General Discussion
Related: Editorials & Other Articles, Issue Forums, Alliance Forums, Region ForumsBahar Mustafa: 'I Can't Be Racist Or Sexist Because I'm An Ethnic Minority Woman
The student diversity officer for Goldsmiths University has said she cannot be racist or sexist because she is an ethnic minority woman.
Bahar Mustafa made the comments as part of a statement defending an event organised at the university, which she controversially told men and white people they were not allowed to attend.
Speaking to the university's student assembly, she said: "There have been charges made against me, that I am racist and sexist to white men. I want to explain why this is false. I, an ethnic minority woman, cannot be racist or sexist to white men, because racism and sexism describes structures of privilege based on race and gender.
"And therefore women of colour and non-binary genders cannot be racist or sexist as we do not stand to benefit from such a system."
Read More:
Goldsmiths' Students' Union backtracked over the event, which was a meeting to follow-up the occupation of a university building, following a huge public backlash.
On the event's Facebook page, Mustafa had written: "If you've been invited and you're a man and/or white PLEASE DON'T COME!.. This is a BME Women and non-binary event only.. Don't worry lads we will give you and allies things to do."
The organisers of the meeting later backtracked, adding: "Allies now welcome" to the event's description.
In her statement, Mustafa continued: "In order for our actions to have been deemed racist or sexist, the current system would have to be one which enables only women and people of colour to benefit economically and socially on such a large scale and to the systematic exclusion of white people and men who for the past 400 years would have had to have been subjected to colonisation."
She then adds: "Reverse racism and reverse sexism are not real."
Earlier this month, University College London Union backed the exclusion of men and white people from anti-racism events, adding it was disappointed "white allies" were being allowed to attend.
The Oxford English Dictionary defines racism as: "A belief that one’s own racial or ethnic group is superior, or that other such groups represent a threat to one’s cultural identity, racial integrity, or economic well-being; (also) a belief that the members of different racial or ethnic groups possess specific characteristics, abilities, or qualities, which can be compared and evaluated."
http://www.huffingtonpost.co.uk/2015/05/13/bahar-mustafa-goldsmiths-cant-be-racist-sexist-woman_n_7272096.html
------------------------------------
I really don't know what to say to this except expressing how juvenile, ridiculous and self-righteous this "diversity officer" is. What does everyone else think? Agree or disagree?
= new reply since forum marked as read
Highlight:
NoneDon't highlight anything
5 newestHighlight 5 most recent replies
bravenak
(34,648 posts)I also do not subscribe to the belief in 'reverse racism' or 'reverse sexism'. History would need to be rewritten for that to even be on my radar as a problem. We live under white/male supremacy, not black/female supremacy.
Response to bravenak (Reply #1)
Name removed Message auto-removed
bluestateguy
(44,173 posts)Universities today are overloaded with oodles of bureaucrats who are arrogant, overpaid and do little of importance.
petronius
(26,602 posts)the Student Union (student government). I.e., a student, elected by students to their representative body...
AgingAmerican
(12,958 posts)We will just fight on despite folks like her.
Behind the Aegis
(53,956 posts)The account has since been shut down but Mustafa claims the hashtags were "in-jokes and ways that many people in the queer feminist community express ourselves".
"It's a way of reclaiming the power from the trauma many of us experience as queers, women, people of colour, who are on the receiving end of racism, misogyny and homophobia daily," she added.
Disgusting.
cali
(114,904 posts)AgingAmerican
(12,958 posts)nt
cali
(114,904 posts)but she can be individually racist or sexist. But I also think her attitude doesn't advance the cause of diversity. Exclusionism isn't a helpful tactic for diversity and inclusion.
bemildred
(90,061 posts)The diversity officer wants to talk about institutions and wants to insist on the right to speak for herself, and the parties being addressed want to talk about the unfairness to them of being silenced and excluded.
Chathamization
(1,638 posts)One of the officers in the Freddie Gray death was a minority woman, and it seems that most here are in agreement that institutional racism was a major factor in that death. One of our major riots here was set off by a minority woman shooting a member of another minority group that had a lower position in the local power structure.
Bahar isn't in a position where she can systematically be racist or sexist, but her exclusionary opinions and her disgusting hashtag to "kill all white men" shows where her beliefs lie and that's firmly in the racist and sexist camp. She doesn't seem to be interested in true diversity, just to rile things up and separate more groups of people from each other.
oberliner
(58,724 posts)I posted a picture of her down thread. There's no reason why she can't be part of institutional racism and benefit from the many privileges she received based on her white skin.
