary girls' gender performance and their self-image and images of their peers. The researchers gathered a focus group of 43 girls, ages five through 11 (median age 9-years-old), grades kindergarten through fifth grade. The participants were primarily white, lower middle class girls, which represented the majority of the school's population. The girls were divided into age-appropriate groups, where discussion was moderated by a researcher, but was guided based on desirable topics of conversation. The researchers found that although the questions prepared were regarding the girls' general interests, the conversation constantly shifted to a boy-centered discussion. Most girls bashfully and secretly desired to discuss their crushes or dating climate in their elementary classes, and some were very open about the boy-centered interests and perceptions.

Through the conversations with girls, the researchers found evidence to support their hypothesis. They found that the girls defined themselves through the lens of boys, and their heteronormative ideologies were consistent with their firm beliefs that sexual orientation should match one's gender identity and expression. There were also consistent findings of heteronormativity being an agent of social control. The researchers found that heteronormativity was utilized as a mirror for girls to measure themselves and one another through a heterosexist lens, and through a very chivalrous, traditional ideology of what it means and looks like to be an "appropriate" girl. Finally, they found that this was policed through school policy and through home life standards. Moreover, most of the girls' parents followed very traditional gender roles.

The researchers acknowledged the lack of racial and economic diversity in their focus group. The participants were primarily white, lower-middle class socio-economic status, and the researchers noted that the group interviews were dominated by the white participants. This lack of representation silenced the perspectives of the young, Black and Latina girls in the focus group (which were they only people of color reported in the demographic notes). The researchers did not discuss this as an opportunity for future research.

Chesney-Lind, Morash, and Irwin (2003) conducted a literature review regarding the impact of policing girls' behavior. The researchers investigated how the policing of relational aggression between girls is utilized as a mechanism of social control. Moreover, they examined the implications of treating relational aggression as a criminal justice problem. The researchers explained that [relational] aggression can be a plethora of behaviors: eye-rolling, spreading rumors, breaking others' confidence, criticism of other girls' appearance and personality, sarcasm, and much more. Further, the researchers hypothesized that the relational aggression should not be handled in a punitive manner and it should not be governed under school zero tolerance and behavioral policies.

The researchers critically examined literature from the 1970s until the early 2000s. They found that most research has emphasized the necessity to prevent relational aggression between girls, because of the emotional and psychological damage they believed would be caused. Nonetheless, Chesney-Lind et al. (2007) also found that the research supporting this psychological damage is inconsistent. They found that intervening in relational aggression has adverse effects on girls. Moreover, the researchers gathered that this increases the formal social control over girlhood, femininity, and what it means to be a girl or woman.

Thus, while previous research suggested that relational aggression be prevented with gender-specific programming, Chesney-Lind et al. (2007) found this method inappropriate. Further, the researchers found that policing noncriminal behavior of girls increased their involvement in the criminal justice system, as opposed to preventing criminal behavior or juvenile girls. While juvenile girl crime rates may have increased, self-report studies suggest that violence amongst young, female offenders was decreasing (Office of Juvenile Justice and Delinquency Prevention, U.S. Department of Justice 2012). This supports the researchers' hypothesis that policing relational aggression will increase girls' involvement in the criminal justice system and have adverse effects. Further, extensive research has been conducted to understand policing of girls' noncriminal behavior. Eventually, scholars developed several theories to understand the needs of girls in the system and ways to better deal with girls in the system.

There has been much existing research on the dichotomy between the chivalry hypothesis and the evil woman hypothesis. The next section of the literature explores the many facets of these theories, as they have been tested several times. Moreover, Embry & Lyons (2012) conducted a study that looked to analyze the "evil woman hypothesis." They hypothesized that females who committed crimes diverting furthermost from traditional gender roles would receive harsher sentences. Further, the researchers believed that women would receive more severe sentences than men for sex offenses, as this type of violent, dominant, and powerful behavior is an egregious diversion from traditional gender roles.

The researchers analyzed data collected by the National Corrections Reporting Program (NCRP) in order to examine the relationship between sentence lengths for males and females convicted and sentenced for sex offenses. The data was pulled from January 1994 through December 2004. There was little demographic information, offense type, and sentencing variable. The authors' analysis of previous research focusing on women as sex offenders was inconsistent; most research in this article focused on women as victims. Further, the researchers did not find evidence to support their hypothesis, based on the "evil woman thesis." Instead, based on their data sample of approximately 2,800 cases involving females and approximately 2,800 cases involved males, the researchers found that males were sentenced more harshly than females.

The researchers discussed some limitations to their study. When they controlled for offenders' criminal history, they found that sentencing discretion was misleading and unreliable, because females' and males' criminal histories are gendered, based on the chivalry hypothesis.

Thus, this study found evidence to support the chivalry hypothesis, which previous research has utilized to compare the discrepancies in sentencing of male and female offenders who commit the same crimes. The study did not mention the implications of race, class or sexual orientation in relation to sex offenses and sentencing discrepancies.

Spivak et al. (2014) also dissected the relevance of the chivalry hypothesis and the evil women theory in relation to female juvenile offenders. The researchers had multiple hypotheses to test the two theories: they projected that status offenders would be primarily girls, girls' cases would be more often referred to court, girls would have less guilty verdicts, and girls would more frequently be sentenced to custody as opposed to probation.

The researchers utilized the Oklahoma Office of Justice Affairs, where they examined approximately 3,000 cases of status offenders (controlling for race, age, prior history, type of status offense, and socio-economic status). Status offenses included runaway, truancy, 'school behavior problems,' 'beyond parental control,' and 'in need of supervision.' The authors found that their hypotheses were supported; however, the data was inconclusive in terms of the chivalry thesis and evil woman hypothesis. The results were inconsistent, which is parallel with most existing research testing these theories. It was apparent that in this focus group, status offenders were primarily females (approximately 57 percent).

Thus, the researchers discussed that the limitations of their study are the sample size. Because the sample was gathered just from Oklahoma, it is difficult to utilize this as a general consensus about female status offending. Also, the study controls for race, age, prior history, type of status offense, and socio-economic status. Nonetheless, it is imperative view these intersectional identities when truly understanding the methods of the juvenile justice system. Although many researchers have studied these models, there have been inconsistent results.

Hirschi's (1969) Social Control model

While the current study utilizes Blalock's (1967) theory on racial and minority threat, it is important to critically examine other models of social control. Further, Peguero, Popp, Latimore, Shekarkhar, and Koo (2011) critically examined Hirschi's (1969) classical criminological theory of social control. The researchers looked to examine the validity of social control theory and school misbehavior (juvenile delinquency) in relation to race and ethnicity. The authors asserted that previous criminological theory and research has failed to address race and ethnicity as a focal point; instead, race and ethnicity have historically been a "peripheral" (Peguero et. al 2011) aspect of findings in previous research. Further, the authors hypothesized that the relationship between social control theory and school misbehavior vary by race and ethnicity.

The researchers dissected the data from Educational Longitudinal Study of 2002 (ELS:2002), which includes a national sample of 10th grade students. Each of the four elements of Hirschi's (1969) social control theory was used: attachment, commitment, involvement, and belief. School misbehavior was operationalized as noncriminal behaviors violate school rules. The researchers found that for the overall sample, each element of social control theory is consistent with explaining school misbehavior for white students. On the other hand, for Black, Latin American, and Asian American students, a variation of two of the four elements of social control theory explained school misbehaviors. For example, Black students' misbehavior did not correlate with their rates of self-reported attachment and involvement. The researchers assume that this is most likely due to students of color being discriminated against, and the likelihood of these students to not be connected to social conventions and normality. Thus, the historic exclusion of people of color from social normality may make them feel disconnected from generally White traditions and norms.

The researchers discussed limitations to this study. They understand that their analysis was drawn from data that represents a small age group of participants and a small date range. Also, the researchers acknowledge that, like the criminal justice system, social control theory is naturally gendered, and it especially fails to address intersectional identities. Lastly, the researchers strongly suggest that further research place race and ethnicity as a focal point, rather than an afterthought of data and criminological research.

Wordarski andMapson's (2008) study filled some gaps of previous research that researchers have encouraged more scholars to contend (Embry & Lyons 2012). Wordarski and Mapson (2008) examined the relationship of the four elements of Hirschi's (1969) social control theory and how it varies between Black and White female offenders. They hypothesized that there is a stronger relationship between the four elements of social control theory and crime rates of White female juvenile offenders than that of Black female juvenile offenders. The researchers used data from the Project on Human Development in Chicago Neighborhoods (PHDCN), which comprehensively drew data regarding the environment of social behaviors. The PHDCN documented Chicago's social, economic, organizational, political, and cultural structures and significant changes that occurred between 1994 and 2001. The sample of the study was Black and White female juvenile offenders, ages 12 to 15.

The researchers asked several questions that were relevant to each of the four elements of social control theory. For example, to understand the girls' 'involvement' (in relation to social control theory), a question asked was "Was the subject involved in any other after-school program other than extracurricular activity" (231). Further, the term delinquency was operationalized as the commission of any illegal act by an individual under 18.

While the researchers found their hypothesis was not supported, they noted several significant implications to their study. Many of the questionnaires had missing data, as many participants were unwilling to report their criminal histories and prior involvement in any crimes. The researchers also concluded that their sample size was not diverse nor large enough to represent girls in the general juvenile population, as the sample size was 837, and they were primarily Black. Lastly, the researchers suggested that more longitudinal research be conducted in order to obtain consistent results on this matter, specifically as it pertains to race in relation to juvenile delinquency.

As most research has taken a narrow focus on determining extralegal factors in juvenile justice outcomes, Guevara et al. (2006) explored juvenile justice decision making in relation to both race and gender. Specifically, the researchers examined the effect of race on outcomes of juvenile justice and how these outcomes vary by gender. They also reviewed this in relation to the effectiveness of DMC. The researchers hypothesized that white females would receive more lenient judicial disposition than male youth of color .

The researchers collected case file data from two Midwestern counties from 1990 through 1994. The names of the counties were undisclosed, and they were referred to as County A and County B. Of a total population of approximately 200,000 people, the majority of residents were White (69 percent White, 15 percent Black, 15 percent Latino, and 1 percent Native American and Asian American). On the other hand, County B had a smaller population, and it was much less racially diverse (92 percent White, 3 percent Black, 2 percent Latino, 1 percent Native American, and 2 percent Asian American). The researchers randomly chose approximately 1,300 case files for County A and approximately 1,047 case files for County B. Further, the sample was primarily minorities, because out of a total 15,000 cases for County A and a total 6,000 cases for County B, the cases referred to court were primarily minorities.

Thus, the researchers did not find evidence to support their hypothesis. The researchers emphasized the necessity to examine race, gender, and the juvenile justice system-particularly decision making-from an intersectional approach, rather than a narrow lens. This was noted several times throughout the study. A major implication to the study was that the categories of race were divided based on status of White and non-White. These labels devalue the existence of people of color, and it places all people of color in a single category, as opposed to by race and ethnicity.

In order to truly dissect the impact of the juvenile justice system on queer, black girls, it is important to look at all components of the justice system. Goodkind and Miller (2006) examined a corrections facility and their gender-specific treatment methods after the 1992 federal mandate for gender-specific services for girls in the juvenile justice system. The researchers wanted to understand the (positive and negative) effects of an art therapy treatment program, designed specifically for girls in a corrections facility, because the art therapy program was based on gender stereotypes about girls. The authors evaluated the program and found that while the art therapy program has positive effects, the inmates (participants) also understand that it is very gender-stereotypical, and it enforces gender norms as a method of controlling young girls. The researchers used the work of Foucault to understand how gender-specific treatment can be utilized to control the behavior and "appropriateness" of young girls.

The authors did not explicitly make any predictions regarding the art therapy program, in regards to the effects it had on the female inmates; they wanted to study both the positive and negative effects and the perceptions of the female inmates and the staff members. The researchers conducted five focus groups of three to six female inmates. Of the 21 participants, 12 were Black, 7 were White, 1 was biracial, and 1 was Asian American. Women of color accounted for about 60 percent of the participants, and this was representative to the population of the entire institution. They also interviewed 14 administrative staff members-four were people of color, and 9 were women. Most of the participants identified very positive aspects of the art therapy program; however, they felt troubled by the fact that only females participated in the therapy program. The participants sensed that the therapy program was gender-specific, because of the notion that they are more "needy" or more "traumatized" than their male counterparts. It is important to note that the male inmates had access to the art studio, but they did not have to participate in the program with the art therapist.

The conversations were primarily about how the female inmates are expected to act "appropriately," and any deviation from appropriateness resulted in indirect or direct punishment. The inmates were expected to create art pertaining to gendered subjects: relationships, self-esteem, etc. Some inmates expressed their frustrations with the expectations of feminine appropriateness, particularly when as it pertains to creating art. The women expressed their concern for the therapy program and the institution, in general, polices feminine "appropriateness" as a way to control the girls.

The researchers concluded that it is important to question the positive effects of the art therapy program. It must be understood that gender-specific services in the juvenile justice system can "widen the net of social control," as an art therapy program can attempt to make girls conform to society's "gendered expectations of them."

Girls' sexuality has been a taboo topic in the juvenile justice system. Practitioners have historically failed to address sexuality and sexual orientation, and they have contributed to damaging assumptions and policing of "inappropriate" behavior of girls. Pasko (2010) conducted a historical analysis of juvenile justice policing of girls sexual behavior. This was an analysis of over a century of the courts and corrections systems, and the author found the ideology of practitioners has not changed much; nonetheless, the policing has become more indirect and covert through policies and the policing of "inappropriate behavior." Pasko also wanted to investigate how the juvenile justice system has dealt with girls' sexual orientation, specifically lesbian, bisexual, and queer girls.

