Black Women, Black Criticism, and the Unremovable Veil of Jezebel

November 2, 2012
By

In her groundbreaking text, Hine Sight: Black Women and the Reconstruction of American History, black feminist scholar Darlene Clark Hine makes a distinction between black women and girl’s experiences “under slavery” and “after slavery.”  She opines that under slavery black women and girls placed priority on protecting their sexual being, however during freedom, while both violence and the threat of violence, sexual and otherwise, remained in tact, emphasis on safeguarding their sexual image increased.  Of course, the preservation of both sexual being and image were always and continue to be significant sources of simultaneous anxiety.  To be sure, the distinction that Clark Hine makes seems to operate on a continuum, not monochrome.  That is, angsts over our sexual beings and/or images are constantly influx and intermingled.  However, the rage and course of the river shift often, depending on context.

When I entered academe ten years ago, I fancied it as safe space—a world away from the violence and the continuous threat of such “out there”—a world most definitely unaccompanied by ubiquitous black female stereotypes.  I was wrong.  For black women choosing not to “stay in their lane,” academia can be a microcosm of the life world “out there.”  I learned this lesson approximately 1 year, 7 months, and 11 days ago—the last time I wrote anything for the public sphere.

Growing up, I was always a firecracker, one to speak my truth as I viewed it, regardless.  My parents encouraged it.  However, it was my intellectual mentors who fortified it.  Like an M.C. they pushed me to “go hard” no matter what and no matter who.  I spent years in the cut learning the critical grammar of bell hooks, Michele Wallace, Hortense Spillers, and others like Stuart Hall, Judith Butler, Jacques Derrida, Ferdinand de Saussure, etc. etc. While in graduate school my mentors seemed to take extra care to ensure that I was equally sufficient in multiple fields and ready to parlay with the best of minds regardless of context.  They trained me as a multi-disciplinary critic and I loved it!!  That is, until the day I decided to actually use those skills in the public domain—post graduate school.

I was punished.  I wrote a critical book review essay that spoke my truth as I saw it, regardless.  I knew it would cause tension.  However, I never imagined fire.  To my mind, I was jumping into a game of intellectual hopscotch, just as I’d seen my male colleagues do many times before.  Naively, I thought it was my turn.  However, I learned quickly that the game of intellectual criticism is not only gendered, but also has psychological, emotional and reputational (and thus, representational) risks—if you are a black woman.

I was a newly minted black feminist scholar of religion…who critiqued the work of a tenured black male scholar.  Among all other sorts of criticisms re: staying in my lane, people asked, “Are they fucking?”  Really?!??  I pledged Delta Sigma Theta Sorority, Inc. at Sigma Chapter at Clark Atlanta University in 1995.  I know full well how to let things that people say about or to me, “roll off my back,” and have been known to withstand the harshest of criticisms without even flinching.  However, the idea that my work as a black feminist scholar of religion and black cultural critic was somehow underpinned by some sort of fantastic and unscrupulous sexual liaison between the author and I sent me into a year long deep depression and almost two years of silence.

I had spent years researching linguistic and representational deployments of the Jezebel trope in scholarship, religion, and popular culture.  I never imagined that I too would be reconfigured and cast with the veil of Jezebel.  How the hell did that happen?!?  I’m a scholar—an academic M.C. (so I thought).  I was intellectually honest—true to my call as a researcher and writer, and true to my reading of the text.  Moreover, I was true to the community in which I feel led to serve through my works: black women and girls.  Still, truth seeking and speaking comes with a fee.  I paid it.  Then I disappeared.  I tightened my circle and stopped communicating with male colleagues.  Clearly, it wasn’t safe.  My sexual image was at stake.  I was being read, but not on my terms.  I was devastated.

For me, “wellness” has always been intricately connected to speaking and seeking truth(s).  However, doing so as a black female academic in academia made me sick.  Literally.  Over time, I realized that it wasn’t the practice of truth speaking and seeking that made me ill, it was the behind the scenes and/or thinly veiled raging waters of the gate-keepers of hetero-sexist patriarchal respectability politics that threatened my well being, and the alienation and censure that sexism produced in some sectors of academe that made me sick.  “Perhaps Fanon was right,” I thought.  There really is no ontological resistance in terms of perception.  I was their Jezebel.  I had to be.  Why else would a black woman be courageous (read: “crazy”) enough to publicly critique a black man?  I must be a woman scorned—a loud talking, Jezebelian, angry black woman, all rolled into one.  Not.

In an essay entitled, “Changing the Letter: The Yokes, the Jokes of Discourse, or, Mrs. Stowe, Mr. Reed,” a comparative reading of Uncle Tom’s Cabin by Harriet Beecher Stowe and Flight to Canada by Ishmael Reed, inspired by Ralph Ellison’s essay, “Change the Joke and Slip the Yoke,” Hortense Spillers argues that if you have the luxury of writing about a phenomenon and are thus situated toward it in a particular manner, words (“letters”) can be manipulated (“changed”) in a variety of ways to tell a story that may be either liberative or oppressive (“yoke”).  Therefore meanings, even once reduced to the ideas of others, cannot be fixed.  Instead, they are constantly being realigned and reconfigured, although sometimes appearing stabilized by routinization and mass-production.  Truth speaking and seeking, regardless, enables black women academics to not only remain healthy, but to change the letter and loosen the yoke.  When talking about “Changing the Letter” and the seemingly permanence of black female stereotypes several years ago, Spillers declared to me, “we are not to ourselves who we are to the world!”  I concur.  Resistance lies within.

Still, if wellness (for me at least) resides in intellectual honesty, and intellectual honesty allows one to “change the letter and loosen the yoke” of structural sexism outside of and within academe, at least for moments at a time, how does one remain well within that context when its metalanguage secretes and infuses capitalistic notions of competition between male and female scholars, black and otherwise, which effectively mock the superstructures, sexism and otherwise, we’re supposed to be critiquing?  I don’t have the answer to this.  However, what I do know is this: in addition to individual resistance, community is essential to survival and success in the academy, particularly for women, and especially for black women.  Still, community isn’t always what or where we think or hope it is.  My community arose mainly among people, some of whom I’ve never even laid eyes on in person, who connected with the greater historical narrative of sexism within the black diaspora, too often re-appropriated and maintained in black academia.  It is this community that loved me into speaking and writing again, and whose names I call as I write publically for the first time since March of 2011, and…whose ongoing, fearless examination of “community” pushes me forth to speak truth about the existing system of power relations within blackademia, regardless.

Tags: , ,

176 Responses to Black Women, Black Criticism, and the Unremovable Veil of Jezebel

  1. Marcia Allen Owens on November 2, 2012 at 8:56 am

    Tamura,

    Thank you for breaking the silence and allowing so many of us who stand alone to know that we are not truly alone.

    Marcia Allen Owens

    • Tamura A. Lomax on November 2, 2012 at 6:28 pm

      Thank you so much Marcia! I appreciate you for more reasons than one. We must continue to tell us stories, regardless.

  2. Marcia Allen Owens on November 2, 2012 at 8:56 am

    Tamura,

    Thank you for breaking the silence and allowing so many of us who stand alone to know that we are not truly alone.

    Marcia Allen Owens

    • Tamura A. Lomax on November 2, 2012 at 6:28 pm

      Thank you so much Marcia! I appreciate you for more reasons than one. We must continue to tell us stories, regardless.

  3. Marcia Allen Owens on November 2, 2012 at 8:56 am

    Tamura,

    Thank you for breaking the silence and allowing so many of us who stand alone to know that we are not truly alone.

    Marcia Allen Owens

    • Tamura A. Lomax on November 2, 2012 at 6:28 pm

      Thank you so much Marcia! I appreciate you for more reasons than one. We must continue to tell us stories, regardless.

