The New Society

“Free speech” is nothing but a shield used to protect ideas that actively harm the oppressed.

Let’s talk about that “she must be lying” reaction whenever women accuse a man of abuse or rape.

Not only are false allegations ridiculously rare, but women are three times less likely to lie than men. And even then, what do women lie about most often? Their feelings. Women have been socialized to conceal their true emotions from men (despite being stereotyped as “emotional”), and made to look like evil liars whenever they have the courage to tell the truth.

I dare you to tell me again about “reasonable doubt.”

If you refuse to believe that Johnny Depp is a serial abuser in the wake of Amber Heard’s evidence, you are an abuse apologist. Period.

And throwing around “innocent until proven guilty” as a defense of Depp is the same as saying “Amber Heard is a liar until proven otherwise.” That is textbook victim-blaming.

You either believe the victims, or you approve of their trauma.

Little-known fact—I am a fan of Magic: The Gathering.

Today’s announcement was amazing from a progressive point of view.

Wizards of the Coast is ending the name “Fat Packs” in favor of “Bundles,” which is an amazing start. Our society tends to throw the word “fat” around without knowing how it affects people dealing with body image issues, or how it seeks to reinforce sizeist marginalization. Removing the descriptor “fat” for a product is an acknowledgement that such a word is neither inviting nor empowering, and has no place in a game that is intended to be safe and welcoming for all people.

Additionally, the set after “Eldritch Moon” will be “Kaladesh,” which is described as a “diverse plane with many ethnicities – including, prominently, many humans who look Indian.” The first planeswalker revealed from this set is not only a person of color, but a woman of color, further adding to Magic’s diversity. Additionally, this is yet another new, female-identified planeswalker. For comparison, the last new, humanoid, male-identified planeswalker was Dack Fayden in 2014′s “Conspiracy” set (not counting Commander 2014). In the two years since, we’ve had three new planeswalkers introduced, who were all female-identified (Narset, Arlinn Kord, and now Saheeli Rai).

In a game that is dominated by straight, white men, increasing the diversity of figures seen in such a way not only extends the hand to a more diverse playerbase to the game, but also tells anyone who objects that they are no longer welcome. The way that Wizards of the Coast has handled Magic in the past years, from inclusion of diverse identities; to taking a zero-tolerance policy towards sex offenders as players; to openly supporting the trans and gender-nonconforming community in events; is nothing short of incredible, and exactly the kind of behavior that is necessary to defeat bigotry and toxicity.

Before I begin, let me start of by saying this: yes, misandry is real.

However, misandry is not evil.

Confused? You shouldn’t be. Misogyny is the enforcement of patriarchy, designed to plant a foot firmly on the face of women worldwide. Misandry is simply a natural reaction to patriarchy.

Compare it to terrorism. We hate terrorists because they drive fear into the hearts of everyday citizens. We do not want them to accomplish their goal of harming us, nor do we want to be bound by the fear of their violent threats. We have a desire to fight against them because we want to protect ourselves from them, as well as prevent their ideology from spreading.

Think of misandry as a sort of anti-terrorism. Except in this case, the patriarchy are the terrorists.

Would you not hate an abusive person? Is it not reasonable to despise those people who actively harm you? Then why is it that hating men is so condemned? If it’s perfectly normal to have contempt for the people that directly benefit from your oppression, why is misandry seen as the opposite equivalent of misogyny?

Misandry is a necessity in a world where women are made to apologize after a man exploits them.

People don’t seem to understand why we use “it’s 2016″ or “it’s the current year” in our arguments.

It’s the shorthand version of “this is long overdue, why are we just now getting to it?”

It’s the current year. Some of our society’s problems with obvious solutions still haven’t been rectified. No excuse is good enough.

With a title like that, I’ve more than likely made some of the people reading this more than a little bit uncomfortable. I’m sure there are some of you out there right now, thinking, “She’s going to call me a racist, isn’t she? I dare her to try.” Even more of you are likely thinking that no matter what, you couldn’t possibly be a racist. You have black friends, or judge people by the content of their character, or voted for President Obama, or never use racial slurs.

Those of you who are so adamant about ensuring that you are not racists, I have bad news. You’re probably racist.

To dispel the first argument to drip from my critics’ lips—no, not everyone can be a victim of racism. And to dispel the inevitable follow-up argument, racism is not simply “prejudice, stereotyping, or discrimination on the basis of race.”

Racism began through conquering certain people groups, and has been facilitated through the enslavement of those groups. Aristotle, the Greek philosopher, referred to non-Greeks as “barbarians,” the equivalent of uncivilized human beings, in order to justify the persecution and enslavement of non-Greek peoples. Of course, throughout the centuries, this idea of the “uncivilized man” would continue to evolve, until it began to describe native Africans. The Tunisian scholar Ibn Khaldun referred to native Africans as “humans who are closer to dumb animals than to rational beings,” justifying the enslavement of their race. “Therefore,” he continues, “the Negro nations are, as a rule, submissive to slavery, because (Negroes) have little that is (essentially) human and possess attribute that are quite similar to those of dumb animals, as we have stated.” Even the term “Negro,” coined by Portuguese traders in 1442, was coined to effectively divide the white Europeans from the black Africans, thus relegating them to the “other.”

