sordxradical

cultural critiques + reblogs + conscious transformation

[sordxradical]

Transformations Post-Harm

I’ve been thinking a lot about how genuine transformations can happen after a person has done harm onto others. 

How to not fall into the trap of continuing to center, manipulate, vying for attention and pity? 

I am reaping what I have sowed in past years from both online and face-to-face behavior. From being combative, putting people down, and to causing real harm to people in my personal life. 

I read this recently- and i can tell that getting past step 1 is still a struggle for me. I believe that in order to stop my desire to defend myself, protect myself, to lash out- i am working on not responding. simply holding space. letting that truth exist. recognize the flurry of emotions that are happening inside me, but to have those emotions leave me, too. When I am told about what harm I did, this is not an attack on me. It’s a call for me to do better by believing others, and taking it to heart so that I do not continue. 

[sordxradical]

Babywearing & Cultural Appropriation: Selective Politics

I blogged for Decolonizing Babywearing about social justice and babywearing this past summer. 

Since then, I’ve continued my participation in various babywearing spaces on Facebook- brand-specific ‘chatter’ groups, mainstream, educative groups, social justice-“lite” babywearing spaces, anti-social justice babywearing spaces, and emerging social justice babywearing spaces. 

In many BW [babywearing] mainstream groups, the topic of cultural appropriation is still generally shut down quickly, derided, haphazardly/inefficiently challenged, or straight up neglected, met with willful ignorance that leaves many social justice-conscious BIPOC [Black, Indigenous, and Peoples of Color- a U.S. context-specific term for groups of Peoples of Color, with the conscious centralizing of Black and Indigenous peoples] babywearers to pick up the emotional scraps after being torn into. It is often a contested decision after one sees an appropriated wrap or fabric on a mei tai/SSC- do i say anything and risk being destroyed, or do i say nothing and feel like i’ve destroyed myself?

More and more, however, discussions of cultural appropriation - semi-confusingly acronymized into “CA” in those online spaces- are starting to pop up more and spread in some mainstream spaces- though it usually gets muddled with highly subjective appropriation versus “appreciation” dialogues. Though these discussions are almost guaranteed to have folks leave the group or get kicked out, the awareness is spreading. More and more people know how messed up Hoppediz is [link shows an appropriated woven wrap with an illustration of an Indigenous man’s head] Tula’s “sugar skulls” print is not okay, and that Oscha is one of the worst propagators for CA in the woven wrap world. There are many more companies on the list: some who have owned up and released statements that the specific products won’t be released again, some who know what some members of the BW have pointed out and yet still do reweaves/re-releases. This awareness is starting to spread, and those who have been doing most of the pushback, aren’t so much the only ones doing so lately. Which is good, and is a sign of growth. 

But sadly, among babywearers or BW spaces where “social justice” is occasionally or all-out made central, I am seeing more and more of a hierarchy of what is considered CA and what is “appreciation” in the BW world. where our outrage and call-outs are justified, and when it is not. When our reactions are considered inappropriate, hostile, over-the-top, unnecessary, etc., it is usually when a person’s fave is being called problematic, and somehow, brand companies become totally humanized and are warranted full defense and protection. Brand companies become the primary concern rather than taking on an honest analysis of the fringed impact their products are having on multiple marginalized communities. 

And that is where I identify that political selectivity is at play, and oftentimes oppressive olympics- hence what I mean by the emerging “CA hierarchy.” Some brands seem almost exempt from being called out, because of the ferocious fandoms that take the company’s flimsy rationales of “cultural appreciation” at face value. Even if it means destroying the potential of connecting with other babywearers who are hurting about the appropriation and exploitation they are seeing. When those brand owners are white themselves, it takes on a deeper meaning when that decision is made. Hint: white supremacy. 

What does it mean when we encourage and enforce a hierarchy of what kind of exploitation and oppression is more real than others? It means that we are continuing to sever the roots of BIPOC cultures from modern-day babywearing practices. It means that cross-solidarity among BIPOC babywearers either become or remain fractured and strife with pain and internalized oppressive actions. It means that “solidarity” is just a feel-good buzzword we throw out here and there. Seriously. Social justice inconsistency means that someone is still getting fucked over. 

My argument is this: social justice politics and principles have to be consistent to * actually be social justice.* I believe there is such a thing as authentic social justice- the social justice where we make sure that we address all forms of power/privilege/oppression, in both others and ourselves- and that this net we cast to understand all forms will be wide and ever expanding. We have to make sure that we dismantle this emerging hierarchy about what CA “is” or “isn’t.” We have to make sure ALL BIPOC groups are afforded the same outrage, pushback, call-outs when their cultural products and textiles are decontextualized, appropriated, marketed for profit, without permission or ownership. Our frameworks have to be even, and not selective. This is how we can make sure we are genuinely reconciling social justice and modern babywearing. 

Social justice is hard work. It’s risky, it’s not fun most of the time, it exhausts you. But I do it so that there is less work for future generations. Even if it means having to be brandished as a wet blanket, I have to continue to name the inconsistencies and dangerous selective politics. What will you do now to make sure we are working towards centralizing people and populations who are exploited in modern day babywearing textiles and products? 

-Elena MF Ruiz-Williams, 2015

[sordxradical]

Reconciling Social Justice and Babywearing

Cross-published here on July 20, 2015. 

~

Hello! I’m a multiracial/ethnic Latinx Deaf PanQueer Femme. Prior to becoming pregnant and becoming a mother, I had identified as an intersectional social justice activist for several years. Intersectional social justice is infused in my personal and professional lives, but not without cost. I’ve faced professional repercussions for my involvement in social justice, and I’ve went from being a social butterfly to someone who carefully cultivates a small circle of chosen family and friends who share similar liberation politics. But social justice frameworks of understanding and analyzing the world has remained steadfast for me, with the frameworks continuing to expand and become more complex over time. I have always thought of raising children as creating agents of change for future generations; and that’s the main principle that guides me as a parent. Though my LO is now only a few months old, I continue to keep imagining ways I can raise consciousness as our child grows up, with empathy, compassion, and prioritizing the liberation of self and others.

My descent into BW was not expected. My LO was born in early March, and during pregnancy I figured that my mamihood obsession was going to be cloth diapering, and worked to build up a stash. I obliged with accepting some secondhand stretchy wraps, but neatly rolled them up and put them in a box in the baby’s dresser and ignored them. It was not until I grudgingly attended a local cloth diapering event, after realizing that I didn’t have the patience or perseverance to cloth diaper, that I asked for a woven wrap demo, and was taught one with a volunteer sign-language interpreter present (a rarity to have such access at events, which I hope to get into in another post).

