Explanation Of Misogynoir
Misogynoir is a word used to describe how racism and anti-Blackness alter the experience of misogyny for Black women, specifically. It alludes to specifically Black women’s experiences with gender and how both racism and anti-Blackness alters that experience diametrically from White women (as anti-Blackness and White supremacy make White women the “norm” in terms of intersectional experiences with gender, even as solely via gender, misogyny harms all women) and differently from non-Black women of colour (as though they face racism, the dehumanization associated with anti-Blackness is more than racism or sexualized objectification alone, but speaks to the history of Black bodies and lives treated as those of non-persons). I recently saw a thread of false information and non-Black women of colour co-opting to erase Black womanhood, Black women’s experiences and Black women’s epistemology from the concept of misogynoir. Again, the origin is in Black womanhood and the term was coined by a queer Black woman, Moya Bailey. (If anyone says it was coined by me, Trudy, or my blog Gradient Lair, they’re incorrect.)
"Misogynoir" is not expandable and consumable under the term "women of colour." "Black women" and "women of colour" overlap as identifiers only because Black women can be considered women of colour (in addition to other non-Black women of colour) and because Loretta Ross, a Black woman no less, and her work, is why the phrase “women of colour” exists. ”Black woman” and “woman of colour” are not synonyms to be used interchangeably. “Women of colour” is a political identity of theoretical solidarity of non-White women because of the impact of White supremacy, racism and White privilege on non-White women. However, it is not also a racial classification in the way that “Black woman” is. Black women’s experiences do not then become non-Black women of colour’s experiences to co-opt and commodify as “women of colour” just like they don’t then become White women’s experiences to co-opt and commodify as “women.” The very notion that this co-opt is acceptable is a violent notion and anti-Blackness. Co-opt through context-stripped generalization is erasure and is not intersectionality. Erasure is violence. Misogynoir is not about non-Black women of colour or White women; period. Misogyny impacts women. Racialized misogyny impacts women of colour. Misogynoir impacts Black women because of misogyny and dehumanization through anti-Blackness.
Below is information about misogynoir (and yes, the post is long but that does not mean anyone has the right to modify this content) so that when you as a Black woman notice erasure of our experiences occurring—or even willingly/unwillingly participate in our own erasure by assuming that “solidarity” means that non-Black women should have the right to consume and co-opt though they do not experience what anti-Blackness causes—you can have a reference, if you are not already aware of all that is below.
Origin: The term “misogynoir” was coined by Black feminist scholar Moya Bailey. She used the term in an essay on Crunk Feminist Collective years ago where she discussed music and specific anti-Black misogyny. Moya mentioned that the term is "to describe the particular brand of hatred directed at Black women in American visual and popular culture." This misogyny is informed by a specifically Black experience, not just because of racism and White supremacy, but because of anti-Black projections from non-Black people onto Black people and thereby internalized and proliferated by Black people. It does not mean that only Black men or only Black people are capable of misogyny nor does it justify anti-Black attitudes or racism against Black people; such an interpretation by a non-Black person is violently anti-Black. Thus, this anti-Black misogyny or misogynoir is something Black women experience intraracially and interracially. Because pop culture does not exist in a vacuum and actually creates/reflects culture, as a Black woman who experiences stereotypes, violence, oppression and dehumanization unique to Black women’s bodies, experiences, lives and histories, it is my evaluation that the term and what Moya wrote about it clearly expands beyond pop culture itself. The term has been used in an academic context as well, including in a scholarly journal article “New Terms Of Resistance” by Moya Bailey. (More info: Misogynoir (Word Origins))
Etymology: "Misogynoir" relates to the word "misogyny;" miso-: hater, gyn-: woman, noir: Black. It’s a hybrid word and -e is not currently used on the end; it was not used on the end when Moya Bailey coined the term. In that “womanism” and “intersectionality” were not considered “real words” before they existed (as with any word, really) and face specific devaluation, co-opt and erasure since the origins are Black women’s lived experiences and knowledge, so does “misogynoir” face this.
Deconstruction of arguments against the word “misogynoir”: The arguments against the word itself are all rooted in hegemony, White supremacy, and anti-Blackness and include:
2) That the word is not etymologically “correct.” False. There are plenty of words that have mixed root origins and are hybrid words. English itself is not etymologically “pure.”
3) That Black women are “appropriating” French people by using -noir suffix. This is painfully ahistorical, anti-intersectional and incredibly anti-Black. One only has to think of how and why Black women in America got here and speak English (which is informed by romance languages such as French) to know why such an assertion is inaccurate. Further, being that language itself has been weaponized against Black people, reclamation of language as subversive to hegemony is important.
