Kristina Bartl – Pike & Hurricane

White feminists: the dark side of Western feminism

Kristina Bartl — Tue, 24 Mar 2020 15:31:32 +0000

The thing with feminists, who are white, and white feminists is kind of like fingers and thumbs. Not all fingers are thumbs, but all thumbs are fingers. This means, that being a feminist who is white, does not necessarily mean that you are a white feminist. Unfortunately, it is very likely though. But before you start questioning yourself, it is time to look at the term and what it actually means.

Swallow the bitter pill

White feminists are, simply put, hypocrites. One second they are celebrating their equally white friends for wearing boxer braids and the next second they file a complaint about their black co-worker, for wearing cornrows at work. They want to have a male gay best friend, but sharing the locker room in the gym with a lesbian makes them awfully uncomfortable. They hype up their shy, but skinny, friend for posting a bikini picture, but tell fat women to cover up as soon she’s wearing something “too revealing”. They tell their friends to wear whatever they feel comfortable in (as long as it fits their body type of course), but try to tell Muslim women that they should get rid off their hijab. They do all of that whilst wearing shirts saying “The Future Is Female”, which were produced by women of colour in a developing country under terrible work conditions.

Further, slogans like the one mentioned before often ignore that non-binary people exist and transsexual people are affected by feminist issues as well. Yet, these women call themselves feminists. If you read this and think that any of these things above reflect your behavior, then I’m sorry to break it to you: If your so-called feminism is racist, homophobic, fatphobic, xenophobic, or transphobic, it is useless.

Break internalized patterns

Not all white feminists exclude minority groups on purpose. Sometimes they are simply so caught up with their privilege that they simply don’t see problems related to race, sexual identity, sexual orientation or social status. Yet, this is clearly not an apology, but it is an explanation. Emma Watson, for example, is a popular example for white feminism, before she started to reflect on her own words and actions. After being called out as white feminist for promoting feminism as something simple and asking men to come to save the female gaze from patriarchy, she started to educate herself on feminism. One can do that by simply asking themselves how they profited from their skin colour, straightness or social status. And most importantly one should not only be able to see how they profit from the inequality in society, but in what way they take part in maintaining it.

Calling yourself and your loved ones out on being inconsiderate is uncomfortable, but in the end it’s better to realize that you’ve been acting ignorantly, than to keep on excluding other people’s issues under the name of feminism. One mistake that feminists who grew up with certain privileges make, is asking to be educated by members of oppressed groups, rather than educating themselves. It is not the responsibility of people of colour to teach you about racism. Just read books and articles written by non-white authors and gain an insight into the struggles people of colour have to face on a daily basis. Don’t ask trans people what problems they are facing and how you can help. Just get familiar with concepts and works created by trans people and find ways to support the community.

No wildcards

Intersectional feminism means that problems and issues of all people—regardless of their sex, social status, ethnic background, religion or ability—are taken into consideration. And if I say all people, I mean all people. There are no wildcards. This means, for example, that being gay does not make one immune against being called out for racist comments or “jokes”. But beware, it does not mean that you are in any position to discuss issues of race with people of colour, if you are white. Neither, does it mean that you are asked to fight other people’s fights instead of them. This is not what being an ally is about. It is fine to use the benefit you gained from living a privileged life to give other people a platform. But, you should keep in mind that those fights are not about you. It is your time to listen, support and stand up, instead of acting like a hero, when no one asked for it, simply to be celebrated for your courage.

White feminists, who call themselves allies, tend to take up space, because they think their voices are louder and more likely to be heard. And yes, sometimes it is helpful and clever to do so, but it does not mean that white feminists should be fighting for other people – they should be fighting with them. As Roxane Gay put it: “We need people to stand up and take on the problems borne of oppression as their own, without remove or distance.” If privileged feminists want to rightfully call themselves intersectional or an ally, it necessitates first of all, that they acknowledge problems, regardless if they are directly affected by them or not.