Back at home, I practiced a bit with the Moby some more, with the sling, and a few more times with the Lenny Lamb wrap I bought at the cloth diaper event. Wanting to geek out on Lenny Lamb, I went on their website and… ahem. Saw their calavera wrap designs. I froze. I’m Latina. Día de Los Muertos is sacred to me. Anti-cultural appropriation is a major family value of ours. But now I owned an item from a company that culturally appropriates. What do I do? That was the first signal that I was getting myself into something completely different than the “SJ world” I created for myself and am trying to create for my growing family. Based on my brief personal experiences and observations, here are some main things I’ve noticed about BW in the U.S. that comes in direct conflict with my SJ values.

Cultural Appropriation

This topic is definitely discussed in some BW spaces, but not enough. And, of course, any CA discussion brings in the chorus of It’s not theft, it’s INSPIRATION! Racism isn’t a real thing. Race has nothing to do with BW. But I think it’s pretty! So I’m a bad person because I like my Oscha?

A remaining aspect that still feels problematic to me is the practice of: “this person from x group created this textile, so we can now wear it and it is not CA.” Here are some of my thoughts on this:

- Ownership, permission, and sharing are main tenets of anti-CA practices. Honoring the ownership of the products, belief of a marginalized group; being granted permission to use/carry out said products/beliefs; and there being a spirit of sharing AFTER ownership was honored/recognized/credited and permission was granted.

-When we have a wrap created by person of x group, it seems at first glance that there is ownership/permission/sharing. I offer: if a person from a privileged group - y group- responsible for the systematic marginalization of people from x group wears a wrap with a pattern created by a person of x group, does that not perpetuate the practice of people from y groups wearing alllll the wraps of allll the marginalized groups? I feel it is too easy for me to go to a BW meetup with a wrap with textiles not from my own cultural group, and for a BWer with no desire to learn about CA politics and anti-racism to go, “hey that is super pretty! I’m gonna add to my extensive appropriated wrap collection now!” In this instance, it becomes clear that ownership/permission/sharing becomes easily lost in a large, competitive market like BW and woven wraps. Most people are gonna be assholes about CA and actively resist and gaslight people who speak out against CA. Therefore, how sustainable is it for us to wear textiles created/inspired by from groups that aren’t our own, if it may indirectly perpetuate CA in other instances?

But to complicate the narrative: at the same time, if we see European brands -cough cough Natibaby cough cough Hoppediz- actively exploit marginalized groups without ownership/permission/sharing, why wouldn’t we support a member of x group creating something from their heritages, because it’s better than a mega-business/corporation completely stealing from their cultural groups? My kneejerk reaction would be, of course! I’d rather support the person from x group’s creation and products rather than exploitative mega businesses who have no interest in collaborating with x groups.

But how do we keep track of ownership/permission/sharing? For me, I still refrain from wearing patterns clearly from cultural groups that are not my own, because of my own principles and also because I do not want to inadvertently perpetuate CA practices. In fact, I even go as far as to not wear any calavera print products, because of my white-presenting privileges and the fact that most people will assume me to be a white woman wearing “sugar skulls” and go “oh wow, that is so cool! I’m gonna get one too!”- and not think about anti-CA or anti-racism. It’s too slippery of a slope, in my perspective.

Capitalism and Consumerism

As a former socialist/remaining anti-capitalist, the BW market was a complete and total trip to me. But I dove into it, and hard. Because while I’m anti-capitalism, I recognize that I life it every day, and I am complicit with capitalism. My credit cards are happy. My mental peace about our finances are not.

Many moments in the past few months, I’ve had to tell myself to pause and say “why am I lusting after this wrap? Why am I crushed that I missed the release? Why am I emanating so much bitterness and jealousy when I see pictures of people who scored? Why do I feel like I am lacking something when I have more than several wraps already?” I’ve had to take these psychological steps in order to ward off toxic consumerism; and I’ll be honest, it doesn’t always work. I offer a perspective that our postpartum struggles, the struggle we have in getting social and even private recognition and validation for our psychological turbulence as new parents or parents of multiple children, becomes channeled into some heavy-duty turbulence. Scoring is a high. Chasing an unicorn is a high. Petting a new purchase is a high. Taking 500 selfies with new wraps is a high. But when we crash, we crash. How many of us have felt very alone in those crashes? I think we should talk about that some more. And for others living out SJ principles, we should talk about how to honestly unpack and be resilient about the daily effects engaging capitalism has on our mental well-being.

Though there are deeply divisive perspectives on this issue, a main struggle I still have after a few months participating in the market is the concept of “market value” (MV). No matter how you slice it to me, the way I react to MV practices is that it’s a grossly capitalistic way to exploit consumerist desires and obsessions/fetishizations. To rob the opportunity of others to pay retail or below because of high desirability is not okay. When done to make a profit, it’s rooted in an individualistic pursuit that leans on the loss of another person. Now, others have said that they do MV to fund emergencies, dire situations. I would react by saying that this is part of the cycle. Fostering product fetishization, marking up products from their retail prices, creating a culture of consumerism, exacerbates dire family situations that need funds. What if we kept costs low and brands didn’t play off on the psychology of materialism by hyping up new, limited releases? What if we were operating in a culture of care and collectivism instead of competition and scarcity? For those reasons, I do not price my resales at MV. I price at retail or below. I try to avoid the higher-end wraps, though I am continually tempted. But I work on living out values of collectivism rather than scarcity.

It also is worth a mention that consumerism and materialism takes us far, far away from the BIPOC [Black, Indigenous, and Peoples of Color] roots of BW. Very far away. It makes act of BW shells of their long, ancestral heritages. And that in itself is an injustice.

~

Like I often have received, I’m sure some will read this thinking I am angry, I am unrealistic, I need to bend. That’s okay- those reactions are their own usual chorus. I share my thoughts out of, I feel, duty. There are many more layers and aspects of BW that require critique and unpacking. I believe we need to make those topics public discourse in the BW community. Because when we do this, we are actively honoring the roots of BW, and resisting it becoming commodified, whitewashed, decontextualized, gentrified. And I personally feel it is my responsibility to do it as the product of my lineages. I hope more will join in an create an authentic decolonial BW movement.

- Elena MF Ruiz-Williams, 2015

[decolonizingbabywearing]

Reconciling Social Justice and Babywearing

Hello! I’m a multiracial/ethnic Latinx Deaf PanQueer Femme. Prior to becoming pregnant and becoming a mother, I had identified as an intersectional social justice activist for several years. Intersectional social justice is infused in my personal and professional lives, but not without cost. I’ve faced professional repercussions for my involvement in social justice, and I’ve went from being a social butterfly to someone who carefully cultivates a small circle of chosen family and friends who share similar liberation politics. But social justice frameworks of understanding and analyzing the world has remained steadfast for me, with the frameworks continuing to expand and become more complex over time. I have always thought of raising children as creating agents of change for future generations; and that’s the main principle that guides me as a parent. Though my LO is now only a few months old, I continue to keep imagining ways I can raise consciousness as our child grows up, with empathy, compassion, and prioritizing the liberation of self and others. 