4) Some people desire an -e be placed on the end. Moya Bailey did not do that when she coined the term; I’m not interested in altering her work. Further, I don’t think this is necessary since -gyn indicates gender and race itself is not gendered; multiple genders of people inhabit the same races. Also, adding the -e made me think it might feel too cis focused if the word was “feminized” in two places (as there is a history of some feminists altering certain words to exclude trans women). Clearly Black trans women face (trans)misogynoir as their experiences have distinction from cis Black women and non-Black trans women, while overlapping in other areas. I’m not suggesting Black trans women have to use this word; as a cis Black woman it’s not my place. I’m just referring to what I learned from their own words (via their writing/talks) about their own experiences. (More info: White woman questions Whites using the word [X], Black women’s epistemology [X])
Definition: Specifically anti-Black misogyny. Race and gender intersectionally are factors, and specifically Blackness in terms of race, because of how anti-Blackness makes Black women’s experiences distinct from non-Black women; from White women and non-Black women of colour. While anti-Black sentiments impact all Black people, because of how Black women experience gender—as “non-women” via forceful masculinization as violence (including of cis Black women, which is why cis privilege has to be discussed with nuance when anti-Blackness is a factor; when Black women are denied womanhood, it’s used as an excuse to justify violence against us) not via self-identification as empowerment (as some Black people do not identify as “women” or “men”) and as sexual chattel via hypersexualization that reduces Black womanhood to a sexual object with non-person status because of gender in addition to race—misogynoir is conceptualized as a way to explain how it’s more than racist misogyny or even objectification but complete dehumanization as a “contradiction” to White womanhood and as something non-Black women of colour are placed “above” even as they’re placed “below” White women.
This type of misogyny exists based on binary with White women (who still face general misogyny) where White women represent “good” womanhood and Black women do not in any comparison. In others, it alludes to hierarchical levels that include other women of colour, but only insofar as Black women are placed at the bottom because of anti-Blackness. This binary creates invisibility for Black women’s pain and hypervisibility for what are deemed inherent flaws based on Black womanhood, as the ultimate conception of “non-womanhood,” as possessed by a woman. This is why even with cis privilege, cis Black women are masculinized as a tool of violence and hypersexualized as a tool of violence; as undesirable objects to be controlled and disposed of and as hyper-desirable objects for sexual use and disposal, simultaneously.
This is also why Black trans women face a rate of violence unmatched by anyone in the LGBTQIA community. Even as relevant statistics are labeled as “trans women” and “trans women of colour” many times Blackness is a major altering factor. The violence enacted against Black trans women is a culmination of racism, anti-Blackness and State violence against Black bodies as non-persons in general, misogynistic violence against women, racist misogynistic violence against women of colour, misogynoiristic violence against Black women, transmisogyny specifically against trans women, intraracial-oppression based on the transphobic notion that Black trans women’s identities “betray” Black masculinity which already is allowed little space to exist because of White supremacy, racism and anti-Blackness, classism/poverty, and violence specific to them being Black trans women, which earlier I referred to (trans)misogynoir. (More info: Laverne Cox’s video)
This hypervisibility is forced and a tool of violence against Blackness itself. For non-Black people of colour to assert that this hypervisibility that connects to the dehumanization of Black people via anti-Blackness and White supremacy is the choice of Black women or any Black people is anti-Black and thereby inherently violent. Thus, because of anti-Blackness and misogyny together, regardless of the misogyny that non-Black women experience (which is still misogyny and still should be fought against)—the history of Black dehumanization into chattel, the relative state of non-personhood ascribed upon Blackness today and the construct of beauty itself being articulated against Blackness and specifically against Black womanhood—misogynoir speaks to Black women’s experiences uniquely. Thus, there is much sociopolitics existing and occurring before this brand of hatred that is misogynoir shapes visual and popular culture, and then that same media shapes sociopolitics on a consistent feedback loop.
