When professional black women are called whores for expecting to be paid for their work.

It has happened again. Another black professional woman has been called a whore because she expected GASP to be PAID for her work (see it posted on Sean Carroll's blog here). She expected to be paid because she is a professional and professionals are compensated for their work. I emphasize professional because having a degree and titles doesn't mean jack shit if you're a black woman wanting remuneration. Apparently a certain person named Ofek at Biology-Online.Org felt Dr. Danielle Lee (aka DNLee) should have been grateful to have been offered a writing stint for exposure to their readers and not coins. It was not enough that they offered her a writing opportunity but when she politely declined (which she had every right to do even if they HAD offered payment because hell, this is America, for God's sake), Ofek called her a whore because she had the gall to want to be paid for her writing.

This is not new. A lot of people bristled at the sexist term "whore" and which I do as well, but this is part of a larger narrative that women, particularly BLACK women are whores for thinking of their financial security and the fact that anyone wants to deal with us should make us flat out GRATEFUL and instead we're just bitter. The fact that Ofek didn't want to pay her and actually cited to another scientist who wrote for them without payment did not sit well with me. For one, what someone else does or did gratis has nothing to do with HER. Two, black women's labor has been exploited for centuries and people continue to think they do not have to pay black women for their work. My grandmother cleaned houses in the 1940s and had to argue with heffas who wanted to pay her in eggs and butter instead of cash because well, she was lucky to be paid ANYTHING in their minds. And that's the view a lot of of people have: DNLee should have been grateful that someone was offering her exposure in the first place; she fucked it all up by asking to be paid.

To be frank, I'm surprised Ofek didn't call her an uppity whore because the sentiment was written all over his response.

White middle class feminists continue the practice of co-opting

the experiences of poor and people of color (PoC) that is. This insidious ploy to gain street cred is nauseating at best and infuriating at worst. White middle class feminists want to be relatable, they want a cause to perpetuate and so many of them feel that they only can do this by co-opting the experiences of other people as their own. Let me qualify that. I should say cis-gendered middle class white feminists do this. They take the fact that they may have grown up around impoverished people as evidence that THEY understand poverty and some even go so far as to claim they were poor growing up too. Some cite having grown up in notorious cities to show they get inner city crime while failing to point out that they lived in the "nice" part of town where drive-bys were unheard of. Fighting patriarchy on their front isn't enough for them; they have try to fight the battles of POC too in the patronizing manner because they get you. They get IT. Because white cis gendered middle class feminists are second to white men as the masters of the universe. God save me from white mainstream feminism.

Holding my tongue.

Holding my tongue has seemed to be my legacy as a black woman. Black women sit silently and suffer the abuse and degradation experienced at home, in the workplace, walking down the street, hell, by just EXISTING. We are considered by many the lowest on the totem pole (even by black men no less) and do not have the luxury or privilege of expressing true emotion lest we be labeled "angry," "difficult," "unruly," "unfeminine," etc. WE are threatening and hostile unless we are smiling, happy and gay at all times.

Working in the professional semi-corporate and corporate world over the last ten years made that abundantly clear. I have been fired from jobs where I was incredibly competent and qualified because I was not viewed as a team player and was difficult to work with. I was labeled this  for a number of actions that when committed by black women are viewed as grave offenses. When I came through the office in the morning, if I did not say good morning first or say hello first, I was considered unfriendly. White women who came in after me and didn't speak to me first or say hello first were not. If I wasn't smiling constantly, I was in a bad mood. Yet white women in my office who hardly smiled at all were not deemed so. If I'm in court and taking care of business for my clients and not chit chatting with my colleagues, I'm anti-social. White women who do the same are not.

Holding my tongue is often strategic. And I continually have to be shit on because we live in a world where I literally cannot get shit done unless I'm going out of my way to let someone else shit on me. Case in point: The other day I called opposing counsel, an older white man, to inquire if we could settle the case in a particular manner. He emailed me and after starting his email with a version of "I'm not coming at you through the lens of patriarchal white male privilege so don't take it that way" proceeded to spew his patriarchal white male privilege all over that email and shit on me. I cannot imagine that this man would have emailed another white man or even black man for that matter taking them to task for how they run THEIR business, criticizing their office procedures, their voicemail set up and mock their manner of speaking (he actually referred to my concise statement about the subject of my call as "hemming and hawing") over the course of two full paragraphs before getting down to business. Yes. He did that.