This concept of “othering” would be the basis on establishing the concept of race, which is nothing more than an attempt to divide humans based on skin color and common physical traits associated with that color. In all instances, the white European race were seen as having the most desirable skin color and associated traits, establishing their “superiority,” which is the driving force behind racism. Because of the white Europeans establishing themselves at the top of the pyramid centuries ago, the prejudices associated with being “non-white” continue to be perpetuated today. White Europeans effectively colonized a grand majority of the world, bringing their prejudices with them and using them for the purposes of subjugation, as history notes in the transatlantic slave trade, the conquering of Native American tribes, and British Imperial rule over India, Australia, Africa, and the Asian Pacific. Because these practices of subjugation were so effective, no other conquered nation but India has been able to emerge as more than a global Middle Power. The only other non-white Great Powers, China and Japan, benefit from their absence in European colonization and global slave trades, and from the many positive stereotypes attributed to East Asian races. It can also be theorized that the lighter skin tone of East Asians allows for a certain degree of privilege among non-white races, as darker-skinned Asians are more likely to be discriminated against for their race. This is why we use the term “people of color” to define disprivileged races.

What do these effects have to do with racism? Everything. By establishing themselves not only as the “superior” race since the coining of the term, but also effectively preventing the dark-skinned races from attaining global power, white Europeans have firmly established themselves as the privileged class, worldwide. They have not experienced oppression based on the sole status of skin color (anti-Irish prejudice does not count, as their oppression was less about race and more about anti-Catholic and classist practices). They have not had their lands stolen and their people systemically eradicated through genocidal practices. Their nations have never been considered “third-world countries.” Therefore, we can say, without a shadow of a doubt, that the white race is the only one that can claim to be outright privileged.

Because race was established as a system to “other” for the purposes of division and oppression, it is foolish to believe that racism is any more than the result of power and privilege working in tandem. As we’ve established, the white race has seized both, and remains in control of both in our global society. And, because racism has been used through history to justify subjugation and to further cement the white race as “superior,” it is equally foolish to say that anyone but the white race can engage in racism or hold racist views. To clarify, this does not mean that people of color cannot be prejudiced, but that they cannot use such prejudices for the purpose of perpetuating institutional powers in order to subjugate others based on race. In short, racism is power plus privilege.

And now for the bad news: Any white person reading this essay is indeed a racist, no matter how much you wish to deny it.

Allow me to explain. A racist is one who is both privileged and socialized on the basis of race by the system that sees the white race as “superior” (a white supremacist system). Because whites worldwide fall into this category, all whites should be considered racists. It is important to note that racism is not a state of mind, nor is it always an individual action. Racism is the result of whites seizing global power over other races, and exploiting that to etch the idea of white supremacy into the minds of other races. Once again, because whites are not and cannot be discriminated against on the sole basis of race, they cannot be victims of racism. “Reverse racism,” or the idea that whites can be victims of individual acts of prejudice on the basis of race, is a term used to deny the fact of white privilege. It is often used out of ignorance of how racism is defined, as well as the misconception that people of color acting out of prejudice against the white race is somehow morally wrong. Though unjustified violent acts and sexual crimes will always be moral wrongs, regardless of who commits the crimes, prejudice against the white race on the sole purpose of race is not a moral wrong, and never will be, for as long as the white race holds worldwide institutional power.

What, then, is a non-racist? This term was created by whites to deny their responsibility and complacency in systemic racism, in order to maintain their innocence in the face of racial oppression, and to shift the responsibility to people of color. This is, in effect, victim-blaming. The responsibility for perpetuating, legitimizing, and benefiting from a racist system lies with those who actively maintain it and those who refuse to challenge it. To remain silent in the face of oppression is to consent to it. Being apathetic to it may as well be the same as vocally supporting it. However, being a vocal anti-racist is not enough to suddenly wipe racism from a white person. So long as the structure stands, whites will always be racist. If white people want to clear themselves of their racism, they must do their part in ensuring that these structures are dismantled completely. Inequality comes in all forms, and in our global society, the challenge is to destroy white supremacy wherever it may stand—even if it means radically transforming the nations that perpetuate it.

However, if you are more concerned with absolving yourself of the label of “racist,” you will never lose that label. Your goal, as a white person, should be the end of racism for the benefit of people of color, not the benefit of yourself. A racist will go out of their way to fight any accusation of racism, all while exhibiting textbook racism. You are not a racist because you treat people equally. You are not a racist because you admire the Rev. Dr. Martin Luther King, Jr. You are not a racist because you support Black Lives Matter. You are a racist because of your heritage and because you refuse to renounce that heritage and dismantle everything it stands for. You cannot (supposedly) hate racism while still loving everything that enables racism and stems from the fact that we live in a white supremacist culture. It’s the equivalent of calling yourself a vegan as long as you didn’t kill the animal, even though it’s perfectly fine for you to load and hand over the gun that did the killing.

“But not all white people,” right? Of course, some people may bear the mark of a racist, but certainly you don’t, right? Consider that by saying such things, you state that reinforcing your own self-image or reputation is of more importance than acknowledging the immorality of white privilege, and the harm faced by its victims, who have their pain flung back in their faces because they should cater to your sensibilities first and foremost. Further, you ignore the possibility that you are enabling such structures of privilege and any responsibility you had in perpetuating it. Even if you were hypothetically innocent of perpetrating racism, you are invalidating the struggles of people of color who have to climb uphill every day just to get to the place you were born at. Do you honestly think things would be better if, when discussing how whites are racist, we pointed to you and said, “You’re the exception, though”?

If you are white, and you are not an active anti-racist, you are a racist. Period.