Age, Race, Class and Sex: Women Redefining Difference

Audre Lorde

Paper delivered at the Copeland Colloquium, Amerst College, April 1980

Reproduced in: Sister Outsider Crossing Press, California 1984

Much of Western European history conditions us to see human differences in simplistic opposition
to each other: dominant/subordinate, good/bad, up/down, superior/inferior. In a society where the good is
defined in terms of profit rather than in terms of human need, there must always be some group of
people who, through systematized oppression, can be made to feel surplus, to occupy the place of the
dehumanized inferior. Within this society, that group is made up of Black and Third World people,
working-class people, older people, and women.

As a forty-nine-year-old Black lesbian feminist socialist mother of two, including one

boy, and a member of an interracial couple, I usually find myself a part of some group defined as other,
deviant, inferior, or just plain wrong. Traditionally, in american society, it is the members of
oppressed, objectified groups who are expected to stretch out and bridge the gap between the actualities
of our lives and the consciousness of our oppressor. For in order to survive, those of us for whom oppres­
sion is as American as apple pie have always had to be watchers, to become familiar with the language and
manners of the oppressor, even sometimes adopting them for some illusion of protection. Whenever the
need for some pretense of communication arises, those who profit from our oppression call upon us to
share our knowledge with them. In other words, it is the responsibility of the oppressed to teach the
oppressors their mistakes. I am responsible for educating teachers who dismiss my children's culture in
school. Black and Third World people are expected to educate white people as to our humanity. Women
are expected to educate men. Lesbians and gay men are expected to educate the heterosexual world. The
oppressors maintain their position and evade responsibility for their own actions. There is a constant
drain of energy which might be better used in redefining ourselves and devising realistic scenarios for
altering the present and constructing the future.

Institutionalized rejection of difference is an absolute necessity in a profit economy which needs

outsiders as surplus people. As members of such an economy, we have all been programmed to respond
to the human differences between us with fear and loathing and to handle that difference in one of
three ways: ignore it, and if that is not possible, copy it if we think it is dominant, or destroy it if we think
it is subordinate. But we have no patterns for relating across our human differences as equals. As a result,
those differences have been misnamed and misused in the service of separation and confusion.

Certainly there are very real differences between us of race, age, and sex. But it is not those
differences between us that are separating us. It is rather our refusal to recognize those differences,
and to examine the distortions which result from our misnaming them and their effects upon human
behavior and expectation.
 Racism, the belief in the inherent superiority of one race over all others and thereby the right
to dominance. Sexism, the belief in the inherent superiority of one sex over the other and thereby the right
to dominance. Ageism. Heterosexism. Elitism. Classism.

It is a lifetime pursuit for each one of us to extract these distortions from our living at the same
time as we recognize, reclaim, and define those differences upon which they are imposed. For we have all
been raised in a society where those distortions were endemic within our living. Too often, we pour the
energy needed for recognizing and exploring difference into pretending those differences are
insurmountable barriers, or that they do not exist at all. This results in a voluntary isolation, or false and
treacherous connections. Either way, we do not develop tools for using human difference as a
springboard for creative change within our lives. We speak not of human difference, but of human
deviance.

Somewhere, on the edge of consciousness, there is what I call a mythical norm, which each one
of us within our hearts knows "that is not me." In America, this norm is usually defined as white,
thin, male, young, heterosexual, Christian, and financially secure. It is with this mythical norm that
the trappings of power reside within this society. Those of us who stand outside that power often
identify one way in which we are different, and we assume that to be the primary cause of all oppression,
forgetting other distortions around difference, some of which we ourselves may be practising. By
and large within the women's movement today, white women focus upon their oppression as women and
ignore differences of race, sexual preference, class, and age. There is a pretense to a homogeneity of
experience covered by the word sisterhood that does not in fact exist.

