I am a woman of color who has taught Women's Studies courses for over 15 years and advocated for feminism longer than that. The behavoir of prominent feminists (Morgan, etc.) in addition to some of Clinton's racially insensitive remarks during the primaries have made me feel like I should write all of the students of color who came to my classes complaining that "feminism" is for "white women." I always passionately argued that feminism is for all women and that the solipsism of some elite white women should not interfere with the possibilities of cross-racial coalition amongst women. However, the published writings of these women suggest that my students were right to be distrustful and I was wrong to try to lessen their suspicion of liberal feminism.

Over and over I saw white women who identify as feminists be as complicit as the mainstream media in assuming that "all the women are white and all the blacks are men," or, worse, co-opting imaginary black women to argue that sexism is a worse problem than racism (see Steinem's NYTimes Op-Ed). "DC Dame" is an example of the first. Votes did not break down among racial lines as she suggests. ALL African-Americans did NOT rally to Obama immediately. His support grew over time. Even now, many African-American women support Hilary. Yes the media was sexist, but that doesn't mean that all the women who supported Obama are blind to sexism or somehow complicit with patriarchy. It means that "woman" is not a monolithic category and that some women wanted a candidate who didn't seem as immediately identified with status quo politics. Elite white women who identify with Hilary (and who are incidentally the ones most heard in the media) need to recognize the role of Hilary's own campaign choices in her rise and fall.

I tend to think the mistrust is warranted. It arises, I believe, out of a focus that is by necessity narrowed to aspects of sexism that have an impact on one's own life.

There was an interesting discussion on a (predominantly white) feminist forum I belong to about how the performance of femininity rituals (hair, makeup, fashion) means something different for white women than it does for black women. Whereas it can be argued that femininity rituals are capitulation on the part of white women, for black women they may be a rejection of social class distinctions.

It's easy for white feminists to ignore their own racial biases, while claiming the moral high ground of social justice. White privilege has a lot in common with male privilege, in that wilful blindness is its greatest facilitator.

Thank you, oya, for pointing out the pink elephant in the room.

Thank you for a wonderful post and for referencing one of my favorite books "All the Women were White, All the Men were Black, But Some of Us were Brave". I am so glad to see other people pointing out that women are far more nuanced and diverse than the few labels put on us.

Working across class lines, race lines, and ethnicity lines brings effectiveness. My students of color are suspicious of feminism when they come in. I'm not sure how I will deal with the suspicion now.

You make some very important points. Being a women and being a feminist is not monolithic and that is why liberal feminism can be very problematic. I have always thought of feminism as providing women with the widest range of opportunities and then letting them choose for themselves not telling them what is best for them.