FOR MORE CLASSES VISIT tutorialoutletdotcom Black feminism remains important because U.S. Black women constitute an oppressed group. As a collectivity, U.S. Black women participate in a dialectical relationship linking African-American women’s oppression and activism.

1. SOC 320 Explain why it is important
FOR MORE CLASSES VISIT
tutorialoutletdotcom
Black feminism remains important because U.S. Black women
constitute an oppressed group. As a
collectivity, U.S. Black women participate in a dialectical relationship
linking African-American women’s
oppression and activism. Dialectical relationships of this sort mean that
two parties are opposed and
opposite. As long as Black women’s subordination within intersecting
oppressions of race, class, gender,
sexuality, and nation persists, Black feminism as an activist response to
that oppression will remain
needed. In a similar fashion, the overarching purpose of U.S. Black
feminist thought is also to resist
oppression, both its practices and the ideas that justify it. If intersecting
oppressions did not exist, Black
feminist thought and similar oppositional knowledges would be
unnecessary. As a critical social theory,
Black feminist thought aims to empower African-American women
within the context of social injustice
sustained by intersecting oppressions. Since Black women cannot be
fully empowered unless
intersecting oppressions themselves are eliminated, Black feminist
thought supports broad principles of
social justice that transcend U.S. Black women’s particular needs.
Because so much of U.S. Black
feminism has been filtered through the prism of the U.S. context, its
contours have been greatly affected
by the specificity of American multiculturalism (Takaki 1993). In

2. particular, U.S. Black feminist thought
and practice respond to a fundamental contradiction of U.S. society. On
the one hand, democratic
promises of individual freedom, equality under the law, and social
justice are made to all American
citizens. Yet on the other hand, the reality of differential group treatment
based on race, class, gender,
sexuality, and citizenship status persists. Groups organized around race,
class, and gender in and of
themselves are not inherently a problem. However, when African-
Americans, poor people, women, and
other groups discriminated against see little hope for group-based
advancement, this situation
constitutes social injustice. Within this overarching contradiction, U.S.
Black women encounter a
distinctive set of social practices that accompany our particular history
within a unique matrix of
domination characterized by intersecting oppressions. Race is far from
being the only significant marker
of group difference—class, gender, sexuality, religion, and citizenship
status all matter greatly in the
United States (Andersen and Collins 1998). Yet for African-American
women, the effects of
institutionalized racism remain visible and palpable. Moreover, the
institutionalized racism that AfricanAmerican women encounter relies
heavily on racial segregation and accompanying discriminatory
practices designed to deny U.S. Blacks equitable treatment. Despite
important strides to desegregate
U.S. society since 1970, racial segregation remains deeply entrenched in
housing, schooling, and
employment (Massey and Denton 1993). For many African-American
women, racism is not something
that exists in the distance. We encounter racism in everyday situations in
work-places, stores, schools,
housing, and daily social interaction (St. Jean and Feagin 1998). Most

3. Black women do not have the
opportunity to befriend White women and men as neighbors, nor do
their children attend school with
White children. Racial segregation remains a fundamental feature of the
U.S. social landscape, leaving
many African-Americans with the belief that “the more things change,
the more they stay the same”
(Collins 1998a, 11–43). Overlaying these persisting inequalities is a
rhetoric of color blindness designed
to render these social inequalities invisible. In a context where many
believe that to talk of race fosters
racism, equality allegedly lies in treating everyone the same. Yet as
Kimberle Crenshaw (1997) points
out, “it is fairly obvious that treating different things the same can
generate as much inequality as
treating the same things differently” (p. 285). Although racial
segregation is now organized differently
than in prior eras (Collins 1998a, 11–43), being Black and female in the
United States continues to
expose African-American women to certain common experiences. U.S.
Black women’s similar work and family experiences as well as our
participation in diverse expressions of African-American culture mean
that, overall, U.S. Black women as a group live in a different world from
that of people who are not Black
and female. For individual women, the particular experiences that accrue
to living as a Black woman in
the United States can stimulate a distinctive consciousness concerning
our own experiences and society
overall. Many African-American women grasp this connection between
what one does and how one
thinks. Hannah Nelson, an elderly Black domestic worker, discusses
how work shapes the perspectives of
African-American and White women: “Since I have to work, I don’t
really have to worry about most of
the things that most of the white women I have worked for are worrying