Unacknowledged class differences rob women of each others' energy and creative insight.
Recently a women's magazine collective made the decision for one issue to print only prose, saying
poetry was a less "rigorous" or "serious" art form. Yet even the form our creativity takes is often a
class issue. Of all the art forms, poetry is the most economical. It is the one which is the most secret,
which requires the least physical labor, the least material, and the one which can be done between shifts,
in the hospital pantry, on the subway, and on scraps of surplus paper. Over the last few years, writing a
novel on tight finances, I came to appreciate the enormous differences in the material demands between
poetry and prose. As we reclaim our literature, poetry has been the major voice of poor, working class,
and Colored women. A room of one's own may be a necessity for writing prose, but so are reams
of paper, a typewriter, and plenty of time. The actual requirements to produce the visual arts also
help determine, along class lines, whose art is whose. In this day of inflated prices for material, who
are our sculptors, our painters, our photographers? When we speak of a broadly based women's culture,
we need to be aware of the effect of class and economic differences on the supplies available for
producing art.

As we move toward creating a society within which we can each flourish, ageism is another
distortion of relationship which interferes without vision. By ignoring the past, we are encouraged to
repeat its mistakes. The "generation gap" is an important social tool for any repressive society. If the
younger members of a community view the older members as contemptible or suspect or excess,
they will never be able to join hands and examine the living memories of the community, nor ask the all
important question, "Why?" This gives rise to a historical amnesia that keeps us working to invent the
wheel every time we have to go to the store for bread.
 We find ourselves having to repeat and relearn the same old lessons over and over that our
mothers did because we do not pass on what we have learned, or because we are unable to listen.
For instance, how many times has this all been said before? For another, who would have believed
that once again our daughters are allowing their bodies to be hampered and purgatoried by girdles and
high heels and hobble skirts?

Ignoring the differences of race between women and the implications of those differences presents
the most serious threat to the mobilization of women's joint power.

As white women ignore their built-in privilege of whiteness and define woman in terms of
their own experience alone, then women of Color become "other," the outsider whose experience and
tradition is too "alien" to comprehend. An example of this is the signal absence of the experience of
women of Color as a resource for women's studies courses. The literature of women of Color is seldom
included in women's literature courses and almost never in other literature courses, nor in women's
studies as a whole. All too often, the excuse given is that the literatures of women of Color can only be
taught by Colored women, or that they are too difficult to understand, or that classes cannot “get into”
them because they come out of experiences that are “too different.” I have heard this argument
presented by white women of otherwise quite clear intelligence, women who seem to have no trouble
at all teaching and reviewing work that comes out of the vastly different experiences of Shakespeare,
Moliere, Dostoyefsky, and Aristophanes. Surely there must be some other explanation.

This is a very complex question, but I believe one of the reasons white women have such
difficulty reading Black women's work is because of their reluctance to see Black women as women
and different from themselves. To examine Black women's literature effectively requires that we be
seen as whole people in our actual complexities — as individuals, as women, as human — rather than as
one of those problematic but familiar stereotypes provided in this society in place of genunine images
of Black women. And I believe this holds true for the literatures of other women of Color who are not
Black.

The literatures of all women of Color recreate the textures of our lives, and many white
women are heavily invested in ignoring the real differences. For as long as any difference between us
means one of us must be inferior, then the recognition of any difference must be fraught with guilt. To
allow women of Color to step out of stereotypes is too guilt provoking, for it threatens the
complacency of those women who view oppression only in terms of sex.

Refusing to recognize difference makes it impossible to see the different problems and pitfalls
facing us as women.

Thus, in a patriarchal power system where whiteskin privilege is a major prop, the
entrapments used to neutralize Black women and white women are not the same. For example,
it is easy for Black women to be used by the power structure against Black men, not because they are
men, but because they are Black. Therefore, for Black women, it is necessary at all times to separate
the needs of the oppressor from our own legitimate conflicts within our communities. This same
problem does not exist for white women. Black women and men have shared racist oppression
and still share it, although in different ways. Out of that shared oppression we have developed joint
defenses and joint vulnerabilities to each other that are not duplicated in the white community,
with the exception of the relationship between Jewish women and Jewish men.

On the other hand, white women face the pitfall of being seduced into joining the
oppressor under the pretense of sharing power. This possibility does not exist in the same way
for women of Color. The tokenism that is sometimes extended to us is not an invitation to join
power; our racial "otherness" is a visible reality that makes that quite clear. For white women there is a
wider range of pretended choices and rewards for identifying with patriarchal power and its tools.