My descent into BW was not expected. My LO was born in early March, and during pregnancy I figured that my mamihood obsession was going to be cloth diapering, and worked to build up a stash. I obliged with accepting some secondhand stretchy wraps, but neatly rolled them up and put them in a box in the baby’s dresser and ignored them. It was not until I grudgingly attended a local cloth diapering event, after realizing that I didn’t have the patience or perseverance to cloth diaper, that I asked for a woven wrap demo, and was taught one with a volunteer sign-language interpreter present (a rarity to have such access at events, which I hope to get into in another post). 

Back at home, I practiced a bit with the Moby some more, with the sling, and a few more times with the Lenny Lamb wrap I bought at the cloth diaper event. Wanting to geek out on Lenny Lamb, I went on their website and… ahem. Saw their calavera wrap designs. I froze. I’m Latina. Día de Los Muertos is sacred to me. Anti-cultural appropriation is a major family value of ours. But now I owned an item from a company that culturally appropriates. What do I do? That was the first signal that I was getting myself into something completely different than the “SJ world” I created for myself and am trying to create for my growing family. Based on my brief personal experiences and observations, here are some main things I’ve noticed about BW in the U.S. that comes in direct conflict with my SJ values. 

Cultural Appropriation

This topic is definitely discussed in some BW spaces, but not enough. And, of course, any CA discussion brings in the chorus of It’s not theft, it’s INSPIRATION! Racism isn’t a real thing. Race has nothing to do with BW. But I think it’s pretty! So I’m a bad person because I like my Oscha? 

A remaining aspect that still feels problematic to me is the practice of: “this person from x group created this textile, so we can now wear it and it is not CA.” Here are some of my thoughts on this:

- Ownership, permission, and sharing are main tenets of anti-CA practices. Honoring the ownership of the products, belief of a marginalized group; being granted permission to use/carry out said products/beliefs; and there being a spirit of sharing AFTER ownership was honored/recognized/credited and permission was granted. 

-When we have a wrap created by person of x group, it seems at first glance that there is ownership/permission/sharing. I offer: if a person from a privileged group - y group- responsible for the systematic marginalization of people from x group wears a wrap with a pattern created by a person of x group, does that not perpetuate the practice of people from y groups wearing alllll the wraps of allll the marginalized groups? I feel it is too easy for me to go to a BW meetup with a wrap with textiles not from my own cultural group, and for a BWer with no desire to learn about CA politics and anti-racism to go, “hey that is super pretty! I’m gonna add to my extensive appropriated wrap collection now!” In this instance, it becomes clear that ownership/permission/sharing becomes easily lost in a large, competitive market like BW and woven wraps. Most people are gonna be assholes about CA and actively resist and gaslight people who speak out against CA. Therefore, how sustainable is it for us to wear textiles created/inspired by from groups that aren’t our own, if it may indirectly perpetuate CA in other instances?

But to complicate the narrative: at the same time, if we see European brands -cough cough Natibaby cough cough Hoppediz- actively exploit marginalized groups without ownership/permission/sharing, why wouldn’t we support a member of x group creating something from their heritages, because it’s better than a mega-business/corporation completely stealing from their cultural groups? My kneejerk reaction would be, of course! I’d rather support the person from x group’s creation and products rather than exploitative mega businesses who have no interest in collaborating with x groups. 

But how do we keep track of ownership/permission/sharing? For me, I still refrain from wearing patterns clearly from cultural groups that are not my own, because of my own principles and also because I do not want to inadvertently perpetuate CA practices. In fact, I even go as far as to not wear any calavera print products, because of my white-presenting privileges and the fact that most people will assume me to be a white woman wearing “sugar skulls” and go “oh wow, that is so cool! I’m gonna get one too!”- and not think about anti-CA or anti-racism. It’s too slippery of a slope, in my perspective. 

Capitalism and Consumerism

As a former socialist/remaining anti-capitalist, the BW market was a complete and total trip to me. But I dove into it, and hard. Because while I’m anti-capitalism, I recognize that I life it every day, and I am complicit with capitalism. My credit cards are happy. My mental peace about our finances are not.

Many moments in the past few months, I’ve had to tell myself to pause and say “why am I lusting after this wrap? Why am I crushed that I missed the release? Why am I emanating so much bitterness and jealousy when I see pictures of people who scored? Why do I feel like I am lacking something when I have more than several wraps already?” I’ve had to take these psychological steps in order to ward off toxic consumerism; and I’ll be honest, it doesn’t always work. I offer a perspective that our postpartum struggles, the struggle we have in getting social and even private recognition and validation for our psychological turbulence as new parents or parents of multiple children, becomes channeled into some heavy-duty turbulence. Scoring is a high. Chasing an unicorn is a high. Petting a new purchase is a high. Taking 500 selfies with new wraps is a high. But when we crash, we crash. How many of us have felt very alone in those crashes? I think we should talk about that some more. And for others living out SJ principles, we should talk about how to honestly unpack and be resilient about the daily effects engaging capitalism has on our mental well-being. 

Though there are deeply divisive perspectives on this issue, a main struggle I still have after a few months participating in the market is the concept of “market value” (MV). No matter how you slice it to me, the way I react to MV practices is that it’s a grossly capitalistic way to exploit consumerist desires and obsessions/fetishizations. To rob the opportunity of others to pay retail or below because of high desirability is not okay. When done to make a profit, it’s rooted in an individualistic pursuit that leans on the loss of another person. Now, others have said that they do MV to fund emergencies, dire situations. I would react by saying that this is part of the cycle. Fostering product fetishization, marking up products from their retail prices, creating a culture of consumerism, exacerbates dire family situations that need funds. What if we kept costs low and brands didn’t play off on the psychology of materialism by hyping up new, limited releases? What if we were operating in a culture of care and collectivism instead of competition and scarcity? For those reasons, I do not price my resales at MV. I price at retail or below. I try to avoid the higher-end wraps, though I am continually tempted. But I work on living out values of collectivism rather than scarcity. 

It also is worth a mention that consumerism and materialism takes us far, far away from the BIPOC [Black, Indigenous, and Peoples of Color] roots of BW. Very far away. It makes act of BW shells of their long, ancestral heritages. And that in itself is an injustice. 

~

Like I often have received, I’m sure some will read this thinking I am angry, I am unrealistic, I need to bend. That’s okay- those reactions are their own usual chorus. I share my thoughts out of, I feel, duty. There are many more layers and aspects of BW that require critique and unpacking. I believe we need to make those topics public discourse in the BW community. Because when we do this, we are actively honoring the roots of BW, and resisting it becoming commodified, whitewashed, decontextualized, gentrified. And I personally feel it is my responsibility to do it as the product of my lineages. I hope more will join in an create an authentic decolonial BW movement. 