In addition to the historical analysis, the researcher conducted interviews with juvenile justice professionals: current and former probation officers, and correctional facility administrators (counselors, therapists, and directors of residential facilities). The researcher included that all but five interviewees were female, and all but 13 were White. These practitioners had been in their position from four to 20 years, and they were from seven different (short-term and long-term) facilities. The interviewer noted that a few of the interviewers felt uncomfortable talking about sexuality and sexual orientation in their places of work; therefore, they arranged to meet at locations other than their offices.

The author included dozens of quotes from the interviewees, most of which portrayed signs of policing girls' "appropriateness" and sexual behavior through institutional policies, psychiatric treatment, and their own personal ideologies on girls' sexuality. The primary concern of the interviewees were girls' promiscuity and pregnancy inside and outside of the institutions, and the notion that lesbian behavior was temporary or the result of trauma, and methods of feeling power over others. It is also important to note that most of the girls who were in the institutions had not committed serious offenses, but that had violated conditions of probations, which were often related to sexual behavior-behavior that was not in line with traditional gender roles. Thus, the researcher found that the interviewees were mostly uncomfortable and unknowledgeable about sexual orientation and gender identity issues. To illustrate the climate of the institutions, the author included the following quote from an interviewee: "They are gay on the inside and straight when they get out. I just had a girl who was, 'Oh, I am in love with [girl].' And I said, 'Yeah right, back to your boyfriend you go when you get out. I am sure of it.' This research illustrated the problematic nature of juvenile facilities for queer girls, especially those expressing non-binary genders.

Crenshaw et. al (2015) found that most existing research on youth in the juvenile justice system excludes girls from analyses, assuming that girls are not as at-risk as boys are. The researchers also found that research focusing on race excluded gender (Guevera et al. 2006). Furthermore, the authors developed a report to draw attention to the misunderstood and misrepresented issues of Black girls and other girls of color in the juvenile justice system and the public school system. The report gathers data regarding the effect of school discipline, zero-tolerance (used interchangeably with "push-out") policies, and the almost inescapable pathways to incarceration (school-to-prison pipeline), poverty, and low-wage work. The researchers conducted interviews with high school girls of color from Boston and New York City public schools. While the report includes statistical analysis, it also provides insightful, first person dialogue from the interviews. The premise of this report was to provide a basis of discussion and increase awareness of "gendered consequences" of discipline tactics in schools that increasingly marginalize girls of color-primarily Black girls.

While the current study cannot address all of the researchers' findings, it is imperative to note that all of the issues found in the juvenile justice system as it pertains to Black girls need to be addressed in future research to develop intervention and best practices. Nonetheless, the findings most relevant to the current research are as follows: the authors found that girls felt extremely uncomfortable, unsafe, and discouraged in the school environment. They understood the devaluing effects of push-out policies, as they argued that administrators and teachers prioritized discipline over education. The researchers gathered that traditional gender roles were enforced, as girls were disciplined for behavior deemed as misconduct (that boys were not disciplined for). The authors also note that the school, in general had extreme security measures, such as police presence, metal detectors, etc., which many girls expressed how uncomfortable this made them, discouraging them from attending school.

The authors attributed some limitations to their research to the sample size. Most importantly, the researchers noted that existing data and statistics are difficult to interpret, because of the misrepresentation of race in many databases. Thus, the authors encouraged uniformity in data reporting, because of the lack of availability of consistent measures.

Holsinger and Hodge (2014) explored the climate of juvenile corrections facilities for incarcerated lesbian, gay, bisexual, and transgender girls. The authors wanted to understand the experiences LGBT girls, because of the disproportionate amount of this population incarcerated. The researchers critically examined the challenges facing the girls and the staff members, and they provide recommendations to better serve LGBT-identified girls in the correctional facilities.

To investigate the needs of LGBT girls, the authors conducted interviews with inmates and staff members. The authors were able to hear the perspectives of three LGB girls in residential facilities, and 21 staff members of these facilities. The results of these interviews show this particular facility illustrates the necessity of LGBT-affirming and protective policies, staff training, and implementation is imperative in order to create safe spaces for this overrepresented population in correctional facilities. The inmates reported that the facilities were uncomfortable for LGBT-identified girls. Moreover, the interviews with staff members portray the lack of knowledge and the dangerous marginalization and implicit discrimination and poor treatment of LGBT-girls. The facility also policed "appropriate" behavior, enforcing traditional gender norms, as well as a poor understanding and acknowledgement of LGBT identities, especially bisexual, transgender, and gender nonconforming youth.

The results of this study are telling and troubling, and illuminate the lack of space for existence of LGBT-identified girls in the justice system. Most of the staff members explained that dealing with LGBT girls in their facilities made their jobs more difficult. The researchers also noted that while there had been some attempted LGBT training done for staff members, the facility needs implementation. The results of this study are also indicative of the majority of findings throughout the literature analysis, which will be elaborated in the discussion of the major findings in the forthcoming sections of this paper.

Discussion

There has been exhaustive research conducted to understand, address, and increase awareness on minority populations in the juvenile justice system. After analyzing the literature, it was concluded that future research must focus on the marginalization of queer black girls as a group of people and how the layers of their identities interact, resulting in intensified oppression and trauma upon entering the juvenile justice system. The major findings were as follows: a) we have little knowledge on the perceptions of youth directly affected, but much knowledge on the lack of understanding of juvenile justice professionals and practitioners, b) most research has a diminishing, narrowed focus on one or two identities, and fail to convincingly address what happens when all of these identities collide in the margins of justice, c) most focus groups conducted reported a lack of diversity in their participants, as one social group was almost always overrepresented, d) the common theme of research on heterosexual and LGTQ girls discusses the enforcing of "appropriateness" and noncriminal, sexual and sexual orientation and gender identity-expressive behavior, and finally, e) the lack of a safe space for queer black girls to exist at every point of juvenile justice involvement.

Existing research has portrayed the power of first-person dialogue through one-on-one and group interviewing. This presentation of data has provided unparalleled insight into the perspectives of the participants in a research study, especially in the social science studying the human experience. While this approach has been utilized in the reviewed literature, most of the focus groups were to understand how equipped juvenile justice practitioners are to respond and address minority issues in corrections. While these interviews were very telling of the climate of current institutions, more youth perspective may appropriately address the issues the youth face. Nevertheless, because of staff testimonials, critical scholars can infer that the type of work that needs to be done to create safe spaces for minority youth.

Revisiting DMC

After reviewing existing research on the effectiveness of DMC and through the analysis of the OJJDP's data reporting techniques, it is clear that the DMC efforts were intended to address the issue of Black, Latino, Asian, and Native American boys' disproportionate confinement. Moreover, these efforts failed to include other "minority" groups, such as LGBTQ, disabled, mentally ill, and poor youth, as well as a major population in the US: girls. The lack of focus on girls in the juvenile justice system has led to a misunderstanding in best practices in dealing with offending girls. As some research has tested the effectiveness of the DMC mandate, as well as the OJJDP's annual reviews of the decades-old program, implicitly excluding girls and other minority groups from the focus of these reviews illustrates the lack of understanding of disproportionate minority contact and responding to the needs of these populations upon intake into juvenile delinquency prevention programs.

More current literature, specifically as it pertains to black girls (a general representation of the focus of the current study), it is apparent that DMC has failed to include queer, black girls in its efforts, because of the reported increase in get-tough policies that have directly affected outcomes for queer, black girls.

Revisiting Minority Threat Theory

Minority threat theory is so important in discussing the findings of this literature. As Blalock (1967) identifies, racial threat theory manifests in the form of overpolicing urban communities of color and mass incarceration. In the same manner, the complete erasure and generalization of the outcomes and experiences of queer black girls exhibits minority threat theory. Much of the literature involving girls' sexuality and gender expression focuses on the "appropriateness" of girls' behavior and the policing of such. In addition, the policing of appropriateness manifests as follows: existing research has found that girls most often enter the system through status offending, conveying the policing of girls' behavior. Data on girls is often generalized to encompass the experiences of all girls; nonetheless, it would be a significant area of study to truly understand how queer, black girls are affected.

Conclusion: Call for intersectional thinking

Potter (2013) cites several intersectional, anti-essentialist, critical feminist criminologists and legal scholars in her article that fervently calls for critical criminologists to dig deeper into the statistical findings to understand the complexities of the human identities. In one section, Potter explains that plague of essentialism by feminist scholars throughout multiple disciplines. She asserts that "there is not a singular, shared experience among all women" (307). She then quotes the declaration of Wing (2003): "women of color are not merely White women plus color…or men of color plus gender. Instead, these identities must be multiplied together to create a holistic One when analyzing the nature of the discrimination against them" (307).

For decades, feminist criminologists have called for the study of intersectionality in criminological theory and practice (Potter 2013; Crenshaw 1989, 1991, 2015); nevertheless, as previously mentioned, this is not being done. Much data analysis has had a narrow focus, which Crenshaw (2015) dissects in her report, Black Girls Matter: Pushed Out, Overpoliced, and Underprotected. Crenshaw alleges that research on race excludes gender, and research on gender excludes race. Moreover, many data analyses have failed to focus on the multi-dimensional human identity and have, instead misrepresented and misinterpreted the needs of queer, black girls in a system that erases their interacting identities.

It is imperative that future research, policy, and practice take on an intersectional approach in order to truly reduce disproportionate minority contact. Otherwise, the oppression applied at the intersections will continue to intensify in the form of violence, brutality, mass incarceration, and erasure. The efforts to include all minority populations may not only contribute to the reduction of the overrepresentation of queer, black youth in the justice system, but it may also create safe spaces for them to decrease the double trauma enhanced by the justice system.

References

Blalock, H. Jr. (1967). Toward a Theory of Minority-Group Relations. New York: Capricorn Books.

Chesney-Lind, M., Morash, M., Irwin, K. (2003). Policing Girlhood? Relational aggression and violence prevention. Youth Violence and Juvenile Justice (5)3.

Crenshaw, K., Ocen, P., Nanda, J. (2015). Black girls matter: pushed out, overpoliced, and underprotected. African American Policy Forum. Columbia Law School Center for Intersectionality and Social Policy Studies.

Crenshaw, K. (1989). Demarginalizing the intersection of race and sex: A black feminist critique of anti-discrimination doctrine, feminist theory and antiracist politics. University of Chicago Legal Forum, 139-167.

Crenshaw, K. (1991). Mapping the margins: Intersectionality, identity, politics, and violence against women of color. Stanford Law Reivew 43(6) 1241-1299.

Embry, R. ,Lyons, P. M. Jr. (2012). Sex-based sentencing: sentencing discrepancies between male and female sex offenders. Feminist Criminology

Goodkind, S., Miller, D. L. (2006) A widening of the net of social control? "Gender specific" treatment for young women in the U.S. juvenile justice system. Journal of Progressive Human Services, 17(1), 45-70.

Graziano, J. L., Wagner, E. F. (2011). Trauma among lesbians and bisexual girls in the juvenile justice system. Traumatology 17(2) 45-55.

Guevara, L., Herz, D., Spohn, C. (2006). Gender and juvenile justice decision making: what role does race play? Feminist Criminology, 1(4), 258-282.

Hirschi, T. (1969). Causes of Delinquency. Berkeley: University of California Press.

Holsinger, K., Hodge, J. P. (2014). The experiences of lesbian, gay, bisexual, and transgender girls in juvenile justice system. Feminist Criminology, 1-25.

Hunt, J., Moodie-Mills, A. (2012). The unfair criminalization of gay and transgender youth: An overview of the experiences of LGBT youth in the juvenile justice system. Washington D.C.: Center for American Progress.

Leiber, M., Bishop, D., Chamlin, M. B. (2011). Juvenile justice decision-making before and after the implementation of the disproportionate minority contact (DMC) mandate. Justice Quarterly 28(3) 460-492.

Myers, K., Raymond, L. (2010). Elementary school girls and heteronormativity: the girl project. Gender & Society 24(2) 167-188.

Office of Juvenile Justice and Delinquency Prevention, U.S. Department of Justice. (2012). Disproportionate minority contact OJJDP: In Focus.

Peguero, A. A., Popp, A. M., Latimore, L., Shekarkhar, Z., Koo, D. J. (2011). Social control theory and school misbehavior: examining the role of race and ethnicity. Youth Violence and Juvenile Justice. 9(3) 259-275.

Pasko, L. (2010). Damaged daughters: the history of girls' sexuality and the juvenile justice system. Journal of Criminal Law and Criminology, 100 (3), 1099-1130.

Potter, H. (2013). Intersectional criminology: Interrogating identity and power in criminological research and theory. Critical Criminology. 21 305-318.

Spivak, A. L., Wagner, B. M., Whitmer, J. M., Charish, C. L. (2014). Gender and status offending: judicial paternalism in juvenile justice processing. Feminist Criminology, 9(3), 224-248.

Wodarski, J., Mapson, A. V. (2008). A differential analysis of criminal behavior among African-American and Caucasion female juvenile delinquents.

Journal of Human Behavior in the Social Environment 18

(2) 224-239.

Imperialist Feminism and Liberalism

By Deepa Kumar

In a recent CNN interview, religion scholar Reza Aslan was asked by journalist Alisyn Camerota if Islam is violent given the "primitive treatment in Muslim countries of women and other minorities." Aslan responded by stating that the conditions for women in Muslim majority countries vary. While women cannot drive in Saudi Arabia, elsewhere in various Muslim majority countries, women have been elected heads of states 7 times. But, before he could finish his sentence pointing out that the US is yet to elect a woman as president, he was interrupted by co-host Don Lemon who declared: "Be honest though, Reza, for the most part it is not a free and open society for women in those states."