"Misogynoir" can include Black women’s experiences outside of the U.S. because anti-Blackness, sexism and misogyny have a global impact for Black women, albeit how it impacts requires an understanding beyond thinking of White supremacy as only “western” or racism as only “American.” It also requires thinking of the impact of anti-Blackness even when White supremacy is only a factor in a place indirectly (because of the impact of the West on other cultures, economies, politics) not necessarily seated in visible local culture and power. However, this inclusion should not come at the price of erasure of uniquely Black American conceptions, ideas, culture and experiences as the descendants of enslaved Black people. (More info: follow @bad_dominicana on Twitter for regular commentary on Afro Latina experiences; see Save Wiyabi Project for commentary on Indigenous identity and anti-Blackness, as examples)
Misogynoir, interracially: Controlling images (i.e. Jezebel, mammy, Sapphire), stereotypes (i.e. welfare queen, welfare mother, emasculating matriarch, mule, gold digger, prostitute [where sex work is used as an automatic tool of degradation via anti-Blackness and must be examined intersectionally, not via a cis White middle class lens]) and archetypes (i.e. Angry Black Woman, Strong Black Woman) are all racist, sexist, misogynistic, misogynoiristic, ableist, some classist and all anti-Black constructions. They exist to make Black women not just harmed, insulted, objectified and oppressed, but to reify the non-human status of Black women when juxtaposed to non-Black women. This is not only in juxtaposition to White women, because anti-Blackness allows non-Black women of colour use these constructions as weapons against Black women and assert the claim that “protection” is needed “from” Black women’s “anger” while pretending said weapon was not enacted. Non-Black people of colour can be anti-Black whether they are seeking White approval and adjacency or not. An appeal to White supremacy isn’t inherently required to be anti-Black. (More info: Misogyny, In General vs. Anti-Black Misogyny (Misogynoir), Specifically)
Misogynoir, intraracially: Anti-Black sentiments are internalized just as other oppressive ones are and require deconstruction. Misogynoir intraracially is proliferated with colourism, fat shaming, classism, ableism, homophobia, transmisogyny (i.e. when Laverne Cox is street harassed and asked is she “a nigga” [transmisogyny in a Black cultural context] or “a bitch” [misogynoir in a Black cultural context] literally no one else on Earth but a Black trans woman would experience that; period) and other oppressions. By possessing an intraracial value system that mirrors external oppressors (i.e. using the same stereotypes about Black motherhood, sexuality, dating, beauty etc. as society does in general), the value of Black women is challenged and not solely by Black men, but by Black people, in general. However, because of how cis, heterosexual, and male privilege function, cishet Black men have privilege over Black women and can reward/punish through patriarchal norms and violence, even as Black men face other oppressions (including racism that Black women also face). This can be seen in intraracial spaces that Black men are expected to dominate and control, such as the home, the Black Church, community organizations (who organizes versus who is seen/lead), Black cultural production (i.e. hip hop, comedy, film), the budding business of “relationship advice" as a secular space of Black male domination in the way the Church is, and public social space (i.e. street harassment) in communities. (Black men can enact male privilege interracially as well, even as they can experience anti-Blackness and racism from non-Black women. Examples include protection via patriarchal culture and college athletics, male dominated social spaces, and domination through sexual violence.)
Retroactive examination of Black women’s knowledge/lived experiences: To further articulate misogynoir with a retroactive and current view, here are some examples to review: gender and enslavement [X], Sojourner Truth’s unique predicament as a Black female slave who faced unique violence that differed from White women and enslaved Black men [X], three primary areas of oppressions for Black women, which includes visual culture [X], the impact of the politics of respectability on Black blues women, creating misogynoiristic interpretations of their work, only to be revered and appropriated post-mortem [X], the impact of anti-Blackness and White supremacy on conceptions of Black motherhood that makes misogynoiristic interpretations of Black motherhood deemed acceptable [X], the exploitation of Black women’s knowledge, bodies, politics and lives by mainstream feminism [X], how anti-Blackness shapes the heterosexual Black male gaze [X], how specifically anti-Black misogyny impacts Black women’s reproductive justice [X].
Deconstruction of arguments against the concept of misogynoir: The most simplistic assertions are ones that seek to generalize and erase how Blackness impacts womanhood and how womanhood impacts Blackness for Black women. Using this term “misogynoir” to speak specifically on Black women’s experiences does receive pushback from Black men (under the belief that intraracial patriarchal violence and domination should not be spoken of and that male privilege does not exist if Black men face racism while they proliferate misogynoir in visual culture), from White women (for whom mainstream feminism and womanhood itself is centralized on and any mention of the lived experiences of Black women that cannot be co-opted or consumed are deemed ”divisive,” and without accountability for their role in the violence against Black women when they use myths of White purity and delicacy against Black women), from non-Black women of colour (who claim the experiences of Black women, use Black women’s epistemology yet are anti-Black and aren’t relentlessly interrogating anti-Blackness), from non-Black people of colour in general (through anti-Blackness, making Black people accountable for our own oppression, oppression which includes hypervisibility as a weapon against Blackness) and by White men (who dismiss the way White supremacist capitalist patriarchy has allowed them to enact unspeakable violence with near impunity against Black women’s bodies, as they own the avenues by which misogynoir is proliferated in visual culture and media). Derailment, gaslighting, co-opting, appropriation and erasure are to be expected when Black women speak of anti-Black misogyny (which some people accept exist) as misogynoir (which some people won’t accept once formally articulated as the word “misogynoir,” as a method of erasure of Black women’s epistemology).
