This post got this song stuck in my head. If you haven't heard Santogold, do so immediately.
I love Michelle Obama. I really do. It makes me so happy to see a woman of color in the White House and I have written before about the sexism embedded in making spectacle of the way the first lady looks while concurrently it being important that historically white standards of femininity and grandeur are being disrupted by having a black first lady. That said, this article really annoyed me in the way it characterizes Michelle Obama as a good role model for black women. It is not that I don't agree that Michele Obama is a positive role model, I just don't think it is appropriate to characterize all other black women that are not like Michelle, as bad role models.
Her youthful, striking looks and dynamism, coupled with the fact that she understands what it means to be a working mother, juggling family life with a successful career, makes it easy for many women to relate to her.But for black women in particular, Michelle Obama's soaring popularity and high, positive visibility marks a huge step forward.
"If you think of the stereotypes of black women, they are either bossy and emasculating or sexually promiscuous, and Michelle Obama is neither of those," said Andra Gillespie, a sociology professor at Emory University in the southern state of Georgia.
"A woman who has an accessible beauty, is considered feminine and lady-like, has a husband and has kept him for more than 15 years and a husband who clearly loves her -- people are not used to seeing black women in that position," she said.
OK, so yes, Michelle Obama is a good role model. And she doesn't live up to stereotypes because (gasp!) they are stereotypes, which are a function of racism and produce racist images of black women. It is not that successful, working black mothers don't exist, they don't exist in media depictions of black women and black women's sexuality. So, while it may be shocking for the rest of white America that Michelle Obama "dresses nice, speaks well and isn't mean," it isn't for those of us that exist in communities of color.
On the other hand, it is frustrating that the reason Michelle Obama is popular and well liked is because she isn't threatening or castrating in nature, the way the popular imagination characterizes black women. Stereotypes aside, what is wrong with being "bossy and emasculating or sexually promiscuous." Why is that diametrically opposed to being a "good woman?" Is Michelle Obama's popularity rating high because she doesn't threaten traditional notions of femininity and as a result people can breath a sigh of relief and say, "oh at least not ALL black women are like that!"
Probably both yes and no. It is not that Michelle Obama isn't demure, well-educated, polite, pretty and "well-spoken," along with being super bad-ass. The point is that assuming most black women are not, is racist. And the belief that when any woman disrupts our notions of acceptable femininity makes her less of a "lady," well that is sexist.
Related:
"Mocha Moms" takeover the White House.
Michelle Obama is not a militant, a victim, or an albatross.
It's not about Michelle.
0 TrackBacks
Listed below are links to blogs that reference this entry: Michele Obama: A Good Black Woman. .
TrackBack URL for this entry: http://www.feministing.com/cgi-bin/movabletype/mt-tb.fcgi/12396
love this post!
and santogold too.
Naturally when Andra Gillespie, a sociology professor at Emory University says "If you think of the stereotypes of black women, they are either bossy and emasculating or sexually promiscuous, and Michelle Obama is neither of those," she meant to say factual trends that are true of most or all other black women besides Obama. Of course she didn't call them stereotypes because she considers them inaccurate.
Forget that, I want to hear this about M. Obama being "demure."
Stephanie1989, it ain't just the hair, baby, it's the name. Michelle. That's just one heck of a white name. Imagine if her name was LaToya or Lekeisha.
Snampire, there's a big difference between being a man and being masculine. Have you ever noticed it?
aleks, does "factual trends" mean stereotype, in a way?
Huh?
Also, FYI, Michelle has long been a hugely popular name within non-immigrant African-American communities. Ditto Brittany and Ashley and Tiffany.
She's referring to a post I made below. And I agree with bob, it's not that Michelle is necessarily a "white" name, it's that it's not a "black" name.
Sorry, she or he.
I don't want to veer off the topic too much, but it's "Bob" not "bob". Wait, I just looked at my name. It is "bob". Damnit.
As if to prove your point, during the primary various Hillary supporters (with I assume no encouragement from the H.C. campaign) took to referring to Michelle Obama as "Shaniqua."