How is it that people like Camerota and Lemon, who very likely have never travelled to "free and open" Turkey, Lebanon or Bangladesh, or read the scholarship on women's rights struggles in Morocco, Iran and Egypt, seem to know with complete certainty that women are treated "primitively" in "Muslim countries"? On what basis does Lemon believe that he has the authority to call Aslan out for supposed dishonesty? How is it that with little or no empirical evidence on women's rights in Muslim majority countries (which vary widely based on country, regions within a country, social class, the history and nature of national liberation movements, the part played by Islam in political movements etc.) Western commentators routinely make such proclamations about women and Islam?

The answer lies in a ubiquitous, taken-for-granted ideological framework that has been developed over two centuries in the West. This framework, referred to by scholars as colonial feminism, is based on the appropriation of women's rights in the service of empire. Birthed in the nineteenth century in the context of European colonialism, it rests on the construction of a barbaric, misogynistic "Muslim world" that must be civilized by a liberal, enlightened West; a rhetoric also known as gendered Orientalism.

Colonial/imperialist feminism has taken new and old forms in the US. The immediate context for a resurgence of imperialist feminism in the US is the 2001 invasion of Afghanistan. Borrowing a trope from Britain in India and Egypt, and France in Algeria, the US argued that it was going to liberate Afghan women. Liberals and feminists in the US, going against the wishes of Afghan feminist organizations such as RAWA (Revolutionary Association of the Women of Afghanistan) who opposed US intervention, linked arms with the Bush administration and supported the Afghan war.

In the Obama era, liberalism became even more intertwined with empire. Despite mountains of evidence to show that the US/NATO occupation had done little for women's rights, Amnesty-USA conducted a campaign in support of the continued occupation of Afghanistan. In 2012, ads appeared in public places of Afghan women in burqas with the caption: "Nato: Keep the Progress Going!" Amnesty further organized a summit that rearticulated through the voices of powerful women, such as Madeline Albright, imperialist feminist justifications for war.

What explains this tendency among liberals to take positions that go against the interests of Muslim women and women of color? While there are numerous factors, two are worth noting-racism and empire.

As several Third World Feminists have argued, a historical weakness of liberal feminism in the West has been its racist, patronizing attitude towards women of color who have been seen less as allies/agents and more as victims in need of rescue. This attitude prevails both in relation to women of color within Western nation states, as well as women in the global South. This is what allows figures such as Madeline Albright and Hillary Clinton to be viewed as feminist saviors even while both, in their roles as Secretary of State, have advanced US imperialism. It is liberalisms understanding of the state as a neutral body, rather than as a coercive apparatus used to advance capitalism and empire, which is at the root of such perspectives.

In the cultural sphere, TV shows such as Homeland reproduce imperialist feminism not only through its plot line and female lead character (Carrie Mathison), but also through its ad campaigns. In the lead up to Season 4, the publicity campaign featured Mathison "far from home" fighting the righteous war. Mathison's red hood, blue gown and white face stand in for the American nation against a sea of Eastern darkness. Her unique clothing and her active posture mark her as the embodiment of liberal individualism in contrast to the passive, indistinguishable Muslim women in black. The larger narrative is the construction of "us" as a society that values women and their agency, and of them as misogynistic in a classic reproduction of the "clash of civilizations" colonial argument.

Yet, imperialist feminism has not been the province only of white elites in the West; comprador intellectuals in the global South have always played a productive role. Today, in the "post-racial" era, it is not only white liberals and feminists that have bolstered imperialist feminism, middle and ruling class brown and black women in the West and the global South have actively contributed to the articulation of new forms and new agents of imperialist feminism.

One recent example of how imperialist feminism can occasionally incorporate Muslim female agency is the widespread media attention in the West focused on the UAE female pilot Maryam al-Mansouri. Widely praised by liberals and conservatives in the US (not withstanding the "boobs on the ground" comment), al-Mansouri became a means by which to paper over the gulf monarchies' atrocious human rights record. Even while the image of a Muslim female pilot served to disrupt the standard victim imagery, the larger narrative was one which cast the US as savior leading a coalition of "good Muslims" in a righteous war against ISIS. In place of T. E. Lawrence, we have Barack Obama.

Liberal feminism has routinely viewed women's participation in the military as positive. In 1991, after the first Gulf war, feminist Naomi Wolf praised US female soldiers for eliciting "respect and even fear" and for taking the struggle for women's rights forward. What she failed to discuss is the over 200,000 Iraqis, men, women and children, who were killed in that war. US women cannot achieve their liberation on the bodies of the victims of empire any more than Arab women can by raining bombs on Syrians. Empire does not liberate, it subjugates.

Deepa Kumar is an associate professor of media studies and Middle Eastern studies at Rutgers University (New Jersey). She is the author of Islamophobia and the Politics of Empire and Outside the Box: Corporate Media, Globalization, and the UPS Strike.

This article was originally published at Open Democracy

Latina Feminism: National and Transnational Perspectives

By Cherise Charleswell

Women's studies and the early waves of feminism were initially dominated by the experiences of white middle-class women, thus leaving Latinas, like other women of color, feeling excluded or not fully represented. Outside of women's studies, ethnic studies also left Latinas feeling the same, in that they focused on issues of racial and ethnic oppression and cultural nationalism, while ignoring the critical issues of sexism and heterosexism. Women and women's issues were only seen as "White," thus denying Latinas and other women of color their full identity. Eventually, Latina women joined other women of color in the introduction of gender issues into ethnic studies and critical race issues in women's studies. Their actions were taking a direct stance against not only the exclusionary practices of white middle-class feminism, but also against those within other social movements. These women helped to ensure that civil rights struggles transcended the US borders, and a number of Latina women have taken on leadership roles in the struggle for human rights. Thus, Latina Feminism, just like the Latino identity, is complex, and is oftentimes transnational in nature. For example, being a Latina means that one has a cultural identity and ethnicity, shared by those from or with origins in Latin America. Latinas can be of any racial group, or more likely a mix of various racial groups.

Origins of Latina Feminism

Latina Feminism in the United States really began to take shape following the Civil Rights and Black Nationalist movements, which saw all oppressed people - Gay, women, other ethnic groups - coming forward and using solidarity to spark social changes during the middle of the 20th century. Although Latina women took leadership roles in the other movements, their contributions have for the most part gone unnoticed or ignored. When scholars and community leaders speak about the legacy of these groups, they continue to excluded Latina women; and even well known iconic images do not include them.

Xicana (Chicana) Feminism

Chicana feminist thought and action really began to take shape during the late 1960s, with an increase in organizing during the 1970s. Chicana feminisms itself was an outgrowth or response to the male-dominated Chicano movements, which demanded access to education, as well as social, political, and economic opportunities and justice for Latino people; and took place primarily in the American South West. Like other women of color, Chicanas realized that discussions of women's issues, such as birth control, were being rejected, ignored, or side-lined; while mainstream White middle class feminism was also unwilling to speak out about the unique oppressions that Chicana women faced; particularly workplace exploitation or discrimination

The Women of the Young Lords

The Young Lords was a mostly Puerto Rican (African Americans and other Latinos were members) organization that was formed in the late 1960s by individuals who were primarily under the age of 20. What was so groundbreaking about this group of young people is that they redefined what is was to be Puerto Rican, openly exclaiming their pride in being Boricuans, not "Spanish", but Afro-Taino; and while fighting for basic human rights - clothing, shelter, food, access to healthcare and justice - they openly challenged machismo, sexism, and patriarchy. Women, such as Connie Cruz, Luisa Capteillo, Denise Oliver, and Bianca Canales, quickly emerged as leaders in the Young Lords. Their Ten-Point Health Program was ahead of its time, and it was clear that they understood early on that factors in one's environment (today referred to as social determinants of health by public health specialist) were important to health and wellbeing. Their Ten-Point Health Program was as follows:

We want total self-determination of all health services in East Harlem (El Barrio) through an incorporated Community-Staff Governing Board for Metropolitan Hospital. (Staff is anyone and everyone working at Metropolitan.)

We want immediate replacement of all Lindsay administrators by community and staff appointed people whose practice has demonstrated their commitment to serve our poor community.

We demand immediate end to construction of the new emergency room until the Metropolitan Hospital Community-Staff Governing Board inspects and approves them or authorizes new plans.

We want employment for our people. All jobs filled in El Barrio must be filled by residents first, using on-the-job training and other educational opportunities as bases for service and promotion.

We want free publicly supported health care for treatment and prevention. We want an end to all fees.

We want total decentralization--block health officers responsible to the community-staff board should be instituted.

We want "door-to-door" preventive health services emphasizing environment and sanitation control, nutrition, drug addiction, maternal and child care, and senior citizen's services.

We want education programs for all the people to expose health problems--sanitation, rats, poor housing, malnutrition, police brutality, pollution, and other forms of oppression.

We want total control by the Metropolitan hospital community-staff governing board of the budge allocations, medical policy along the above points, hiring, firing, and salaries of employees, construction and health code enforcement.

Any community, union, or workers organization must support all the points of this program and work and fight for that or be shown as what they are---enemies of the poor people of East Harlem.

#5 essentially calls for universal healthcare.

#7 focuses on prevention on disease and is forward-thinking in looking at addiction as not a criminal activity, but a disease.

#8 describes the need for programs to address the social determinants of health.

Unfortunately, despite their seemingly Progressive attitudes, the Young Lords was still governed by an all-male central committee and its initial 13-point platform advocated for "revolutionary machismo." The women members turned on the pressure and began to directly address this sexism, which resulted in the "machismo" line being dropped, and a new point was added to the program, stating, "We want equality for women. Down with machismo and male chauvinism"; and more importantly, attention and protest was turned to the issue of sterilization. In short, during the 1960s, Puerto Rican women were used as guinea pigs for the development of the birth control pill and later birth control and sterilization were used in some sort of twisted eugenics campaign as a tool of social policy and as a form of directed population control. Over a third of Puerto Rican women of child-bearing age were sterilized. The Young Lord's fight against this abusive practice inspired Ana Maria Garcia's 1982 documentary, La Operacion. The Young Lord's Women's Caucus was progressive and transformative in other ways: defending a woman's right to abortion and childcare, and establishing a women's union with a publication called La Luchadora; and their efforts helped to ensure that half of the content of the Young Lords' newspaper, Pa'lante, focused on women's issues.

Pioneering Latina Feminists in the US

Although "feminist" is being used to describe these women, we must keep in mind that many of them may have not considered or referred to themselves as feminists. Their actions - advocating for women's equality and challenging patriarchy and systems of oppression - indeed made them feminists.

Nina Otero-Warren was a Chicana educator, politician, suffragist, and first wave feminist. She worked for women's suffrage in New Mexico and, in 1918, became superintendent of public schools in Santa Fe County. Later, in 1923, she became Inspector of Indian Schools in Santa Fe County, where she was able to improve the education of indigenous populations.

Jovita Idar was a pioneering Chicana activist and feminist. As early as 1910 she was writing articles for her father's newspaper, covering stories on discrimination, lynching, and other violence committed by Texas Rangers - all issues that, unfortunately, remain relevant today as we continue to witness the same type of oppression. La Ligua Femenil Mexicanista (The League of Mexican Women), which she formed in 1911, is now recognized as the first attempt in Mexican-American history to organize a feminist social movement. These women formed free schools for Mexican children and provided necessities for the poor.

Maria Rebecca Latigo de Hernandez was not a self-described feminist; however, she was a pioneering Xicana activist, working for the improvement of civic, educational, and economic opportunities for Mexican-Americans. In 1929, she co-founded the Orden Caballeros of America, a civic and civil organization.

Sylvia Rivera was a bisexual trans Latina activist and feminist who advocated for the inclusion of queer and transgender people who were left out of the gay-rights movement. She co-founded the Street Transvestite Action Revolutionaries (S.T.A.R.) in 1970.

Feminist scholar Gloria Anzaldua self-describes as a "Chicana/Tejana/lesbian/dyke/feminist/writer/poet/cultural theorist." Her writing focused on providing representations of women of color. Her 1987 book "Borderlands/La Frontera: The New Mestiza," her most famous work, focuses on overlapping issues of gender, race, sexual orientation, and class (factors which feminist scholar Kimberlee Crenshaw later referred to as intersections when speaking on the theory of intersectionality). Other notable works by Anzaldua include "This Bridge Called My Back: Writings by Radical Women of Color" (co-authored with Cherrie Moraga) and "Making Face Making Soul/Haciendo Caras: Creative and Critical Perspectives by Feminists of Color."

Although Cesar Chavez became the face of the United Farm Workers, has a national holiday in his honor, and was featured in the biographical film Cesar Chavez, much has been known about Dolores Huerta, labor leader, activist, feminist, awardee of the Presidential Medal of Freedom, and co-founder of the United Farm Workers. Her lobbying efforts helped to bring about the Immigration Act of 1985. Her other political achievements include:

In 1961, she succeeded in obtaining the citizenship requirements removed from pension and public assistance programs.

In 1962, she was instrumental in the passage of legislation allowing voters the right to vote in Spanish, and the right of individuals to take the drivers license examination in their native language;

In 1963, she helped secure Aid for Dependent Families ("AFDC") for the unemployed and underemployed, disability insurance for farm workers in the State of California, and unemployment benefits for farm workers.

She continues her activism work as an active board member of the Feminist Majority Foundation.

Chicana second-wave feminist, Cherrie Moraga, began discussing "interlocking" oppressions early on in her activist, academic, and artistic career during the 1970s. She co-authored "This Bridge Called My Back: Writings by Radical Women of Color" with Gloria Anzaldua in 1981, and was a founding member of La Red Xicana Indigena, a network of Chicanas organizing nationally and internationally for social change, indigenous rights, and political education.

