I am aware of some of your claims of civil rights violations that you mention here. And hey, I might even believe that you’re telling the truth about these incidents. None of what you describe comes as a complete surprise given other incidents I’ve read about and attitudes I’ve come across. You probably didn’t read my earlier post deeply enough to note the difference between having disdain for what you’ve experienced and having disdain for the position you take regarding those of us who face different or even differently severe oppressions.
The idea that you and only you, or you and only your friends, out of all those who took part in RaceFail discussions, suffer “real” oppression while others only understand it academically is laughable. Not that you are oppressed, but that you think you are uniquely/more oppressed. If you’ve suffered civil rights violations, that does not make me happy. Being a black woman, I have experienced my share, too. It’s not something I want to happen to others, which is why I speak out and fight against oppression.
Just so we understand each other: it’s not your oppression I’m ridiculing, it’s you, specifically, and the things you say and the things you do. I’m reserving my compassion here for your children as they must have suffered a great deal going through the things you’ve laid out. You I have no compassion for.
On top of that, you once again return to your old tactic of outing in order to punish people for criticizing you. Shame, woman. Shame.
Damn, is she still at it? Geez.
*eyes popping*
And an anonymized link
http://anonym.to/?http://www.kathryncramer.com/kathryn_cramer/2009/09/a-clarification-for-k-tempest-bradford-jane-carnall-et-al.html
I am sincerely sorry she has suffered civil rights violations. I don’t want her, or anyone, to be in a situation in which they are oppressed or discriminated against as members of a marginalized group.
I don’t understand how that makes her oppression more real than mine, or how that oppression cancels out decades of discussion about said violations.
I’m also deeply confused at the retconning of the history of how civil rights have been achieved for marginalized peoples and how legal definitions of rights are not always relevant in discussions about oppression.
If someone screams racial slurs at me, does it matter if what he did was legal? Isn’t discussing “civil rights” in this situation making it more academic by making it more legalistic? Can we discuss legalism without discussing why certain groups may distrust the police?
I don’t understand how that makes her oppression more real than mine
Because in her mind, she is more real than you. I mean, she is a complete solipsist. There is no sexism in science fiction, because she says so. She is a slim blonde, because she says so. She and her fellow white women are the only people who have experienced oppression, because she says so.
Your feedback is not needed or wanted in the Cramerverse.
Excellent post! (As usual.)
Did you mean “not that you are oppressed” or “not that you are not oppressed”? I can read it either way.