"It makes me so happy to see a woman of color in the White House"
I probably should have realized this long ago, but because of the wording of this sentence, it's interesting how there's a woman of "color" in the "White" house. What a statement to history, the US and the world Michelle (and Barack too) is making by this fact. I love it :)
I hate the fact that she's considered a role model for BLACK women. She's a role model for ALL women (but especially for Black and women of color). I mean, shit, she went to Harvard and Princeton! How cool is that?
exactly. just like barrack obama is not just a role model for black men but all men. i have the same issue with the usage of asians as the "model minority." both has the purpose of dividing and conquering oppressed groups.
Ackkk i hate the term "emasculating" so much.
maybe because there's no female equivalent.
or maybe because the whole concept doesn't make sense to me. i've always thought of it as women feeling like they need to walk on eggshells to protect men's sense of manliness, and doesn't that contradict the whole idea of "manliness" anyway? that masculinity is so fragile, almost...."feminine"? All the examples I've seen played out of a woman "emasculating" a man seem like men being treated like children by women,,,, like letting a little boy think he's driving an airplane when he gets to meet the pilot. or something. now all i can think about is Dwight Schrute. Sorry, anyway, yeah i just find it weird, it's like we all know preserving ideas of masculinity has turned into a silly charade that both men and women make fun of, so it's just ridiculous to me that people still take this idea seriously, and as a negative. If anyone wants to try to articulate this better, please do because I.....agh.
I use "FGM" or "cliterectomy" where others use "emasculating" I find it gets the point across nicely, shocks men and women into some recognition of what they're saying/thinking, and also raises awareness of an actual and consistent crime against women (as opposed to underlining a metaphor for unsubstantiated male fear). I like to use these terms in work and social settings for these reasons.
Yes, I agree with you so much. But, if you think about it, masculinity (well, and femininity, both) really ARE and always have been quite fragile categories. It takes hardly anything - tiny transgressions, like a guy wearing a thong or a woman having a butch haircut - to be singled out and punished. This fragility perhaps explains some of the massive anxiety surrounding the upholding/breaking of gender norms, the massive anxiety surrounding trans people and people with ambiguous gender presentations.
I honestly don't think Michelle Obama would be thought of nearly as highly if she did not straighten her hair; which is just another example of how black people are only respected if they conform to stereotypical standards of "whiteness".
While I agree that the idea of the Obamas as role models for black people specifically is incredibly condescending and offensive, I also don't really see why the first lady as such should be a role model for anyone. Don't get me wrong, Michelle Obama seems like a cool human being, but as first lady, she's not being celebrated for her many accomplishments, but simply for having married a guy who became president.
I door knocked for the Obama and Franken and local campaigns for months before the election, and many black homeowners told me that Obama was a role model for their children, because he's a black man who was making it to the top via intelligence, education and hard work. I heard variations of "Now I have the perfect answer when my kids tell me there's no point in school because a black man can never get anywhere anyway" and how it was nice to have a hero to point to who wasn't a rapper or in the NBA over and over. You don't have to like it, but Obama is a special role model for a lot of African-Americans.
I wasn't saying Barack Obama shouldn't be a role model for people in general. I was saying that a) suggesting that either Obama is a role model for blacks only is condescending and offensive and b) suggesting that Michelle Obama is a role model because she got to be first lady is problematical because you get to be first lady by marrying a dude who gets to be president. She's accomplished a lot in her own right, but it's not why she's being celebrated now.
I don't think I made my point very clearly. I'll try again.
I door knocked for the Obama and Franken and local campaigns for months before the election, and many black homeowners told me that Obama was a role model for their children, because he's a black man who was making it to the top via intelligence, education and hard work. I heard variations of "Now I have the perfect answer when my kids tell me there's no point in school because a black man can never get anywhere anyway" and how it was nice to have a hero to point to who wasn't a rapper or in the NBA over and over. You don't have to like it, but Obama is a special role model for a lot of African-Americans.