  4. Marcia Allen Owens on November 2, 2012 at 8:56 am

    Tamura,

    Thank you for breaking the silence and allowing so many of us who stand alone to know that we are not truly alone.

    Marcia Allen Owens

    • Tamura A. Lomax on November 2, 2012 at 6:28 pm

      Thank you so much Marcia! I appreciate you for more reasons than one. We must continue to tell us stories, regardless.

  5. Khadijah White on November 2, 2012 at 12:41 pm

    Beautifully composed, brilliantly executed, and soothing to this academic black woman’s soul. I so needed to hear this right now. Thank you for shaking loose the binds and so bravely sharing.

    • Tamura A. Lomax on November 2, 2012 at 6:29 pm

      Thank you so much!

  6. Khadijah White on November 2, 2012 at 12:41 pm

    Beautifully composed, brilliantly executed, and soothing to this academic black woman’s soul. I so needed to hear this right now. Thank you for shaking loose the binds and so bravely sharing.

    • Tamura A. Lomax on November 2, 2012 at 6:29 pm

      Thank you so much!

  7. Khadijah White on November 2, 2012 at 12:41 pm

    Beautifully composed, brilliantly executed, and soothing to this academic black woman’s soul. I so needed to hear this right now. Thank you for shaking loose the binds and so bravely sharing.

    • Tamura A. Lomax on November 2, 2012 at 6:29 pm

      Thank you so much!

  8. Khadijah White on November 2, 2012 at 12:41 pm

    Beautifully composed, brilliantly executed, and soothing to this academic black woman’s soul. I so needed to hear this right now. Thank you for shaking loose the binds and so bravely sharing.

    • Tamura A. Lomax on November 2, 2012 at 6:29 pm

      Thank you so much!

  9. Karen on November 2, 2012 at 1:32 pm

    Thank you for writing this piece! As an African American woman scholar in the academe, I truly understand your experience. Thank you for reclaiming your voice and “talking back!”

    • Tamura A. Lomax on November 2, 2012 at 6:29 pm

      Amen and Ase.

  10. Karen on November 2, 2012 at 1:32 pm

    Thank you for writing this piece! As an African American woman scholar in the academe, I truly understand your experience. Thank you for reclaiming your voice and “talking back!”

    • Tamura A. Lomax on November 2, 2012 at 6:29 pm

      Amen and Ase.

  11. Karen on November 2, 2012 at 1:32 pm

    Thank you for writing this piece! As an African American woman scholar in the academe, I truly understand your experience. Thank you for reclaiming your voice and “talking back!”

    • Tamura A. Lomax on November 2, 2012 at 6:29 pm

      Amen and Ase.

  12. Karen on November 2, 2012 at 1:32 pm

    Thank you for writing this piece! As an African American woman scholar in the academe, I truly understand your experience. Thank you for reclaiming your voice and “talking back!”

    • Tamura A. Lomax on November 2, 2012 at 6:29 pm

      Amen and Ase.

  13. Shayne Lee on November 2, 2012 at 5:14 pm

    Tamura is correct in that several of her close friends did inquire about the nature of our relationship after they read her review of my book. I should make it clear that these were all women who raised the question, no men that I know of. And this was done privately, never publicly.

    I was asked by several of her close friends if we had a past relationship because they perceived her review of my book as so personal, so subjective and so arrogant in its tone that it read to them like nothing they had ever seen in book reviews in scholarly journals. It read like she had a score to settle not like an objective scholarly assessment.

    Most of the women who raised questions about the nature of our relationship are respected black feminist and womanist scholars who know her well.

    Tamura’s friends read the review and were troubled by the fact that she included a private text correspondence from me in the review. They found that to be excessive, petty and highly unusual for a scholarly review.

    Tamura’s friends also were surprised that she began the review insinuating that I wrote the book for sensationalist reasons, arguing that I wasn’t getting enough light as a public intellectual, so I had to exploit black women to garner attention for my career. Tamura’s claim was made shortly after I had multiple appearances on CNN and Good Morning America, and was quoted by just about every major newspaper in the nation. Tamura’s friends didn’t understand why a scholar would question another scholar’s motives for writing a book. To them that sounds personal.

    Tamura’s friends wondered why the tone of her review was so arrogant and why the review did not offer a fair and balanced assessment of the book, like other scholarly reviews on the same book. So yes, they deduced that there must have been a personal gripe to settle, not because they’re sexists, but because the review was that unprofessional and petty. Had Tamura offered a balanced critique, assessing the book’s main arguments and offering constructive criticisms and pointing out shortcomings, no one would have asked if we had a relationship. This is done by scholars all the time. But when you write a personal review like that, some people are going to wonder about the backstory behind the review.

    Tamura has to take responsibility for writing the kind of review that would make her own close friends, feminist scholars of repute, think that there must be a personal story behind the review. She was no helpless victim. She was the aggressor who launched a rather bitter attack through a review and then once her friends checked her on her unprofessionalism, then she decided to play the victim card.

    • Tamura A. Lomax on November 2, 2012 at 6:21 pm

      Shayne,
      Your response to my essay actually does not warrant a response from me. However, I’m going to give you one–this one time. I read your book. I didn’t like it. I wrote a review. You didn’t like it. You stepped out of line by sending me the text that you sent. I made your text public. The community responded. End of story. I don’t have a single “close friend” who would question my “relationship” with you or anyone else. You and them need to check your sexism at the door. You are not the subject of this essay, so check your narcissism too. The essay is about the sexism and isolation that *I* experienced from several men and women in the academy. *You,* believe it or not, cannot speak to my experience. The only “score that needed to be settled” was the black formenism in your text parading as black feminism. I did that. And yes, I take full responsibility.
      Peace.

      • Crunktastic on November 2, 2012 at 6:44 pm

        Tamura,

        Thank you so, so much for your powerful testimony. I’m glad you’ve girded up your loins to write again. We so need your energy, your words, and your thinking.

        And a straight up side eye to the haters (read: narcissistic megalomaniacal faux Black male feminists masquerading as reasonable human beings.)

        Much love,

        Crunktastic

        • Tamura A. Lomax on November 2, 2012 at 7:24 pm

          “narcissistic megalomaniacal faux Black male feminists masquerading as reasonable human beings.” Amen and Ase.

    • Carolyn Tyjewski on November 4, 2012 at 8:40 am

      Admittedly, I haven’t read the review of the book nor have I read the book; this is strictly in reference to your commentary here, Professor Lee. The commentary is beyond patronizing and clearly misreads what was written by Tamura Loman within this piece. She was clearly writing about what happened to her with regard to the review she wrote and nothing to do with you; you are an endnote, at best, in this piece. Yet, you feel the need to validate that some of her “close friends” talked to you… What you were told, heard, asked, etc. wasn’t the subject matter and the notion that these people who supposedly spoke to you were “close friends” is nonsensical; close friends don’t ask someone else if their close friend is or had a relationship with someone. They know this information from their close friend BECAUSE they’re close friends — that’s how a close friend relationship works. It has been my observation that when one starts discussing subjects (like that they were on CNN or GMA), one is clearly still upset that one got a bad review. As scholars, we both know that reviews are submitted to journals months before they are published and so the commentary that you speak of was written before your unimportant and irrelevant appearances on CNN and GMA. If one doesn’t like criticism, being a scholar and/or an author is a bad career choice. In short, sir, your post merely demonstrates your unprofessional behavior and your inability to examine criticism, determine if it will help you improve your scholarship or not and then act accordingly (do something to correct the flaws or ignore the critique). The behavior you’ve displayed is that of an unprofessional individual with a bone to pick that, in all likelihood, happened quite some time ago. Take your own advice: take responsibility for what you wrote (own it — the good, the bad and the ugly); and, stop acting like some helpless victim (you did write the book). What Tamura Lomax’s book review was a book review… quite frankly, they are insignificant pieces of bullshit and aren’t worthy of anyone’s commentary; so, academics bringing up a book review to question one’s love life is inappropriate and sexist. I realize you aren’t a feminist (neither am I) but, as a sociologist, one should know that this is one of the many discrepancies and discriminatory processes that women within academe experience that most male scholars do not. So, try a little academic detachment to the subject matter — it’s not about you.