Misogynoir is NOT womanism in that it can be claimed as a politic by non-Black women of colour: While womanism as politics of resistance, knowledge and wholeness was originally conceptualized by Alice Walker about Black women and she included non-Black women of colour, this is NOT at the price of erasure of Black women, particularly Black American women, for whom Alice Walker originally spoke this about, and NOT at the price that non-Black women of colour can engage in anti-Blackness while claiming Black women’s politics of resistance. Anti-Blackness is not acceptable in womanism; it is violence. Further, the term “womanism” is in no way for White women to claim. This is violence as well, for an oppressor to claim the politics that the oppressed use to resist oppression. Womanism is specifically about the resistance against racist oppression (particularly racism and anti-Blackness) on gender in addition to intersecting oppressions. Also, womanism was coined by a queer Black woman; interracially or intraracially trying to remove the experiences of queer Black women, Black trans women, and Black genderfluid or intersex people must be interrogated. (And womanism is not specifically theist.) Black men can identify as womanists, but womanism cannot center on Black male politics of domination; only on a politics of liberation for all Black people where Black women’s experiences and knowledge are centered.
However, misogynoir is NOT about resistance; it is naming the actual violence that Black women uniquely face for which a politics like womanism would be needed. Thus, it is not a term to be expanded in any way because anti-Blackness speaks to Black experiences specifically, and misogynoir speaks to Black women’s experiences specifically. The lived experiences of Black women who create the terms, scholarship and ideas to express these experiences are not products to shopped for and consumed. It is anti-Black to do this while uncentering Black women from these experiences. Even if uncentering is not the intent of a non-Black woman of colour, co-opt automatically erases Black women because of anti-Blackness; Black women are automatically no longer considered central to their own experiences but the “lighter” or “better” or “more feminine” non-Black woman of colour is then deemed central. There is no “solidarity” with non-Black women of colour, “unity” with Black men or “allyship” with White women when the erasure of Black women must occur.
On the appropriation of Blackness as a “consumable product”: A great deal of anti-oppression scholarship has been created by/articulated by Black women, even as this is purposely erased. See the concepts “intersectionality” (Kimberlé Crenshaw, though before her, from Sojourner Truth through Combahee River Collective you can see remnants of interlocking identity facets spoken of), “womanism” (Alice Walker) and “matrix of domination” (Patricia Hill Collins) as examples of Black women’s knowledge regularly stripped from its origin and meanings. The very concept of “anti-Blackness” itself? Not accidental. See Frank B. Wilderson III, Hortense Spillers, Saidiya Haartman, and Jared Sexton to start. Also so_treu (like this Storify) and strugglingtobeheard (like this essay) on Tumblr discuss this quite a bit, with exquisite nuance. It’s not just pop culture where Black people experience the most cultural pilfering but even in anti-oppression scholarship, ideas and praxis. It’s not a matter of “possession” over the words themselves but the fact that these are not just words. These are concepts used to describe real lived experiences and knowledge and erasing them from the origin via co-opt, generalization, appropriation and misattribution are acts of violence.
Non-Black women need to question why must they use Black women’s experiences as a stepping stone for their own by which erasure for Black women always occurs. Why must Blackness be consumed and why must Black women be the primary laborers of anti-oppression thought before any expression of oppression as an experience can occur? This is based on the notion of Black people especially Black Americans as non-persons, only existing for consumption and a pathway by which non-Black people can explain their own lives. Think about why people deem it acceptable to pilfer and shop from Blackness as if we are a bill of goods meant for consumption and cultural appropriation, and not human—not people who actually think, create, speak and live our own experiences in a way so relevant that everyone must consume it, yet people think consumption alone is “solidarity” or “allyship.” Non-Black women who seek the latter must actually respect the origins, knowledge and experiences of Black women, without co-opt (which causes de-contextualized generalizations and erasure) and without reducing Black women to mere projections of pain on which to build their own healing as persons while Black women remain non-persons. Non-Black women do experience and resist against misogyny itself; however, they can do this without harming Black women and erasing our experiences.
I’ve found the term misogynoir and its articulation very relevant to my life as a Black woman and it fits into existing Black women’s experiences and womanist politics. I use the term as a Black woman in several ways, as the same misogynoir that impacts pop culture (which Moya Bailey originally coined and discussed) impacts culture itself and histories/experiences for Black women.
[A while back I asked Moya Bailey herself if I can create a post like this for this term and she said it was okay. Please do not modify this post in any way.]