[sordxradical]

Reblogged- written by myself for DCBW.

[decolonizingbabywearing]

Educating fellow leaders

(submission from juliachenier)

I’m a queer black woman living in east Texas, heart of the bible belt. I belong to a fairly new, very white local babywearing group.

By very white, I mean as far as I know, I’m the only non white-presenting person that has ever stayed through a whole meeting. I recently volunteered myself into a leadership position, despite several months of being ignored in person and attended our first leader’s meeting yesterday afternoon. The group was small, six women including myself, and very informal.

I am sure that they didn’t prepare for the meeting like I did. In front of a mirror, practicing smiling while speaking so that I wouldn’t be called aggressive, AGAIN. Or that they didn’t make sure to arrive early, stay late to clean or keep an extra eye on the children during the afternoon. So that I wouldn’t later be called mean, disrespectful, lazy or any of the descriptors I am regularly given when approaching people about their privilege.

I styled my hair, wore the local mom outfit of a long shirt and leggings, brought carefully prepared homemade snacks and my brand name wraps. I did my best to appear friendly and relateable, to make my points easier to digest.

The talk covered: ·an extremely brief history of the main types of carriers ·appropriation vs. appreciation ·steering away from savior complex ·making meetings more accessible for all ·avoiding using offensive language · not shaming DIY carriers ·avoiding microaggressive behaviors ·buying from responsible brands ·how to conduct our online group

When I spoke on why I don’t support beloved brands, I was questioned more intensely than when I opened up for questions on traditional carriers being modernized.

“What, exactly, did my favorite brand do?”

“What do they have to do to be deemed good again?”

My description of previously being served microaggressions in front of the majority who attended yesterday’s meeting was met with resistance. As I sat there attempting to educate, my lived experience was invalidated yet again by my students and peers. I felt requested to change my tone although it was neutral, if not friendly. I blamed myself out loud for them by saying that I was often misinterpreted due to my direct nature. Instead of saying that I’ve regularly been accused by groups of white women of being aggressive as a tactic to deflect from their privilege making them uncomfortable. I spoke briefly on assimilation and how painful it is to be forced to ignore parts of yourself to make others comfortable enough to hear your voice.

There is no doubt that they didn’t understand that I was speaking about how they made me feel in ALL of our previous interactions. Or how I had to plan my words and actions so carefully in order to be looked at as close to them in babywearing experience, or as a human.

Yet again I prioritized those that needed education, over myself, and the other people who are suffering, due to the ignorance that their privilege affords them. I coddled them. By not telling them how I set a reminder two days ahead of every meeting to emotionally prepare to be ignored. I also didn’t let them know how at two meetings obvious people of color have walked in and gone unacknowledged by everyone but myself until they walked out upset. I didn’t tell them how it hurt my feelings to give advice online in our group regularly all year but to have been asked only one meeting before how to spell my name. I didn’t let them know that I fought back tears as I once again went through spelling Julia as if it couldn’t possibly fit me although I was named after both my grand and great grandmothers.

What I didn’t do was allow ignorance to be an excuse. I didn’t allow myself to be spoken over. I made sure that even when time was running low, that I touched on all the topics so that the window was open for later discussion. Saying there was a need to unpack that room is an understatement but I will continue to try.

As I left I felt heard, but after thinking, it appears that I was acknowledged just enough to be resisted. Immediately after leaving, I wrote down my thoughts in a message to a friend and then waited to compose this piece until I had reflected a bit. Once I had said friend read my first draft, she asked why the article was so emotionally distant when it had potential not to be and this was part of my response:

“I’m tired of being upset, it’s draining and I’m making excuses for people who won’t give me the same courtesy. I’m so accustomed to being ignored that being acknowledged feels like an accomplishment even though I have to change my demeanor and coddle to get the crumbs that are given to me as if I should be appreciative.”

Truly, I am tired. I am incredibly tired of triggering myself in order to educate those more privileged than I will ever be. I am frustrated that I cannot be considered equal without first giving a detailed list of pain inflicted upon my soul. Even if not specifically asked to, my experience educating has shown me the necessity of making myself the example.

As tired as I am, I will continue. My children have to grow up in this world and as a parent, it is my responsibility to give them the most positive life experience possible.

I see no other option.

[sordxradical]

An Open Set of Notes to Hearing Parents* Using Baby Signs

*Hearing Parents of Hearing[-abled] Children.

Since becoming a parent earlier this year, my child’s language development has been something I rack my brain about constantly. It is a source of worry, contestation, inspiration, creativity, and struggle. 

My child is physically hearing, in the process of becoming enculturated as a CODA - Child of Deaf Adults- by way of ASL and other signed languages being the primary languages of the home. Searching for resources to sponsor this goal has been difficult- the majority of accessible resources are those created/championed by hearing people for hearing babies for early onset communication in infancy, for greater intelligence/IQ scores [already an ableist set of thinking], and so on. Those resources for hearing children are largely linguistically incorrect, true to their label of being “Baby Signs”; but they are the main exposure many hearing adults and children have with some form of a signed language in their lives. But it is not an accurate one, nor one that reflects the ASL and signed languages we use at home, the languages that are our lifeline. In addition, resources for hearing children provided by hearing parents usually are phased out immediately after the onset of spoken language. those resources are not for the long term, not with the goal of connecting with the Deaf community as a whole, not for creating foundations of allyship for Deaf, DeafBlind, DeafDisabled, Hard-of-Hearing people. As the artwork by Maureen Klusza depicts, the irony is that a Deaf baby is more likely to be prohibited from signing than a hearing baby would be. 

That is one reason why I have such emotional responses when I see hearing parents of hearing children in various Facebook “mommy groups” gush about how cute it is that their baby signed “more” at dinnertime eating mashed peas and pears. The main aspect of my response is, however, the vast difference in language concerns and approaches I have with my physically hearing child than they have with their hearing children. 

Since March, i’ve caught myself countless times of not ensuring that I am consciously fostering ASL to my child. I catch myself in deep, subconscious operating that i should use spoken language because “it’s more real” than sign language- very intense, covert linguicism and phonocentrism. I, of course, do not consciously think that, but my being a product of a phonocentric background and society, that thinking is buried in me somewhere. After I started being more honest with myself about my internalized thinking, I’ve urged myself to become more honest and authentic about my daily struggles in language teaching/acquisition with my child. Below is a concise set of notes: 

- I worry every day that I am not doing a good job of fostering ASL to my child.

- I worry every day that I am not doing a good job of ensuring that my child is acquiring spoken language.

- I worry every day that my child will resent me and my partner for being deaf.

- I worry every day that my child will internalize the message that deaf people need to be saved by hearing people, including well-intentioned CODAs.