Obama's a hell of a guy by any standard, but pretending black Americans aren't especially proud of and inspired by him is ridiculous. Do you also feel it's condescending and offensive to act like JFK had special meaning to Irish Catholic Americans? Do we need to pretend that the first female or Jewish or Hispanic president will be equally inspiring to Americans of all demographics? Many, many, many black parents feel that their children do not have positive black role models, and that Obama fills that gap. Maybe that's condescending and offensive of them, but I'm willing to take their word for it.
Heh. P.S., to incompetent author of Yahoo! News article, there is no need to specify whether universities are in "southern" or "nothern" states. Usually the university title can stand alone. Emory is not some dumpy school nobody knows about, so we need to specify what "half" of the country it's in. The way the author wrote this is pretty ridiculous.
I also love "has a husband who clearly loves her." What constitutes "clearly" loving someone? He's romantic? They do PDA? As though having less of an openly affectionate, romantic husband makes you less of a human being. And this is to again imply that the woman would be to blame for a husband "falling out of love" with her.
Well, I guess Bill Clinton "clearly loved" Hillary, too, until - or despite that - he found happiness in the arms of Ms. Lewinsky.
I guess Hillary didn't do as good a job of "keeping" her husband. Blarf.
It's more that she married a guy who was unkeepable.
Mom, orestes, and aleks...lets not be judgmental
I defended Bill Clinton long after I should have known better. I'll judge him all I want.
yes a great role model, but I agree with your assessment. the comments strike me as condescending/patronizing, as well as feed into the very stereotypes the article is presuming to be against.
Are you sure the rest of white america is shocked though? OR just that the media keeps spouting that??? I ask because I don't know anybody who is shocked but maybe that's because I live in a village famous for being a haven for racial and gender equality.
"A woman who has an accessible beauty, is considered feminine and lady-like, has a husband and has kept him for more than 15 years and a husband who clearly loves her -- people are not used to seeing black women in that position," she said.
This sounds almost like a parody of mainstream American constructions of womanhood.
Beauty? check. Must always have Teh Beauteee.
Accessible beauty, no less? Check. Because women must be endlessly accessible to all and sundry: sexually, emotionally, as a mother, as a human (oops--I forgot: Humans default to men. Women are always just women).
A husband? Well, obviously, since many Black women have been so deviant by being single mothers...why can't they get in the patriarchal line like we've demanded of Euro women for so long?
A husband she's "kept?" Oh, you mean like this? http://www.feministing.com/archives/013810.html
There is clearly truth to the idea that as U.S. society attempts to normalize "race" and amend its "issues," it rewards only those minority woman who fit into the oppressive ideals enforced on Euro-American women for centuries. This leaves us with two harms: (1) the initial harm Samnhita pointed to of pathologizing non-conforming minority (here, Black) women, and (2) the second harm of implicitly reifying and enforcing the already messed-up codes of "femininity" enforced on Euro/mainstream women for so long.
That's why a Black/Asian/Arab flight attendant in the Virgin Airways ad; a raft of Halle and Alicia-wannabe starlets; and Black women's mags that emulate Cosmo have a double harm: to the minority woman and the majority one.
You've nailed it exactly, Okra.
This is a bit off topic, but relevant in that it just happened yesterday regarding this line from Okra,
"(oops--I forgot: Humans default to men. Women are always just women)."
Just last night my boyfriend was referring to humans in general as "man", and I pointed out how wrong that was. So, to back himself up he said that "man" was a part of "human" so it was ok to refer to humans as "man." I was like, wow, so women aren't humans? He replied with yes, obviously. I said, then why say humans are just men? I cornered him there. I know that he was partially egging me on because I like to argue and point out sexist things, but still. Ugh.
Sorry for the off-topic story. But I'm sure many of you can relate.
It saddens me that for those of us women with male partners (or for same-sex or hetero partners of different ethnic groups), we will never be able to experience complete empathy and understanding from our loved one. No matter how "feminist-friendly," "enlightened," and "humanist" (as is my male partner), people of different experiences to our own can never fully step outside their own consciousness and the advantages that shaped it.
