Op-ed recommendation: Why white women must make the equal-pay fight more inclusive

Originally published at: http://boingboing.net/2017/04/06/op-ed-recommendation-why-whit.html


See outside support for the “Women’s March” VS outside support for “A Day Without Immigrants”. The immigrants were, for the most part, the only ones supporting each other, The Women’s March saw all kinds of people come out in support.


You cannot dismantle oppression while you practice it.

Sounds like a good reason to invalidate every activist everywhere. You’re not pure enough, so STFU.


What is breath-taking here in this part of the article is that it talks about an oppressed group (white women) not standing up for another oppressed group (women of color), while not addressing the needs or responsibility of another oppressed group (men of color).

Without seeing any stats (as this summary chooses to ignore it) I would assume that men of color earn more money on the dollar than women of color. The article never even mentions the phrase “men of color” let alone their responsibility to stand up for for women of color as well.

Surely it would be equally on men of color to stand up for their female counterparts (or even ALL women). But that doesn’t sell ad-clicks, does it?

And of course, the one public policy that would have the greatest impact on these figures is never even mentioned.

You want more equal pay- Raise the minimum wage.


In some particularly funny irony, one supporter of the article actually says in the comments:

“If we are not willing to fight for the equality of ALL women, we have no place in the fight. Thank you for a wonderful article.”

Not realizing that the author is actually condemning them with that attitude:

“the “but all women” crowd tends to shout women with marginalized identities along the lines of race, sexuality, class, and physical ability back into silence.”

1 Like

White people, who needs 'em?

I think we should ship all the white people off to their own island, let them get up to their shenanigans without bothering other people.

It worked for Gilligan.

1 Like

That’s not what they mean here. This isn’t about purity, it’s about ignoring the more complicated structure of oppression. Yes, white women, like me have real problems that need to be addressed on the systemic level. That doesn’t mean that white women themselves can’t benefit from and practice racism themselves. This was a major blindspot for many white second wave feminists. Class issues, too.


This is an article about women, though.


Next to the last one…



Even the Japanese people on that island were white.


And Asian-American, Pacific Islander, and Native women are often not even considered “statistically significant” enough to be calculated.

I am trying to figure out what could be meant by this. It looks like the author is taking it as an insult, but if someone doesn’t have a statistically significant sample, they probably shouldn’t generate statistics from it: the generated data might not have anything to do with reality. (Also, the proximal link doesn’t seem to comment on significance so I don’t know where it is coming from.)


Statistics are not neutral. [quote=“knappa, post:13, topic:98466”]
the generated data might not have anything to do with reality. (

I’d say that’s probably always true.


I lurve that comic so much!

Also this one is so bang on.



Oh come now. Your hit- and-run quips are usually much smarter than that!


White guys outsource accountability for “diversity” to White women, who then decide “diversity” is mostly White women with a background nearly identical to theirs. If anything inclusion of White women ensures the ladder will be kicked away to prevent any women who is actually atypical from gaining admittance. See- Raspberry Pi Foundation.



It would probably help if they were clearer on their actual goals. I mean, if they’re going for a “from each according to his ability, to each according to his need” sort of thing, well, you have my axe, but it doesn’t really sound like they want to make everyone’s pay equal regardless of social position, education, or employment.

But those are the statistics they’re using. How is it relevant that people who’ve made different choices end up with different results?

Oh yes… if only women had made choices that included not having to take care of family, maybe we’d move up the ladder faster, just like a man. /s

Unfortunately, many of us have to make hard choices about family care vs. careers, and if we just drop the second shift of unpaid labor, it just doesn’t get done, far too often. When a child or parent is ill, the care often falls to women.