- I worry every day that my child will want no part in the Deaf-Signing community, and that that will create emotional and physical distance with us as their parents. 

- I worry about my child expressing rebellion or dominance by refusing to sign to us, and therefore cutting off our access to communicating with them.

- I worry about my child being embarrassed to bring over their peers to our house because of us being deaf.

- I worry about my child being tokenized/fetishized/picked on in schools for knowing “hand signs.”

- I worry about my child losing out on their child-innocence because of being asked/expected to interpret for their parents by others.

- I worry about not being able to seize ‘teachable moments’ with my child while out in public, when they hear problematic or violent things, and quietly internalize them instead of being able to openly address them with me.

- I worry that my child will be sneered at/rejected by well-known white CODA figures. [Our child is a multiracial CODA of Color.]

- I’m worried that other deaf adults will assume that they need to speak with my CODA because they are physically hearing; and that my child will internalize the phonocentric concept that all deaf people should be able to speak.

- I’m worried about becoming invisible to my child at family events where my partner and i are the only deaf people present. 

- I’m worried that my child will emotionally abandon us if our language/culture expectations were too high, if there was too much trauma in their lives, if they simply did not want to be our child. 

I don’t like to use absolutes too much, but I’m pretty sure the above are not the concerns most hearing parents have when they teach their child “FINISH” when they’re smeared with spaghetti, seated in a high chair drenched with drying sauce. I’m not trying to say that hearing people shouldn’t use [a watered down, mostly linguistically incorrect form of] ASL with their hearing babies and children. I am asking for more a more conscious understanding and contextualizing of what is involved in this situation. That the ease of access to “baby signs” resources are dramatically different than the access to linguistically correct and sustainable resources i need to teach my CODA my language. the emotional weight is vastly, incredibly, insurmountably different for hearing parents of hearing [able-privileged, meaning children who do not have cognitive, developmental, neurological disabilities] children, but my struggles, worries, experiences are often never contextualized in hearing parents of hearing-abled children’s decision to teach a few “cute”/“cool”/”useful” signs. but our stories matter. and our stories should be at the forefront of any decision or practice of signed languages- because without Deaf, DeafBlind, DeafDisabled, and Hard-of-Hearing people, there would be no sign languages. Remembering us is a deceptively simple shift that could spark many more ties, bridges, connections across many communities. this is what I ask all of us do to. Will you do this? 

-Elena MF Ruiz-Williams, 2015

[caribbeaangal-deactivated201610]

I don’t understand why white/white-passing latin@s are complaining about how they not represented enough in the media with this #mirame selfie crap. have you not seen telemundo and univison??? like??? and most of y'all don’t even bother addressing the anti-blackness in the latin@ community and be so upfront in your anti-blackness against afrolatin@s

[sordxradical]

#palabra.

[flanneryogonner]

Hi y’all! 

I’ve compiled a list of readings that speak to issues of nationalism, indigeneity, colonialism, and resistance/decolonization

The list is of course limited to what readings I’ve encountered at some point. They also come from a variety of academic disciplines and political movements (settler colonial studies, native studies, queer theory, postcolonial studies, feminist studies, trans studies).

And, with a few exceptions, these files were legally uploaded and shared… a lot of the time by the authors themselves, which I feel the need to point out because I love when authors can/do share their work online for free. (I say this not because I’m worried about the sanctity of ‘intellectual property’ but because I’m worried about things being deleted.)

Also re-linking to this list of pdf readings, “Natives Read Too,” from The Yáadihla Girls!  human rights/war/nationalism/sovereignty 

“What Do Human Rights Do?” by Talal Asad

“On Torture: Abu Ghraib by Jasbir Puar

“From Cold War to Trade War: Neocolonialism and Human Rights" by Susan Koshy

“Necropolitics" by Achile Mbembe

“Algeria Unveiled" by Frantz Fanon

A Dying Colonialism by Frantz Fanon

History and Imperialism: A Century of Theory, from Marx to Postmodernism by Patrick Wolfe

Who Sings the Nation-State? Judith Butler and Gayatri Spivak

“Where Lawlessness is the Law: The Settler Colonial Frontier as a Legal Space of Violence" by Julie Evans

“1492: a New World View" by Sylvia Wynter

Frames of War by Judith Butler

“Purchase by Other Means: The Palestine Nakba and Zionism’s Conquest of Economics" by Patrick Wolfe

Manifesting America: The Imperial Construction of U.S. National Space by Mark Rifkin 

transnational/native/postcolonial feminisms & feminist critiques: 

Woman, Native, Other: Writing Postcoloniality and Feminism - Trinh T. Minh-Ha

“Lynching, Empire, and Sexuality in Black Feminist Theory" -Hazel V. Carby 

“Transnational Feminist Pedagogy: An Interview with Inderpal Grewal and Caren Kaplan”

“Under Western Eyes: Feminist Scholarship and Colonial Discourses" by Chandra Talpade Mohanty

“Feminist Problematizations of Rights Language" by Jasbir Puar and Isabelle Barker

Feminist Genealogies, Colonial Legacies, Democratic Futures by M. Jacqui Alexander & Chandra Talpade Mohanty

“The Subject of Freedom" by Saba Mahmood

The Spivak Reader

Borderlands/La Frontera by Gloria Anzaldúa

“Colonialism, Nationalism, and Colonialized Women: The Contest in India" by Partha Chatterjee

“Can the Subaltern Speak?” Gayatri Spivak

The Politics of the Veil - Joan W. Scott

“Decolonizing Feminism: Challenging Connections between Settler Colonialism and Heteropatriarchy" by Maile Arvin, Eve Tuck, and Angie Morrill

“Native American Feminism, Sovereignty, and Social Change" by Andrea Smith 

decolonization, art, and resistance (not necessarily feminist):  

Edward Said and Critical Decolonization 

Culture and Resistance: Conversations with Edward W. Said 

“Decolonization is not a Metaphor" by Eve Tuck and K. Wayne Yang

“Decolonizing Antiracism" by Bonita Lawrence and Enakshi Dua

Bury My Art at Wounded Knee / R.I.S.E  

The Boarding School Healing Project 

Center for Third World Organizing 

Queers Against Israeli Apartheid 

queer theory/sexuality studies/native studies/trans studies 

Imperial Leather: Race, Gender, and Sexuality in the Colonial Contest by Anne McClintock

“Homonationalism As Assemblage: Viral Travels, Affective Sexualities" by Jasbir Puar*

Conquest: Sexual Violence and American Indian Genocide by Andrea Smith

“Un-settling Settler Desires" by Scott Morgensen Also the Unsettling America wordpress.

