It is standard practice to look at combined oppression: Race and sex. However, the historical and conceptual connection of race and sex are closer than previosly thought.
The candidates racing to win pole position for the Democratic Party have attracted an unprecedented amount of media attention. Although the both popular and charismatic Hilary Clinton and Barack Obama are clearly worthy of such recognition, much of the interest stems from their demographic characteristics: Ms. Clinton is a woman and Mr. Obama is black!
Consequently, for the first time, the eventual leader of the party will represent at least one oppressed and historically marginalized group. Despite both candidates’ attempts to deflect the importance of such simplistic characterizations and focus on their political agendas, the media seems bent on framing the competition in these terms. “Is America Ready?” was Newsweek’s headliner.
More recent work in genetics is finally laying to rest the notion that race is a biological reality (Genetic Structure of Human Populations, Science 12.20.02) and advances in feminism, queer theory, and gender studies are exposing the fallacy of our binary system of sex that still considers these categories as “natural” (Sexing the Body, Fausto-Sterling 2000). Moreover, there is a growing body of research that is illuminating the geneology of both concepts and showing that sex and race, rather than being natural and inevitable are socio-political conceptual constructions deployed for the purpose of subjugating women and people of color.
Furthermore, these terms must necessarily be defined in terms of each other, not in comparison or as conceptual analogies. As Siobhan Somerville (1997) illustrates, sex and race have historically been conceptualized in tandem in a wide range of discourses. For example, Somerville notes that “One of the most consistent medical characterizations of the anatomy of both African-American women and lesbians was the myth of an unusually large clitoris.” Similarly, races have often been gendered such that Caucasian industrialized groups represent masculinity and Oriental races are characterized as feminine.
Consequently, as we continue to tackle issues of social injustice with regard to women and people of color we must be aware of the legacy of combined oppression. We must understand how the nuances of sexualized and racialized discourses and representations impact our lives today. Why is the hyper-sexual, black buck image being continually reinvented and reproduced? Why, on the other extreme, are other non-white men feminized (whatever that is)? Why are black women still characterized as being less than feminine (whatever that means)? Why is there a pervasive sexualization and emotionalization of mixed-raced people (women in particular)?
Perhaps when we truly understand the hegemonic legacy of the construction of sex and race we will be better able to confront oppression and social injustice. And no longer will it be big news to have a black or female president.