Know your place

I am a white woman, who grew up in central Europe. I am very much aware that I am writing this article from a very privileged perspective. This article is not about me, nor am I glorifying myself as a woke feminist. There is always something new to learn, but personally I think the most important thing is to listen and realize when your perspective is lacking intersectionality. Internalized patterns are hard to overcome, but actively stepping away from them is one first step to distance yourself from white feminist beliefs. Actively following the work of members of the LGBTQ+ community, people of colour and other groups, who question and tackle the inequality of the social construct we are living in, can certainly help in this process. But it is not only important to actively work on your own behavior, but also to call out your white friends, when they are ignoring issues, simply because they can’t relate to them. I mean, you would probably tell your friends if they had some spinach stuck in their teeth, so I guess it’s only right to tell them that they have some racism in their feminism.

In case you want to broaden your horizon in regards to this topic, make sure you check out:

@elleschar

@munroebergdorf

@webcomicname

@nonwhitesaviors

@mattxiv

@goddessplatform

@bodyposipanda

@rachelcargle

@jvn

@alokvmenon

@iamrachelricketts

by Kristina Bartl

Photo Credits

White Egg, Olga1205

White Egg Shells, Corophoto

Egg Box, moiranazzari

The post White feminists: the dark side of Western feminism appeared first on Pike & Hurricane.

What Goes Around Should Always Come Back Around

Kristina Bartl — Sat, 22 Feb 2020 15:31:59 +0000

I still remember the first time I went to visit the British Museum with my brother. I found myself staring at the museum’s collection map and, as indecisive as I am, I could not pick a starting point for our journey. Did I want to be taken back to Ancient Rome and Greece and stroll through halls full of temples and statues? Or was I rather in the mood for South Indian Artifacts such as the statue of Shiva Nataraja? And what about Ancient Egypt — I always wanted to see a Sphinx! I was amazed by the fact that all those treasures could be found within one building in Central London, but my brother only rolled his eyes and said: “Ever heard of Colonialism?” and all of a sudden I was not that amazed anymore.

They came, they saw, they took

People who grew up in western parts of the world tend to forget that exhibition material is more than just a collection of pretty things to look at. Those objects are related to ancient myths and represent the origin of entire cultures. One of the many ways Britain exploited several parts of the world as a colonizer, was the theft of cultural assets, only for them to be displayed in their museums. Especially in the last few years, countries have started to demand those stolen artifacts back. Since then it’s been heavily discussed in the media if those artifacts should be returned or not.

Museums have two main arguments that speak against them handing back the artifacts. Firstly, it is claimed that the countries of origin do not have the required knowledge and means to maintain the objects. The fact that western museums consider their knowledge regarding ancient artifacts as superior to eastern museums, is not a good look considering the entity of this discussion. Furthermore, and almost a bit ironically, there is a claim that returning some of these goods is almost impossible, because the original owners are not traceable, even though researching the artefacts’ origins is a huge part of the museums’ work. Yes, returning heavy marvel-built parts of Greek temples back to their home country would be without a doubt an intense process, but maybe this is just one more hint that they were never meant to be displayed in foreign museums in the first place.

Cultural appreciation or exploitation?

Museums are not the only places where we can find awkwardly placed ancient artefacts. Within one mile distance from the British Museum stands Cleopatra’s Needle, which has no connection to Cleopatra besides its origin. It came all the way from Alexandria in 1877 after being gifted to Britain by the Sultan of Egypt and Sudan. Two similar obelisks found their way to Paris and New York. Shipping those enormous artifacts to their current placements was expensive and nearly took the lives of some of the sailors. All this expenditure for a monument. What is it with the West and its obsession with other cultures? Whilst cases such as Cleopatra’s needle are at least not as ethically questionable as the display of stolen artifacts, it is still an example of the West and its exceptionally strong interest in other cultures. On the one hand, some representatives have openly spoken about appreciating the fact that their culture is being displayed to a huge audience, yet it should also be possible for their citizens to see the artifacts that have been crafted by their ancestors.

Some museums, such as the Nationaal Museum van Wereldculturen, introduced a policy which is dedicated to the returning of goods that are reclaimed by their original owners. There are also private collectors who handed back artifacts that they inherited, which is how some of the famous Benin Bronzes found their way back home, while most of them are still in the British Museum in London or in the Metropolitan Museum in New York. France handed back a few objects in November last year, but it does not outweigh the fact that former colonies only own a small percentage of their cultural artifacts, whilst their former colonizers withhold most of them. For example, 90 percent of African artifacts displayed are exhibited in European museums.