Today, with the defeat of ERA, the tightening economy, and increased conservatism, it is easier
once again for white women to believe the dangerous fantasy that if you are good enough, pretty enough,
sweet enough, quiet enough, teach the children to behave, hate the right people, and marry the right men,
then you will be allowed to co-exist with patriarchy in relative peace, at least until a man needs your job
or the neighborhood rapist happens along. And true, unless one lives and loves in the trenches it is
difficult to remember that the war against dehumanization is ceaseless.

But Black women and our children know the fabric of our lives is stitched with violence and
with hatred, that there is no rest. We do not deal with it only on the picket lines, or in dark midnight
alleys, or in the places where we dare to verbalize our resistance. For us, increasingly, violence weaves
through the daily tissues of our living — in the supermarket, in the classroom, in the elevator,
in the clinic and the schoolyard, from the plumber, the baker, the saleswoman, the bus driver, the
bank teller, the waitress who does not serve us.

Some problems we share as women, some we do not. You fear your children will grow up to
join the patriarchy and testify against you, we fear our children will be dragged from a car and shot
down in the street, and you will turn your backs upon the reasons they are dying.

The threat of difference has been no less blinding to people of Color. Those of us who are
Black must see that the reality of our lives and our struggle does not make us immune to the errors of
ignoring and misnaming difference. Within Black communities where racism is a living reality,
differences among us often seem dangerous and suspect. The need for unity is often misnamed as a need
for homogeneity, and a Black feminist vision mistaken for betrayal of our common interests as a people.
Because of the continuous battle against racial erasure that Black women and Black men share,
some Black women still refuse to recognize that we are also oppressed as women, and that sexual
hostility against Black women is practiced not only by the white racist society, but implemented within
our Black communities as well. It is a disease striking the heart of Black nationhood, and silence will
not make it disappear. Exacerbated by racism and the pressures of powerlessness, violence against
Black women and children often becomes a standard within our communities, one by which
manliness can be measured. But these woman-hating acts are rarely discussed as crimes against
Black women.

As a group, women of Color are the lowest paid wage earners in america. We are the
primary targets of abortion and sterilization abuse, here and abroad. In certain parts of Africa,
small girls are still being sewed shut between their legs to keep them docile and for men's pleasure.
This is known as female circumcision, and it is not a cultural affair as the late Jomo Kenyatta in­
sisted, it is a crime against Black women.
 Black women's literature is full of the pain of frequent assault, not only by a racist
patriarchy, but also by Black men. Yet the necessity for and history of shared battle have made us,
Black women, particularly vulnerable to the false accusation that anti-sexist is anti-Black.
Meanwhile, womanhating as a recourse of the powerless is sapping strength from Black
communities, and our very lives. Rape is on the increase, reported and unreported, and rape is not
aggressive sexuality, it is sexualized aggression. As Kalamu ya Salaam, a Black male writer points
out, "As long as male domination exists, rape will exist. Only women revolting and men
made conscious of their responsibility to fight sexism can collectively stop rape."

Differences between ourselves as Black women are also being misnamed and used to separate us
from one another. As a Black lesbian feminist comfortable with the many different ingredients of
my identity, and a woman committed to racial and sexual freedom from oppression, I find I am
constantly being encouraged to pluck out some one aspect of myself and present this as the
meaningful whole, eclipsing or denying the other parts of self. But this is a destructive and
fragmenting way to live. My fullest concentration of energy is available to me only when I integrate
all the parts of who I am, openly, allowing power from particular sources of my living to flow back
and forth freely through all my different selves, without the restrictions of externally imposed
definition. Only then can I bring myself and my energies as a whole to the service of those strug­
gles which I embrace as part of my living.

A fear of lesbians, or of being accused of being a lesbian, has led many Black women into
testifying against themselves. It has led some of us into destructive alliances, and others into despair
and isolation. In the white women's communities, heterosexism is sometimes a result of identifying
with the white patriarchy, a rejection of that interdependence between women-identified women
which allows the self to be, rather than to be used in the service of men. Sometimes it reflects a die-hard
belief in the protective coloration of heterosexual relationships, sometimes a self-hate which all
women have to fight against, taught us from birth.