      • Tamura A. Lomax on November 7, 2012 at 12:43 pm

        Love this. So on point. One misreading. Dr. Lee does in fact self identify as a feminist. Just wanted to clear that up.

    • Taylor P. on November 9, 2012 at 12:07 am

      That was a thoughtful response. I think that academic professionals can agree to disagree. That being said, where can we find the essay/critique online. I would love to read both the book and essay myself.

    • s. mandisa moore on November 9, 2012 at 3:59 pm

      Tamura: Audre Lorde told us “Because the machine will try to grind you into dust anyway, whether we speak or not”-thank you for speaking.

      Shayne:

      This is really sad. The fact that you respond on EVERY single blog post about this only proves you are what you say you are not. Clearly, what she said deeply affected you and she has been correct in her assertions or why would you spend so much time continuing the personal attacks. Just say her review hurt my feelings and it made me angry. That is a totally human response. But instead you CONSISTENTLY show the extent of your commitment to patriarchy and white supremacy and the degradation of black women- first by sticking to your writing, second by attacking Tamura, and third by continuing to dodge responsibility like its the plauge. Completely sad. I live in New Orleans. I have seen you on panels at Tulane and Ashe. Please come for me instead.

  14. Shayne Lee on November 2, 2012 at 5:14 pm

    Tamura is correct in that several of her close friends did inquire about the nature of our relationship after they read her review of my book. I should make it clear that these were all women who raised the question, no men that I know of. And this was done privately, never publicly.

    I was asked by several of her close friends if we had a past relationship because they perceived her review of my book as so personal, so subjective and so arrogant in its tone that it read to them like nothing they had ever seen in book reviews in scholarly journals. It read like she had a score to settle not like an objective scholarly assessment.

    Most of the women who raised questions about the nature of our relationship are respected black feminist and womanist scholars who know her well.

    Tamura’s friends read the review and were troubled by the fact that she included a private text correspondence from me in the review. They found that to be excessive, petty and highly unusual for a scholarly review.

    Tamura’s friends also were surprised that she began the review insinuating that I wrote the book for sensationalist reasons, arguing that I wasn’t getting enough light as a public intellectual, so I had to exploit black women to garner attention for my career. Tamura’s claim was made shortly after I had multiple appearances on CNN and Good Morning America, and was quoted by just about every major newspaper in the nation. Tamura’s friends didn’t understand why a scholar would question another scholar’s motives for writing a book. To them that sounds personal.

    Tamura’s friends wondered why the tone of her review was so arrogant and why the review did not offer a fair and balanced assessment of the book, like other scholarly reviews on the same book. So yes, they deduced that there must have been a personal gripe to settle, not because they’re sexists, but because the review was that unprofessional and petty. Had Tamura offered a balanced critique, assessing the book’s main arguments and offering constructive criticisms and pointing out shortcomings, no one would have asked if we had a relationship. This is done by scholars all the time. But when you write a personal review like that, some people are going to wonder about the backstory behind the review.

    Tamura has to take responsibility for writing the kind of review that would make her own close friends, feminist scholars of repute, think that there must be a personal story behind the review. She was no helpless victim. She was the aggressor who launched a rather bitter attack through a review and then once her friends checked her on her unprofessionalism, then she decided to play the victim card.

    • Tamura A. Lomax on November 2, 2012 at 6:21 pm

      Shayne,
      Your response to my essay actually does not warrant a response from me. However, I’m going to give you one–this one time. I read your book. I didn’t like it. I wrote a review. You didn’t like it. You stepped out of line by sending me the text that you sent. I made your text public. The community responded. End of story. I don’t have a single “close friend” who would question my “relationship” with you or anyone else. You and them need to check your sexism at the door. You are not the subject of this essay, so check your narcissism too. The essay is about the sexism and isolation that *I* experienced from several men and women in the academy. *You,* believe it or not, cannot speak to my experience. The only “score that needed to be settled” was the black formenism in your text parading as black feminism. I did that. And yes, I take full responsibility.
      Peace.

      • Crunktastic on November 2, 2012 at 6:44 pm

        Tamura,

        Thank you so, so much for your powerful testimony. I’m glad you’ve girded up your loins to write again. We so need your energy, your words, and your thinking.

        And a straight up side eye to the haters (read: narcissistic megalomaniacal faux Black male feminists masquerading as reasonable human beings.)

        Much love,

        Crunktastic

        • Tamura A. Lomax on November 2, 2012 at 7:24 pm

          “narcissistic megalomaniacal faux Black male feminists masquerading as reasonable human beings.” Amen and Ase.

    • Carolyn Tyjewski on November 4, 2012 at 8:40 am

      Admittedly, I haven’t read the review of the book nor have I read the book; this is strictly in reference to your commentary here, Professor Lee. The commentary is beyond patronizing and clearly misreads what was written by Tamura Loman within this piece. She was clearly writing about what happened to her with regard to the review she wrote and nothing to do with you; you are an endnote, at best, in this piece. Yet, you feel the need to validate that some of her “close friends” talked to you… What you were told, heard, asked, etc. wasn’t the subject matter and the notion that these people who supposedly spoke to you were “close friends” is nonsensical; close friends don’t ask someone else if their close friend is or had a relationship with someone. They know this information from their close friend BECAUSE they’re close friends — that’s how a close friend relationship works. It has been my observation that when one starts discussing subjects (like that they were on CNN or GMA), one is clearly still upset that one got a bad review. As scholars, we both know that reviews are submitted to journals months before they are published and so the commentary that you speak of was written before your unimportant and irrelevant appearances on CNN and GMA. If one doesn’t like criticism, being a scholar and/or an author is a bad career choice. In short, sir, your post merely demonstrates your unprofessional behavior and your inability to examine criticism, determine if it will help you improve your scholarship or not and then act accordingly (do something to correct the flaws or ignore the critique). The behavior you’ve displayed is that of an unprofessional individual with a bone to pick that, in all likelihood, happened quite some time ago. Take your own advice: take responsibility for what you wrote (own it — the good, the bad and the ugly); and, stop acting like some helpless victim (you did write the book). What Tamura Lomax’s book review was a book review… quite frankly, they are insignificant pieces of bullshit and aren’t worthy of anyone’s commentary; so, academics bringing up a book review to question one’s love life is inappropriate and sexist. I realize you aren’t a feminist (neither am I) but, as a sociologist, one should know that this is one of the many discrepancies and discriminatory processes that women within academe experience that most male scholars do not. So, try a little academic detachment to the subject matter — it’s not about you.

      • Tamura A. Lomax on November 7, 2012 at 12:43 pm

        Love this. So on point. One misreading. Dr. Lee does in fact self identify as a feminist. Just wanted to clear that up.

    • Taylor P. on November 9, 2012 at 12:07 am

      That was a thoughtful response. I think that academic professionals can agree to disagree. That being said, where can we find the essay/critique online. I would love to read both the book and essay myself.

    • s. mandisa moore on November 9, 2012 at 3:59 pm

      Tamura: Audre Lorde told us “Because the machine will try to grind you into dust anyway, whether we speak or not”-thank you for speaking.