Pioneering Latina Feminists in Latin America

Leila Gonzalez was an intellectual involved in the Brazilian Black movement and is credited for being responsible for the development and practice of Black Feminism in Brazil (More to come on the topic of racial identity and Black feminism in Latin America and the US). Leila was born in 1935, just 47 years after the Lei Áurea ("Golden Act") abolished slavery in Brazil, and despite being a Black woman, she went on to earn university degrees in history, geography, philosophy, and a PhD in social anthropology.

Petra Herrera was a Soldadera, a female soldier who fought along the men during the Mexican Revolution. She initially disguised her gender and went by the name "Pedro Herrera." After not being credited for valor in battle and promoted to a General, Petra left Pancho Villa's forces and formed her own all-woman brigade.

In 1946, Felisa Rincon de Gautier was elected mayor of San Juan Puerto Rico, becoming not only the first woman to be elected mayor of San Juan, but of any mayor capital city in the Americas. She held this position from 1948 - 1968. She was an active participant in Puerto Rico's women's suffrage movement (won in 1932) and her efforts on child care programs inspired the United States' Head Start program.

Puerto Rican Nationalist, Blanca Canales, has been conveniently erased from history books, and is not greatly discussed in women's studies courses. She helped organize the Daughters of Freedom, the women's branch of the Puerto Rican Nationalist Party, and is one of the few women in history to have led a revolt against the United States, which was known as the Jayuya Uprising, taking place in 1950. The US government declared martial law to put down the uprising, sentencing the activists to life imprisonment and dismissing their protests as nothing more than an "incident between Puerto Ricans."

Afro-Puerto Rican poet, feminist and activist, Julia de Burgos, used her writings to openly contest the prevailing notion that womanhood and motherhood are synonymous. She courageously began challenging these notions in the 1930s.

Celia Sanchez was the woman at the heart of the Cuban Revolution, and although she was rumored to be the main decision-maker, more is known about her male counterparts Fidel Castro and Che Guevara. She was the founder of the 26th of July Movement and leader of combat squads throughout the Revolution.

Frida Kahlo was a Mexican artist born around the time of the Mexican Revolution. She is best known for her self-portraits filled with pain and passion, which mirrored her own life. She survived polio, a horrific and near-fatal bus accident, an amputation, multiple miscarriages, as well as rampant infidelity. Her work represents a celebration of indigenous traditions, as well as an uncompromising depiction of the female experience and form, the dichotomies, the personal and political, love and loss, physical and emotional pain.

Intersectionality and the Latina in the United States

For the most part, the Latina in the United States is still viewed as "The Other," a racial minority outside of the dominant White society (despite the growing Latino population), and at times as a stereotypical caricature, whether it is the Domestic or the Spicy oversexed Spanish Fly, whose presence is primarily for the pleasure and entertainment of men ( Sophia Vergara's public persona and willingness to be literally put on display during the 2014 Emmy Ward s best exemplifies this caricature). This status as "The Other" has historically left Latinas having to cope with not only gender oppression, but gender and discrimination based on their ethnicity. These are the intersections that impact their lives. Further, one has to understand how these varying intersections drive Latinas to feminism in different ways than their white counterparts. For example, reproductive justice for Latinas, expands beyond the need to control reproduction and ensure that there are no unwanted pregnancies, but includes the need to safeguard the right of women of color to have children.

In a 2013 Ms Magazine interview, Latina feminist blogger, Sara lnes Calderon, explained why feminism or women's issues often go undiscussed or are not viewed as urgent matters to Latinas:

"I find mainstream feminism to often be lacking in substance for myself. I can't relate to it, perhaps because to me feminism is often wrapped up with white privilege. I'm not sure why there aren't more Latinas discussing feminism online. I think one major reason is that, since Latinos are historically not the dominant class and are often immigrants, there are other, more important things that occupy their time. I know that's true for myself; I spend much more time talking about politics and structural issues in my blogging than just pure Latina feminism because I feel like, in the larger sense, it's more important."

Of course, one has to ask, why can't Latina women actively and simultaneously advocate for equality, whether it is racial, gender, or based on sexual orientation? The problem with saying that women's issues are not as important, or can wait, is that they will need to be given an opportunity to be addressed; and thus impeding any form of progress.

On Invisibility: Afro-Latinas in the US

The group often excluded from discussions about the Latina experience in North America are Afro Latinos, whose complex identities, renders them invisible. These women include actresses Rosie Perez, Rosario Dawson, Zoe Saldana, and Gina Torres. While also coping with gender inequality, Afro-Latinas also face discrimination (and racism) from other Latinos, the dominant white society, as well as African-Americans (who are often adamant that Afro-Latinos put their racial identity before their cultural or ethnic). Due to these varying degrees of invisibility and discrimination, alluding to intersectionality is not enough; instead, the experiences of Afro-Latinas can be viewed as a complex spider web.

"The Other": The Indigenous & Afro Latinas in Latin America

"I know that when I was working at the Spanish language television station, there was no one of color on television. And I knew this before, so it wasn't like I got there and I was like 'Whoa, there's nobody on TV.' You just realize that you know, when I go travel, and I go to Cuba, and I go to Puerto Rico, and I go to Peru. You go to these places and you see people who are brown, of indigenous descent. But then you look at the television and you go, 'How come what I see is not what I saw when I visited these places?'"

Kim Haas, founder of the Los Afro-Latinos, shared these sentiments during her interview for Feministing. Her statement speaks to the fact that while Latinos in North America are seen as a monolithic group, indigenous women and those of African descent in Latin America are explicitly seen as "The Other," and are marginalized. While Latinas in the Chicana movement and other Latino social movements in North America advocate for inclusion, fair representation, and civil and human rights, these marginalized groups - indigenous and Afro Latino - in Latin America have historically and continue to have to do the same. When it comes to the media, they remain invisible for the most part, and in comparison to their mestizo or "White" Latino counterparts, these marginalized groups disproportionately have higher rates of poverty and disease. Thus, indigenous and Afro Latina feminists in Latin America have to cope with these deeply rooted intersections - discrimination, racial prejudice, marginalization, poverty, and gender inequality. It is this ironic reality that marks the difference between Latina Feminism in North America and Feminism in Latin America. A mere crossing of the United States border automatically lumps these groups, the marginalized indigenous and Afro-Latino women, with the mestizo/"White" Latinas who represent the dominant society, in the same way that Middle Class, White women in North America were accused of harboring privilege in that they were members of the dominant society.

Acknowledging and addressing this reality has proven to be difficult in Latin America. During the 20th century, Latin American nations were moving towards Democratic forms of governance. By the 1980s, many spaces for debate and political analysis began to open up for different voices from the Latin American civil society; however, these organizations were still not addressing the issue of racism. Thus, during the 5th Latin America and Caribbean Feminist Encuentero taking place in San Bernardo Argentina, different Black women from throughout the region met for the first time and discussed the reality of Black women's lives and the need for their own spaces and having their own voice in Latin America. This initial meeting led to the 1st Latin American and Caribbean Black women's Encuentro in 1992, which took place in Santo Domingo, Dominican Republic. Thus, Afro-Latin American feminism was built on the common experiences of Afro-Latinas who collectively experience gender and racial oppression.

Indigenous women, from various tribes in Latin America (Mayan, Quechuas, Quiche, etc.) have given rise to an indigenous feminism, which really began to take root in the 1990s. The Zapatista National Liberation Army (EZLN) emerged in 1994, serving as a catalyst for indigenous women's organization in Mexico, and an example of indigenous feminism for the rest of Latin America. The Zapatista women created what was called the Women's Revolutionary Law, and made it public on January 1, 1994. The 10 point law called for the following rights for indigenous women: the right to political participation and to hold leadership posts within the political system, to a life free of sexual and domestic violence, to decide how many children they want to have, to a fair wage, to choose a spouse, to an education, and to quality health services. In looking at this law and the declaration of women of the Young Lords (previously discussed), it is clear that Latina women in Latin America and in North America - and of varying racial, ethnic, and economic backgrounds - have been advocating for essentially the same rights. These issues - reproductive health, having to counteract patriarchy, having full representation, and so on, forms the basis of the commonality as feminists.

Indigenous feminists advocate not only for increased political, cultural, and civil rights, but also for a more equal society within their respective tribes. The following provides an overview of how indigenous feminism differs from the mainstream framework of feminism:

"Indigenous feminism differs from the western idea of the movement; indigenous feminist groups consider equality not just as a gender issue but also as an issue of equality between the human race and nature. Whilst the indigenous feminist groups are fighting their own battles regarding their ethnicity, class and gender, and the perceived exclusion they have experienced as both women and indigenous people, they also work within and for their own groups' overall struggles against issues such as climate change and deforestation." (Castillo, 2010)

Ultimately, ethnicity, class, and gender identity have shaped the struggle of indigenous women in Latin America, and they have opted to assert themselves into the broader struggles of their communities (against multinational organizations and the destruction of the environment and their homelands, exploitation by Latina American governments, as well as violence that accompanies the trafficking of narcotics), all while creating specific spaces to reflect on and speak out against their experiences with sexism and exclusion within their own societies.

Mobilization & Organizing

Latin-American and Latina/Chicano feminism organization continues to evolve, as an increasing number of Latinas in Latin America and North America begin to define their own forms of feminism, which are distinctive and complex. Whether it is considering the Afro-Latina in North America, whose ethnic identity is often dismissed, or the Afro-Latina in Latin America who is faced with great racial discrimination despite their ethnic identity as a Latino, or the mestiza or "White" Latina in Latin America who holds a position of privilege in the dominant society, or the mestiza/"White" Latina in North America who is viewed as "The Other" and faces the same types of prejudice and discrimination. Peasant, poor, working-class, or professional Latina women, whether in the West or Latin America, often have a myriad of concerns, those dealing with survival (escaping violence and having ready access to shelter, food, and potable water). They strive for increased political participation, representation, and socioeconomic equality, as well as safeguarding reproductive justice health and rights (including access to contraception and safe abortions, and access to education.

These transnational Latina feminisms involve different methods of women's organization and mobilization. In the 21st century, these efforts highly rely on digital media, which is often touted as the 4th Wave of Feminism. This form of mobilization is carried out through blogs (L atina Feminista, Womanisms, Los Afro Latinos ), journals (Chicana/Latina Studies, Latin American Perspectives), and think tanks, social media group pages, electronic newsletters, discussion boards, and websites. However, grassroots efforts of organizing are still used, particularly in areas where women have greater economic uncertainty and may not readily have access to digital media. There are, of course, the professional conferences, symposiums, and political advocacy which bring together Latina women who engage in discussions that center on how much progress has been made towards gender equality and how much more work has to be done. They call attention to, draft needed policies, and engage legislators.

Here are various Latina Feminist Mobilization Efforts & Organizations:

Chicana por mi Raza : is an online archive project that focuses on recapturing and highlighting the contribution of Mexican American, Chicana, and Hispanic women to vibrant social, political, and economic justice movements in the United States; looking at the development of Chicana feminist thought and action from 1960 to 1990. The website will serve as a digital archive, and is set to launch later this year. Items that will be available in the archive includes: newspapers, reports, leaflets, out-of-print books, correspondence, and oral histories.

Mundo Afro Salto : A regional Black culture group, decided to profile women of African descent in Salto Uruguay, in recognition of the 2011 United Nations International Year for People of African Descent. This was done via video, where these women proclaim not only their black heritage, but touch on gender issues, declaring that house work is not only woman's work.

The Roundtable of Latina Feminism : Is a collective grounding hosted by John Carroll University, which provides a dedicated space to discuss all issues related to Latina and Latin American feminisms. These gatherings are held annually, and they represent a break from academic conferences, which founder Mariana Ortega believed prioritized competitive and agnostic discussions. Instead, the roundtable provides an example of an alternative enuentros, and centers on the idea of transnational coalition building.

Colectivo Feminista Sexualidade Saude (CFSS ): is a feminist health action group based in Brazil that provides health education and training for women and professionals. They encourage self-help and also have a focus on women's mental health, violence against women, and child mortality.

CEFEMINIA : is a non-profit women's organization founded in 1975 in Costa Rica, which focuses in five key areas: violence against women, women's health, women and the legal system, as well as housing and environmental justice. The organization promotes self-help and community-based efforts, including providing needed housing.

California Latinas for Reproductive Justice : is a state-wide organization that focuses on building Latinas' power and cultivating leadership through community education, policy advocacy, and community-informed research, in order to achieve reproductive justice.

Black Women of Brazil : is a website dedicated to Brazilian women of African descent, which features news, essays, reports and interviews spanning an array of topics including race, racism, hair, sexism, sexual objectification and exploitation, affirmative action, socioeconomic inequity, police brutality, etc. intended to give a more complete view of the experiences of black women in particular, and black people in general in Brazil with a goal of provoking discussion through the lens of race.

Conclusion

Despite their distinctive characteristics, Latina Feminisms are quite similar, and this may be due to the transnational interconnections and bidirectional contacts between North America and the countries of Latin America. The greatest similarities is that Latina feminisms all differ from the Western middle-class white construct, and remain deeply rooted in social movements that impact their communities. For this reason, much of Latina Feminist organizing is non-academic, where Latinas in women's movements often do not accept the label feminist. These women are self-taught, and their actions are not shaped by academic theory, but lived experiences with sexism, racism, marginalization, and inequality; which have contributed to their awakening and activism.

Latina feminists have collectively criticized white-dominated Western feminism for being too homogenous, particularly in the blogosphere, where Latina feminist issues are not believed to be discussed in a satisfactory manner on mainstream feminist blogs. However, Latina feminist blogs, websites, publications, and organizations must take their own advice and grow to be more inclusive; and create spaces for the voices of marginalized indigenous and Afro-Latina women.

Ultimately, Latina feminisms advocate for the recognition of the full humanity of women and girls, and the removal of sexism, racism, ableism, classism, and discrimination based on sexual orientation.