The discussion surrounding the stolen artifacts has, of course, many more factors and stories that have to be considered, but in the end; theft is theft. If former colonies reclaim their cultural heritage, they have every right to have them handed back. And if it is, for whatever reason, not possible to return stolen goods, then there has to be at least enough transparency regarding how they ended up in the museum’s possession. Britain, and other former colonizers, have profited from other cultures for long enough and it is time for them to talk about their history. After all, that’s what museums are here for, isn’t it?

by Kristina Bartl

Photo Credits

London, Das British Museum, symbol

Museum, Roof, Architecture, London, hurk

Benin Bronzes, Archie, CC BY 2.0

The post What Goes Around Should Always Come Back Around appeared first on Pike & Hurricane.

The single rebellion and its happy lonely riders

Kristina Bartl — Mon, 06 Jan 2020 19:11:33 +0000

Way too often being single is seen as an unintentional stop on the way to a next relationship that will lead to a fulfilled life with a long-term partner. It seems to be easily forgotten that being single can also be your chosen final destination. It almost confuses people, when someone tells them that they are not dating with the main purpose of finding a partner. And this reaction is not surprising, when there are studies out there that display an image of sad and lonely millennials. Some even claim that our lack of (or too little) income and too much stress at Uni or work are the reasons for the high number of singles in our generation. The same factors are also used to explain why we choose renting a place over buying it. If I didn’t know better I’d almost believe that we are a generation of broke and highly depressed loners with commitment issues. Anyhow, there are other studies and articles that paint a picture of self-empowered individuals. Tinder published a survey that showed that 72 percent of the 1000 participants made an active choice to remain single. A generation of young people that don’t need a traditional relationship to feel fulfilled. Is it just a coincidence that the most educated generation is also the one that says farewell to traditional life-goals?

About relationships and happiness

The celebration of singledom has become an empowering movement over the last years. If we take a closer look, we will see that the main voices behind it have some things in common: They are all twenty-somethings, single (or in non-traditional partnerships) and identify as female. Before you pity any of them or even call them bitter single ladies, you should know that unmarried women without kids are the happiest group of people. Ironically men are healthier, when they are in a stable relationship. Taken this terribly outdated binary-based gender approach aside, it seems as if being in a heterosexual relationship is a rather unhealthy decision for women.

This does not mean that everyone should be hating on the male gaze or relationships in general, neither does it mean that the unhealthy aspects of relationships are related to the genitals one is born with. It is more a problem of social constructs and, as a consequence of that, also of toxic masculinity. From an early stage on almost everyone is conditioned to fulfill certain roles. Women are supposed to suppress themselves and their needs. Men on the other side are conditioned into being strong, whilst also being taught to deny their emotional side. Both can be really unhealthy in the long run, but especially men and the role they are taught to fulfill can become highly toxic for their partners and their relationships. It can lead to an inability to communicate feelings and emotions or non-appreciation of partners and their actions. A consequence of that could be ending up in an unequal relationship, were one party nurtures the other one, without getting anything in return. And now it makes sense that women become miserable in relationships with men, when society, radically spoken, is teaching the male part of the world population that they are superior over everyone without a penis. But those beliefs and habits can be unlearned and therefore, the genitals one is born with shouldn’t be used as an excuse for being a bad partner.

Become a lonely rider

For a long time being single, especially if you were a woman, has been seen as an equivalent to being a failure. Not that long ago, it was even more “tragic” to be a pregnant single woman. In Ireland some unmarried and pregnant women were even brought to so-called Houses of Shame. Which were a dangerous and harmful environment for both, the babies and their mothers. To full extent it became clear, when investigations earlier this year showed that over 800 children died in Irish mother and baby homes from 1925 to 1961. As you can see shaming women for embracing life in all its aspects, regardless of their relationship status, has a long history and could even lead to ending up in life-threatening circumstances. Even though, those official organizations, which were established for the purpose to punish women for not fitting into the rules of society, are less common in most parts of the world nowadays, some women still think that it is safer for them to stay in relationships that make them unhappy, instead of breaking them up. But, as mentioned above, young people are more and more likely to see that being single offers you more than an unhealthy partnership could. I know that I am diving into a sensitive topic here, so please note that I am not talking about severe physical or emotional abuse. I am talking about about staying with someone, who does not fulfill you, makes you unhappy or is taking advantage of you.