      Shayne:

      This is really sad. The fact that you respond on EVERY single blog post about this only proves you are what you say you are not. Clearly, what she said deeply affected you and she has been correct in her assertions or why would you spend so much time continuing the personal attacks. Just say her review hurt my feelings and it made me angry. That is a totally human response. But instead you CONSISTENTLY show the extent of your commitment to patriarchy and white supremacy and the degradation of black women- first by sticking to your writing, second by attacking Tamura, and third by continuing to dodge responsibility like its the plauge. Completely sad. I live in New Orleans. I have seen you on panels at Tulane and Ashe. Please come for me instead.

  15. Shayne Lee on November 2, 2012 at 5:14 pm

    Tamura is correct in that several of her close friends did inquire about the nature of our relationship after they read her review of my book. I should make it clear that these were all women who raised the question, no men that I know of. And this was done privately, never publicly.

    I was asked by several of her close friends if we had a past relationship because they perceived her review of my book as so personal, so subjective and so arrogant in its tone that it read to them like nothing they had ever seen in book reviews in scholarly journals. It read like she had a score to settle not like an objective scholarly assessment.

    Most of the women who raised questions about the nature of our relationship are respected black feminist and womanist scholars who know her well.

    Tamura’s friends read the review and were troubled by the fact that she included a private text correspondence from me in the review. They found that to be excessive, petty and highly unusual for a scholarly review.

    Tamura’s friends also were surprised that she began the review insinuating that I wrote the book for sensationalist reasons, arguing that I wasn’t getting enough light as a public intellectual, so I had to exploit black women to garner attention for my career. Tamura’s claim was made shortly after I had multiple appearances on CNN and Good Morning America, and was quoted by just about every major newspaper in the nation. Tamura’s friends didn’t understand why a scholar would question another scholar’s motives for writing a book. To them that sounds personal.

    Tamura’s friends wondered why the tone of her review was so arrogant and why the review did not offer a fair and balanced assessment of the book, like other scholarly reviews on the same book. So yes, they deduced that there must have been a personal gripe to settle, not because they’re sexists, but because the review was that unprofessional and petty. Had Tamura offered a balanced critique, assessing the book’s main arguments and offering constructive criticisms and pointing out shortcomings, no one would have asked if we had a relationship. This is done by scholars all the time. But when you write a personal review like that, some people are going to wonder about the backstory behind the review.

    Tamura has to take responsibility for writing the kind of review that would make her own close friends, feminist scholars of repute, think that there must be a personal story behind the review. She was no helpless victim. She was the aggressor who launched a rather bitter attack through a review and then once her friends checked her on her unprofessionalism, then she decided to play the victim card.

    • Tamura A. Lomax on November 2, 2012 at 6:21 pm

      Shayne,
      Your response to my essay actually does not warrant a response from me. However, I’m going to give you one–this one time. I read your book. I didn’t like it. I wrote a review. You didn’t like it. You stepped out of line by sending me the text that you sent. I made your text public. The community responded. End of story. I don’t have a single “close friend” who would question my “relationship” with you or anyone else. You and them need to check your sexism at the door. You are not the subject of this essay, so check your narcissism too. The essay is about the sexism and isolation that *I* experienced from several men and women in the academy. *You,* believe it or not, cannot speak to my experience. The only “score that needed to be settled” was the black formenism in your text parading as black feminism. I did that. And yes, I take full responsibility.
      Peace.

      • Crunktastic on November 2, 2012 at 6:44 pm

        Tamura,

        Thank you so, so much for your powerful testimony. I’m glad you’ve girded up your loins to write again. We so need your energy, your words, and your thinking.

        And a straight up side eye to the haters (read: narcissistic megalomaniacal faux Black male feminists masquerading as reasonable human beings.)

        Much love,

        Crunktastic

        • Tamura A. Lomax on November 2, 2012 at 7:24 pm

          “narcissistic megalomaniacal faux Black male feminists masquerading as reasonable human beings.” Amen and Ase.

    • Carolyn Tyjewski on November 4, 2012 at 8:40 am

      Admittedly, I haven’t read the review of the book nor have I read the book; this is strictly in reference to your commentary here, Professor Lee. The commentary is beyond patronizing and clearly misreads what was written by Tamura Loman within this piece. She was clearly writing about what happened to her with regard to the review she wrote and nothing to do with you; you are an endnote, at best, in this piece. Yet, you feel the need to validate that some of her “close friends” talked to you… What you were told, heard, asked, etc. wasn’t the subject matter and the notion that these people who supposedly spoke to you were “close friends” is nonsensical; close friends don’t ask someone else if their close friend is or had a relationship with someone. They know this information from their close friend BECAUSE they’re close friends — that’s how a close friend relationship works. It has been my observation that when one starts discussing subjects (like that they were on CNN or GMA), one is clearly still upset that one got a bad review. As scholars, we both know that reviews are submitted to journals months before they are published and so the commentary that you speak of was written before your unimportant and irrelevant appearances on CNN and GMA. If one doesn’t like criticism, being a scholar and/or an author is a bad career choice. In short, sir, your post merely demonstrates your unprofessional behavior and your inability to examine criticism, determine if it will help you improve your scholarship or not and then act accordingly (do something to correct the flaws or ignore the critique). The behavior you’ve displayed is that of an unprofessional individual with a bone to pick that, in all likelihood, happened quite some time ago. Take your own advice: take responsibility for what you wrote (own it — the good, the bad and the ugly); and, stop acting like some helpless victim (you did write the book). What Tamura Lomax’s book review was a book review… quite frankly, they are insignificant pieces of bullshit and aren’t worthy of anyone’s commentary; so, academics bringing up a book review to question one’s love life is inappropriate and sexist. I realize you aren’t a feminist (neither am I) but, as a sociologist, one should know that this is one of the many discrepancies and discriminatory processes that women within academe experience that most male scholars do not. So, try a little academic detachment to the subject matter — it’s not about you.

      • Tamura A. Lomax on November 7, 2012 at 12:43 pm

        Love this. So on point. One misreading. Dr. Lee does in fact self identify as a feminist. Just wanted to clear that up.

    • Taylor P. on November 9, 2012 at 12:07 am

      That was a thoughtful response. I think that academic professionals can agree to disagree. That being said, where can we find the essay/critique online. I would love to read both the book and essay myself.

    • s. mandisa moore on November 9, 2012 at 3:59 pm

      Tamura: Audre Lorde told us “Because the machine will try to grind you into dust anyway, whether we speak or not”-thank you for speaking.

      Shayne:

      This is really sad. The fact that you respond on EVERY single blog post about this only proves you are what you say you are not. Clearly, what she said deeply affected you and she has been correct in her assertions or why would you spend so much time continuing the personal attacks. Just say her review hurt my feelings and it made me angry. That is a totally human response. But instead you CONSISTENTLY show the extent of your commitment to patriarchy and white supremacy and the degradation of black women- first by sticking to your writing, second by attacking Tamura, and third by continuing to dodge responsibility like its the plauge. Completely sad. I live in New Orleans. I have seen you on panels at Tulane and Ashe. Please come for me instead.

  16. Shayne Lee on November 2, 2012 at 5:14 pm

    Tamura is correct in that several of her close friends did inquire about the nature of our relationship after they read her review of my book. I should make it clear that these were all women who raised the question, no men that I know of. And this was done privately, never publicly.

    I was asked by several of her close friends if we had a past relationship because they perceived her review of my book as so personal, so subjective and so arrogant in its tone that it read to them like nothing they had ever seen in book reviews in scholarly journals. It read like she had a score to settle not like an objective scholarly assessment.

    Most of the women who raised questions about the nature of our relationship are respected black feminist and womanist scholars who know her well.

    Tamura’s friends read the review and were troubled by the fact that she included a private text correspondence from me in the review. They found that to be excessive, petty and highly unusual for a scholarly review.