References

Castillo, R. A. (2010). The Emergence of Indigenous Feminism in Latin America. Chicago Journals, Vol. 35,(No. 3), 539-545.

Now That's a Bad Bitch!: The State of Women in Hip Hop

By Asha Layne

The state of rap music has changed since its creation in the 1970s. Starting in Bronx, New York rap was always seen as an underground subculture that deviated from the social norms and patterns of the dominant culture. It was here that the expressions of young Black and Hispanic men were freely expressed and not criticized. Rap music is a cultural art form that consists of four elements: deejaying, break dancing, rapping, and graffiti. Having its historical roots in ancient African culture traditions, rap music can also be traced to countries that were part of the African diaspora. For example, Lliane Loots indicated that two elements of hip-hop culture have their roots in Brazil and Jamaica (2003, p.67). The art of rhyming culturally stems from West African tradition of the griots or story tellers that were part of the oral tradition of African culture. The Jamaican influence on hip-hop can be located in deejaying practices referred to as dub-mixing, utilized first by Jamaican immigrant Deejay Kool Herc.

Since its inception, rap music has evolved from an underground subcultural movement to a mainstream subcultural expression that profits from the ideology of dominant culture and vice versa. Rap music during the 1970s remained national commodity until the 1980s. During this time participants in this subculture were involved directly in one of the four elements (Hunter, 2011, p.16) in which young men and women of color were rapping at parties, tagging or creating graffiti on subway cars, or breaking (Nelson, 1998). The 1980s ushered in the idea that rap music could not only be popular in the United States but also in other countries. The market for rap music increased as capitalism expanded along with the industry. With the increased popularity of the genre, media sources became the main locus for rap music to not only become more mainstream, but to also increase their purchasing power under capitalism. In order to examine the purchasing power of rap music under capitalism it is important to talk briefly of the underpinnings of capitalism.

Rap and Capitalism

Capitalism can be defined as an economic system based on private ownership with the goal of making capital or profit for the owner. Under capitalism there exists a divergent economic relation between the laboring class (proletariat) and the ruling class (capitalist). Unlike the capitalist, the laborer becomes a commodity as their labor is sold to the purchaser. According to Rousseau, the relationship between the owners of production and the workers is inherently oppressive, as the goal of the capitalist to accrue wealth from the laboring working class (2009, p.20). As the laboring class becomes increasingly objectified in the market, the state represents the instrument of class rule. The state can be seen as an instrument of power because of its production of ideological hegemony of the ruling class, which not only legitimizes exploitation but maintains the ruling class ideals as described by Antonio Gramsci. The state produces ideas that control our behavior through various forms (i.e. the media).

Manning Marable argues that the logic of the ideological apparatuses of the racist/capitalist state leads inextricably to Black accommodation and accommodation into the status quo, a process of cultural genocide which assists the function of ever-expanding capital accumulation (1983, p.9). As capitalism moved from the industrial sector to financial, and from financial/corporate to global, capitalists are continuously seeking cheap labor power and methods of exploitation; and the rap industry is not immune. This buttresses Antonio Gramsci's argument that the capitalists can assert their power and control through the subordination of the working class by means of ideological hegemony. The ideological hegemony of the ruling class, therefore, prolongs the subordination of the working class and also legitimizes the power and control of the capitalist or owner.

As hip hop grew in popularity, capitalists found new ways to assert their control and power over the industry, which became more lucrative with neoliberal policies. According to Derek Ide, rap was born from the ashes of a community devastated by a capitalistic economic system and racist government officials (2013). Ide continues to express that it was not long before corporate capitalism impinged upon the culture's sovereignty and began the historically familiar process of exploitation (2013). As hip-hop transitioned from its unadulterated underground image to mainstream adulteration, the industry began to support the capitalist ideologies which spread rapidly as profits increased with the deregulation of the market.

As the rap industry expanded, many have argued that the image and state of rap worsened as rap became a keen marketing tool for corporations. Corporate giant, Viacom, which owns Black Entertainment Television (BET), VH1, and Music Television (MTV), has been influential in disseminating controversial messages and images to its audience and critics. Felicia Lee asserts that "protestors want media companies like Viacom to develop 'universal creative standards' for video and music including prohibitions on some language and images" (2007). Achieving this level of prohibition has not happened in recent years as images of scantily clad female rappers, misogynistic lyrics, and the negative portrayals of African culture continue to be exploited. The relationship between rap artists and corporations can be paralleled to that of slavery.

Solomon Comissong explained that the 1990s saw a corporate takeover and commodification of rap, which has made the music less diversified in various media forms (2009). This change has led to changes in lyrical content, style, and fashion as artists display themselves in the best way to expand their marketing power, which is directly influenced by capitalism. The hegemonic ideologies of the ruling class have been transferred into the beats, rhymes and imagery in the rap industry as artists continue to exploit themselves and culture for economic gain.

In 2007, Forbes magazine released its first annual "Hip Hop's Wealthiest Artists" list which measured the annual earnings of rappers. As stated by Greenburg, unlike traditional music genres like pop, rock, and country, whose artists generally make their money through touring and album sales, rappers like Jay Z, 50 Cent, Kanye West, and Sean "Diddy" Combs have become entrepreneurs who have parlayed their fame into lucrative entertainment empires (Goldman and Pain, 2007). More recently, Nicki Minaj became the first documented female rapper on Forbes "Hip-Hop's Cash Kings" list since its creation in 2007. Earning an estimated $29 million in 2012, Minaj has successfully beaten many boys at their own game. But at what cost?

This paper explores how the commodification and consumption of the black female body has given rise to the "bad bitch" phenomenon in rap culture. It is argued that the effects of being a bad bitch not only changes the state of rap but also the attitudes and behaviors of young black girls, and their interactions with the opposite sex. Also, the topic of whether or not the bad bitch phenomenon is a form of deviant behavior within African-American culture will be addressed.

Bad Bitch

The word "bitch" has morphed from a term of disrespect to a term of endearment that often takes on the meaning of empowerment. Once viewed as debilitating, the term has appropriated a new perspective within a subcultural context that is perceived as a term of empowerment. In examining this change, Aoron Celious explains that the term "is located in a society where sex and power are interrelated - men afford status and privilege over women because they are men, and women are relegated to a diminished status and restricted access to resources because they are women" (2002, p.91). The change in the meaning of the word thus subverts the tools of oppression used to dominate women to now empower them. This has been seen in the frequent usage of the word by many female rappers as rap music became commercially lucrative.

Although the word historically has been a long-noted negative stereotype against women, it has only added to many stereotypical orientations for women of color. Misogynistic orientations of Black women were not separate from the historical changes in the United States - "the imagery projected in rap has its roots in the development of the capitalistic patriarchal system based on the principles of White supremacy, elitism, racism, and sexism" (Adams and Fuller, 2006, p.942). During slavery - a form of capitalism - Black women were not only exploited for their labor power but also their reproductive power. The location of Black women under capitalism therefore is dually exploitative and profitable. The patriarchal attitudes seen against Black women today can be traced back to oppressive and exploitative control methods of the state and the economy.

The images of Black women historically have served the interests of the ruling class. Adams and Fuller further assert that the images of the "Saphire" are analogous to the "Mammy" image in that they both serve the entertainment needs of Whites (2006, p.944). In rap music, the word "bitch" can be linked to the stereotypical image of the Saphire, as a woman who de-emasculates her man by running the household and being financially independent, or as a woman who simply does not know her place. This sentiment has been shared by radical feminist Jo Freeman. In Freeman's The Bitch Manifesto, the word is used to describe a woman who "rudely violates conceptions of proper sex role behavior" (Buchanan, p.12). Among Generation Y, this word has been enhanced to compliment women who are sexy, smart and independent, thus justifying and perpetuating the commodification of the Black female body.

According to Stephane Dunn, in "Baad Bitches" and Sassy Supermamas: Black Power Action Films," the term "Baad Bitches" began with the sexploitation of Black female actors in the 1970s, as well as being products of contemporary dominant culture (2008). Scallen highlights Dunn's (2010) work by referencing the following:

The "Bad Bitch" suggests a black woman from working-class roots who goes beyond the boundaries of gender in a patriarchal domain and plays the game successfully as the boys by being in charge of her own sexual representation and manipulating it for celebrity and material gain" (2010, p. 27).

The role of black women in film is strikingly similar to the rap industry in that they both lucratively exploit black sexuality in different media outlets. The image of Foxy Brown, Coffy, and Cleopatra Jones by Pam Grier embodies her super-womanhood and sexuality. Gwendolyn Pough (2004) states:

By exploiting Black women's bodies, the blaxploitation movies fall short of offering fulfilling and complete images of empowerment for Black women. However, the films do offer some interesting subversions and complications. If we really begin to critique and explore the genre, we can see the ways Black women such as Pam Grier have participated in the cultural processes of gender construction for Black women and turned some of those processes completely around. We will also be able to explore and critique contemporary reclamation of Grier's characters such as the ones offered by Foxy Brown and Lil Kim. They are bringing the big bad Black supermamas into the new millennium and using them to construct contemporary Black women's gender and sexuality (p. 67-68).

The portrayals of Black women in film, along with the music industry, have either classified Black women as Saphires, Mammys or Jezebels, also known as "hos". These various forms of imagery have continuously been accepted by White America and thus perpetuated into the social interactions and perceptions of Black women and men in the Black community. The depictions mentioned here are increasingly common as more and more consumers are not only buying, but are also emulating these negative stereotyped roles.

Black Feminist Thought

The inclusion of black feminist theory is essential in examining the exploitation of the Black female body in rap. Collins' Black Feminist Thought explains that race, gender, and class are oppressive factors that are bound together. In investigating the placement of the commodified Black female rappers in the industry, the role and location of Black women in the United States has to be examined. Since, central to this analysis, one may ask: Is the emergence of the bad bitch phenomenon foreign to the lives of Black women in this country? Collins highlights how the role of Black women always contradicted the traditional role of women in mainstream society. Collins poses the question, "if women are allegedly passive and fragile, then why are Black women treated as 'mules' and assigned heavy cleaning chores" (2000, p.11)? The placement of Black women as 'objects' and 'tools' for production has been and will always be embedded into American culture.

Black feminist thought places the standpoint of Black women at the forefront, which deviates from the general practices used under conventional feminist theories. According to Collins (2000), Black women in the United States can stimulate a distinctive consciousness concerning our own experiences and society overall (p.23-24). Collins understands this knowledge can be thoroughly attained from both women in academia and outside academia. The lyrics of some female rappers have taken a vocal stance displaying the issues and struggles faced particularly by Black women. These rappers have voiced their opinions on women's oppression in the industry as well as within their communities from the hypermasculinity of their male counterparts. For example, in Queen Latifah's U.N.I.T.Y., she writes:

But I don't want to see my kids getting beat down
By daddy smacking mommy all around
You say I'm nothing without ya, but I'm nothing with ya
This is my notice to the door, I'm not taking it no more
I'm not your personal whore, that's not what I'm here for
And nothing good gonna come to ya til you do right by me
Brother you wait and see, who you calling a bitch (1994)!!

Rap music has been used as a stage for both men and women from disadvantaged neighborhoods to express their experiences with oppression and also serve as a means for coping with that oppression. One main characteristic of oppression is the repressive nature it places on the individual that results in objectification of material wealth. Historically, the Black body has taken the form of material wealth in that it was aggressively commodified during the Trans-Atlantic slave trade, especially for women. The commodification of the Black female body has changed to meet the needs of the political economy in a particular society. The "bitch phenomenon" in rap culture is no different because it has been integrated into forms of the dominant culture to serve the needs of the dominant and ruling class.

Collins argues that the domination always attempts to objectify the subordinate group in which the ideas and one's own reality is not defined by members of the subordinate group (2000, p.71). This was clearly visible in the distinction between the figures of the "Mammy" and the matriarch. The Mammy symbolized something good by the dominant group whereas the matriarchal figure was deemed bad according to the same "standards". Collins references the Patrick Moynihan's report, The Negro Family: The Case for National Action, in locating the thesis for Black matriarchy. She writes:

…the Black matriarchy thesis argued that African-American women failed to fulfill their traditional "womanly" duties at home contributed to the social problems in Black civil society (Moynihan 1965). Spending too much time away from home, these working mothers ostensibly could not properly supervise their children failure at school. As overly aggressive, unfeminine women, Black matriarchs allegedly emasculated their lovers and husbands (2000, p.75).

Black feminist theory reminds us to never forget how race, class, and gender are central in understanding the development of the Mammy, matriarch, and the vast appearance of the "bad bitch" phenomenon.

Data and Methods

The "bad bitch" and Black feminist thought theses could be utilized to explain the manifestation of the "bad bitch" phenomenon. The bad bitch thesis explained by Dunn and Pough is a black woman who can be successful under a patriarchal system of control by defining success for herself and how she will go about achieving it. The limitations of the bad bitch thesis are considered by Collins through the use of Black feminist theory. This expansive theory examines how the intersection of race, class, and gender serves as a form of oppression for Black women under a patriarchal system.

To answer the question of how the bad bitch phenomenon continues to increase the commodification and consumption of the black female body, a content analysis of Nicki Minaj's songs will be reviewed. Nicki Minaj's work was selected because of her being the first female rap artist to make the Forbes list since its creation in 2007. It is argued that the effect of being a "bad bitch" not only affects the state of rap but also the attitudes and behaviors of Blacks. Also, it will be important to examine whether or not the bad bitch phenomenon is a form of deviant behavior within African American culture.