Although elements of these attitudes exist for all women, there are particular resonances
of heterosexism and homophobia among Black women. Despite the fact that woman-bonding has a
long and honorable history in the African and African american communities, and despite the
knowledge and accomplishments of many strong and creative women-identified Black women
in the political, social and cultural fields, heterosexual Black women often tend to ignore or
discount the existence and work of Black lesbians. Part of this attitude has come from an
understandable terror of Black male attack within the close confines of Black society, where
the punishment for any female self-assertion is still to be accused of being a lesbian and therefore
unworthy of the attention or support of the scarce Black male. But part of this need to misname
and ignore Black lesbians comes from a very real fear that openly women-identified Black women
who are no longer dependent upon men for their self-definition may well reorder our whole
concept of social relationships.

Black women who once insisted that lesbianism was a white woman's problem now insist that
Black lesbians are a threat to Black nationhood, are consorting with the enemy, are basically un-Black.
These accusations, coming from the very women to whom we look for deep and real understanding,
have served to keep many Black lesbians in hiding, caught between the racism of white women and the
homophobia of their sisters. Often, their work has been ignored, trivialized, or misnamed, as with the
work of Angelina Grimke, Alice Dunbar-Nelson, Lorraine Hansberry. Yet women-bonded women have
always been some part of the power of Black communities, from our unmarried aunts to the amazons
of Dahomey.

And it is certainly not Black lesbians who are assaulting women and raping children and
grandmothers on the streets of our communities.

Across this country, as in Boston during the spring of 1979 following the unsolved murders of
twelve Black women, Black lesbians are spearheading movements against violence against Black women.

What are the particular details within each of our lives that can be scrutinized and altered to
help bring about change? How do we redefine difference for all women? It is not our differences which
separate women, but our reluctance to recognize those differences and to deal effectively with the
distortions which have resulted from the ignoring and misnaming of those differences.

As a tool of social control, women have been encouraged to recognize only one area of human
difference as legitimate, those differences which exist between women and men. And we have learned to
deal across those differences with the urgency of all oppressed subordinates. All of us have had to
learn to live or work or coexist with men, from our fathers on. We have recognized and
negotiated these differences, even when this recognition only continued the old
dominant/subordinate mode of human relationship; where the oppressed must recognize the
masters' difference in order to survive.

But our future survival is predicated upon our ability to relate within equality. As women, we
must root out internalized patterns of oppression within ourselves if we are to move beyond the most
superficial aspects of social change. Now we must recognize differences among women who are our
equals, neither inferior nor superior, and devise ways to use each others' difference to enrich our visions
and our joint struggles. The future of our earth may depend upon the ability of all women to
identify and develop new definitions of power and new patterns of relating across difference. The
old definitions have not served us, nor the earth that supports us. The old patterns, no matter how
cleverly rearranged to imitate progress, still condemn us to cosmetically altered repetitions of the
same old exchanges, the same old guilt, hatred, recrimination, lamentation, and suspicion.

For we have, built into all of us, old blueprints of expectation and response, old structures of
oppression, and these must be altered at the same time as we alter the living conditions which are a
result of those structures. For the master's tools will never dismantle the master's house.

As Paulo Freire shows so well in The Pedagogy of the Oppressed, the true focus of
revolutionary change is never merely the oppressive situations which we seek to escape, but that
piece of the oppressor which is planted deep within each of us, and which knows only the
oppressors' tactics, the oppressors'relationships.

Change means growth, and growth can be painful. But we sharpen self-definition by
exposing the self in work and struggle together with those whom we define as different from ourselves,
although sharing the same goals. For Black and white, old and young, lesbian and heterosexual
women alike, this can mean new paths to our survival.
We have chosen each other

and the edge of each others battles

the war is the same

if we lose

someday women's blood will congeal

upon a dead planet

if we win

there is no telling

we seek beyond history

for a new and more possible meeting.