alimarko:
That would be great in a world where there were no oppressed groups, but that’s definitely not the case.
In a world where men and women and those who identify outside the gender binary all started off being equally oppressed, we’d say everyone starts off with a score of -5. So in this perfect world that you apparently think we live in, we would fight for every group’s rights/etc equally. So let’s say we had a giant movement called “Equalism” that was literally for every single person on Earth “regardless of gender.” And it automatically added 10 points to everyone’s score. With the success of this group, everyone would reach a score of +5, and oppression would be equally lifted from everyone’s shoulders. That sounds a little too perfect, doesn’t it?
Probably because we don’t all start off with an equal “oppression score.” The more privileges you have, the higher your score starts off with. People who identify either as women or as outside the gender binary will always have a lower score than those who identify as men strictly based on gender and without the addition of outside factors. Those other factors, such as race, ability, sexuality, weight, wealth, etc, also affect a person’s score. So let’s say that a white, heterosexual male starts off with +3 and a white heterosexual woman starts off with +2. Adding 10 points to both of them might seem helpful, but if you’re giving an “equal” amount of support to each, the male will still end up being 1 point ahead of the female.
And that’s just when the woman is as privileged as the man other than with gender. Why don’t you try being a trans* woman of color and starting off with something like -10 oppression points, and then listening to somebody with +2 or +3 points saying that we should fight for everyone equally?
Because that tends to be the GOP way of looking at it: A bunch of mostly white, heterosexual, able-bodied extremely wealthy men (who probably have a “score” of at least +20) constantly try to tell those far less privileged than they to either stop whining because everybody has the same rights or to just shut up and deal with it.
Generally speaking, playing what has become known as the “oppression olympics” and trying to quantify/rank oppression tends to be highly problematic and simplistic, so this example was meant to be illustrative instead of decisively establishing any real system of scoring oppression. But I think it communicates the point effectively; fighting for the rights of every person regardless of gender will do nothing to diminish sexism against women. Posts like this ignore the existing disparities between gender identities/expressions, and don’t actually help anyone.
(Source: shorthairedgirl, via afunnyfeminist)