But I suppose this is a limitation on all of us; and a natural outgrowth of being human. I can try very hard to learn from other people about their struggles, but I can never live their actual struggle. The best I can do is be open to what they tell me ("oh, saying 'man' instead of 'human' is harmful to women? Well, I never thought of it that way, but I respect the pain you feel over it, so I will stop using that word.")
I had a big WTF moment when reading this. Especially the scare quotes for feminist-friendly, enlightened, and humanist. I read that to mean: feminist-friendly since men, due to that pesky Y chromosome, can't be 'real' feminists, and enlightened and humanist in quotes because they aren't any good at those either.
I apologize if that wasn't your intention but I find your comment to be extremely condescending. It's also self-defeating: if you only hold men to a 'well, that's good enough for a dude, I guess' standard, what is the message being sent?
Second, is it really empathy to empathize with people who have the same experiences that you do?
Quotation marks /=/ scare quotes. Quotation marks can also denote, well, direct quotes, as mine did. If you are a frequent reader of this blog, you will recall much discourse has used these words; I have invoked them here, using quotes to signify that they are not my own words.
I myself have frequently here referred to men as "feminists," and disagree with some people's asseritions that men cannot ever truly be feminists.
I'm not certain how I can be condescending (to whom? To men with feminist principles?) when I have pointed out a characteristic endemic to all humanity: we can never truly get into another person's head and walk in their shoes, and that has proved to be a major obstacle to getting people to empathize. Having undergone the same or a similar experience should not, theoretically, be a requirement of empathy, but unfortunately, for humans, it often has been. (and I am speaking as a social scientist and non-Western person alike: this human stumbling block crosses cultures).
Sometimes--just very occasionally-- it's nice to share a moment with people with whom words are not needed, people who, by virtue of what they've lived, "get it." No explanations needed, no deconstructions of privilege, no analogies to situations the other can make sense of. It is not a requirement in life. Indeed, if I loved and trusted only those people who shared my gender, peculiar social background, educational profile, and fairly rare ethnic and religious combination, I would be alone in this world.
If you have never been a minority four or five times over surrounded by people who share few to none of your life experiences, and if you've never felt that moment of blessed respite with someone who has gone through the same things you have, then perhaps you cannot understand how very appreciated it is.
Not necessary, just appreciated.
"If you think of the stereotypes of black women, they are either bossy and emasculating or sexually promiscuous, and Michelle Obama is neither of those," said Andra Gillespie.
If there is a stereotype that black woman are "bossy", then that's one stereotype which Michelle hasn't failed to reinforce. In a campaign speech at UCLA, she said that "Barack Obama will require you to work. He is going to demand that you shed your cynicism." "Barack will never you to go back to your lives as usual – uninvolved, uninformed."
I'm not allowed to be cynical, and I'm doing wrong when I'm excercizing my right to be uninvolved and uninformed, which in fact I am on plenty of issues, especially political ones? If that's not bossy, then what is? Who does she think she is to tell me how to live my life?
"Never allow you to go back [to your old way of living/thinking]" is a common rhetorical device. It rests on the implicit idea that the audience does not WANT to go back to their old ways (here, to uninvolvement and ignorance), and then promises that the promise-maker will be the one to help the listener move forward, avoid regression.
But I suspect you already knew that, orestes.
Even though you seem to have a point about the latter part of the quote, and though I must say that I certainly enjoy some privileges of uninvolvement and ignorance too much to approve of her message, making a demand that I shed my cynicism is more than what's appropriate to expect of me, unless you're something more to me than a mere politician.
"Kept him"?? Oh, my. Is he is a cage?
"Kept him"?? Ugh.
The most upsetting thing about all of this is that she had to give up a good job to follow her husband because of a career opportunity and now is expected to work very hard for free. Isn't slavery illegal? Yeesh!
She had to? Really? You don't think Michelle Obama had a say in the matter? I had no idea she was so meek and unassertive.