When I visited her site, the main thing I learned is that she's been anthologized so many times, and what--does this give her some type of authority in speaking about oppression? NO! She's full of herself and needs to take a hike!
Apparently her business is to be in anthologies and stir shit - and right now business is, unfortunately, good for her. I have my suspicions that she and Shetterly have made a bet as to who can fail most spectacularly.
By now, I'm kind of used to hearing my fellow white people vent their ignorance about the topic of how oppression works in America - but this really got under my skin like crazy.
What got to me is that she presumes to have the authority to a) lead a panel on the topic and b) decide who's oppression is legitimate and deserves attention, recognition, and serious discussion! As though she can pick and choose who she validates and who she doesn't.
How in the world did she ever get the idea that she, Kathryn Cramer, could be the authority on this topic? What gave her that right? Furthermore, what gave her the idea that somehow there needed to be someone around to pick and choose in the first place, that some people needed to be told, "Sorry, we're not going to consider your pain and lack and experience valid right now!"
What made her think she had any right to set down a definition of oppression (which, oddly enough, seems to work in her very UN-oppressed favor and support her ideology) and say that anyone who doesn't stick to it is wrong or only working in the "theoretical"?
Well, on behalf of my stepdad and my family and all those people who have lived under this system and have had their lives shaped by it, Kathryn Cramer can "theoretically" kiss my ass.
![[personal profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/user.png){kind=small}
no subject
Date: 2009-09-18 12:07 pm (UTC)Apparently her business is to be in anthologies and stir shit - and right now business is, unfortunately, good for her. I have my suspicions that she and Shetterly have made a bet as to who can fail most spectacularly.
By now, I'm kind of used to hearing my fellow white people vent their ignorance about the topic of how oppression works in America - but this really got under my skin like crazy.
What got to me is that she presumes to have the authority to a) lead a panel on the topic and b) decide who's oppression is legitimate and deserves attention, recognition, and serious discussion! As though she can pick and choose who she validates and who she doesn't.
How in the world did she ever get the idea that she, Kathryn Cramer, could be the authority on this topic? What gave her that right? Furthermore, what gave her the idea that somehow there needed to be someone around to pick and choose in the first place, that some people needed to be told, "Sorry, we're not going to consider your pain and lack and experience valid right now!"
What made her think she had any right to set down a definition of oppression (which, oddly enough, seems to work in her very UN-oppressed favor and support her ideology) and say that anyone who doesn't stick to it is wrong or only working in the "theoretical"?
Well, on behalf of my stepdad and my family and all those people who have lived under this system and have had their lives shaped by it, Kathryn Cramer can "theoretically" kiss my ass.