The question that comes up now is, why do some people still stick with their partner even though there is no rational reason for it? Well, it is not always that simple and sometimes people need to be nudged into making themselves less miserable. Artist and writer Florence Given empowers people worldwide to dump their spouse. About one year ago she broke up with her boyfriend and since then she did not only motivate other people to end their unhealthy relationships, but also spread a positive message regarding singledom. Her work inspires people to see dating more as something fun and exciting, rather than an instrument to find a new relationship. Her journey showed that letting go of the need to find someone else will eventually lead you to become closer to yourself.

Reclaiming our sexual power

Another woman I admire from afar is Ruby Stevenson. The non-monogamous bisexual sex educator is spreading her sex positive vibe and body positivity. Both topics have to be mentioned when we are talking about single life. Not being in a relationship does not mean that someone can’t or shouldn’t have sex, even though, women are being called out for satisfying their sexual needs by themselves or with sexual partner(s) and embracing their body, regardless if it fits society’s beauty standards. Stevenson takes it one step further, as she explains in an Instagram post about one of her public talks: “Being a slut is an attitude, and transcends the number of people you’ve slept with or what your sexual preferences are; it’s about embracing your sexuality with confidence.”

So please - in case you ever recognize that someone is being slut-shamed or you are experiencing it yourself, keep in mind, that being a “slut” is nothing to be ashamed of. Reclaiming words that are used to shame certain groups of people is a powerful move. Not only words that have an openly negative association, such as bitch or slut, should be reclaimed. Also the relationship status “single” itself should no longer stand for being depressed and lonely, because it can be the exact opposite!

Wrap it up

So basically, as soon as you realize that being single has nothing to do with being miserable, you will see that there is nothing to be afraid of and you will learn to embrace the independence that comes along with it. If you are in a happy and equal relationship, that’s great! But you’re not weird for not wanting a relationship and guess what? You don’t need one! You want to see that movie and finally have dinner at this new restaurant? Take a friend out on a fun night or just go by yourself. You prefer casual hook-ups over relationships? Just make sure to get yourself tested for STDs from time to time, have safe sex and you’re good to go. Do whatever you want to do, as long as you’re happy with it. What I’m trying to say is, and I can not stress this enough, don’t let anyone ever tell you again that you need a relationship for anything.

by Kristina Bartl

Photo Credits

Blowin' in the wind, Rajarshi Mitra, CC BY 2.0

Rotten Banana, Christoph Schütz

Banana Skin, Photorama

Juicy Peach, Daria Głodowska

The post The single rebellion and its happy lonely riders appeared first on Pike & Hurricane.

Dead or alive: on Punk and Anarchism

Kristina Bartl — Wed, 04 Dec 2019 17:12:13 +0000

Music and protesting have always gone hand in hand. Even Mozart once composed a six voice canon and titled it “Difficile lectu mihi mars et jonicu difficile”, which does not make much sense in Latin, but it sounds like “Kiss my arse!” in German. Why did he do it? Rumor has it that it was solely out of fun. Whilst this form of provocation is not the norm in classical music, there are certain genres that have always been a form of more serious protest. When Punk, a genre fueled by anger and disappointment in society, gained popularity, a new form of protest was born. In the 70s no one in the Rock or Punk scene questioned the necessity of the rebellion, whose soundtrack was provided by The Sex Pistols, Mötley Crue or The Clash. But nowadays, in the time of millennials and avocados, many claim that Punk is dead – for real this time.

Before making any assumptions regarding Punk’s extinction, it’s time to take a step back and remember its glorious early days. Until this day there are many different answers, when one asks for the origin of Punk. Some claim it came all the way from land of Down Under, others would bet their first born that Punk arose from an underground scene in the United States. And people like myself consider the United Kingdom as its origin. Regardless of where it came from, one thing is clear: Punk was the voice for and of the misunderstood and silenced members of society.