Pink Friday

The mentioning of women in rap music by men has been a largely demoralizing phenomenon, at which women are referred to as "gold-diggers," trifling, bitches, and hos. While it is easy to criticize male rap artists for demoralizing Black women, female rappers have not only participated in the gender politics but have also capitalized from these stereotypes in the rap industry. Born Onika Maraj, Minaj's popularity skyrocketed in 2010, with the releases of several mixtapes: Playtime is Over, Sucka Free, and Beam Me up Scotty, before her first major album Pink Friday in 2010. According to Caulfield, Minaj scored her second number one album on the Billboard 200 Chart in 2012 following the release of Pink Friday: Roman Reloaded with the hit single "Starships" (2012). Upon her growing album sales, Minaj's popularity further increased with various collaborations that widened her notoriety to other areas of music, beyond rap. In analyzing the content of Nicki Minaj's songs, the following themes appeared: reclamation of the words "bitch" and "ho"; female independence; and female masculinity.

Reclamation of the Words Bitch and Ho

One significant difference seen between male and female rappers is the usage of the words "bitch" and "ho". Despite the negative, literal meaning of the words, Minaj has used them to demand attention from her competitors. In her controversial song Stupid Ho, Minaj allegedly addresses fellow female rappers in the same misogynistic form of disrespect typically reserved for male rappers. In the song, she writes:

Bitch talking she the queen, when she looking like a lab rat
I'm Angelina, you Jennifer
Come on bitch, you see where Brad at
Ice my wrists and I piss on bitches
You can suck my diznik if you take this jizzes
You don't like them disses, give my ass some kisses
Yeah they know what this is, giving this the business
Cause I pull up and I'm stuntin' but I ain't a stuntman
Yes I'm rockin' Jordans but I ain't a jumpman
Bitches play the back cause they know I'm the front man
Put me on the dollar cause I'm who they trust in
Ayo SB, what's the fucks good?
We ship platinum, them bitches are shipping wood
Them nappy headed hoes but my kitchen good
I wish, I wish, I wish, I wish, I wish, I wish
A bitch would (2012).

In this example, the word "bitch" is used as: a form of address, form of disrespect; and distinction. Above, the word "bitch" is metaphorically used to address her competitors in a disrespectful manner traditionally used by male rappers to address women. It becomes self-evident that she is not on the same level as her competitors and refers to them in an unattractive manner as, "nappy headed hoes." The labeling of her female competitors as "nappy headed hoes" is even more destructive than the words bitch and ho, in that it brings about a new area of concern, which is beauty.

Female Independence

The establishment of female independence in rap has taken many forms. Black female identity by male rap artists has helped generate negative stereotypes of the Black female body or a male objectifying the female body. Female independence could also be seen as a woman objectifying her own body and image to gain financial independence. In her song Blow Ya Mind, Minaj writes:

She said her name is Nicki
She came to play and her body was sicken
She gets what she wants, so sexy when she talks
Oh, you know she gon' blow your mind
Okay, Nicki
Did these bitches fall and bump their little heads
I got 'em like, oh, which one of them I'ma dead
'Cause when they get sick, they start to cough bread
Body looks right, plus we crop heads
The Rolls Royce Phantom, yeah, the drop head
And that just goes to show I'm that bitch
I 26'inched the rims with black lips
Now this is the anthem, this is the anthem (x2)
In-ear, in-ear, all in your in-ear
Boy, I put this pussy on your chinny, chin, chin hair (2011).

In the above lyrics, Minaj demonstrates that her body allows her to get what she wants, which (according to her) makes her unique. Self-sexual exploitation can be seen here as a method in gaining financial freedom from the traditional methods.

Female Masculinity

The use of masculine rhetoric has been used by rap artists since the days of "battling", or battle rap, to gain popularity and to command respect from their fellow artists. The machismo attitude in rap music has been denoted by images of male rappers "acting hard", and having multiple women and material possessions, which have been expressed through misogynistic imagery and lyrics. However, female rappers have utilized this macho image as a tool of female empowerment despite its negative imagery. Nicki Minaj has continuously utilized masculine rhetoric in her lyrics as an act of empowerment which implies that, just like men, women could also be violent-so don't mess with me or else. In the song, I am your Leader Minaj writes:

Look sucker, this my gun butter
Street fighter bitches, this Is the up cutter
Nunchucka,' no time to ducka'
Sign of the cross, cause this is her last suppa'
Play with me, check who came with me
I brought a couple 9's, plus the k's with me
I breeze through Queens to check some bad bitches
I stunt so hard, assess the damage
Cause this that aw, this is that aw
And yes I body bitches go get the bandages
I hate a phony bitch that front that chunk chummy
I'm the top shotta' drop the top toppa
Big fat pussy with a icy watch (2012).

The aforementioned lyrics demonstrate how female rappers have perpetuated the repressive and oppressive nature of women in hip hop. It is important to note that the usage of negatively degrading words against women by women carries more weight and meaning. Within the subcultural context of rap, women disrespecting other women in the same manner as men solidify their "street" credibility therefore perpetuating the cultural acceptance of misogynistic lyrics, regardless of the gender of the artist.

Justifying the Commodification of a Bad Bitch

The role of female rappers in the rap industry has been manipulated to justify ongoing exploitation and repression of Black women. Examining the lyrical content alone does not clearly illustrate the role the media plays in justifying the commodification of a "bad bitch". Following the lyrical trend and imagery of female rappers in the industry, it is strikingly evident that the sexploitation of women has become more lucrative, thus legitimizing the bad bitch phenomenon. In making this connection, it is imperative to recognize how forms of media serve as tools of oppression by reproducing ideological hegemony. Gramsci saw that the ruling class maintained their power not by coercive actions, but through hegemony at which the ruled would accept the norms, belief systems, and culture of the ruling class without challenge.

The media, like the family, serve as an agent of socialization. Mass media is seen as a powerful agent of socialization in that it has been, and continues to be, used to manipulate the consciousness of others. For example, consumer research has shown that there is a correlation between mass media and the attitudes of consumers. In terms of music, Viacom Inc. owns the controlling interests of MTV, VH1, and BET. As a result, the interests of Viacom are not reflective of the 'ruled' class, but instead of the ruling class; which uses its platform to maintain its hegemonic control. The raunchy lyrics and depiction of female rapper Nick Minaj is largely supported by these capital investors who are benefiting off of an alternate form of labor: self-sexploitation.

The media is a tool of oppression that justifies and perpetuates the negative stereotypes of Black women. Therefore, support and acceptance of these negative stereotypes is measured lucratively by media giants. The three factors discussed: reclamation of the words "bitch" and "ho"; female independence; and female masculinity have been repackaged and sold to consumers in today's market. The popularity of mainstream rapper Nicki Minaj not only demonstrates cultural acceptance of the thesis of a bad bitch but approves of the notion that self exploitation and objectification is justified because women are defining it for themselves within a male-dominated framework.

Conclusion

The placement of Black women in the history of the United States has always deviated from the norms and standards of dominant culture. Black women's bodies have been both criticized and exploited by Whites for economic gains. These stereotypes have created images of Saphires, Jezebels, and the Mammy, which further pushed Black women's intelligence onto the periphery while mass media has largely capitalized on body and cultural images. The mainstream representation of these stereotypes, especially the Saphire or bad bitch, revisits how Black women have always been exploited and oppressed.

Attributes of the bad bitch phenomenon are not exclusive to Generation Y but can be traced back to sassy images and roles Black women coveted. The rap industry has served as a new locus for this type of Black female to dominate in. Adopting the bad bitch persona not only gives Black women the opportunity to survive economically and socially in a Eurocentric male-dominated society, but also provides them the freedom to assert their power under their own rules without apology. This essay indicates that the adoption and commercialization of the bad bitch phenomenon are not foreign to the history of the Black female body. One important difference is the rise in self-exploitation by Black women in the industry to attain money, power, and respect that is indicative of the transferring of a Eurocentric-based ideological hegemony onto an oppressed subcultural group.

References

Buchanan, P. (2011). Radical Feminists: A Guide to an American Subculture. ABC-CLIO. Santa Barbara, California.

Celious, A. (2002). How "bitch" became a good thing-or, at least not that bad." Perspectives. Retrieved November 25, 2013 from http://www.rcgd.isr.umich.edu.

Collins, P. (2000). Black feminist thought: Knowledge, consciousness, and the politics of empowerment. Second edition. Routeledge. New York, New York.

Comissiong, S. (2009, September). Corporate hip hop, white supremacy and capitalism. Black Agenda Report. Retrieved November 25, 2013 from http://www.blackagendareport.com.

Dunn, S. (2008). Baad bitches and sassy supermamas: Black power action films. Urbana. University of Illinois Press.

Fuller, Adams and Fuller, Douglas. (2006). The words have changed but the ideology remains the same: Misogynistic lyrics in rap music. Journal of Black Studies, 36,(6), 938-957.

Goldman, L. and Paine, J. (2007, August). Hip-Hop cash kings. Forbes. Retrieved November 24, 2013 from http://www.forbes.com.

Ide, D. (2013, June). How capitalism underdeveloped hip hop: A people's history of political rap (part 1 of 2). Social Movement Studies Analysis. Retrieved November 24, 2013 from http://www.hamptoninstitution.com.

Lee, Felicia R. (2007, November). Protesting demeaning images in media. New York Times. Retrieved November 24, 2013 from http://www.newyorktimes.com.

Marable, M. (1983). How capitalism underdeveloped black America: Problems in race, political economy, and society. Boston, MA: South End Pres.

Moynihan, P. (1965). The negro family: A case for national action. Office of Policy Planning and Research. United States Department of Labor. Retrieved on November 24, 2013 from http://www.blackpast.com.

Nicki Minaj (2011). Blow ya mind on All Pink Everything [CD]. MTC Records.

Nicki Minaj (2012). Stupid Ho on Pink Friday: Roman Reloaded [CD]. Cash Money, Young Money, and Universal Motown.

Nicki Minaj (2012). I am your leader on Pink Friday: Roman Reloaded [CD]. Cash Money, Young Money, and Universal Motown.

Pough, G. (2004). Check it while I wreck it: Black womanhood, hip-hop culture and the public sphere. Boston, MA: Northeastern University Press.

Queen Latifah (1994). U.N.I.T.Y. on Black Reign [CD]. Motown Records.

Scallen (2010). Bitch thesis. Department of American Studies. Retrieved from http://www.americanstudies.nd.edu.com on November 24, 2013.

http://www.billboard.com . Retrieved on November 25, 2013.

Herstory: The Origins and Continued Relevancy of Black Feminist Thought in the United States

By Cherise Charleswell

Academics, second-wave, and third-wave feminists would likely agree that the Black Feminist movement grew out of, and more importantly, in response to, the Black Liberation Movement (itself an out-growth of the Civil Rights Movement), and the Women's Movement taking place in the United States and the West. The title of the groundbreaking anthology, All the Women are White, All the Blacks are Men, But some of us are Brave , published in 1982, and edited by Gloria T. Hull, Patricia Bell Scott, and Barbara Smith, perfectly illustrates the sentiments behind the need for the development of the Black Feminist Movement. In short, Black women were being marginalized and openly discriminated against in both movements, and they were finding it difficult or impossible to build solidarity with those who were also acting as their oppressors. All too often, "black" was equated with black men and "woman" was equated with white women; and the end result of this was that black women were an invisible group whose existence and needs were (and many would rightfully argue continues) to be ignored. Frustrations over this led to the formation of the National Black Feminist Organization in New York in 1973. Thus, Black Feminism is merely an effort, coping mechanism, and tool to be utilized by Black women who are racially oppressed within the Women's Movement, and sexually oppressed within the Black Liberation Movement, as well as within the patriarchal system of the Black community, which simply mimics the sexist ideas of the larger society.

Documentary filmmaker Nevline Nnaji's film, Reflections Unheard: Black Women in Civil Rights, released in 2013 along with the Association of Black Women's Historians text, The True worth of a Race: African American Women and the Struggle for Freedom, which was released to commemorate the 150 th Anniversary of the Emancipation Proclamation and the 50th Anniversary of the March on Washington, both carry out the wonderful mission of giving a voice to the Black women involved in the Civil Rights Movement, Black Liberation Movement, and other liberation struggles. These women include the likes of Mary Church Terrell, Fannie Lou Baker, Ida B. Wells, bell hooks, Audre Loure, Barbara Christian, Angela Davis, and the many other women who have gone on nameless and forgotten by history. These are the women who were told to stand in the back as Black people were collectively fighting to sit at the front of the bus and at the lunch counter. These are the women who were fighting to end racial inequality, while dealing with gender inequality and sexism. These were the women who were expected to just keep on marching, singing, sexing, and birthing "babies for the revolution." This revolution did not include their liberation and was subsequently nothing more than a fallacy. As explained by Michele Wallace in her book, Black Macho and the Myth of the Superwoman, "There is no revolution if, at the end of it, you ask any group of people to continue their subjugation."[1] Therefore, these women declared the following manifesto:

Black Woman's Manifesto

Racism and capitalism have trampled the potential of black people in this country and thwarted their self-determination. Initially, the physical characteristics of those of African descent were used to fit blacks into the lowest niche in the capitalist hierarchy - that of maintenance. Therefore, black women and men of today do not encourage division by extending physical characteristics to serve as a criterion for a social hierarchy. If the potential of the black woman is seen mainly as a supportive role for the black man, then the black woman becomes an object to be utilized by another human being. Her potential stagnates and she cannot begin to think in terms of self-determination for herself and all black people. It is not right that her existence should be validated only by the existence of the black man.

The black woman is demanding a new set of female definitions and recognition of herself of a citizen, companion and confidant, not a matriarchal villain or a step stool baby-maker. Role integration advocates the complementary recognition of man and woman, not the competitive recognition of same. [2]

Daring to become an activist and join the various Black Liberation struggles meant that a Black woman would have to face constant sexism. Viewing Black women as merely objects to be controlled meant that even their bodies and sexuality would be controlled. The following comment by feminist, author, popular speaker, and social activist bell hooks, explains the nature of this control as well as the underlining hypocrisy: "Black men overemphasize[d] white male sexual exploitation of black womanhood as a way to explain their disapproval of inter-racial relationships." It was, however, no contradiction of their political views to have inter-racial relationships themselves. Again, part of "freedom" and "manhood" was the right of men to have indiscriminate access to and control over any woman's body." [3] In other words, these attitudes, again, only represent a desire to switch or assume the position of the oppressor, and not truly bring about liberation and equality.