And I as looked at that email and hit reply, I had to really consider how I was going to respond. If I was going to call him out for shitting on me or if I was just going to keep my mouth shut because I needed him to agree to settle on this case and didn't trust that he could remain professional; afterall, he did just send me that email which aside from being unprofessional was also inappropriate, unwelcome, offensive and insulting to me as a colleague and as a black woman. He knew exactly what he was doing. And once again, I would have to hold my tongue.

On black male patriarchy.

Black male patriarchy is a motherfucker. Maybe because so often so many black men deny their own misogyny toward black women. The notion that black women are responsible for the destruction of black families, black homes and the emasculation of black men is rooted in a deep hatred and disdain of black women, female power and agency. There is really no other explanation. At the same time that black women are denigrated, patriarchal black males deflect attention from themselves and deny any responsibility for the sexism that helps to beat down black women. To further deny culpability patriarchal black men iterate the strong black woman mythos as a testament to what black women have endured against all odds. Yet they stop short of acknowledging that much of what black women endure is the shit patriarchal black men flung at them. By this refusal to acknowledge the depth of the pain black women feel from their own black men, patriarchal black  have again demonstrated that they do not love or respect black women.

To patriarchal black men, black women are here to service them sexually on demand, feed the children they have, bring home money to help support your lifestyle, keep their house clean and be submissive. While patriarchal black men are proclaiming that they are the "kings of their castle," they are busy abdicating their patriarchal dictated responsibilities (like financially supporting their family for instance).

Over the last couple of days, #blackpowerisforblackmen has been trending and has been a way for black women to vocalize the sexism and misogyny they are subjected to from black men on a daily basis. It was a cathartic experience watching the stories of black women from varying backgrounds unfold on the screen. And yet patriarchal black men had to step in with the bullshit. But they also didn't tell us anything we didn't already know about them. Those who have power, no matter how much or little, are loathe to give it up. And oppressing of others is a very cheap way to empower oneself but feels and appears to very effective.

So patriarchal black men can kick rocks. They can kiss my ass. They can go to hell. There is real work to done because these battles are real and no one has time for foolishness. Thus, my new mantra: Do your work or get the fuck out of the way.

Did you know that....

Congress has voted to repeal the Affordable Care Act 40 times? Your tax dollars work.

White people be like: talking about racism is racist!

I seriously debated whether I wanted to discuss this via this medium right here but since that's the purpose of Mother Dean Says I'm gonna speak on it. The idea that black people or any people of color talking about racism is racist drives me up the fucking wall. The fucking wall. Apparently scores of white people took umbrage at the Ebony magazine's September cover paying homage to fathers and sons who posed wearing Travyon Martin-like hoodies, a demonstration of solidarity that was powerful in its imagery as it invoked the fundamental truth that every black man and black boy is Trayvon Martin. That is, every black man and black boy is deemed a suspect and up to no good for being black. His very skin is the badge of a criminal in an America that tells black men and black boys that their blackness makes them scary, threatening and suspicious.

White people were deeply OFFENDED by this. First of all, there is nothing objectively racist about this cover. There is nothing objectively offensive in the image of a black father posing with his black son in a demonstration of the impenetrable bond between a parent and child. Secondly, the headlines "We are Trayvon" and "Save our sons" more than likely referred to the painful reality that faces black men and black boys: That they are targets and that they have been and can be killed with impunity merely due to the fact of their blackness.

And apparently it's racist to talk about that. It's racist to acknowledge the inequalities and oppression black men and black boys face because of their blackness. Because in a supposedly post-racial America, white people think merely mentioning race is playing a card, that you are invoking some sort of racist ideology because you aren't blind to the fact that you experience oppression and degradation because you are black. White people demand colorblindness from those who suffer through the injustice of being shamed FOR their color while at the same time failing to recognize that color blindness is the purest form of color consciousness. Afterall, in order to not SEE color, I have to first actively repress the color I do see and then pretend that it doesn't exist.