Contemporary Punk

Punk is is not a synonym for destructive behaviour or certain aesthetics and it never was supposed to be a specific style or even a particular sound. Punk was and is a rebellious act. When Refused, a Swedish hardcore-punk band, released their new album “War Music” this October the Punk scene welcomed the LP with open arms, because it satisfies its listeners’ nostalgia by taking them back to the early days of punk. The band also made a public statement regarding their latest release, which was full of empowering messages as: “[…] But we still believe that capitalism is cancer. And we still believe it can be cured. We still believe that the patriarchy is cancer. And we still believe it too can be cured. […]”. Even though, their most recent work is without a doubt an anarchistic and powerful piece of art, there are multiple other artists, who have kept Punk alive over the years.

In 2011, for example, a group of young Russian women formed a band called Pussy Riot and wrote protest songs against their politicians. In March 2012, three of those women got arrested for playing their music in front of a cathedral. If you think that their imprisonment for this so-called act of ‘hooliganism’ stopped the band from being vocal about politics, then you are absolutely wrong. Right after her release one of the band members, Nadezhda Tolokonnikova, showed that not even a Russian prison can hold her back from being vocal about the political situation in her home country by shouting “Russia without Putin!” in front of journalists. Also the band’s musical protest has continuously been going strong, for example, in 2018 they published a song in protest against the upcoming Putin election that year.

The actions of Pussy Riot are an example of Punk in its purest form. But there are more Russian groups, who use their art to express their thoughts on, not only the Russian, but the worldwide political and social climate. One of them is Shortparis – a group that combines visuals, choreographies, experimental punk and electronic music. Contrary to Pussy Riot, they do not explicitly refer to Russian topics. The group is rather discrete in their lyrical message, but their music videos and live performances are full of powerful images. One could interpret some of the visuals as signs against neo-Nazism, toxic masculinity or social inequality. The band does not comment on those speculations and give their audience room for their own interpretation, because they would rather let their art speak for itself. In my opinion, their work is a balancing act between political and social matters, whilst their sound is flowing somewhere between hope and frustration.

Not only the Russian government inspires artists to articulate their anger. The American government, for example, has inspired the punk scene for years and especially one song became the sound for the protest against the country’s political situation. I am speaking of “American Idiot” by Green Day, which was not dedicated to the current president, but to one of his predecessors – George W. Bush – and yet, it still is as relevant in 2019 as it was at its release 15 years ago.

In the summer of 2018, when Donald Trump visited the United Kingdom, British Trump critics launched a campaign that hyped the song so much that it ended up in the charts during Trump’s stay in the UK. But also the members of Green Day themselves are very open about their opinion on the man in the oval office. At the 2016 American Music Awards the band’s front man Billie Joe Armstrong took the opportunity of having a large audience to express his disapproval by chanting “No Trump, no K.K.K., no fascist U.S.A.!” into the mic during their performance. Those were just some of the many examples of how Punk is being used as a form of protest in different variations.

A small pinch of Anarchism

Since Anarchism means questioning hierarchical systems of power, the overlap between left-wing supporters, anarchistic beliefs and the punk scene are undeniable. Hence, it is not surprising that the most popular Punk artists are rebelling against fascism, capitalism and right-wing politics. From the very beginning Punk has been an anthem for the ones who are fighting against injustice performed by the ones in power.

It should be clear by now, that being Punk does not have anything to do with throwing bricks at police officers or any other kind of vandalism. It is about questioning social constructs. Deciding to stand up against discrimination is just as Punk as rocking a Mohawk. And in a world that constantly tells you who to love and how to look like, simply embracing and loving yourself is Punk.

To come back to my main question: If one defines Punk as a movement run by people, who spend their days occupying abandoned houses, whilst listening to The Ramones, then yes, Punk has probably died a little and no, we might not be able to relive those days to their full extent. But if one defines Punk as a movement run by people who question the constructs of power and articulate their disappointment in society by creating art such as music then it is still very much alive.

by Kristina Bartl

Photo Credits

Boots, Galdramenn

Pussy Riot, Subterranean Chicago, March 7, 2018, Daniel X. O’Neil, CC BY 2.0

Fight Racism Fight Imperialism – Anti-Trump protesters start to gather in London’s Trafalgar Square, Alisdare Hickson, CC BY-SA 2.0

Protest 2, Pxhere

The post Dead or alive: on Punk and Anarchism appeared first on Pike & Hurricane.