"Domestic violence, the decline of marriage, the spread of HIV/AIDS, substance abuse, adolescent pregnancy, and similar social issues all refelect, in large part, the damage done by prevailing Black sexual politics." -Patricia Hill Collins (Page 199)
Author: Patrcia Hill Collins
This section addresses black gender ideology, both male and female. This wasn’t a section I had intended to read in its entirety, but the issues and ideas that Collins brings up are quite relevant to the overall discussion of black women and HIV/AIDS. Specifically the section highlights the tensions that exist between black women and black men in terms of gender and the larger societal conflicts between and among these groups. How black men and women relate to each other and to society as a whole is an important element of the discussion of HIV/AIDS among black women. This is partly due to the fact that large portions of black women are contracting HIV through heterosexual sex with black partners.
The section also refers to important social and historical roots of what may be factors which put black women more at risk for contracting HIV/AIDS, specifically their marginalized social and economic positions within society. Collins presents ideas surrounding images of black gender through a class lens examining both male and female working class and middle class blacks.
She presents two images each of gender ideologies related to black women and men. According to Collins, black women are depicted in two ways within contemporary North American society. The working class black female is perceived as being a “bitch” and a Bad (Black) Mother, while images of the middle class black woman stem from ideas of modern mammies, black ladies and educated bitches. Working class black men in contrast are defined by images of the athlete and the criminal while their middle class counterparts are relegated to the role of sissies and sidekicks in wider societal depictions.
Collins asserts that these images are widely produced and reproduced through the media and popular culture. She uses examples like Destiny’s Child songs and Danny Glover film roles as evidence. I can’t dispute the fact that some of the images that Collins refers to are quite prevalent in the media (which can include news, television, movies and other outlets of popular culture), but I found myself wondering how true they really are. The images Collins points out are stereotypes. It would be easy to dismiss them as such, but Collins also shows how these stereotypes have real affects on the lives and situations of black men and women and their ability to advance as a group and individually within American society.
I found Collin’s discussion of hegemonic gender ideology and its impact on black gender ideology and relation to black sexual politics especially interesting. The historical views of black men and women tie in to current perceptions of black women and those perceptions exist, according to Collins, in opposition to contemporary hegemonic gender ideologies (i.e. the dominant white male and submissive white female). The main result of this and Collins’ discussion in this section is the continued disadvantaged position of African Americans in American society. Collins also continues to make a case for structural causes of African Americna disadvantage in America without explicitly saying so.
While I found Collins’ discussion in this section intriguing and worth considering, I was somewhat sceptical of a few of her assertions, simply because they were so adamant. Collins’ phrasing doesn’t allow for other interpretations of black gender ideology and black sexual politics. I do not disagree with what she writes, but I did find myself adding caveats to it, saying something doesn’t make it true and Collins’ approach ignores that fact to a certain extent. For example in the section on black female gender ideology Collins concludes at one point that “Aggressive African American women create problems in the imperfectly desegregated post-civil rights era, because they are less likely to accept the terms of their subordination,” (138). This is an interesting point, and perhaps true but the way it is written makes it sound as if it were the gospel—the only truth. In it Collins speaks for an entire group of people and how they are viewed by society. I just think that a caveat of some sort, that this is her interpretation based on her theories, is necessary and is not provided at multiple points in the text.
She speaks with an authority I don’t think is hers in entirety. It just makes me weary in terms of her speaking for all or making assertions about all on both sides of this—black males and females as well as speaking for wider society. This point also makes me wonder who exactly the text is written for; that is, who is Collins’ intended audience, African Americans or people outside of that group? As a black person reading this I can easily agree or disagree with Collins’ points based on my own experiences and those of other blacks close to me. But I would assume that someone who isn’t black reading this text is going to take away different things (not necessarily good or bad) from Collin’ work. Which is what makes me wonder who exactly her audience is—that’s more an issue of my own curiosity than something that needs to be addressed in the text though. I also recognize that her audience would include people from both groups.
With only a few concerns on my part, I think this is an especially valuable text and section in attempts to address African American gender theory. It is an important text in understanding the historical, current and evolving roles of black men and women and their relations to one another.
I think you point to some important tensions in collins' work; it tends to slip between academic analysis and political platform, as is more the case in American academic writing than Canadian. So, as is often the case in politics, nuance is lost in favour of arguing a particular position. I think that there are limits and possibilities in each approach, but sometimes when a piece slips from academic authority into a strong political position, it is important to read closely and consider how, what someone with academic credentials says, is taken as truth, without empirical evidence behind it. Collins' is very well known, so once she publishes a position, it is cited extensively and replicated as a truth. I think you raise helpful comments. There is little space for debate in Collins' style of writing. At the same time, given the context into which she is writing, maybe it needs to be so to be heard?
ReplyDeleteI wonder how linking this piece back to Treichler and her concerns with the representational aspects of the HIV pandemic might help you thinking through Black women's vulnerability to HIV and the challenges of living with this pandemic. Collins' work is a contemporary take on much of Treichler's seminal work on cultural representations.