    Tamura’s friends also were surprised that she began the review insinuating that I wrote the book for sensationalist reasons, arguing that I wasn’t getting enough light as a public intellectual, so I had to exploit black women to garner attention for my career. Tamura’s claim was made shortly after I had multiple appearances on CNN and Good Morning America, and was quoted by just about every major newspaper in the nation. Tamura’s friends didn’t understand why a scholar would question another scholar’s motives for writing a book. To them that sounds personal.

    Tamura’s friends wondered why the tone of her review was so arrogant and why the review did not offer a fair and balanced assessment of the book, like other scholarly reviews on the same book. So yes, they deduced that there must have been a personal gripe to settle, not because they’re sexists, but because the review was that unprofessional and petty. Had Tamura offered a balanced critique, assessing the book’s main arguments and offering constructive criticisms and pointing out shortcomings, no one would have asked if we had a relationship. This is done by scholars all the time. But when you write a personal review like that, some people are going to wonder about the backstory behind the review.

    Tamura has to take responsibility for writing the kind of review that would make her own close friends, feminist scholars of repute, think that there must be a personal story behind the review. She was no helpless victim. She was the aggressor who launched a rather bitter attack through a review and then once her friends checked her on her unprofessionalism, then she decided to play the victim card.

    • Tamura A. Lomax on November 2, 2012 at 6:21 pm

      Shayne,
      Your response to my essay actually does not warrant a response from me. However, I’m going to give you one–this one time. I read your book. I didn’t like it. I wrote a review. You didn’t like it. You stepped out of line by sending me the text that you sent. I made your text public. The community responded. End of story. I don’t have a single “close friend” who would question my “relationship” with you or anyone else. You and them need to check your sexism at the door. You are not the subject of this essay, so check your narcissism too. The essay is about the sexism and isolation that *I* experienced from several men and women in the academy. *You,* believe it or not, cannot speak to my experience. The only “score that needed to be settled” was the black formenism in your text parading as black feminism. I did that. And yes, I take full responsibility.
      Peace.

      • Crunktastic on November 2, 2012 at 6:44 pm

        Tamura,

        Thank you so, so much for your powerful testimony. I’m glad you’ve girded up your loins to write again. We so need your energy, your words, and your thinking.

        And a straight up side eye to the haters (read: narcissistic megalomaniacal faux Black male feminists masquerading as reasonable human beings.)

        Much love,

        Crunktastic

        • Tamura A. Lomax on November 2, 2012 at 7:24 pm

          “narcissistic megalomaniacal faux Black male feminists masquerading as reasonable human beings.” Amen and Ase.

    • Carolyn Tyjewski on November 4, 2012 at 8:40 am

      Admittedly, I haven’t read the review of the book nor have I read the book; this is strictly in reference to your commentary here, Professor Lee. The commentary is beyond patronizing and clearly misreads what was written by Tamura Loman within this piece. She was clearly writing about what happened to her with regard to the review she wrote and nothing to do with you; you are an endnote, at best, in this piece. Yet, you feel the need to validate that some of her “close friends” talked to you… What you were told, heard, asked, etc. wasn’t the subject matter and the notion that these people who supposedly spoke to you were “close friends” is nonsensical; close friends don’t ask someone else if their close friend is or had a relationship with someone. They know this information from their close friend BECAUSE they’re close friends — that’s how a close friend relationship works. It has been my observation that when one starts discussing subjects (like that they were on CNN or GMA), one is clearly still upset that one got a bad review. As scholars, we both know that reviews are submitted to journals months before they are published and so the commentary that you speak of was written before your unimportant and irrelevant appearances on CNN and GMA. If one doesn’t like criticism, being a scholar and/or an author is a bad career choice. In short, sir, your post merely demonstrates your unprofessional behavior and your inability to examine criticism, determine if it will help you improve your scholarship or not and then act accordingly (do something to correct the flaws or ignore the critique). The behavior you’ve displayed is that of an unprofessional individual with a bone to pick that, in all likelihood, happened quite some time ago. Take your own advice: take responsibility for what you wrote (own it — the good, the bad and the ugly); and, stop acting like some helpless victim (you did write the book). What Tamura Lomax’s book review was a book review… quite frankly, they are insignificant pieces of bullshit and aren’t worthy of anyone’s commentary; so, academics bringing up a book review to question one’s love life is inappropriate and sexist. I realize you aren’t a feminist (neither am I) but, as a sociologist, one should know that this is one of the many discrepancies and discriminatory processes that women within academe experience that most male scholars do not. So, try a little academic detachment to the subject matter — it’s not about you.

      • Tamura A. Lomax on November 7, 2012 at 12:43 pm

        Love this. So on point. One misreading. Dr. Lee does in fact self identify as a feminist. Just wanted to clear that up.

    • Taylor P. on November 9, 2012 at 12:07 am

      That was a thoughtful response. I think that academic professionals can agree to disagree. That being said, where can we find the essay/critique online. I would love to read both the book and essay myself.

    • s. mandisa moore on November 9, 2012 at 3:59 pm

      Tamura: Audre Lorde told us “Because the machine will try to grind you into dust anyway, whether we speak or not”-thank you for speaking.

      Shayne:

      This is really sad. The fact that you respond on EVERY single blog post about this only proves you are what you say you are not. Clearly, what she said deeply affected you and she has been correct in her assertions or why would you spend so much time continuing the personal attacks. Just say her review hurt my feelings and it made me angry. That is a totally human response. But instead you CONSISTENTLY show the extent of your commitment to patriarchy and white supremacy and the degradation of black women- first by sticking to your writing, second by attacking Tamura, and third by continuing to dodge responsibility like its the plauge. Completely sad. I live in New Orleans. I have seen you on panels at Tulane and Ashe. Please come for me instead.

  17. Shayne Lee on November 2, 2012 at 7:35 pm

    Scholarly reviews are not the place to include private text messages.That’s why your friends thought we were dating. You made the review way too personal for an academic journal. In my years of being a scholar I have never read a review like yours in a scholarly journal that was so personal and arrogant. You claim you were a newly minted scholar but you wrote it with the arrogance of a position of power, like you had all the answers, and you attacked me personally, which is unprofessional. You can’t find another review out there like yours bc most scholarly journals refuse to publish reviews that get so personal. Tamura at some point you have to stop being a victim. Only a victim would be depressed for a year just because a few friends thought we were dating because of your personal review of my book. No one attacked you publicly. I did not lose one day of sleep and I was the one who had a very public response launched against me. I continued to write and thrive while you were wallowed in depression just because a few warranted criticisms by your friends. That should prompt you to look in the mirror and stop being a victim. You really make black women look fragile.

    • Tamura A. Lomax on November 2, 2012 at 7:51 pm

      At some point you need to admit that you’re not a feminist and that you possibly hate women. This is your last opportunity to speak here. You are delusional and a waste of feminist space. The end.

    • so_treu on November 2, 2012 at 7:55 pm

      Shayne, enough. If you absolutely feel the need to continue to engage, you should do so in your own space. As a black woman in the academy there are SO few spaces for us to discuss the ACTUAL topic of this series……..black women’s mental health, remember? A topic which you have no experiential knowledge of and as such, you should really allow us to have this space. AND to leave Tamura alone as she has made it abundantly clear that she no longer wishes to engage with you. You know what type of person ignores other people’s boundaries? A bully. Or a stalker. Or an abuser. Which one are you?

      If you’re none of the above then suck it up and let black women have our space and our moment.

    • The Alchemist on November 2, 2012 at 7:58 pm

      @Shayne Lee

      “You really make black women look fagile”

      We can be fagile sometimes. We should not appologize for it or be ashamed. We are not the mythical amazons depicted in the media. A man would never try to shame any other race of women for being fragile.