Jackpine Radical
(45,274 posts)and just use "bigot" to describe anyone who holds other identifiable groups in contempt.
Mostly this whole business descends into a debate about what one means by "racism." We privileged majority-types tend to think of racism as an undesirable individual trait, while the targets of racism see that they're not just facing nasty individuals from the majority culture, but a whole system of unfairness that is sustained, not just by the obvious bigots, but by a whole lot if institutionalized mechanisms, formal and informal. The Civil Rights movement did remove many of the obvious formal mechanisms, but perverted human inventiveness has found ways of shifting the horrific unfairness onto informal processes that lie within the formally "neutral" system.
This is at least my understanding of the issue, but I'm running the risk of honkiesplaining here, and readily stand to be educated in my understanding.
Oneironaut
(5,494 posts)To say, "I can't be racist because I'm a minority" is wrong - you can still show overt racism. The same is true for sexism.
AgingAmerican
(12,958 posts)When sociology does not study individuals or individual behavior. This position is 'cake eating'.
My Good Babushka
(2,710 posts)She cannot be racist or sexist because "reverse racism" or "reverse sexism" is not a thing. I don't know what the event was about, so I don't know if it was appropriate to dis-invite allies who wished to attend. I don't think it's wrong for minority and non-binary people to have one thing for themselves, so they can hear themselves think, without being talked over by ethnically privileged white males, whether they are well-wishers or not.
Oktober
(1,488 posts)No qualifier necessary...
My Good Babushka
(2,710 posts)you have to be in the position of privilege and power. So, no. She can be prejudiced, but not sexist or racist.
Oktober
(1,488 posts)The grown ups know that there are specific categories for what you are referring to i.e. institutional racism.
NuclearDem
(16,184 posts)There's a difference between the pathetic whining about "reverse racism" against white people because of affirmative action or whatever perceived slight du jour is circling around the right wing media and people who actually do hate white people because they're white.
cali
(114,904 posts)The definitions of those words don't preclude applying them to a member of any group, but ok, let's just call this individual a bigot
Lizzie Poppet
(10,164 posts)That majority (which I should point out includes all races) employs the qualifier institutional racism. Using "racism" to describe all such prejudice is a superior usage to "bigotry" because it is more specific. Bigotry takes many forms (over race, religion, economics, etc.). Restricting "racism" to only institutional racism is nothing more than an attempt at linguistic appropriation.
oberliner
(58,724 posts)If she is the one who can decide who can and who cannot attend this event, does that not put her in a power position?
Oktober
(1,488 posts)Last edited Sat May 23, 2015, 11:55 AM - Edit history (1)
... that a non white person or a non male person can do no wrong because of oppression that exists in the world.
Whatever power or position they might have is totally and completely negated by the historical tidal wave and thus any faults or negative actions are the responsibility of the aforementioned white males.
Sounds like a pretty cushy way to go through life when nothing is your fault....
romanic
(2,841 posts)you'd have to give women like Michelle Malkin a pass too.
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/alex-koppelman/michelle-malkins-white-su_b_20873.html
http://thedailybanter.com/2014/04/translating-michelle-malkins-hate-filled-racist-eulogy-of-obamas-aunt/
http://articles.philly.com/2003-06-30/news/25446551_1_admissions-hopwood-decision-ethnic-minorities
I'm not going to lessen her vitriol as just "prejudiced" when it's straight up racism.
lumberjack_jeff
(33,224 posts)Particularly among the faculty, and rethink what the words "privilege and power" mean.
She had the privilege and the power to do, say and organize such a stupid thing to begin with.
No, the allies who "will be given things to do" are the ones who lacked both privilege and power at Goldsmiths university.
mythology
(9,527 posts)I don't know specifically if she was being so here, as there are valid reasons to have events only open to specific groups, but she probably isn't qualified to have her job if she's so inartful in dealing with this situation or thinks that having a public social media presence with using the hashtag killallwhitemen was going to be helpful. Even though I take her at her word that it's an in joke, doing so in a public setting like social media is a bad idea. I say all sorts of things that out of context would be inappropriate, I just only do them with individual people in real life that know me well enough to understand that it's humor.
I don't agree with the effort to reduce the definition of racism down to institutional racism. I think it does a disservice to reducing racism in general and it shoves all of the responsibility onto white people, and even more specifically white men. Doing so removes agency from minority groups to impact their own lives, and to me, smacks of the colonial past where white men decided that blacks or other non-white populations were better off for us putting in changes because they weren't capable.
cwydro
(51,308 posts)Oh my.
Lizzie Poppet
(10,164 posts)Ba-dum...tish!
Doctor Who
(147 posts)You win the Internet today Lizzie.