Within the Black liberation struggles, there was also a blatant disregard for Black women's humanity, autonomy, and bodies; and so, they were subjected to sexist statements, practices, and even violence. Even Dr. Martin Luther King, Jr., was guilty of being a male chauvinist. In particular, he resisted allowing women to take on leadership positions within his own organizations. [4] In the article, "Martin Luther King, Jr. Revisited: A Black Power Feminist Pays Homage to the King," Gwendylon Zoharah Simmons, a former Student Nonviolent Coordinating Committee (SNCC) volunteer, provides an account of her experiences with this widely known chauvinism and rampant sexism within the Civil Rights Movements:

"Sexism was definitely a problem throughout all civil rights organizations. Dr. King, not surprisingly -- like most if not all men in the movement who were products of the Black Church and American culture was sexist. ... The civil rights movement was hardly a model of female inclusion in the area of leadership. Patriarchy plagued the black freedom struggle on all sides. ...All men had difficulty seeing women in leadership roles."

She goes on to say that "King's inability to see movement women as his peers and even mentors prevented him from forging strong connections with radical black women who could have been his greatest allies in the struggle he was about to launch against economic oppression."[5]

Even more appalling were the daily acts of misogyny. Former Black Panther Party member, Elaine Brown, shared the following recollection of those experiences:

During an organizational meeting of the Black Congress in which she and the other women were forced to wait to eat until the men were served food for which they had all contributed money. The "rules" were then explained to her and a friend: "Sisters... did not challenge Brothers. Sisters... stood behind their black men, supported their men, and respected them. In essence... it was not only 'unsisterly' of us to want to eat with our Brothers, it was a sacrilege for which blood could be shed."

Much of this was carried out minus any criticism; and, of course, speaking about it openly would have been, and remains to be, deemed as a form of treason, or "airing out dirty laundry." Nevertheless, when Black liberation leaders would speak, much of the vocabulary they would choose and statements they would make focused on the greatness of the Black man, the needs of the Black man, and the oppression of the Black man; all while rarely mentioning the Black woman.

Consider the following statements that exemplify the disregard of the humanity of Black women:

We have black MEN who have mastered the field of medicine, we have black MEN who have mastered other fields, but very seldom do we have black MEN in America who have mastered the knowledge of the HIStory of the black MAN himself. We have among our people those who are experts in every field, but seldom can you find one among us who is an expert on the HIStory of the black MAN.

- Malcolm X, The Black MAN's History, December 1962

And so this separation [of black men and women] is the cause of our need for self-consciousness, and eventual healing. But we must erase the separateness by providing ourselves with healthy African identities. By embracing a value system that knows of no separation but only of the divine complement the black woman is for her man. For instance, we do not believe in them 'equality' of men and women. We cannot understand what the devils and the devilishly influenced mean when they say equality for women. We could never be equals... Nature has not provided thus."

- Amiri Baraka statements expressing that gender equality between Black women and men are unequal, and that Black women are complements "for" Black men.

I became a rapist. To refine my technique and modus operandi, I started out by PRACTICING on black girls in the ghetto-in the black ghetto where vicious and dark deeds appear NOT as aberrations or deviations from the norm, but as part of the sufficiency of the Evil of a day-and when I considered myself smooth enough, I crossed the tracks and sought out white prey.

- Black Panther, misogynist, rapist, and wife beater, Eldrige Cleaver, discussing his predatory pattern. It is telling that he viewed violence committed against black women to be "less serious, less criminal," than that against their white counterparts.

Feminism, White Women, & Hierarchy

That man over there says that women need to be helped into carriages, and lifted over ditches, and to have the best place everywhere. Nobody ever helps me into carriages, or over mud-puddles, or gives me any best place! And ain't I a woman? Look at me! Look at my arm! I have ploughed and planted, and gathered into barns, and no man could head me! And ain't I a woman? I could work as much and eat as much as a man - when I could get it - and bear the lash as well! And ain't I a woman? I have borne thirteen children, and seen most all sold off to slavery, and when I cried out with my mother's grief, none but Jesus heard me! And ain't I a woman?

- Sojourner Truth, "Ain't I A Woman," Delivered in 1851 at the Women's Convention in Akron, Ohio.

The above sentiments delivered by abolitionist and pioneering Black feminist Sojourner Truth speaks to the problem of marginalization and invisibility that plagues Black women. In fact, she repeatedly punctuates her speech with the question, "Ain't I A Woman?" and, in essence, is pointing out that she and other Black women are indeed women, and equals to white women. Therefore, their humanity should also be recognized. Sojourner Truth delivered this speech during a time when women's suffrage and other empowerment movements were beginning to take root; however, these movements almost always focused on solidarity and the rights of white women only. At times, the exclusion or undeniable racism was quite blatant. This difficult dance of sisterhood was continued into the 20th century, particularly during the 1960s, when the feminist movement re-emerged. However, the racism that Black women experienced was more subtle and structural in nature. A number of Black women were invited to engage in the movement and women's studies courses only to discover they were treated as tokens.

Much of these frustrations with inherent racism, classism, etc. in the feminist movement and women's studies exploded, and were explored during the first National Women's Studies Association Conference held in 1979 in Lawrence, Kansas. Barbara Smith, an attendee of that Conference shared the following during her address:

Although my proposed topic is black women's studies, I have decided to focus my remarks in a different way. Given that this is a gathering of predominantly white women and given what has occurred during this conference, it makes much more sense to discuss the issue of racism: racism in women's studies and racism in the women's movement generally." Oh no, "I can hear some of you groaning inwardly. Not that again. That's all we've talked about since we got here." This of course is not true. If it had been all we had all talked about since we got here, we might be at a point of radical transformation on the last day of this Conference that we clearly are not.

For those of you who are tired of hearing about racism, imagine how much more tired we are of constantly experiencing it, second by literal second, how much more exhausted we are to see it constantly in your eyes. The degree to which it is hard or uncomfortable for you to have the issue raised is the degree to which you know inside of yourselves that you aren't dealing with the issue, the degree to which you are hiding from the oppression that undermines Third World women's lives. I want to say right here that this is not a "guilt trip." It's a fact trip. The assessment of what's actually going on. [6]

Barbara's calls for the honest discussion of racism apparently went unheard by many of the majority-white female audience that she spoke to, and feminists as a whole. This disregard became quite apparent during a NWSA's Conference that took place much later, in 1990, in Akron, Ohio. Viewed as a watershed moment, over a hundred women of color and their allies got up and walked out of the Conference in protest to the entrenched and continued racism existing within the movement. Again, the concerns and viewpoints of Black women, and other women of color, were relegated to the margins. The fundamental issue was that the experiences of white, middle class women were viewed as the universal experience of women, without any considerations for race, class, sexuality, and so on. Compounding this problem was/is that many white women operate, often times unknowingly, from this point of privilege. The walk-out signified the frustration of having to educate another group about the privilege they enjoy (in this case, racial privilege), and having to deal with their discomfort and push-back in the process.

Just last year (yes, this is still an issue in 2013), the issue grabbed national headlines during a two-day Twitter campaign on the topic #SolidarityIsForWhiteWomen. Writer Mikki Kendall started the hash tag during a discussion about Hugo Schwyzer, who gained notoriety for being an admitted manipulator and antagonizer of women, especially women of color. So, what was the problem? Well, a number of white women rushed in to defend Schwyzer after he claimed he was being bullied and attacked. In other words, so much for sisterhood and solidarity. Women of color watched, and later reacted to, the actions of their "sisters," and these actions once again made it clear that white women's issues and stances continued to be a priority over women of color; and yes, true solidarity was/is for white women. In an article for The Guardian, Mikki explained the following regarding the controversy, "It appeared that these feminists were, once again, dismissing women of color (WOC) in favor of a brand of solidarity that centers on the safety and comfort of white women. For it to be at the expense of people who were doing the same work was exceptionally aggravating." Black women and the issues that directly impacted them (such as racism) were again being shout out, silenced, ignored, and marginalized by white women's positions of privilege in feminism.

The trending topic #SolidarityIsForWhiteWomen quickly spread to other media platforms, and women shared the following sentiments on Twitter:

Ayesha A. Siddiqi (@pushinghoops) August 12, 2013

#SolidarityIsForWhiteWomen when you idolize Susan B. Anthony & claim her racism didn't matter.

Mikki Kendall (@Karnythia) August 12, 2013

#SolidarityIsForWhiteWomen when "sexpositivity" never includes women of color.

SaltedCarmelSouthron (@deluxvivens) August 12, 2013

#SolidarityIsForWhiteWomen white feminists get seen as 'heroes' for starting feminist societies, but WOCs are brushed off as 'aggressive'

Angry Black Fangirl (@TheAngryFangirl) August 13, 2013

I know #SolidarityIsForWhiteWomen when any critique of white privilege in feminism is written off as "racist" and "divisive."

Cabbage Patch Ninja (@thewayoftheld) August 13, 2013

#SolidarityIsForWhiteWomen means criticizing Beyonce for wearing onesies while applauding Lena Dunham for going topless.

Rania Khalek (@RaniaKhalek) August 15, 2013

SolidarityIsForWhiteWomen on display: Alice Walker disinvited from U of Michigan's women center 4 Israel comments.

Ebony in Inwood (@TheRealMsMurphy) February 22, 2014

@TheRealRoseanne supports Tommy Sotomayor's black woman hatred and calls ME a bigot. Isn't that cute? #solidarityisforwhitewomen

Intersectionality

When considering their daily interactions, as well as academic and professional experiences, it became apparent that is difficult, or impossible, for Black women to separate race from class and sex oppression, because they experience them simultaneously. Kimberle Crenshaw coined the term "Intersectionality" to describe this phenomenon. Patricia Hill Collins, in her groundbreaking book, Black Feminist Thought, explains why the theory of Intersectionality is central to Black feminist thought: "Black feminist thought fosters a fundamental paradigmatic shift in how we think about oppression. By embracing a paradigm of race, class, and gender as interlocking systems of oppression, Black feminist thought re conceptualizes the social relations of domination and resistance."[7] Thus, in considering intersectionality, Black feminist thought makes it clear that Black women do not have the luxury of focusing on issues of gender oppression, in comparison to their white counterparts. Instead, they must be equally, or more so, vigilant on issues of race, class, sexuality, etc. that is tied to separate means of oppression and discrimination.

For instance, consider the following:

26.5% of African American women are poor, compared to 22.3% African American men, 11.6% of white women, and 9.4% of white men. [8] Thus, Black women are twice as likely as white women to be living in poverty, a fact that creates a different set and larger amount of challenges and obstacles in life. Further, white woman are more likely to be tied to white men, those with the greatest degree of social equity and lowest rates of poverty, which allows them to benefit from the higher degree of privilege experienced by their male counterparts. Understandably, the concerns between the two groups of women will be different.

Black women and other women of color have been historically failed and ostracized by the communities which they identify with, whether based on race/ethnicity or gender. The extent of this failure could easily be discerned by simply looking at the nation's health indicators. African American women have much higher rates of disease prevalence and mortality than Caucasian women - differences which are not purely explained by genetic and physiology factors. Instead, the differences are mostly due to socio-economic conditions (again varying intersectional factors) within the built environment. In comparison to Caucasian women, more women of color live in low income and impoverished areas; and this lack of resources and access to health services - especially preventative care, nutritional foods, safe living conditions, and employment opportunities - help to account for the great health inequities. Consequently, the question of whether feminism and women studies have any real benefit to Black women, on the surface, seems valid. However, within their own ethnic and racially-identified communities, Black women and other women of color continue to face abject sexism and cultural norms that reinforce their positions of inferiority; and these circumstances stand as testimony to the need for women of color to be actively involved in feminism/womanism.

What about Our Daughters?

"White girls don't call their men 'brothers' - and that made their struggle enviably simpler than mine. Racism and the will to survive, it creates a sense of intra-racial loyalty that makes it impossible for black women to turn our backs on black men - even in their ugliest and most sexist of moments. I needed a feminism that would allow us to continue loving ourselves and the brothers who hurt us without letting race loyalty buy us early tombstones," [9] shares Joan Morgan in her book, When Chickenheads Come Home To Roost. Joan's statement helps to explain the paradox of loyalty-and-priority that black women face. While racial oppression has forced black women to constantly rally around black men, reciprocity is often not carried out. Due to "loyalty," black women are expected to accept these unfair circumstances, and in fact address those who often act as their oppressor as "brotha." Even in the rhetoric of the Black Liberation movements, race was tremendously sexualized and freedom itself was equated with manhood; and this continues to be the case. When there was talk about "The Man," it was primarily due to frustrations of Black men who wanted to switch places with that oppressor so that he could be as dominant; which, again, leaves Black women in a position of subjugation. These sentiments continue today, where Black men continue to view the loss of manhood as the real tragedy of racism, and openly accuse Black women of assisting in the emasculation of Black men. For Black women are expected to "hold a brotha down," even when there is no reciprocity for her actions. Black feminism provides the means to point out these double-standards and hypocrisies.

Pioneering Black feminists and women's suffragists, Frances Ellen Watkins Harper, expressed this cautionary statement about the need for Black women to be empowered and guaranteed the same rights of men, particularly Black men, whose liberation is not tied to Black women's:

There is a great stir bout colored men getting their rights, but not a word about the colored women; and if colored men get their rights and not colored women theirs, the colored men will be masters over the women, and it will be just as bad as it was before. So, I am keeping the thing going while things are stirring; because if we wait till it is still, it will take a great while to get it going again.