4. about. And if these women did
their own work, they would think just like I do—about this, anyway”
(Gwaltney 1980, 4). Ruth Shays, a
Black inner-city resident, points out how variations in men’s and
women’s experiences lead to
differences in perspective. “The mind of the man and the mind of the
woman is the same” she notes,
“but this business of living makes women use their minds in ways that
men don’t even have to think
about” (Gwaltney 1980, 33). A recognition of this connection between
experience and consciousness
that shapes the everyday lives of individual African-American women
often pervades the works of Black
women activists and scholars. In her autobiography, Ida B. Wells-
Barnett describes how the lynching of
her friends had such an impact on her worldview that she subsequently
devoted much of her life to the
anti-lynching cause (Duster 1970). Sociologist Joyce Ladner’s
discomfort with the disparity between the
teachings of mainstream scholarship and her experiences as a young
Black woman in the South led her
to write Tomorrow’s Tomorrow (1972), a groundbreaking study of
Black female adolescence. Similarly,
the transformed consciousness experienced by Janie, the light-skinned
heroine of Zora Neale Hurston’s
(1937) classic Their Eyes Were Watching God, from obedient
granddaughter and wife to a self-defined
African-American woman, can be directly traced to her experiences with
each of her three husbands. In
one scene Janie’s second husband, angry because she served him a
dinner of scorched rice, underdone
fish, and soggy bread, hits her. That incident stimulates Janie to stand
“where he left her for unmeasured
time” and think. And in her thinking “her image of Jody tumbled down
and shattered … [S]he had an

5. inside and an outside now and suddenly she knew how not to mix them”
(p. 63). Overall, these ties
between what one does and what one thinks illustrated by individual
Black women can also characterize
Black women’s experiences and ideas as a group. Historically, racial
segregation in housing, education,
and employment fostered group commonalities that encouraged the
formation of a group-based,
collective standpoint.1 For example, the heavy concentration of U.S.
Black women in domestic work
coupled with racial segregation in housing and schools meant that U.S.
Black women had common
organizational networks that enabled them to share experiences and
construct a collective body of
wisdom. This collective wisdom on how to survive as U.S. Black
women constituted a distinctive Black
women’s standpoint on gender-specific patterns of racial segregation
and its accompanying economic
penalties. The presence of Black women’s collective wisdom challenges
two prevailing interpretations of
the consciousness of oppressed groups. One approach claims that
subordinate groups identify with the
powerful and have no valid independent interpretation of their own
oppression. The second assumes
the oppressed are less human than their rulers, and are therefore less
capable of interpreting their own
experiences (Rollins 1985; Scott 1985). Both approaches see any
independent consciousness expressed
by African-American women and other oppressed groups as being either
not of our own making or
inferior to that of dominant groups. More importantly, both explanations
suggest that the alleged lack of
political activism on the part of oppressed groups stems from our flawed
consciousness of our own
subordination.2 Historically, Black women’s group location in

6. intersecting oppressions produced
commonalities among individual African-American women. At the same
time, while common
experiences may predispose Black women to develop a distinctive group
consciousness, they guarantee neither that such a consciousness will
develop among all women nor that it will be articulated as such by
the group. As historical conditions change, so do the links among the
types of experiences Black women
will have and any ensuing group consciousness concerning those
experiences. Because group
standpoints are situated in, reflect, and help shape unjust power
relations, standpoints are not static
(Collins 1998a, 201–28). Thus, common challenges may foster similar
angles of vision leading to a group
knowledge or standpoint among African-American women. Or they may
not. U.S. BLACK FEMINISM IN
TRANSNATIONAL CONTEXT Black women scholars and
professionals cannot afford to ignore the straits of
our sisters who are acquainted with the immediacy of oppression in a
way many of us are not. The
process of empowerment cannot be simplistically defined in accordance
with our own particular class
interests. We must learn to lift as we climb. angela davis 1989, 9 Within
U.S. Black feminism, race, class,
gender, and sexuality constitute mutually constructing systems of
oppression (Davis 1981; Smith 1983;
Lorde 1984; Crenshaw 1991). Intersectional paradigms make two
important contributions to
understanding the connections between knowledge and empowerment.
For one, they stimulate new
interpretations of African-American women’s experiences. Much of the
work on U.S. Black women
reported in earlier chapters relies on intersectional paradigms of some
sort. For example, AfricanAmerican women’s confinement to domestic
work revealed how race and gender influenced Black

