An example of how a theory we learned about in the AIP readings has reflected in reality in the Women’s Center is a theory that was presented in the reading, “Age, Race, Class, Sex” by Audrey Lorde, Lorde asserts that “too often, we pour the energy needed for recognizing and exploring difference into pretending those differences are insurmountable barriers, or that they do not exist at all”. I see both the truth and the limits of this statement in my role at the Women’s Center. Lorde’s assertion contains much truth in the sense that we need to embrace intersectionality in feminism since gender and race are inalienable aspects of one’s identity. Therefore, based on her statement it is important for the Women’s Center to try to educate about feminism through an intersectional approach, which is most definitely aims to do through the various gender buffets, events, and diverse professional staff and interns.
For example, we’ve had gender buffets on not only more explicit diverse racially related topics such as South Asian women in Bollywood movies and black hair, but also on identities such as women refugees and indigenous women, which encompass a broader range of identities. Although we’ve had accusations from other people as being a center that only propagates “white mainstream feminism,” our programming, staff, and those who use the resources at our space are actually very diverse and have multiple intersecting identities. It is important to have a diverse staff with various intersecting identities so that each person can help illuminate a part of their own identity and in doing so promote intersectional feminism. In the role of my own job as curator of Online Social Media, whenever I put out images or quotes related to feminism or draft “Did You Knows” for the e—newsletter, I try my best to include images or cover topics that represent a diverse range of identities associated with feminism.
For example, one time I wrote a did you know on breast cancer statistics for women by racial categories, which depicted the vast disparity between white women and women of color in recovery rates primarily due to the inequity in healthcare access between races. This Did You Know promoted intersectionality because it concerned not only the gender related issue of women’s health but also factored in the social implications and adverse affects of remaining inequalities between races within the identity of women. Therefore, for the most part, Lorde’s assertion that we must expend the effort to recognize and highlight differences in identity is beneficial. However, an important note to remember is that with social justice issues, just like any issue, a tension exists between identifying and doing. It is equally important to fully scrutinize a problem and understand all its intricate fallacies as it is to actively work towards tangibly solving it.
In fact, these two aspects of problem-solving should not even be viewed as a dichotomy—each part depends on the otheri For example, if we do not give enough thought to the issue and intricacies of feminism and instead charge full steam ahead with “women and men should be equal” in our minds, it is easy to accidentally overlook more hidden aspects of genderjustice issues, such as intersectionalism, which was mentioned by both Crenshaw and Lorde. However, at the same time, if too much time and energy is given to constantly fixating on identifying problems the situation can end up as being “all talk and no action” due to the fact that there will always be an infinite amount of problems that contribute to an overarching issue. A practical example of how this played into my internship at the Women’s Center is in the way that certain interns from other community centers had often delineated what other centers could do in order to help advance social equality.
Although these interns had good intentions similar to those of Lorde’s when she spoke of taking the Lime and energy to recognize the differences within a movement, most likely the intention to simply help such differences become more visible and be addressed, the unfortunate reality was that sometimes these interns had fixated on delineating the differences without posing possible methods of action to reconcile or appropriately highlight such differences. For example, one intern from the LGBTRC had asserted that the Women’s Center was not doing enough to recognize identities other than white feminism and wanted more programming that focused on very specific identities such as the body politics associated with transwomen of color, Although it is important to remind the masses that feminism does indeed include a variety of identities, it is difficult because the question is if we should give every single identity equal attention or to focus on identities and issues that are most relatable, common, and understandable to the masses.
In our AIP discussion one day, the scenario came up where even if we did hold a discussion on body politics of transwomen of color, how many would attend? A very small percentage of UCSD’s student body fits into that identity, and the rhetoric use to explain such a topic requires a deeper understanding of social identities and social justice that most students do not have Would the content of the program simply go over everyone’s head? Or even worse, if there were a mix of those who identify with that group and those who are completely new to the topic, would we run the risk of the less knowledgeable participants unintentionally saying something hurtful or offensive to someone in that group? How effective would it be? Would it not be better to spend that time highlighting and further exploring an identity that is more common and understandable to UCSD students?
This is where I believe the limit to Lorde’s statement liesi Although yes, it is extremely important that we take time to focus on identifying the differences within a movement so that we can understand them, there comes a point of practicality when we need to decide to focus on education about a few already identified differences rather than continuously delve into more differences. She is correct when she says that these differences are not “insurmountable barriers,” but only so if we treat them realistically. The Women‘s Center cannot practically cover every single identity within feminism because of time, resources, and lack of complete knowledge. However, we can try our best to do what we can with the represented Identities we have and by referring students to other centers to learn about certain identities more in depth if we cannot offer that opportunity.
This resolution actually resonates with another AIP reading, titled “It‘s Not My Job to Educate You,” by Ashley Burczakr In Burczak’s article, she discusses how it should not be a social justice activist’s job and burden to educate the masses. I agree with this sentiment that it should not be the sole job of social activists to “educate” the people Of course we have a passion to educate, so we try our best in our daily lives by being cognizant of and speaking out against micro aggressions, but at the end of the day, a revolution is very difficult to have without media and institutions on our side However, I feel that if we broaden our inclusion of “feminists” and attempt to have feminist who do work at institutions or in media agencies, we can slowly try to change the laws and media to eradicate sexist norms and propagate feminist ideals.
This article also very closely related to my job as head of Online Social Media> because with my job I am provided the opportunity to create such anti—sexist media that will help promote feminist ideals, A few ways that I have taken advantage of this opportunity is by trying to expand our events to those who have never set foot into the realm of social justice or feminism but are perhaps interested in itithose who simply have not known of the opportunities to get involved. I always try my best to incorporate upcoming Women‘s Center events into my upcoming conversations with people, and it‘s rather interesting that most people are interested in the topic and even in attending the event; the only thing is that they are hesitant to go if they have not participated in something like it before. There seems to be a sentiment where people are discouraged from attending events because they feel like they need to know someone there or else they will feel
discluded. I try my best to alleviate the by telling them that I‘ll be there, and that many who go are not “experts” in the field. Most people simply go because they are interested and they want to learn more! Another issue I have noticed is that many male have a preconceived notion that Women’s Center events are only open to women. I have tried to actively change this sentiment by making it clear in every gender buffet description that the event is open and welcome to people of all genders, I have also tried to actively engage more of my male friends who are interested in feminism to attend events and to talk about feminism in daily conversation.
This aligns with Burczak’s belief that the cause of the overarching sexist mindset of American society is due to the fact that people “don’t know what they don‘t know,“ and so through my role as an inherent peer educator at the Women’s Center, I’ve been trying my best to help spread knowledge about feminism. Overall, I have observed many connections between the theoretical underpinnings of feminism and social justice that l have studied through readings and discussions during AIP this quarter and my practical experience as an intern at the Women’s Center this quarter: I feel that the readings have provided me a much more in depth understanding of feminism and has helped me become more articulate about its leading ideals and issues.
