Who gets to be angry?
-
The discussion in class on who gets to be angry is continued, as we see that anger is seen as masculine in the West, and only manageable if held by those who are not a threat in the face of white supremacy, patriarchy and colonialism, among other frameworks. The grieving Oriental woman trope is spoken of, giving us endless narratives of women being sad vs men being angry. Men aren't supposed to cry, but women are always crying... It's kind of in opposition of how I see it, with my conception of fury closer to the deity Kali, representing the dark feminine, the mother, earth shattering life and death. Once again we can perhaps parallel the demonization of Blackness with the demonization of feminine rage, and the demonization of darkness itself. Darkness seen as evil when it really is not. To return to the British context, I think the way that people with more melanin in their skin were connected through oppression and experiences of immigration and culture differences, but over time Brown and Black people are different despite solidarity because there is a difference in their experiences. I also think as much as connection is powerful and important, it's a disservice to liberation to put everyone on the same wavelength. We shouldn't erase the very specifics of everyone's realities. We should emphasize the nuances and unique aspects that different communities and even sub-communities go through in order to be able to organize more wisely and purposefully.