The problem with this view of course is that racism is actually not the recognition of color or how people experience oppression and degradation of color. It isn't racist to talk about my experiences of anti-blackness as a black woman. It isn't racist to recognize the danger black men and black boys are in due to anti-sentiment. And it's most certainly NOT racist to celebrate the bond and union between black men and black boys as sons and fathers. It just simply is not. 

Can Dads just be normal parents and not buffoons?

It is commercials like this one that make me think society has some hope of redeeming itself. Imagine, a father who is not completely incompetent as a parent, not a buffoon who changes a baby on the pristine kitchen counters and gets baby butt juice everywhere (like in a commercial Lysol did recently) and who does something as mundane and boring as LAUNDRY.

Believe it or not, I actually recorded this commercial because I am so smitten. I watch it almost daily.

What #twittersilence has to do with intersectionality.

Days after the #twittersilence campaign spearheaded by Caitlin Moran, twitter remains saturated with critiques about how misguided it was along with the occasional jokes mocking its perceived silliness. First, there were those who discounted Caitlin Moran's campaign as nonsense due to her personal beliefs, presumably derived from various tweets she's posted, mostly between two and four years ago as captured in this Storify here. I won't even get into the problems inherent in taking isolated statements out of context that someone made over four years ago and using that to articulate some sort of statement about their beliefs. Suffice it to say, I call bullshit on that one.

But there were those who actually were concerned with the overall message Caitlin Moran was conveying. Zerlina Maxwell said "#Twitter silence is what happens when people with privilege try to pretend like they don't have it. Really misguided and unhelpful." Many feminists, particularly feminists of color took issue with Caitlin Moran's stance because they were aware of the painful struggle women of color and poor women have had with the feminist movement. Women of color have fought to expand the bounds of a feminism that insists that women are a homogenous group and that the experience (and oppression thereof) of all women can be defined by women who are white and middle class. Feminists of color are deeply concerned with uncovering and exposing the different ways in which women are oppressed and the various axes of oppression. This intersectionality theory and methodology is necessary to in order to fully grasp how women experience the world and requires simultaneously an uncovering and ownership of privilege. Thus goes the critics, Caitlin Moran, a white woman with the privilege of being white, didn't understand that calling for women to silence themselves came from a position of privilege: that is, only someone who has a voice and can be heard has the power and ability to be silent. Only to someone who has been heard does silence have any power.

Now, as a feminist who is a black woman and a black woman who believes that the examination of oppression must be intersectional, I agree that Caitlin Moran certainly has privilege. At the very least, she has white and ableist privilege. She may have class privilege as well. But that isn't really the point I don't think because #twittersilence was never about silencing women in the face of oppression to begin with. #Twittersilence was effectively a boycott. Against twitter. As a way to shall we say, entice the big whigs at Twitter to take more proactive steps to protect women from abuse and rape threats they receive daily on Twitter. Something more than a "report abuse" button that is. And despite the fact that Caitlin Moran and others joining the campaign reiterated this fact several times, people still insisted that silencing is about privilege and silence does nothing to stop the abuse from happening. In other words, keeping your mouth shut isn't going to stop the misogynists and women-hating trolls from sending women rape threats. But again, the campaign for silence wasn't meant to stop the trolls per se; it was a strategy employed to send a message to Twitter that something more must done, that Twitter, the entity, the organization, cannot stand idly by while women-hating trolls utilize its platform to subject women to rape threats and other forms of abuse deeply rooted in misogyny and racism ('cause yeah some of those threats had very racist elements as well).

What could have been an effective strategy was shut down by many not because it wasn't inclusive enough. If you understood that it was a boycott directed AT Twitter we can move on from that point. #Twittersilence didn't have the impact it could have because we insisted that Caitlin Moran wasn't recognizing and owning her privilege and that she wasn't advocating an intersectional brand of feminism. We were so caught up in what kind of feminist Caitlin Moran was that we couldn't see what she was actually DOING. If an aim of intersectionality is to accurately describe the different perspectives that impact that ways in which women experience the world, then intersectional feminists should also understand that from Caitlin Moran's perspective, a boycott was a useful (and has been historically) and effective strategy. And not necessarily misguided. As intersectional feminists, we must try to understand ALL women and their brand of feminism, not just advocate ours.