7. women’s social class experiences. Similarly, the sexual politics of Black
womanhood that shaped Black
women’s experiences with pornography, prostitution, and rape relied
upon racist, sexist, and
heterosexist ideologies to construct Black women’s sexualities as
deviant. Not only do intersectional
paradigms prove useful in explaining U.S. Black women’s experiences,
such paradigms suggest that
intersecting oppressions also shape the experiences of other groups as
well. Puerto Ricans, U.S. White
men, Asian American gays and lesbians, U.S. White women, and other
historically identifiable groups all
have distinctive histories that reflect their unique placement in
intersecting oppressions (Andersen and
Collins 1998). Intersectional paradigms make a second important
contribution to untangling the
relationships between knowledge and empowerment—they shed new
light on how domination is
organized. The term matrix of domination describes this overall social
organization within which
intersecting oppressions originate, develop, and are contained. In the
United States, such domination
has occurred through schools, housing, employment, government, and
other social institutions that
regulate the actual patterns of intersecting oppressions that Black women
encounter. Just as intersecting
oppressions take on historically specific forms that change in response to
human actions—racial
segregation persists, but not in the forms that it took in prior historical
eras—so the shape of domination
itself changes. As the particular form assumed by intersecting
oppressions in one social location, any
matrix of domination can be seen as an historically specific organization
of power in which social groups
are embedded and which they aim to influence. When Maria Stewart

8. asked, “How long shall the fair
daughters of Africa be compelled to bury their minds and talents beneath
a load of iron pots and
kettles?” (Richardson 1987), her query focused on the dialectical
relationship linking oppression and
activism for one period of time, the early 1800s, and in one social
location, the United States. When
Angela Davis counsels that privileged Black women not “ignore the
straits of our sisters who are
acquainted with the immediacy of oppression in a way many of us are
not,” she stresses the need for
new ways of conceptualizing oppression and activism that take class
differences of a global matrix of
domination into account. All contexts of domination incorporate some
combination of intersecting
oppressions, and considerable variability exists from one matrix of
domination to the next as to how
oppression and activism will be organized. For example, as Senegalese
feminists (Imam et al. 1997), Black
American feminists (Guy-Sheftall 1995b), and Black British feminists
(Mirza 1997) all point out, social
institutions in Senegal, the United States, and the United Kingdom
reflect intersecting oppressions of race, class, gender, and sexuality. Yet
social relations within these three nation-states differ: Domination
is structured differently in Senegal, the United States, and the United
Kingdom. Thus, regardless of how
any given matrix is actually organized either across time or from society
to society, the concept of a
matrix of domination encapsulates the universality of intersecting
oppressions as organized through
diverse local realities. Placing U.S. Black women’s experiences in the
center of analysis without
privileging those experiences shows how intersectional paradigms can
be especially important for
rethinking the particular matrix of domination that characterizes U.S.

9. society. Claims that systems of
race, social class, gender, and sexuality form mutually constructing
features of social organization foster a
basic rethinking of U.S. social institutions. For example, using
intersecting paradigms to investigate U.S.
Black women’s experiences challenges deeply held beliefs that work and
family constitute separate
spheres of social organization. Since U.S. Black women’s experiences
have never fit the logic of work in
the public sphere juxtaposed to family obligations in the private sphere,
these categories lose meaning.
As the persistent racial discrimination in schooling, housing, jobs, and
public services indicates, Black
women’s experiences certainly challenge U.S. class ideologies claiming
that individual merit is all that
matters in determining social rewards. The sexual politics of Black
womanhood reveals the fallacy of
assuming that gender affects all women in the same way—race and class
matter greatly. U.S. Black
women’s activism, especially its dual commitment to struggles for group
survival and to institutional
transformation, suggests that understandings of the political should be
rethought. Thus, by using
intersectional paradigms to explain both the U.S. matrix of domination
and Black women’s individual and
collective agency within it, Black feminist thought helps reconceptualize
social relations of domination
and resistance. NATION AND NATIONALISM Despite these
contributions, U.S. Black feminist thought
must continue to develop even more complex analyses of intersecting
oppressions—how such
oppressions are organized, their effect on group composition and history,
their influence on individual
consciousness, and, most importantly, collective strategies of resistance.
Moving from race, class, and