  18. Shayne Lee on November 2, 2012 at 7:35 pm

    Scholarly reviews are not the place to include private text messages.That’s why your friends thought we were dating. You made the review way too personal for an academic journal. In my years of being a scholar I have never read a review like yours in a scholarly journal that was so personal and arrogant. You claim you were a newly minted scholar but you wrote it with the arrogance of a position of power, like you had all the answers, and you attacked me personally, which is unprofessional. You can’t find another review out there like yours bc most scholarly journals refuse to publish reviews that get so personal. Tamura at some point you have to stop being a victim. Only a victim would be depressed for a year just because a few friends thought we were dating because of your personal review of my book. No one attacked you publicly. I did not lose one day of sleep and I was the one who had a very public response launched against me. I continued to write and thrive while you were wallowed in depression just because a few warranted criticisms by your friends. That should prompt you to look in the mirror and stop being a victim. You really make black women look fragile.

    • Tamura A. Lomax on November 2, 2012 at 7:51 pm

      At some point you need to admit that you’re not a feminist and that you possibly hate women. This is your last opportunity to speak here. You are delusional and a waste of feminist space. The end.

    • so_treu on November 2, 2012 at 7:55 pm

      Shayne, enough. If you absolutely feel the need to continue to engage, you should do so in your own space. As a black woman in the academy there are SO few spaces for us to discuss the ACTUAL topic of this series……..black women’s mental health, remember? A topic which you have no experiential knowledge of and as such, you should really allow us to have this space. AND to leave Tamura alone as she has made it abundantly clear that she no longer wishes to engage with you. You know what type of person ignores other people’s boundaries? A bully. Or a stalker. Or an abuser. Which one are you?

      If you’re none of the above then suck it up and let black women have our space and our moment.

    • The Alchemist on November 2, 2012 at 7:58 pm

      @Shayne Lee

      “You really make black women look fagile”

      We can be fagile sometimes. We should not appologize for it or be ashamed. We are not the mythical amazons depicted in the media. A man would never try to shame any other race of women for being fragile.

  19. Shayne Lee on November 2, 2012 at 7:35 pm

    Scholarly reviews are not the place to include private text messages.That’s why your friends thought we were dating. You made the review way too personal for an academic journal. In my years of being a scholar I have never read a review like yours in a scholarly journal that was so personal and arrogant. You claim you were a newly minted scholar but you wrote it with the arrogance of a position of power, like you had all the answers, and you attacked me personally, which is unprofessional. You can’t find another review out there like yours bc most scholarly journals refuse to publish reviews that get so personal. Tamura at some point you have to stop being a victim. Only a victim would be depressed for a year just because a few friends thought we were dating because of your personal review of my book. No one attacked you publicly. I did not lose one day of sleep and I was the one who had a very public response launched against me. I continued to write and thrive while you were wallowed in depression just because a few warranted criticisms by your friends. That should prompt you to look in the mirror and stop being a victim. You really make black women look fragile.

    • Tamura A. Lomax on November 2, 2012 at 7:51 pm

      At some point you need to admit that you’re not a feminist and that you possibly hate women. This is your last opportunity to speak here. You are delusional and a waste of feminist space. The end.

    • so_treu on November 2, 2012 at 7:55 pm

      Shayne, enough. If you absolutely feel the need to continue to engage, you should do so in your own space. As a black woman in the academy there are SO few spaces for us to discuss the ACTUAL topic of this series……..black women’s mental health, remember? A topic which you have no experiential knowledge of and as such, you should really allow us to have this space. AND to leave Tamura alone as she has made it abundantly clear that she no longer wishes to engage with you. You know what type of person ignores other people’s boundaries? A bully. Or a stalker. Or an abuser. Which one are you?

      If you’re none of the above then suck it up and let black women have our space and our moment.

    • The Alchemist on November 2, 2012 at 7:58 pm

      @Shayne Lee

      “You really make black women look fagile”

      We can be fagile sometimes. We should not appologize for it or be ashamed. We are not the mythical amazons depicted in the media. A man would never try to shame any other race of women for being fragile.

  20. Shayne Lee on November 2, 2012 at 7:35 pm

    Scholarly reviews are not the place to include private text messages.That’s why your friends thought we were dating. You made the review way too personal for an academic journal. In my years of being a scholar I have never read a review like yours in a scholarly journal that was so personal and arrogant. You claim you were a newly minted scholar but you wrote it with the arrogance of a position of power, like you had all the answers, and you attacked me personally, which is unprofessional. You can’t find another review out there like yours bc most scholarly journals refuse to publish reviews that get so personal. Tamura at some point you have to stop being a victim. Only a victim would be depressed for a year just because a few friends thought we were dating because of your personal review of my book. No one attacked you publicly. I did not lose one day of sleep and I was the one who had a very public response launched against me. I continued to write and thrive while you were wallowed in depression just because a few warranted criticisms by your friends. That should prompt you to look in the mirror and stop being a victim. You really make black women look fragile.

    • Tamura A. Lomax on November 2, 2012 at 7:51 pm

      At some point you need to admit that you’re not a feminist and that you possibly hate women. This is your last opportunity to speak here. You are delusional and a waste of feminist space. The end.

    • so_treu on November 2, 2012 at 7:55 pm

      Shayne, enough. If you absolutely feel the need to continue to engage, you should do so in your own space. As a black woman in the academy there are SO few spaces for us to discuss the ACTUAL topic of this series……..black women’s mental health, remember? A topic which you have no experiential knowledge of and as such, you should really allow us to have this space. AND to leave Tamura alone as she has made it abundantly clear that she no longer wishes to engage with you. You know what type of person ignores other people’s boundaries? A bully. Or a stalker. Or an abuser. Which one are you?

      If you’re none of the above then suck it up and let black women have our space and our moment.

    • The Alchemist on November 2, 2012 at 7:58 pm

      @Shayne Lee

      “You really make black women look fagile”

      We can be fagile sometimes. We should not appologize for it or be ashamed. We are not the mythical amazons depicted in the media. A man would never try to shame any other race of women for being fragile.

  21. Michael R. Lomax on November 2, 2012 at 8:26 pm

    Shayne,

    I do not know what your obsession is with my wife, her work or TFW – but your inability to refrain from following her and commenting on her article (that is clearly not about you, but her experience) leads me to believe that you might be a cyber stalker. If you are such a senior scholar and have moved on then please go back to sleep – your lack of self-control demonstrates who is petty and your long responses seem to be trying to make up for something much smaller.

    If you want to call me and discuss further outside of this forum please do so – I would love to talk with you my brother.

    Michael Lomax

    • Tressie on November 2, 2012 at 9:21 pm

      This is so satisfying.

      • Janice Graham on November 3, 2012 at 2:22 am

        Thank you Michael and thank you Tressie. Taumura has a right to style,place and space. Sr, jr. or just an author,she has precisely and eloquently presented her opinion as she has a right. Not a scholar, not a writer- I am a thinker, believing @shayne has lost credibility and defense of all kind and should bow out with what he has left, if anything. My guess, he won’t. He will stay out of ego proving all criticism (book and otherwise)pretty true.

  22. Michael R. Lomax on November 2, 2012 at 8:26 pm

    Shayne,

    I do not know what your obsession is with my wife, her work or TFW – but your inability to refrain from following her and commenting on her article (that is clearly not about you, but her experience) leads me to believe that you might be a cyber stalker. If you are such a senior scholar and have moved on then please go back to sleep – your lack of self-control demonstrates who is petty and your long responses seem to be trying to make up for something much smaller.

    If you want to call me and discuss further outside of this forum please do so – I would love to talk with you my brother.

    Michael Lomax

    • Tressie on November 2, 2012 at 9:21 pm

      This is so satisfying.

      • Janice Graham on November 3, 2012 at 2:22 am

        Thank you Michael and thank you Tressie. Taumura has a right to style,place and space. Sr, jr. or just an author,she has precisely and eloquently presented her opinion as she has a right. Not a scholar, not a writer- I am a thinker, believing @shayne has lost credibility and defense of all kind and should bow out with what he has left, if anything. My guess, he won’t. He will stay out of ego proving all criticism (book and otherwise)pretty true.