- Frances Ellen Watkins Harper, 1867 AERA Meeting

Her warnings essentially foreshadowed exactly what would begin to manifest in the later Black liberation movements, within the Black church, and within the Black community; the accepted subjugation and disrespect of Black women. As of recent, there have finally been honest discussions about Black men failing to "Show Up" for Black women.

In her article, On Black Men Showing Up for Black Women at the Scene of the Crime , a Crunk Feminist Collective contributor recounted her experience on a panel that included a white woman and Black man, where her questions and prodding of this man to provide a deeper analysis of gender dynamics, instead of his repeated statement about "what he had done for us [women]," resulted in her being cut off, yelled at, publicly humiliated, frightened (by his towering frame), and with her face and clothing soaking wet by the cup of water the man threw at her during his abrupt departure. The most interesting or worrisome and sad part about her ordeal is that no one, not even the other Black women in the room (who of course have been programmed to accept this behavior and only rally for Black men in need) readily stepped in or stood up to defend her. In considering her ordeal, one has to ask whether those who witnessed the exchange truly believe she deserved this treatment due to her audacity to question a Black man's authority, to challenge him to admit there is rampant sexism in our communities, and for not remaining silent.

Yet, similar scenes are played out on street corners and other areas every day; and, again, no one, particularly no Black man Shows Up in defense of Black women. Just consider the historical epidemic of Street harassment, where for generations Black girls and women have to cope with cat-calling, uninvited conversations, being stared at, taunted, and touched by random Black men as they attempt to navigate city streets. Regardless of how offensive the act, or whether or not they are actually interested in these men who cross their paths, they are expected to accept the behavior, to feign some sort of appreciation for the unsolicited compliments, and, above all, smile through the ordeal and refrain from challenging these men, unless they want to be victimized - whether verbally or physically. These situations are played out daily - and often, when a Black girl or woman finds herself in this predicament, she quickly realizes that the other Black men who are witnessing the behavior will not Show Up in her defense. Proving that #SolidarityIsAlsoForBlackMen.

While Black women have traditionally taken to the streets to rally against forces of oppression that harm Black men and boys, the same amount of fervor is not given to them in return. The focus continues to be on Black men and boys - leaving many to ask, What About Our Daughters? A website with this name launched in April 2007 in response to the Oprah Winfrey Show episode entitled, "After Imus: Now What?," which focused on the infamous "nappy headed hoes" remark made by radio commentator Don Imus. Adding fuel to the fire were the distasteful comments, under the guise of comedy, made by comedian-actor DL Hugley. The mission of the website is as such, "Unapologetic, uncompromising, and unbowed in defense of Black women and girls." In other words, the website steps forward to fill a gap - to uplift and protect Black women and girls from the constant waves of oppression, discrimination, and prevalence of destructive images of Black womanhood.

Further, those who have assisted in creating and disseminating much of these negative images of Black womanhood have unfortunately been Black men. It is Black men who have helped to make the terminology and images of the "sassy, lazy, over-sexed, ratchet, Black vixen…ho, slut, bitch" popular and ubiquitous globally, which, contrary to misconceptions, started before the hip hop generation. During the Blaxploitation era, Black women were still portrayed as hyper-sexual caricatures and prostitutes, while pimps were celebrated as pop culture figures.

It is not difficult to trace the continuation of pimp/misogynistic culture from the 1970s to the present, particularly when looking at hip hop. Jay Z boastfully rapped about Big Pimpin', Bishop Don Juan, dressed in his stereotypical pimp attire, became part of Snoop Dog's entourage, Snoop's mannerisms and speech have always been reminiscent of the celebrated pimps, and Three 6 Mafia's "It's Hard Out Here For A Pimp," part of the Hustle & Flow soundtrack, even won an Oscar for best original song. Indeed, the pimp culture has ingrained itself in Black culture, and this is problematic because it represents the celebration of a figure whose "job description" is controlling, using, and often abusing women. Therefore, pimp culture is nothing more than a means to protect and celebrate the "Black Macho." It is for this reason why, despite wanting to address the issue of cultural appropriation, Black women, and particularly Black feminists, found it difficult to stand in solidarity with Black men who were angered over Seattle, Washington born-and-bred, Caucasian rapper, Macklemore, winning "best rap album" at the 2014 Grammy Awards. Instead, they were forced to be honest with themselves and admit they could appreciate a rap/hip hop album that wasn't filled with misogynistic lyrics that caused them to flinch each time their favorite rapper called women "bitches" and "hoes" - or described them as nothing more than conquests. As pointed out in the viral article, " Why Macklemore Beat Your Favorite Rapper ," Macklemore actually presented music that was void of hyper-consumerism and the glorification of luxury and material items, and instead touched on topics of social justice.

The Numbers - #BlackPowerIsForBlackMen

The fact that Black women have been taught, or arguably programmed, to constantly protect and Show Up for Black men results in them having to be silent about their own abuse and oppression. It has to do with the push-pull historical factors of prioritizing race or gender. Essentially, Black women are typically unwilling to "offer up" yet another Black man to a system they know to be corrupt and unjust, even when they are victimized by the same Black man. This is one of the many ways that Black women Show Up for Black men.

The Truth - across the board, Black women have the highest rates of victimization of rape, intimate partner violence (or domestic violence) and homicide, and their attackers are usually Black men - not surprising, since most cases of violence are intra-racial:

• Black females experience intimate partner violence at a rate 35% higher than that of white females, and about 22 times the rate of women of other races. [10]

• African-American women experience significantly more domestic violence than White women in the age group of 20-24. [11]

• Approximately 40% of Black women report coercive contact of a sexual nature by age 18. [12]

• The number one killer of African-American women ages 15 to 34 is homicide at the hands of a current or former intimate partner. [12]

• Black females made up 35% (or 1,200) of the nearly 3,500 female homicide victims. [13]

• In 2005, most homicides involving one victim and one offender were intra-racial. [13]

• In a study of African-American sexual assault survivors, only 17% reported the assault to police. [12]

• For every white woman that reports her rape, at least 5 white women do not report theirs; and yet, for every African-American woman that reports her rape, at least 15 African-American women do not report theirs. [13]

It is on these issues - harassment, abuse, and violence - that Black feminists and Black women in general truly need the support of male allies. When looking at these statistics, the relevancy and need for Black feminism cannot be denied or dismissed. In her article, Why #BlackPowerIsforBlackMen: Exploring Intragroup Domestic Violence , Bea Hilton, intersectional activist and founder of the Freedom Project, eloquently shares the following sentiments: "It is imperative that Black men unpack their privilege and begin to accept these truisms not as betrayal, personal attacks or attempts at emasculation, but as acts of self-love, as steps toward a more equal and peaceful reality."

In an attempt to address this hypocrisy and inequality, the hashtag #BlackPowerisforBlackMen was created, and the posted comments provided concrete examples as to why this continues to be the case:

FilthyFreedom @Filthy Freedom August 14, 2013

#BlackPowerisforBlackMen because reporting domestic abuse also means serving up another black man to an unjust system - & - u don't get that

Zellie @Zelliemani August 14, 2013

#BlackPowerisforBlackMen because black on black violence never includes sexual violence against women

KayJacks RT @ RobinDGKelley February 25, 2014

#BlackPowerIsForBlackMen When we can name Emmett Till but can't name Addie Mae Collins, Denise McNair, Carole Robertson…

GRSurvivingRape : RT @ BlackCanseco I got nuthin. Thx @ UncleRush RT @ LurieDFavors #blackpowerisforblackmen when female slave rape parodies are mass marketed.…

Posted in regards to Russell Simmons' endorsement

GRSurvivingRape : RT @ nealcarter : Another "black america" panel, without one black women's voice http://t.co/cY25ytPnaD #blackpowerisforblackmen

Posted in regards to this:

Auset93 : RT @ thembithembi: #blackpowerisforblackmen when we agreed that Trayvon was no thug but divided on whether Rachel Jeantel had an "attitude" …

@_theELLE_ # blackpowerisforblackmen when a Black man's way of uplifting Black women is writing a book telling her what she needs to change to get a man

Demetria Lucas @abelleinbk RT @ GradientLair: # blackpowerisforblackmen When Stop & Frisk is deemed wrong, yet BM street harass me 10-75 a week for TWENTY YEARS

Essentially, Black feminism, which advocates for the removal of all systems of oppression, is a means to truly bring about solidarity within the Black community - a solidarity that does not depend upon the subjugation of one group in order to uplift and coddle another.

Conclusive Statements

Black feminism continues to remain relevant for a plethora of factors, including the fact that Black women are often asked to choose a side or are shamed into putting race and ethnicity over their gender; and, for this reason, many of them shy away from the title, feminist, instead accepting the more appropriate title, Womanist. From the beginning, the Black women who took part in the Black liberation movements (Civil Rights, Black Power), the Suffrage movement, and Women's movement, were often discriminated against sexually and racially. Anna Julia Cooper, a Black woman who was also a staunch suffragists, is best known for the statement, "Only the BLACK WOMAN can say when and where I enter in the quiet undisputed dignity of my womanhood, without violence or special patronage; then and there the whole Negro race enters with me." Rightfully, Cooper believed and was particularly effective in emphasizing to Black women the fact that their access to the ballot and right to vote was important for their own determination, and crucial to ensure their needs were addressed; instead of the erroneous belief that Black men's experiences and needs were the same as theirs.

Nevertheless, Black feminists continue to be reminded by men of color, and to some extent White feminists, that the Feminist movement is also a place of inequality and privilege. White women were and continue to be the greatest beneficiaries of the Feminist movement - a fact that cannot be ignored, as it is often thrown in the face of Black women and other women of color who attempt to assert themselves as being women who are also interested in gender equality. Ultimately, white feminists are not burdened by the additional barriers of racism and prejudice; such as the anxiety African American female job seekers face when it comes to how they wear their hair, particularly if it is natural, and whether or not their hairstyle will disqualify them as a job candidate.

Black women have to cope with a multitude of these intersecting factors, as well as the intra-racial issues with sexism, misogyny, abuse, and violence. For this reason, True solidarity and Black liberation will not be brought about by mimicking the patriarchal system of the broader society and replacing one oppressor (white male) with another (black male). Instead, it depends on the removal of all forms of oppression, particularly gender oppression, which Black feminism works towards.

The following sentiments of Huey P. Newton, co-founder of the Black Panther Party, speaks to the fact that continued support and acceptance of oppression and discrimination cannot be viewed as revolutionary, or as any part of a revolutionary values system:

Remember, we have not established a revolutionary value system; we are only in the process of establishing it. I do not remember our ever constituting any value that said that a revolutionary must say offensive things towards homosexuals, or that a revolutionary should make sure that women do not speak out about their own particular kind of oppression. As a matter of fact, it is just the opposite: we say that we recognize the women's right to be free. [14]

Thus, the purpose of Black feminism is the development of theory which can adequately address the way race, gender, and class are interconnected in our lives, in order to take action to stop racist, sexist, and classist discrimination. In the end, Black women's strength does not equal the emasculation of Black men; and Black women's subjugation is not a requirement for Black men to be men.

References

Wallace, M. Black Macho and the Myth of the Superwoman. Verso Books: New York; 1999.

La Rue, L. The Black Movement and Women's Liberation, Black Women's Manifesto. The Black Scholar, Vol. I. May, 1970. p.42 http://library.duke.edu/rubenstein/scriptorium/wlm/blkmanif/

But Some of Us Are Brave: A History of Black Feminism in the United States. Retrieved from: http://www.mit.edu/~thistle/v9/9.01/6blackf.html

Dyson, Michael Eric. I May Not Get There With You: The True Martin Luther King, Jr. Free Press: New York, 2000.

Zoharah-Simmons, G. Martin Luther King Jr. Revisited a black power feminist pays homage to the king. Journal of Feminist Studies in Religion. 2008; 24(2):189-213

Smith, Barbara. Racism and Women's Studies. Frontiers: A Journal of Women Studies. 1980; National Women's Studies Association: Selected Conference Proceedings. 5(1):48-49.

Collins P. Black Feminist Thought: Knowledge, Consciousness, and the Politics of Empowerment. Routledge: New York 1990.

Cawthorne, A. The straight facts on women in poverty. American Progress. 2008. Retrieved from: http://www.americanprogress.org/wp-content/uploads/issues/2008/10/pdf/women_poverty.pdf Sterling D. We are your sisters: Black women in the nineteenth century. New York: W.W. Norton and Company, 1984.

Morgan, J. When Chickenheads Come Home to Roost: A Hip-Hop Feminist Breaks It Down. Simon & Schuster: NY, 1999.

Callie Marie Rennison. and Sarah Welchans, U.S. Dep't of Just., NCJ 178247, Intimate Partner Violence (2000), available at http://www.ojp.usdoj.gov/bjs/pub/ascii/ipv.txt

Callie Marie Rennison, U.S. Dep't of Just., NCJ 187635, Intimate Partner Violence and Age of Victim, 1993-1999, at 4, (2001), available at http://www.ojp.usdoj.gov/bjs/abstract/ipva99.htm

Africana Voices Against Violence, Tufts University, Statistics, 2002, www.ase.tufts.edu/womenscenter/peace/africana/newsite/statistics.htm

Harrell, E. Bureau of Justice Statistics Special Report: Black Victims of Violent Crime. US Department of Justice. Office of Justice Programs. 2007, NCJ 214258. Retrieved from: http://www.bjs.gov/content/pub/pdf/bvvc.pdf

Newton HP. A Black Panther's view in 1970. Retrieved at http://www.workers.org/2012/us/huey_p_newton_0524/