To the queer feminist this may concern: an open letter on the political and personal of White-supremacy

(This is the open letter I briefly showed during my blog presentation in class. It slightly requires an understanding of critical race (and) feminist thought.)


To the queer feminist this may concern: an open letter on the political and personal of White-supremacy






I unsympathetically ended any personal involvement we had as friends, due to the incidences that transpired in the last several months leading up to this. I will not write casually for I feel that is something that transits in a purely personal issue, however this is the age old feminist issue that White feminist have overlooked, misread or been ignorant towards: not only is the personal political, the political is personal. I wish for you to understand the events not as personal issues, but political issues that are personal.

In on start it was the attempt to save another relationship, and then situate its demise, was what we discussed over. However, actions that privileged 'White ignorance' (virtue) over the pain it inflicted to those racialized (long before us, before are voices) was then reified. When one individual had made 'knowingly ignorant' racist remarks and then retracted and apologized for them as inappropriate and “wrong”, there was an affirmation of a consensus against racist remarks, an affirmation that is so insignificant. Upon discussion there was a negation to view or even acknowledge the remarks beyond its ignorance to an understanding of White-supremacist history and mindset. Why was there an expectation that referring to racist remarks as ignorant, already socially and culturally affirmed as such, was progressive towards anything? Is it that the most willing dialogue from White voices whom made racial remarks are based on an already established consensus? I found it striking that both yourself and the other individual attempted to use your position as having had intimate relationships with people of color in order to privilege then negate your own racist White-supremacy within your actions. The only thing that arose was that “we” might be 'good enough to fuck'. Which means little to nothing (positively) seeing as how this has held consensus by White patriarchs during imperialism and slavery to seemingly present; however, it does much to advance the negative in that our bodies have again been positioned as new object, objects to hold relationships with, objects nonetheless.

In aftermath of the remarks it was suggested that I should “teach him” or “explain to you”, what had been done or what hurt was inflicted upon myself, and others. Yet the issues had again become White-supremacist, in that the issue had become re-centered as your needs had become most significant. Somehow his hurt from being exposed from his racial-neutrality (in both the raceless of Whiteness and the privileged voice of neutrality he had taken up) had taken precedence over the racialized hurt it inflicted. How did we allow for the re-privileging of racist voices and the hurt inflict by their exposition? Why had I again become a racialized object, this time an educational object one to teach the oppressor, why do the needs of the oppressed become secondary even after the admission of racial insensitivity, or is it admission that is an allowance of a clean slate. How can the White-supremacy within this be so oblivious: white voices taking it upon themselves to declare incidences or voices (including one’s own) to not be White-supremacist.

Why in the aftermath, when I clearly declared your perception ‘White-supremacist’ did you confide in more White voices, is the oblivion so wound up that you could not see the 'Whitening processes' of affirming your non-White-supremacy by other White voices. I had been bewildered in the allegiances you took with the individual who self-devolved himself of any racist implications. I had originally and reluctantly taken up your thought that you simply had a stronger personal friendship, yet as a feminist how would these political implications become ignored. I soon recognized that what had transpired was not only allegiances of the personal but allegiances of the political. If we were all brothers and sisters of the queer movement then let me reiterate the voices from a number of women of color: any analysis absent due to withstanding of only the 'privileged' to speak of certain forms of domination is incomplete, as are they a reliance on the patriarchal system for their support and legitimacy. When you had taken sides it was not that you taken sides with one queer brother over another it is that you chose sides with your 'equivalency in White' brother. I appreciate your call to hear my voice, but again am reluctant to assume significance in speaking again. I hope you can conceptualize and understand what I have said in both the “political” and “personal” realms as carefully as I have done with what you had said.