Icy intersection
One of these is not like the others.
She’s a barrister, who specializes in women’s rights, including FGM cases, so she can’t actually be stupid, but…come on. Being literally [the thing that makes you not-privileged in the first place] can’t possibly be a form of privilege! Being literally Black as opposed to being another Rachel Dolezal is not a form of privilege. Obviously. Everybody knows this…except, suddenly, when it’s women. Then somehow everything becomes its own opposite and we rapidly lose track of where we are. Is that the sky over there, or is it the water?
Rich women have privilege compared to poor women, for sure. Able-bodied women over disabled women, same again. Education, location, health, influence – lots of things can convey or withhold privilege on women or anyone else. Actually being a woman cannot, because being a woman is not separable from the disprivilege of being a woman. It’s ludicrous to claim otherwise.
“We fight for all women” doesn’t mean we fight for men (men can do their own fighting). “We fight for all women” doesn’t mean we fight for men who say they are women.
I’ll never understand how intelligent people can buy into this nonsense.
So being white, “cis” (presumably not trans), middle class, or able bodied means that these women have not been oppressed? I know a lot of 3rd wavers who would disagree. There is diversity among women, but I sure don’t see the intersection she is trying to point out. Feminism fights to *eliminate* women’s stereotypes, while trans “women” (who aren’t women) *reinforce* the stereotypes. You can’t have it both ways. Being in the wrong lane doesn’t mean there is an intersection.