Race and the Education of Desire: Foucault’s History of Sexuality and the Colonial Order of Things - Ann Laura Stoler

“Romancing the Transgender Native: Rethinking the Use of the ‘Third Gender’ Concept" by Evan B. Towle and Lynn Morgan

“Transing and Transpassing Across Sex-Gender Walls in Iran." by Afsaneh Najmabadi

“Queer Settler Colonialism in Canada and Israel: Articulating Two-Spirit and Palestinian Queer Critiques" by Scott Lauria Morgensen

“Queer Theory and Native Studies: The Heteronormativity of Settler Colonialism" by Andrea Smith 

*Actually just going to link to this page of Dr. Puar’s work because it’s  great and relevant (and she also has a lot of work on Israel/Palestine). critiques of humanitarianism/developmentalism: 

“Stealing the Pain of Others: Reflecting on Canadian Humanitarian Responses" by Sherene H. Razack

“The Rationality of Empowerment: Microcredit, Accumulation by Dispossession, and the Gendered Economy" by Christine Keating, Claire Rasmussen, and Pooja Rish

“Reflections on Violence, Law, and Humanitarianism" by Talal Asad

“How to Write about Africa" by Binyavanga Wainaina

“Militarized Humanitarianism Meets Carceral Feminism: The Politics of Sex, Rights, and Freedom in Contemporary Antitrafficking Campaigns" by Elizabeth Bernstein

“Coca-Cola, Labor Restructuring and Political Violence in Colombia" Lesley Gill 

[Really wish I knew more about this kind of work.] 

Biopolitics, science, environmental justice 

“Peversity, Contamination, and the Dangers of Queer Domesticity" -Nayan Shah 

“Your DNA Is Our History:’ Genomics, Anthropology, and the Construction of Whiteness as Property" by Jenny Reardon and Kim TallBear

“Displaying Sara Baartman" by Sadiah Qureshi

“The Biopolitics of Settler Colonialism: Right Here, Right Now" by Scott Morgensen 

“Black Bodies, White Science" -Brian Wallis 

The Violence of Green Revolution: Third World Agriculture, Ecology and Politics by Vandana Shiva

“The Seed and the Earth" by Vandana Shiva

“Earth Democracy: An Interview with Vandana Shiva”

“Putting knowledge in its place: science, colonialism, and the postcolonial" by Suman Seth

and…. U.S. politics  

“Workfare–Warfare: Neoliberalism, ‘Active’ Welfare and the New American Way of War" by Julie MacLeavy and Columba Peoples

“Women and Chile at the Alamo: Feeding U.S. Colonial Mythology" by Suzanne Bost

“The People of California are Suffering’: The Ideology of White Injury in Discourses of Immigration" by Lisa Marie Cacho

“American Studies without America: Native Feminisms and the Nation-State" by Andrea Smith 

[tenderqweer-blog]

Allyship is not supposed to look like this, folks. It’s not supposed to be about you. It’s not supposed to be about your feelings. It’s not supposed to be a way of glorifying yourself at the expense of the folks you claim to be an ally to. It’s not supposed to be a performance. It’s supposed to be a way of living your life that doesn’t reinforce the same oppressive behaviors you’re claiming to be against.

Mia McKenzie No More “Allies” (via tenderqweer)

[librarian-wnm-deactivated202002]

Ecuador A sign language jewel! Our songs in sign language are incredible. This is Ecuadorian sign language and it differs from ASL some but we are still able to understand 70% of it.

Today’s total attendance 127,433!

Courtesy of @johnnycomps Thank you!!! 

Una joya en lenguajes de señas! Nuestros cánticos en lenguaje de señas son increíbles!! Éste aquí es el Lenguaje de señas, o signos, utilizado en Ecuador y es diferente al Lenguaje Americano de Señas (ASL). Aún así existen muchas similitudes de modo que logramos entender un 70% de su significado

Asistencia total hoy 127,433

[thisisnotlatinx]

Disabled Latinxs are fabulous!

[sordxradical]

some context for thisisnotlatinx-- video comes from a JW tumblr. Deaf Latin Americans' original signed languages are consistently being erased by religious missionaries who bring American Sign Language to various communities. note: American Sign Language is the white-dominant sign language used in the U.S. and in canada. (yes, this means that there are different signed languages around the world.) at first glance, this seems like a great thing because many Deaf Latinxs are isolated, marginalized, and deprived of language access. however, this linguistic colonialism wipes out the native, original signed languages that have been used by native signing Latinxs. also, the language access provided by these religious organizations come with the expectation of those Deaf Latinxs joining their orders. so it is not unconditional language access and connection. so really- should we celebrate this video knowing that it's a continuation of multiple forms of colonization?

[sordxradical]

Inner-Community Phonocentrism: We Are Not On Even Ground

in late 2007, i started perusing a blog named Cochlear Implant online, (co?)run by Rachel Chaikof, a CI-user and non-signer probably not that much younger/older than i am. at the time, i was in a relationship with an older white cis het hearing man, was just getting my start in the field of deaf ed, and was starting to -albeit slowly- uncover many years of internalized self-hate about being Deaf. [i mention this to give context about my life back then compared to now, particularly as an intersectional social justice activist.] over the following months, i started to go deeper and deeper into reclaiming that identity after allowing it to be a source of shame and despair. at the time, i didn't have the multifaceted/layered approach that i now have to name what was happening, the observations i was making, the responses i was feeling when i read entries from Cochlear implant Online. but i'd usually close my browsing session feeling furious, helpless, and oftentimes debased as a human being, in spite of still living a life that emphasized phonocentrism rather than liberation as a diverse sensorial being. i felt like utter shit.

{note: i use phonocentrism to refer to the social system and belief of hearing/speaking being inherently superior modes of being and language; and that as a result of phonocentrism, various systems collaborate to push Deaf, DeafBlind, DeafDisabled, and Hard-of-Hearing people towards hearing-centric ways of being and living... meaning: the normative model of hearingness is constantly pushed on us from all angles, rather than recognizing our bodies and experiences as sensorially diverse. recognizing Deaf, DeafBlind, DeafDisabled, and Hard-of-Hearing people as sensorially diverse people removes the forces of normalcy that goad us -oftentimes in violent ways- to be hearing and able-privileged. audism is the system of oppression that upholds the ideology of phonocentrism.}

over the years, ive noticed that i've continued to have really strong reactions to deaf people who assert their experiences of being non-signing CI-users. but i have long felt that my reactions differed from other signing Deaf people (including those who use CIs but do not make their CIs central to identity)- which seemed to be very single-issue, and to only discuss audism as the root and manifestation of non-signing/CI-users' principles. for me, it's always been more than that, far more layered and nuanced. 