10. gender to generate analyses that include heterosexism as a system of
oppression certainly constitutes a
step in the right direction. But U.S. Black feminism will remain hindered
in its goal of fostering Black
women’s empowerment in a context of social justice unless it
incorporates more comprehensive
analyses of how nation can constitute another form of oppression
(Anthias and Yuval-Davis 1992; YuvalDavis 1997). Race, class, gender,
and sexuality all remain closely intertwined with nation. In exploring
these connections, it is important to distinguish among the terms nation,
nation-state, and nationalism.
These terms are often used interchangeably, but they refer to different
things. A nation consists of a
collection of people who have come to believe that they have been
shaped by a common past and are
destined to share a common future. That belief is usually nurtured by
common cultural characteristics,
such as language and customs; a well-defined geographic territory; the
belief in a common history or
origin; the belief that closer ties exist among members of the nation than
with outsiders; a sense of
difference from groups around them; and a shared hostility toward
outsider groups. Nationalism is a
political ideology that is expressed by any group that self-defines as a
distinctive people or nation.
Nationalist ideologies strive to foster beliefs and practices which permit
a people or nation to control its
own destiny. When any one group acquires sufficient state power that
allows it to realize its goals, it
controls a nation-state. In the United States, because affluent White men
control government and
industry, public policies usually benefit this group. In other words,
despite the U.S. Constitution’s stated
commitment to equality of all American citizens, historically, the
differential treatment of U.S. Blacks,

11. women, the working class, and other subordinated groups meant that the
United States operated as a
nation-state that disproportionately benefited affluent White men.
Because this group controls schools,
the news media, and other social institutions that legitimate what counts
as truth, it possesses the authority to obscure its own power and to
redefine its own special interests as being national interests.
In response to this situation, U.S. Blacks, Chicanos, Puerto Ricans,
Native Americans, and other similar
groups have often themselves embraced nationalist ideologies. Because
such ideologies stress solidarity
and resistance, such ideologies have effectively been used in challenging
U.S. state policies. Women are
important within nationalist philosophies, whether the nationalism is
forwarded by dominant groups
who wield nation-state power, or by subordinated groups who use
nationalist ideologies to challenge
their oppression. Groups on both sides of state power view the women in
their group in particular ways.
Because women are capable of becoming mothers, women are central to
three elements in nationalist
thinking, namely, issues of sexuality and fertility, of motherhood, and of
being symbols of the nation
(Yuval-Davis 1997). In the United States, all women experience the
peculiar situation of being
responsible for reproducing the nation-state’s population, passing on an
American national culture, and
accepting the role of being inscribed with that same national culture. But
within the U.S. matrix of
domination, this entire process is racialized, is organized in class-
specific ways, and has varying impact on
women of diverse sexualities. Women are differentially evaluated based
on their perceived value to give
birth to the right kind of children, pass on appropriate American family
values, and become worthy

12. symbols of the nation. Black women, White women, Latinas, Native
American women, and Asian
American women all occupy different positions within gender, class,
race, and nation as intersecting
systems of power. Because American citizenship is so often taken for
granted among U.S. Black women,
we often have difficulty seeing not only how deeply nationalistic U.S.
society actually is, but how its
nationalisms affect us. African-American women encounter differential
treatment based on our
perceived value as giving birth to the wrong race of children, as unable
to socialize them properly
because we bring them into bad family structures, and as unworthy
symbols for U.S. patriotism. This
treatment is based, in part, on ideologies that view U.S. Black women as
the Other, the mammies,
matriarchs, welfare mothers, and jezebels who mark the boundaries of
normality for American women
overall. African-American women and many others typically have
difficulty seeing the assumptions that
underlie this situation because American nation-state policies obscure
how American national interests
in actuality are special interests. These same assumptions also limit
understanding of how U.S.
nationalism operates globally. In this context, working exclusively
within prevailing nationalistic
assumptions fosters views of the U.S. matrix of domination where the
effects of nationalism become
difficult to see, let alone resist, because they seem so everyday and taken
for granted. One important
assumption that affects African-American women is how ideas about
family influence understandings of
American national identity. Just as ideas about sexuality permeate
multiple systems of oppression (see
Chapter 6), ideas about family perform a similar function (Collins

13. 1998b). Similarly, ideas about
motherhood become especially important to American national identity.
Whereas all women are
assigned the duty of reproducing the national group’s population, and of
passing on a national culture
while simultaneously being inscribed with that same national culture, in
the United States, these ideas
about race, class, motherhood, and citizenship influence public policies.
***************************************************