Rose McGowen “melts down” at Barnes & Noble bookstore

[FATCAT 55,846]

36 minutes ago, StrawberryBlond said:

She may be going over the top but I understand her rage, especially the whole labelling thing. There's a place for the trans discussion and this was not it. I'd like to see a more extensive piece on what she thinks of transwomen. The fact she says: "the stats are almost identical and if you break it down, it's a much smaller population" is something that I'd like to see expanded on. The thing is, if transwomen want to be seen as much a woman as a biological woman, then why should they want to separate themselves? Can't we just fight together? Why do we have to separate ourselves into trans feminists and cis feminists? Black feminists and white feminists? Lesbian feminists and straight feminists? Girlie feminists and butch feminists? We're all women together. When an already oppressed group starts in-fighting and separating themselves, it'll never achieve s**t.

No, what she was meaning that she hates it when people try to invalidate someone's opinion because in their eyes, they're not the "right" race to be saying such a thing. And certainly, there's been a big backlash towards any white feminist these days, insisting that their brand of feminism is solely for white women, even labelling it "white feminism." Which is ironic because every white feminist I know is wanting change for all women. If anything, black feminism is even more exclusive because it doesn't want to deal with anyone who isn't black. They demand special focus and treatment for being black women specifically which irks me to no end. You never find these women wanting to talk about the fetishization white women endure from non-white men, for example, but wax lyrical about the fetishization they get from white men. Fetishization happens to all racial groups and is not acceptable to be endured by any race, but no, apparently, it's an issue white women cannot relate to and any white woman who does claim its happened to her is silenced. Some feminism that is.

I'm saying that using the wild colors was racist, because it promotes this idea that we shouldn't see race, like "I don't see black and white" etc. 

[StrawberryBlond 13,300]

Just now, FATCAT said:

I'm saying that using the wild colors was racist, because it promotes this idea that we shouldn't see race, like "I don't see black and white" etc. 

I'm perfectly fine with seeing race if it's relevant. And it was not relevant here. Rose and the transwoman were both white, so why did she include "white" in her contemptuous put-down? Your race should never be used against you. If race is not relevant to the discussion, then we're all one and the same. I'm willing to highlight issues that specifically affecting WOC but I am not prepared to see the entire concept of feminism through a racial lens and making everything to do with WOC the #1 priority. That goes against the very nature of inclusive, intersectional feminism that WOC keep banging on about. Feminism already is intersectional, but the SJW branch of it is ironically trying to racially segregate it by wanting WOC and LGBT women to take over the cause and make their issues the only ones that are talked about. Because in their minds, straight, white, cis women have no problems. That's the exact opposite to feminism. Feminism should not involve a hierarchy or any form of racial or sexual exclusivity or supremacy.

[FATCAT 55,846]

3 hours ago, StrawberryBlond said:

I'm perfectly fine with seeing race if it's relevant. And it was not relevant here. Rose and the transwoman were both white, so why did she include "white" in her contemptuous put-down? Your race should never be used against you. If race is not relevant to the discussion, then we're all one and the same. I'm willing to highlight issues that specifically affecting WOC but I am not prepared to see the entire concept of feminism through a racial lens and making everything to do with WOC the #1 priority. That goes against the very nature of inclusive, intersectional feminism that WOC keep banging on about. Feminism already is intersectional, but the SJW branch of it is ironically trying to racially segregate it by wanting WOC and LGBT women to take over the cause and make their issues the only ones that are talked about. Because in their minds, straight, white, cis women have no problems. That's the exact opposite to feminism. Feminism should not involve a hierarchy or any form of racial or sexual exclusivity or supremacy.

I'm literally only talking about one instance where this Rose girl said something inherently racist, it's not a commentary on feminism or the protester. She said something racist.

[StrawberryBlond 13,300]

10 hours ago, FATCAT said:

I'm literally only talking about one instance where this Rose girl said something inherently racist, it's not a commentary on feminism or the protester. She said something racist.

But context matters. Both parties were white and the discussion was not about race, so why was Rose's race held against her? That's what she's pointing out. You shouldn't have something that you can't help held against you. If it's not right to hold a non-white person's race against them, then you shouldn't do it to white people either. Everyone has an opinion worth listening to and no one should be silenced just because they're deemed to be from a "privileged" section. That's what she's saying. The whole "white, black, brown, yellow, purple" thing is not a racist phrase, it's to emphasise how little someone cares about race, literally another way of saying "I don't care what colour you are." The phrase tends to come out when a white person is unfairly criticised of being racist when they're not. It's the person who's pushed them to say it that has the problem. Those who go looking for racism at every turn and pin it onto innocent people are the ones with the problem.

[FATCAT 55,846]

2 hours ago, StrawberryBlond said:

But context matters. Both parties were white and the discussion was not about race, so why was Rose's race held against her? That's what she's pointing out. You shouldn't have something that you can't help held against you. If it's not right to hold a non-white person's race against them, then you shouldn't do it to white people either. Everyone has an opinion worth listening to and no one should be silenced just because they're deemed to be from a "privileged" section. That's what she's saying. The whole "white, black, brown, yellow, purple" thing is not a racist phrase, it's to emphasise how little someone cares about race, literally another way of saying "I don't care what colour you are." The phrase tends to come out when a white person is unfairly criticised of being racist when they're not. It's the person who's pushed them to say it that has the problem. Those who go looking for racism at every turn and pin it onto innocent people are the ones with the problem.

Her statement was inherently racist, it's not about their race or their overarching argument, she just said something racist.

[Andy McQueen 4,484]

I watched now several interviews with her and changed my opinion entirely. I actually like and understand her now much better. I still think she is in need of therapy desperately, though