for instance, though i firmly believe that in this capitalistic, ableist and audist society that technology is not of neutral social value- technology is always weighted with the ideologies of systems of power- i've learned more about the concept of agency, autonomy, when it comes to us selecting technological assistive devices, especially as survival in a society that is intensely ableist and audist. the choice to use assistive devices such as hearing aids and CIs is one usually rooted in just that: survival in navigating through a world that is hostile to Disabled, Deaf, DeafBlind, DeafDisabled, and Hard-of-Hearing people. (i should make it clear at this juncture that i'm focusing on adult non-signing CI users rather than children whose parents/families elected to get them CIs and to not use a signed language with them.) people who elect to get CIs, for instance, oftentimes are really trying to gain accesses - if not freedoms- that are consistently and cruelly denied. this is a form of survival in many senses. but not always so simple. 

over time, i think i've acquired the language to best express my feelings and reactions in analytical ways- ways that connect different systems of power and experiences of oppression in complex ways.

so when i read Alanna Kilroy's recent "Hidden in Television: A Marginalized Portrayal of Deafness in Switched at Birth" in response to the #DeafTalent Twitter campaign, those old feelings and thoughts were once again stirred. i tweeted my responses to Alanna, and a brief conversation ensued the next night. however, it was clear that we both have our own principles, approaches, ideas, perspectives about this topic, and i felt that a conversation was not going to emerge into a dialogue where we could go deep into social justice analytical frameworks. instead, i'm gonna write some of my reactions to this experience here- because this is larger than a Twitter conversation that wasn't so positive in the end. 

before reading on, i suggest checking out the storified edition of my tweets and Alanna's responses. 

first, i should say that i noticed some classic derailing tactics at play here. but i've experienced worse, actually, especially from fellow signing Deaf, DeafBlind,DeafDisabled, and Hard-of-Hearing people on topics of inner-community racism, sexism, cissexism, and so forth. but i still name Alanna's reactions as derailing. i recognize that a number of people went hard on Alanna's blog post, and towards her personally- i definitely think that edged her response to my own tweets about her blog post. i can contextualize that, and i still dont view Alanna as a bad person. however, it still DOES NOT mean that 1) the analysis i brought in "had nothing to do" with her blog post, and that 2) i was attacking her personal character and being. 

if you read the Storify of the conversation, i repeated a number of times that my critique was not about non-signing people who have CIs being terrible people because they do not sign or because they have CIs- my critiques were based on the push towards accountability in understanding and accepting that being a deaf person who does not sign and who uses CIs is to align with the normative expectations in a phonocentric society. And that as a result, those people have very real privileges over many Deaf, DeafBlind, DeafDisabled, and Hard-of-Hearing people. and that in the realm of media, being a speaking deaf person with a CI is to be lauded and humanized. we know this because a non-signing speaking Deaf person with a CI is instantaneously a more desirable candidate for any number of jobs. we know this because a non-signing speaking Deaf person with a CI is what many of our parents and family members imagined as a success story for us. i can bring in many more instances where i explain that no matter how reclaimed we may be, we still have to contend with the shadow of phonocentric expectations trailing behind us. 

with all of those social realities in mind, i argued that when a non-signing CI-user is represented in the media, they are prized and humanized before any of us signing Deaf, DeafBlind, DeafDisabled, and Hard-of-Hearing people are, because: phonocentrism and audism. Alanna was insistent on the numerical representations of CIs in Deaf-based media portrayals. i get that there's a not a lot of appearances of CIs on popular TV shows. but hey, guess what? i can go on youtube any time of the day and search for scores of videos about CI activations among babies, children, and adults that celebrate the experience of hearing, and receive accolades for finally "being able to hear" from many hearing people worldwide. this is important to note because this is phonocentrism at play: hearing is celebrated and embraced, and humanized. it prompts people to be emotionally moved. it is inspiration porn. and it is rooted in a default deficit thinking of Deaf, DeafBlind,DeafDisabled, and Hard-of-Hearing people- that we are not complete, we are not fully human, until what is "missing" is filled in, remediated, "fixed." the social approval of being "fixed" is more widespread and intense than it is to be an "exotic" "strange" "unfortunate" "uncomfortable" Deaf, DeafBlind,DeafDisabled, and Hard-of-Hearing person who isn't a speaking, non-signing CI user. so what does this mean on larger social scales? it means a hell of a lot. 

Alanna also mentioned that if i was "really for social justice" that i would fight for the representations and inclusion of all deaf people, regardless of them being signers or non-signing CI-users. let me clarify once again: all Deaf, DeafBlind, DeafDisabled, and Hard-of-Hearing people who use various modalities of communications, who may or may not use assistive devices, are all impacted by phonocentrism and audism. however. there are degrees and nuances to this shit. to tell me that i should fight for "all of us" implies a very, very false presumption that "all of us" are on equal footing, that all of our experiences are completely lateral. they are not- they are not lateral across the axis of sensorial experiences- our experiences of being Deaf, DeafBlind,DeafDisabled, and Hard-of-Hearing- and they are not lateral because of multiple axes of race, ethnicity, sex, gender, sexuality, nationality, and so on. to urge me to be inclusive of various experiences of being Deaf, DeafBlind,DeafDisabled, and Hard-of-Hearing is to erase the degrees and nuances of privilege within those experiences. for instance: the capacity to hear and speak, as well as to see and to be mobile, or to be emotionally-abled, and so on, among Deaf, DeafBlind,DeafDisabled, and Hard-of-Hearing is INTENSELY varied. as i mentioned, i am a Deaf person with hearing and speaking capacities. i also have a MA degree. i come from a professional-class background. i pass for a white person and for a heterosexual person. therefore: i have a shitload more privilege than my community members, who may be Deaf too, but do not possess the other privileges that i have. this is my point: non-signing, speaking CI-users have privileges granted to them that are not granted to me and the vast majority of Deaf, DeafBlind,DeafDisabled, and Hard-of-Hearing who are struggling to survive every damn day. this is why i cannot, in good conscience, encourage/fight for even more social representations and acceptance of non-signing, speaking CI-users. i will recognize and affirm your existence and embrace you as a human being and desire to be in community with you, but i cannot, in the context of multiple systems of power, fight for your social overrepresentation. 

