Lena Chen

is a reluctant sexpert, a feminist and queer advocate, and a walking case study on bad publicity. As a Harvard undergrad, she authored the blog Sex and the Ivy about her college sexcapades and misadventures. Her reputation has never quite recovered. Want to give her a book deal, send her hate mail, or misquote her in an article? Read her daily musings at The Ch!cktionary and check out her full bio.

photo

In April, I had the pleasure of moderating a talk with Anna Holmes and Jessie Daniels at Ain’t I A Woman: Women Of Color Speak On Activism. Our panel focused on the intersection of race and social media in the feminist movement. (Jessie is a professor at Hunter College and the author of Cyber Racism. Anna is the founding and former editor-in-chief of the women’s website, Jezebel.) For those of you who couldn’t make the event, here are some of the themes that we explored: Online media is often heralded as being more democratic and progressive than mainstream media, since it allows marginalized groups and those without the power of capital to establish a platform for their ideas. The reality is more nuanced. How is the Internet both a tool for social change and a weapon against it? Does the anonymity afforded by the Internet encourage the voicing of racist or homophobic views that might not be welcome were these conversations to take place in the real world? Even in progressive communities, the feminist blogosphere can replicate the same power structures that exist in mainstream feminist activism, giving a privileged few a louder voice while silencing less powerful/mainstream-friendly groups. How can we prevent digital spaces from becoming hierarchical and oppressive? While it is now acknowledged that feminism is lacking when addressing marginalized identities beyond gender, bringing up the notion of intersectionality is often just paying lip service to inclusion without taking active steps toward it. Cedar/Hazel Troost writes in “Beyond Inclusion” of how feminism fails to address the needs of trans people: Let’s make the record clear: there is virtually no women’s space extant today. Michfest is not women’s space, nor would it be even if trans women were allowed—it’s cis, white, middle class, able women’s space.  When one group controls a space or institution, when only its members’ voices, concerns, and perspectives are relevant to the determination and organization of that space—that is to say, when that group ‘owns’ the space—it is their space, regardless of who else may enter. So when allies to trans women demand our inclusion without simultaneously demanding that that space be accountable to us—including that trans & cis women be equally in charge of what constitutes women’s space and feminism—they are not demanding fundamental change, only a softer supremacy. Is the trend in feminist media to attempt inclusion or to aim for accountability? To which extent are Internet “call-outs” effective and to which extent do they deter those with white privilege from engaging in discussions of race? Sometimes, people of color are mistaken for white in online communities, due to the anonymous nature of the Internet. This is an experience that resonates with Anna, who is biracial but founded Jezebel, which is frequently thought of as a “white blog”. How is it that even when WOC do engage in mainstream movement-building that their contributions get white washed so that it’s not about a WOC speaking her truth but rather a WOC lending her voice to white feminists? Is participating in mainstream media necessarily selling out? What happens when other WOC don’t consider you one of their own as a result? Creating a truly representative feminism online is as difficult as creating it off-line. Can we encourage the mainstream (BlogHer, Bitch Magazine, big feminist pubs/sites, etc.) to become more inclusive or is the only way to give non-white issues adequate coverage to create spaces specifically for women of color/other minorities (Autostraddle, The Root, Blogalicious, Racialicious, etc.).How does one straddle the need to include without tokenizing? Where does that line get drawn? Feminist media faces a tough Catch-22 when it comes to balancing ideals and money. For example, adhering to a feminist ideology eliminates taking ad revenue from most major advertisers, and a publication may get criticized for lack of diversity only to find that less mainstream posts get fewer page views and comments than the ones targeting a white/cis/straight audience. Is a nuanced portrait of feminism even possible in a free market economy?

In April, I had the pleasure of moderating a talk with Anna Holmes and Jessie Daniels at Ain’t I A Woman: Women Of Color Speak On Activism. Our panel focused on the intersection of race and social media in the feminist movement. (Jessie is a professor at Hunter College and the author of Cyber Racism. Anna is the founding and former editor-in-chief of the women’s website, Jezebel.) For those of you who couldn’t make the event, here are some of the themes that we explored:

Online media is often heralded as being more democratic and progressive than mainstream media, since it allows marginalized groups and those without the power of capital to establish a platform for their ideas. The reality is more nuanced. How is the Internet both a tool for social change and a weapon against it? Does the anonymity afforded by the Internet encourage the voicing of racist or homophobic views that might not be welcome were these conversations to take place in the real world? Even in progressive communities, the feminist blogosphere can replicate the same power structures that exist in mainstream feminist activism, giving a privileged few a louder voice while silencing less powerful/mainstream-friendly groups. How can we prevent digital spaces from becoming hierarchical and oppressive?

While it is now acknowledged that feminism is lacking when addressing marginalized identities beyond gender, bringing up the notion of intersectionality is often just paying lip service to inclusion without taking active steps toward it. Cedar/Hazel Troost writes in “Beyond Inclusion” of how feminism fails to address the needs of trans people: Let’s make the record clear: there is virtually no women’s space extant today. Michfest is not women’s space, nor would it be even if trans women were allowed—it’s cis, white, middle class, able women’s space.  When one group controls a space or institution, when only its members’ voices, concerns, and perspectives are relevant to the determination and organization of that space—that is to say, when that group ‘owns’ the space—it is their space, regardless of who else may enter. So when allies to trans women demand our inclusion without simultaneously demanding that that space be accountable to us—including that trans & cis women be equally in charge of what constitutes women’s space and feminism—they are not demanding fundamental change, only a softer supremacy. Is the trend in feminist media to attempt inclusion or to aim for accountability? To which extent are Internet “call-outs” effective and to which extent do they deter those with white privilege from engaging in discussions of race?

Sometimes, people of color are mistaken for white in online communities, due to the anonymous nature of the Internet. This is an experience that resonates with Anna, who is biracial but founded Jezebel, which is frequently thought of as a “white blog”. How is it that even when WOC do engage in mainstream movement-building that their contributions get white washed so that it’s not about a WOC speaking her truth but rather a WOC lending her voice to white feminists? Is participating in mainstream media necessarily selling out? What happens when other WOC don’t consider you one of their own as a result?

Creating a truly representative feminism online is as difficult as creating it off-line. Can we encourage the mainstream (BlogHer, Bitch Magazine, big feminist pubs/sites, etc.) to become more inclusive or is the only way to give non-white issues adequate coverage to create spaces specifically for women of color/other minorities (Autostraddle, The Root, Blogalicious, Racialicious, etc.).How does one straddle the need to include without tokenizing? Where does that line get drawn?

Feminist media faces a tough Catch-22 when it comes to balancing ideals and money. For example, adhering to a feminist ideology eliminates taking ad revenue from most major advertisers, and a publication may get criticized for lack of diversity only to find that less mainstream posts get fewer page views and comments than the ones targeting a white/cis/straight audience. Is a nuanced portrait of feminism even possible in a free market economy?

blog comments powered by Disqus
  1. free-registry-cleaner reblogged this from lenachenblogger
  2. lenachenblogger reblogged this from lenachen
  3. lenachen posted this