  23. Michael R. Lomax on November 2, 2012 at 8:26 pm

    Shayne,

    I do not know what your obsession is with my wife, her work or TFW – but your inability to refrain from following her and commenting on her article (that is clearly not about you, but her experience) leads me to believe that you might be a cyber stalker. If you are such a senior scholar and have moved on then please go back to sleep – your lack of self-control demonstrates who is petty and your long responses seem to be trying to make up for something much smaller.

    If you want to call me and discuss further outside of this forum please do so – I would love to talk with you my brother.

    Michael Lomax

    • Tressie on November 2, 2012 at 9:21 pm

      This is so satisfying.

      • Janice Graham on November 3, 2012 at 2:22 am

        Thank you Michael and thank you Tressie. Taumura has a right to style,place and space. Sr, jr. or just an author,she has precisely and eloquently presented her opinion as she has a right. Not a scholar, not a writer- I am a thinker, believing @shayne has lost credibility and defense of all kind and should bow out with what he has left, if anything. My guess, he won’t. He will stay out of ego proving all criticism (book and otherwise)pretty true.

  24. Michael R. Lomax on November 2, 2012 at 8:26 pm

    Shayne,

    I do not know what your obsession is with my wife, her work or TFW – but your inability to refrain from following her and commenting on her article (that is clearly not about you, but her experience) leads me to believe that you might be a cyber stalker. If you are such a senior scholar and have moved on then please go back to sleep – your lack of self-control demonstrates who is petty and your long responses seem to be trying to make up for something much smaller.

    If you want to call me and discuss further outside of this forum please do so – I would love to talk with you my brother.

    Michael Lomax

    • Tressie on November 2, 2012 at 9:21 pm

      This is so satisfying.

      • Janice Graham on November 3, 2012 at 2:22 am

        Thank you Michael and thank you Tressie. Taumura has a right to style,place and space. Sr, jr. or just an author,she has precisely and eloquently presented her opinion as she has a right. Not a scholar, not a writer- I am a thinker, believing @shayne has lost credibility and defense of all kind and should bow out with what he has left, if anything. My guess, he won’t. He will stay out of ego proving all criticism (book and otherwise)pretty true.

  25. Nneka S on November 2, 2012 at 10:49 pm

    As a Black female scholar in psychology, I find Mr. Lee’s vitriol thoroughly offensive and ironically illustrative of Dr. Lomax’s points as well as the overall need for these articles. Mr. Lee’s sexism is astounding. I’m sorry, but is he actually suggesting that a newly minted scholar cannot speak from a position of authority?! What utter rubbish. The appropriation of mental health to vilify a Black woman and to create this spurious narrative of “victimized, irrational Black woman” speaks to a person of poor moral fiber. Dr. Lomax, I salute you and your courage. Your words and your perspective are invaluable for other Black female scholars, both established and “newly minted.”

    • Tamura A. Lomax on November 7, 2012 at 12:42 pm

      And the “gendering” of mental challenges…
      But truly, all of this speaks to an anti-feminist-feminist gaze…

  26. Nneka S on November 2, 2012 at 10:49 pm

    As a Black female scholar in psychology, I find Mr. Lee’s vitriol thoroughly offensive and ironically illustrative of Dr. Lomax’s points as well as the overall need for these articles. Mr. Lee’s sexism is astounding. I’m sorry, but is he actually suggesting that a newly minted scholar cannot speak from a position of authority?! What utter rubbish. The appropriation of mental health to vilify a Black woman and to create this spurious narrative of “victimized, irrational Black woman” speaks to a person of poor moral fiber. Dr. Lomax, I salute you and your courage. Your words and your perspective are invaluable for other Black female scholars, both established and “newly minted.”

    • Tamura A. Lomax on November 7, 2012 at 12:42 pm

      And the “gendering” of mental challenges…
      But truly, all of this speaks to an anti-feminist-feminist gaze…

  27. Nneka S on November 2, 2012 at 10:49 pm

    As a Black female scholar in psychology, I find Mr. Lee’s vitriol thoroughly offensive and ironically illustrative of Dr. Lomax’s points as well as the overall need for these articles. Mr. Lee’s sexism is astounding. I’m sorry, but is he actually suggesting that a newly minted scholar cannot speak from a position of authority?! What utter rubbish. The appropriation of mental health to vilify a Black woman and to create this spurious narrative of “victimized, irrational Black woman” speaks to a person of poor moral fiber. Dr. Lomax, I salute you and your courage. Your words and your perspective are invaluable for other Black female scholars, both established and “newly minted.”

    • Tamura A. Lomax on November 7, 2012 at 12:42 pm

      And the “gendering” of mental challenges…
      But truly, all of this speaks to an anti-feminist-feminist gaze…

  28. Nneka S on November 2, 2012 at 10:49 pm

    As a Black female scholar in psychology, I find Mr. Lee’s vitriol thoroughly offensive and ironically illustrative of Dr. Lomax’s points as well as the overall need for these articles. Mr. Lee’s sexism is astounding. I’m sorry, but is he actually suggesting that a newly minted scholar cannot speak from a position of authority?! What utter rubbish. The appropriation of mental health to vilify a Black woman and to create this spurious narrative of “victimized, irrational Black woman” speaks to a person of poor moral fiber. Dr. Lomax, I salute you and your courage. Your words and your perspective are invaluable for other Black female scholars, both established and “newly minted.”

    • Tamura A. Lomax on November 7, 2012 at 12:42 pm

      And the “gendering” of mental challenges…
      But truly, all of this speaks to an anti-feminist-feminist gaze…

  29. Derrais on November 3, 2012 at 10:19 am

    Dr. Lee,
    As a grad student who identifies as a black male feminist, I must express how disheartening it is to read your responses. I read your book before I learned about last year’s rupture, and I greatly disagreed with it. You criticize Dr. Lomax for her alleged arrogance in her book review, but I’m wondering what kind of black male feminist ally proudly claims to “[restore] the proverbial ‘cl*t’ to its rightful place in black sexual politics”? Brothas who identify as black male feminists, including myself, need to seriously grapple with male privilege. More to the point, we need to address the ways that our male privilege potentially (and here it clearly does) enact psychological violence against our female allies.

    • Jason Craige Harris on November 5, 2012 at 12:42 am

      Precisely! The absurdity that a cisgender-identified man can self-identify with black feminism while perpetually living into its antithesis is what hegemony looks like when its performing in subaltern drag.

      • Tamura A. Lomax on November 7, 2012 at 12:40 pm

        You *said* that!! I’ve responded at length below. Cheers!

    • Tamura A. Lomax on November 7, 2012 at 12:40 pm

      Thank you for this. So many men have been silent on this issue. It’s telling and unfortunate.

  30. Derrais on November 3, 2012 at 10:19 am

    Dr. Lee,
    As a grad student who identifies as a black male feminist, I must express how disheartening it is to read your responses. I read your book before I learned about last year’s rupture, and I greatly disagreed with it. You criticize Dr. Lomax for her alleged arrogance in her book review, but I’m wondering what kind of black male feminist ally proudly claims to “[restore] the proverbial ‘cl*t’ to its rightful place in black sexual politics”? Brothas who identify as black male feminists, including myself, need to seriously grapple with male privilege. More to the point, we need to address the ways that our male privilege potentially (and here it clearly does) enact psychological violence against our female allies.

    • Jason Craige Harris on November 5, 2012 at 12:42 am

      Precisely! The absurdity that a cisgender-identified man can self-identify with black feminism while perpetually living into its antithesis is what hegemony looks like when its performing in subaltern drag.

