Feminist Racism in the Time of COVID
We have written often on this blog about the current tendency for feminists in Europe to ally with extreme-right Islamophobes, supposedly in the name of women’s rights. But this phenomenon of feminists allying with the extreme right is, naturally, not restricted to Europe: it exists all over the western world. Here we have a strong example in this article by prominent Canadian feminist Meghan Murphy, in which she minimises and excuses some fairly extraordinary racism on the basis that it is a joke, and that – somehow – attacking an individual who shared a link to the “joke” is a distraction from criticising China.
First point: if the design is indeed a joke, it’s not a very good one.
Murphy’s article concerns a shirt with a design of a Chinese takeaway box and chopsticks flying away on bat wings, with “no thank you” written on the sleeve in a faux-Asian font. At a time when people of Asian appearance are the victims of greatly increased levels of racism as a result of the COVID-19 pandemic, I don’t find this particularly funny. In fact, I would say it is not so much a joke as an incitement to violence.
I can’t help but wonder if Murphy would react in the same way if the “joke” in question was a sexist joke. In fact, feminists spend a great deal of time arguing against various men’s excuses that such-and-such a sexist statement they made was “just a joke”. But when the “joke” in question is racist, oh, no problems here.
Double standards with respect to sexism and racism is a common characteristic of feminists who adopt right-wing, racist rhetoric.
Second point: criticism of a racist shirt design and a refusal to criticise China are two different things.
Murphy asks whether the reaction to the shirt came about because “joking about or criticizing China is off-limits at this point, solely because China is not a Western country?” She then mentions that China is “on its way to becoming a major superpower that dictates much of our economy in Canada and the US”, and the authoritarianism of the ruling CCP (Chinese Communist Party). In so doing, Murphy falls into a common trap for feminists who ally with the extreme right (often seen in feminist rhetoric against the Islamic headscarf): that of ignoring the very great differences in power relations within western countries, in which racialised people are an oppressed minority, and countries in which racialised minorities originate, in which they are (often) the majority.
Her argument she implies that criticising the racist shirt is akin to some kind of politically-correct, moral panic-inspired refusal to allow any critique of China whatsoever. Which is insane. There is certainly a place for critique of China – though I certainly would not trust Murphy to make it – but the main problem with the shirt has nothing to do with that. In China, (Han) Chinese are the majority of the population and hold power. In North America and other western countries, people of Chinese origin and/or Asian appearance constitute oppressed minorities, victims of centuries of official and unofficial discrimination and racism that continues today. These people are currently experiencing significant increases in violence as a result of the COVID-19 pandemic.
In short, the point is not that China’s domestic or foreign policy should never be criticised, it is that the shirt that is the supposed subject of Murphy’s article has immediate negative effects on people of Asian appearance in North America and other western countries.
Finally, I wonder, has supposedly-feminist Murphy (and the rest of the numerous other “feminists” who choose to ally with the extreme right) forgotten that half of people of colour are women of colour? Racism is not some abstract entity that exists out in the ether; it has concrete effects on people’s lives. We do not sanction these effects on any people, male or female, but as anti-racist feminists our key constituents are racialised women. Both the shirt and Murphy’s article contribute to legitimating violence against them.