Igel
(35,300 posts)The school was 75% black, 20% Latino, and the rest white and Asian and Native American when it opened. Give or take a percentage or two.
Before we transferred our kid out, it was 80% black, 18% Latino, and 2% white/Asian/NA.
The principal said it was great that their school was becoming more diverse.
I snarked at her afterwards that perhaps it would be maximally diverse if it were 100% black, and she nodded enthusiastically for a moment. Then the utter idiocy of what she just agreed to--what her earlier statement entailed--hit her. As long as the percentage of whites decreases, it's more diverse.
Completely non-diverse = completely diverse.
Non-diverse = diverse.
She made "diverse", as many do, into what some refer to as a "ravel" word.
Ravel: to disentangle or unravel; to tangle. Unravel: to disentangle.
Ravel is an antonym of ravel.
Ravel is a synonym of unravel.
Ravel is an antonym of unravel.
ck4829
(35,071 posts)This argument by assertion is stupid, regardless of who does it.
Race as a category for classifying people, but especially as a category for excluding other people, it all needs to be abolished. It needed to be abolished before it was created. Perpetuating this, why?
Humanist_Activist
(7,670 posts)Jesus fucking Christ on a pogo stick.
gollygee
(22,336 posts)She can be bigoted but there's no way for a woman of color to be racist or sexist toward white men. Our society doesn't allow for it. Women of color don't have the societal power to do that particular kind of harm to white men.
cali
(114,904 posts)or sexism,.but as an individual she can be both or either
gollygee
(22,336 posts)It's completely different when an individual is bigoted but you can easily escape the bigotry by escaping that individual, than when you're discriminated against everywhere because of how our society is structured. Totally different amounts of harm, and they are in no way comparable.
Lizzie Poppet
(10,164 posts)I agree with the lexicon. I reject the attempt to define all racism as institutional racism and thereby demand that non-institutional racism be redefined as "bigotry" or suchlike. Narrowing the definition of racism creates unnecessary confusion (and a crapload of annoying semantic pedantry that inhibits real discussion).
gollygee
(22,336 posts)and the majority of social scientists agree with me.
Lizzie Poppet
(10,164 posts)Unless one is utterly deaf to context, the difference between individual and institutional racism is obvious.
And argumentum ad vericundiam fallacies don't convince me otherwise...
gollygee
(22,336 posts)Lizzie Poppet
(10,164 posts)I refuse to let them determine my lexicon.
gollygee
(22,336 posts)Lizzie Poppet
(10,164 posts)I can't get that to parse...
SickOfTheOnePct
(7,290 posts)cali
(114,904 posts)in any case, what you are referring to is clearly institutional racism. We have no disagreement on that. The rest is quibbling about language. Every dictionary says an individual can be a racist or sexist, but there is certainly a movement that agrees with you.
gollygee
(22,336 posts)and they're written primarily by white people. Everything I've read and heard tells me most people of color describe racism this same way but their usage doesn't make its way into dictionaries.
Lizzie Poppet
(10,164 posts)Do you not see that a different lexicon for different groups contributes to the problem?
gollygee
(22,336 posts)But see the post about how some people are unable to see context.
99Forever
(14,524 posts)... but you are already doing a bang-up job of it.
I guess cognitive dissonance isn't just for neo-cons and neo-liberals any more.
MichMan
(11,919 posts)While I think her position is patently ridiculous, I have seen that exact same argument used by DU members many many times before.
HassleCat
(6,409 posts)Her argument holds true when speaking of society at large. There is no such thing as reverse racism, because racism is a feature of the power structure of society. Of course, the exact nature of racism may vary from one society to another, so that Christians persecute Muslims in the United States, and Muslims persecute Christians in Pakistan. What she ignores is that the typical college or university sets up a sort of micro-society and imposes an artificial structure on its students. I would agree with her that what she did could not be called "reverse sexism," but it could be called "really stupid." In her artificial little world, she has authority and power and all the other attributes that enables racism and sexism. When she uses that power and authority to exclude men, she's emulating the sexism to which she objects. But she's just a college administrator, so she can't be expected to appreciate this.
B2G
(9,766 posts)"In her artificial little world, she has authority and power and all the other attributes that enables racism and sexism. When she uses that power and authority to exclude men, she's emulating the sexism to which she objects."
lumberjack_jeff
(33,224 posts)That words like "racism" can't mean whatever we want it to mean from moment to moment.
Institutional racism is the phenomenon by which the racist attitude of individuals imprint on society.
Racism is something individuals experience. Institutional racism is something expressed by social institutions.