Alanna stated that her blogpost had nothing to do with phonocentrism and audism. that she had a specific topic in mind, and that i've- and others- have gone completely off track. but it actually had everything to do with phonocentrism and audism. stating that it was not her aim or her intention is moot. because as we know from a social justice framework: the social privileges a person has is inherent and molds who they are by constructing their thoughts, behaviors, and languages. to have privilege is to oftentimes, if not always, not be conscious of it at all. for me, Alanna probably is not yet aware of how she possesses immense privileges as a person of her background, and how these privileges shape who she is and what she writes, what she produces. overall, as of late, she's made it clear that she does not want to perceive herself in the frameworks i am bringing in. and that is her right, and i still honor that choice that she is making, from my own perspective- because i will still recognize her autonomy--- while continuing to contextualize the social impact her beliefs and actions have. (this complexity IS possible.) but you know what: i dont want to focus/fixate on her specifically. i want to bring us to all the other Alannas and Rachels and many more folks who have the principles and perspectives that they have. because i want to talk about the patterns i witness and analyze among many non-signing speaking CI-users. 

i have observed that the assertion of the right for CIs/non-signing representation is usually (though, yes, i recognize not always) bound with systems of whiteness, economic/class privilege, and able-privileges.

namely, i observe non-signing people with CIs to espouse very white euro-american-centric/WASP-centric values of "individualistic choice"- which then means that many of them are disinterested in examining the collective impact that their decisions and actions have on other Deaf, DeafBlind,DeafDisabled, and Hard-of-Hearing people. when i observe this, i instantly know that the non-signing, speaking CI-user and i are dwelling in different worldviews, and that there are no bridges between ourselves. because i don't front for white, euro-centric, WASP systems of thought and behavior, or for the entitlement of individual rights and decisions. i believe in communities and fighting for collective liberations. my principles are my principles because of my marginalized identities and because of the long, long, lifelong unpacking processes i am on regarding my privileged identities. if we aren't operating from a shared approach of centralizing power systems and differentials, then we can't really move on from there. 

and of course, the assertion of having the right to be non-signing, speaking, and CI-using is still entrenched in ideologies of normalcy- that human bodies need to mold to a specific default shape of being hearing, ambulatory, body-normative, neurotypical, and so on. multiple systems such as science, medicine, technology, and education, have pushed many people towards normative molds of being for generations at an end. to opt to mold to those expectations often happens. and sure, we can talk about agency and autonomy. but we need to also go deep into discussions of larger social meaning and impact. 

i also observe attempts to assert non-signing, speaking CI-using experiences as laterally important to the dire marginalizations that Deaf, DeafBlind,DeafDisabled, and Hard-of-Hearing people experience because of phonocentrism and audism. this is where i get tripped up: how do i support your desire to be represented in the media and other public spaces when your lived experiences are so drastically different than the people who do not have your accesses and privileges? do you not realize that you are many rungs above us on the ladder? 

to assert the experience of being a non-signing, speaking CI-using person is to endorse phonocentrism. to demand representation and inclusion in media is to come from a phonocentric angle, because it is without consideration for the experiences you do not have in comparison to so many people with your natural sensorial experience worldwide. this is harmful. it's hurtful on personal levels. and it has dire social impact because of your complicity to a system of power and violence. 

so while Alanna was talking about Switched at Birth and her desire to see CI representations and "inclusion" in popular television media, i still contend that her blogpost was much larger than that: one thing i am appreciative about is that her blogpost is sparking the need to have more consistent, analytical, and profound discussions about the degrees and nuances of privilege among all of us Deaf, DeafBlind,DeafDisabled, and Hard-of-Hearing people when it comes to our sensorial and politically sensorial experiences. because as long as non-signing, speaking CI-using Deaf people are going to claim that the community is divided and exclusionary because of their choices/decisions, then we need to get serious about unpacking our internalized phonocentrism and audism across the board. unity does not happen without serious unpacking and pinpointed awareness/consciousness about how power dynamics and stratifications exist among all of us. this is the point: we are all Deaf, DeafBlind,DeafDisabled, and Hard-of-Hearing, signers, non-signers, users of technological devices, non-users. yes. but we are not on equal ground. we are not dwelling in the same spaces. we are not experiencing the world in the same ways. and we cannot afford to to presume or assert that we all are- because then we opt out of being accountable for the privileges we hold; and once we opt out of accountability, we perpetuate power and violence. this is not kind, this is not socially responsible, this is not sustainable. the discussions must start and continue here on out. 

-Elena Ruiz-Williams, 2015

multiracial/multiethnic Xicanx cis Femme PanQueer Deaf-Signing writer/activist

[jibril2-deactivated20150509]

All white imperialist nations have benefitted from the destruction of the black body, you aren’t innocent just bc you live in Europe, Canada, or Australia.

[walterwhitemediocrity]

also: anti-blackness exists universally and is not exclusive to white majority countries. Middle Easterners are anti-black. East and South Asians. Latin Americans.

We’re all complicit. Being non-white doesn’t exempt you from accountability.

[sonofbaldwin]

Here are the things I believe to be true: 1. This country has a history of regarding black men as both inherently rapist and the defilers of the “sanctity” of white womanhood. Rape wasn’t even a considered crime culturally and socially in this country until the prospect of an enslaved black man...

[ulibeanzz]

imho it is straight up dangerous to perpetuate the mentality that women cannot be abusive to their partners and I’ve found this is ESP prevalent in queer spaces with women/girls dating other women/girls. unfortunately it is fucking false that women are all tender and...

[chanclazo-deactivated20150401]

You can’t just say Latino is a culture or an ethnicity without imposing a monotype on hundreds upon hundreds of diverse cultures, ethnicities and traditions. 

You can’t just say Latino is not a race without ignoring the way race has and continues to shape Latinidad. 

Latino is a geopolitical label with a lot of problems and nuances and trying to break it down into checkboxes es una pendejada on an embarrassing scale. 

[arabellesicardi]

Femmeness is especially vilified because it’s seen as being connected to decadence and class-privilege. I know this from experience: if you bring five bucks to the thrift store, you can walk out with a total gem and look really good. It takes a good eye but you cultivate that from being without, like I did. You have to cultivate that skill, and you earn it by being able to feel really confident. It’s a problematic notion because it also allows men and masculine people to put on a working class aesthetic: “Look at the one flannel I wear over and over again!” This isn’t seen as performance, it’s seen as more authentic. I experienced really fucked-up mean-girl dynamics in anarchist spaces, because there was a vying for social capital. There was really shitty and weird behavior. I’m more focused on surviving and creating a sustainable lifestyle that’s not just me crying at the end of every meeting. People were emotionally terrorizing, and I don’t think it’s any coincidence that it happened to femme women more often. In political spaces, the Left demonizes femininity because it is associated with excess – as though all of these heterosexist men would listen to us if we came into meetings looking like shit. They wouldn’t even hear us out if we didn’t look fucking fierce.

*screams yes at this a thousand fucking times until i pass out*  (via arabellesicardi)

I had the privilege of sharing a roundtable with femme artists of color Luna Merbruja and Khrys Jackson for Mask Magazine. You should read it!

(via brujacore)

[friendlyangryfeminist]

In order to construct self-narratives, then, we need not only the words with which to tell our stories but also an audience able and willing to hear us and to understand our words as we intend them. This aspect of remaking a self in the aftermath of trauma highlights the dependency of the self on others and helps to explain why it is so difficult for survivors to recover when others are unwilling to listen to what they endured.

Outliving Onself: Trauma, Memory and Personal Identity by Susan J. Brison (via friendlyangryfeminist)