She can be - and in fact is - a racist. What she lacks is the support to imprint that bigotry on social institutions... with the possible exception of her workplace.
La Lioness Priyanka
(53,866 posts)so she is right when she says reverse racism does not exist. even if one has negative evaluations of men/whites, there is no systemic oppression of men/whites based on their gender/color.
oberliner
(58,724 posts)She can certainly be racist - she has white privilege.
Is this not her?
romanic
(2,841 posts)I think you mean "white passing" which she definitely is.
oberliner
(58,724 posts)Though, I do think that she is able to go through the world differently than someone who doesn't look as white as she does.
B2G
(9,766 posts)then I'd like a list of all of the people who are considered to have white privilege, so I can keep track.
TexasMommaWithAHat
(3,212 posts)nt
B2G
(9,766 posts)
cali
(114,904 posts)you can apply the words racist and sexist to her. Sick Bigot is a fine descriptor for anyone who has the hashtag #KillAllWhiteMen- and her excuse for it, is dog shit.
Fire her. She has no business in that position.
romanic
(2,841 posts)She'd look just like Bahar. What a juvenile looking human being. Bleh
B2G
(9,766 posts)Since she is of Turkish heritage, she is by default a 'minority'? Because she lives and works in the UK?
If she lived and worked in Turkey, where she would be a part of the majority, and espoused these views against whites there, would she THEN be racist?
oberliner
(58,724 posts)In Turkey racism and ethnic discrimination are prevalent in its society and throughout its history, and this racism and ethnic discrimination is also institutional against the non-Muslim and non-Sunni minorities.[2][3][4][5][6][7][8] This appears mainly in the form of negative attitudes and actions by Turks towards people who are not considered ethnically Turkish. Such discrimination is predominately towards non-Muslim minorities such as the Christian minorities like Greeks, Armenians, Assyrians, and others, as well as hostility towards various interpretations of Islam such as Alevis, Sufis, Shiites and other Muslim non-Turks such as Kurds, Zazas and Arabs.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Racism_in_Turkey
B2G
(9,766 posts)she yes, she would be considered to be a racist in Turkey.
MichMan
(11,919 posts)Racism and discrimination is present in Turkey against Armenians? Who knew? 
I wondered what the genocide that my Armenian friends have been discussing for decades was.
MichMan
(11,919 posts)Since she appears to be white herself, does that mean she has been banned from attending?
notadmblnd
(23,720 posts)but not being a racist or sexist does not exclude her from being a bigot nor a member of the man hating woman's club. I cant think of the proper word for a women that discriminate against men, is it misandry?
But for a supposedly educated woman, she sounds pretty damn dumb saying what she said.
socialist_n_TN
(11,481 posts)Racism and sexism are words that, back in the 60s/70s when this was being heavily debated, exclusively reserved for official bias against differently colored people or the female gender. Biased or prejudiced would be the term for someone who had an unreasoning hatred for white people because that bias WAS NOT BACKED BY THE POWER STRUCTURE OF THE STATE.
The problem with this attitude from a Marxist perspective is that it atomizes the resistance TO the actual racism that does exist and, because it discounts the economic basis of the said racism, it also blocks the solution to systemic racism which would be a socialist revolution led by the working class. Marxists would have no problem with black people LEADING the fight against black oppression or women LEADING the fight against sexism, but you will not be able to do it alone. These fights would need to be fought concurrently with the fight against capitalism. Because you'll NEVER be able to totally get rid of either racism or sexism (both ultimately and historically based on capitalist property rights of white males) UNTIL YOU GET RID OF CAPITALISM ITSELF.
Anything else would involve merely continuing the oppression and changing the color and gender of the faces. My evidence for this consists of two names. Herman Cain and Carly Fiorina.
jwirr
(39,215 posts)have long been racist against the Native Americans. In turn Native Americans were anti-black and also hated whites with reason.
All of that started to change when our groups all went to the schools together and started inter-marrying. Today there is still some racism present all around but for the most part the three races do not hold the same hatred that we saw in the past. It is hard to hate your own family.
My one grandson was a great example of this change. After I learned of their black heritage doing genealogy this young Native American grandson decided to celebrate his other heritage and started rapping. His fans included all three races (and so does his heritage). And that is happening in different ways all across our area.
muriel_volestrangler
(101,312 posts)http://heyevent.com/event/611410902336800/gold-bme-holding-senior-management-to-account-organising-meeting
And if you're trying to organise a 'cross campus campaign', excluding people, making snarky 'we'll find something for you to do' comments and '#KillAllWhiteMen' jokes looks more like someone interested in self-promotion than actually getting change to happen.