      • Tamura A. Lomax on November 7, 2012 at 12:40 pm

        You *said* that!! I’ve responded at length below. Cheers!

    • Tamura A. Lomax on November 7, 2012 at 12:40 pm

      Thank you for this. So many men have been silent on this issue. It’s telling and unfortunate.

  31. Derrais on November 3, 2012 at 10:19 am

    Dr. Lee,
    As a grad student who identifies as a black male feminist, I must express how disheartening it is to read your responses. I read your book before I learned about last year’s rupture, and I greatly disagreed with it. You criticize Dr. Lomax for her alleged arrogance in her book review, but I’m wondering what kind of black male feminist ally proudly claims to “[restore] the proverbial ‘cl*t’ to its rightful place in black sexual politics”? Brothas who identify as black male feminists, including myself, need to seriously grapple with male privilege. More to the point, we need to address the ways that our male privilege potentially (and here it clearly does) enact psychological violence against our female allies.

    • Jason Craige Harris on November 5, 2012 at 12:42 am

      Precisely! The absurdity that a cisgender-identified man can self-identify with black feminism while perpetually living into its antithesis is what hegemony looks like when its performing in subaltern drag.

      • Tamura A. Lomax on November 7, 2012 at 12:40 pm

        You *said* that!! I’ve responded at length below. Cheers!

    • Tamura A. Lomax on November 7, 2012 at 12:40 pm

      Thank you for this. So many men have been silent on this issue. It’s telling and unfortunate.

  32. Derrais on November 3, 2012 at 10:19 am

    Dr. Lee,
    As a grad student who identifies as a black male feminist, I must express how disheartening it is to read your responses. I read your book before I learned about last year’s rupture, and I greatly disagreed with it. You criticize Dr. Lomax for her alleged arrogance in her book review, but I’m wondering what kind of black male feminist ally proudly claims to “[restore] the proverbial ‘cl*t’ to its rightful place in black sexual politics”? Brothas who identify as black male feminists, including myself, need to seriously grapple with male privilege. More to the point, we need to address the ways that our male privilege potentially (and here it clearly does) enact psychological violence against our female allies.

    • Jason Craige Harris on November 5, 2012 at 12:42 am

      Precisely! The absurdity that a cisgender-identified man can self-identify with black feminism while perpetually living into its antithesis is what hegemony looks like when its performing in subaltern drag.

      • Tamura A. Lomax on November 7, 2012 at 12:40 pm

        You *said* that!! I’ve responded at length below. Cheers!

    • Tamura A. Lomax on November 7, 2012 at 12:40 pm

      Thank you for this. So many men have been silent on this issue. It’s telling and unfortunate.

  33. Brown Lawyer on November 3, 2012 at 7:49 pm

    I neither read the review nor the book being reviewed. Nor am I an academic or a woman or even black (except in the general sense of being a minority).

    My question is. Why the hell was that brother texting a reviewer he didn’t like. Who does that? That’s not professional at all. It’s not academic. Most people send a reply via the journal. Or an email. Or a posting.

    And I think it’s pretty telling that more recently the male scholar didn’t shut up until the female scholars husband had to step in. He doesn’t respect a females space. He may not be physically aggressive but he is emotionally. this means that he doesn’t understand the privilege of power. The more powerful party must always exhibit more restraint bc their power is built on a history of domination.

    Dude don’t you understand that whatever your reading of the past this space is hers to talk in. If you actually believe that she did damage to her career by writing an over the top review why are you coming in here and getting in the way of her attempt at rehabilitation. That suggests that you want to punish her because you still feel aggrieved. Meaning bro that you are playing victim just as you accuse her of that.

    My message to the female scholar. Stay soft and fragile and free inside yourself. Don’t let your external defense take your creative agency away by turning it into a deep dark fortress. There will always be people who will mistake your inner curiosity for weakness. Let them think that. But don’t let them in.

  34. Brown Lawyer on November 3, 2012 at 7:49 pm

    I neither read the review nor the book being reviewed. Nor am I an academic or a woman or even black (except in the general sense of being a minority).

    My question is. Why the hell was that brother texting a reviewer he didn’t like. Who does that? That’s not professional at all. It’s not academic. Most people send a reply via the journal. Or an email. Or a posting.

    And I think it’s pretty telling that more recently the male scholar didn’t shut up until the female scholars husband had to step in. He doesn’t respect a females space. He may not be physically aggressive but he is emotionally. this means that he doesn’t understand the privilege of power. The more powerful party must always exhibit more restraint bc their power is built on a history of domination.

    Dude don’t you understand that whatever your reading of the past this space is hers to talk in. If you actually believe that she did damage to her career by writing an over the top review why are you coming in here and getting in the way of her attempt at rehabilitation. That suggests that you want to punish her because you still feel aggrieved. Meaning bro that you are playing victim just as you accuse her of that.

    My message to the female scholar. Stay soft and fragile and free inside yourself. Don’t let your external defense take your creative agency away by turning it into a deep dark fortress. There will always be people who will mistake your inner curiosity for weakness. Let them think that. But don’t let them in.

  35. Brown Lawyer on November 3, 2012 at 7:49 pm

    I neither read the review nor the book being reviewed. Nor am I an academic or a woman or even black (except in the general sense of being a minority).

    My question is. Why the hell was that brother texting a reviewer he didn’t like. Who does that? That’s not professional at all. It’s not academic. Most people send a reply via the journal. Or an email. Or a posting.

    And I think it’s pretty telling that more recently the male scholar didn’t shut up until the female scholars husband had to step in. He doesn’t respect a females space. He may not be physically aggressive but he is emotionally. this means that he doesn’t understand the privilege of power. The more powerful party must always exhibit more restraint bc their power is built on a history of domination.

    Dude don’t you understand that whatever your reading of the past this space is hers to talk in. If you actually believe that she did damage to her career by writing an over the top review why are you coming in here and getting in the way of her attempt at rehabilitation. That suggests that you want to punish her because you still feel aggrieved. Meaning bro that you are playing victim just as you accuse her of that.

    My message to the female scholar. Stay soft and fragile and free inside yourself. Don’t let your external defense take your creative agency away by turning it into a deep dark fortress. There will always be people who will mistake your inner curiosity for weakness. Let them think that. But don’t let them in.

  36. Brown Lawyer on November 3, 2012 at 7:49 pm

    I neither read the review nor the book being reviewed. Nor am I an academic or a woman or even black (except in the general sense of being a minority).

    My question is. Why the hell was that brother texting a reviewer he didn’t like. Who does that? That’s not professional at all. It’s not academic. Most people send a reply via the journal. Or an email. Or a posting.

    And I think it’s pretty telling that more recently the male scholar didn’t shut up until the female scholars husband had to step in. He doesn’t respect a females space. He may not be physically aggressive but he is emotionally. this means that he doesn’t understand the privilege of power. The more powerful party must always exhibit more restraint bc their power is built on a history of domination.

    Dude don’t you understand that whatever your reading of the past this space is hers to talk in. If you actually believe that she did damage to her career by writing an over the top review why are you coming in here and getting in the way of her attempt at rehabilitation. That suggests that you want to punish her because you still feel aggrieved. Meaning bro that you are playing victim just as you accuse her of that.

    My message to the female scholar. Stay soft and fragile and free inside yourself. Don’t let your external defense take your creative agency away by turning it into a deep dark fortress. There will always be people who will mistake your inner curiosity for weakness. Let them think that. But don’t let them in.

  37. Toyia Zachery on November 3, 2012 at 8:43 pm

    I am incredibly grateful to you and the work that you are doing on behalf of the women who need you most. Women like me who have found it hard at times to verbalize and articulate the pain that is seeded when we are routinely and unjustly treated like Jezebles and the host of other controlling images used to subjugate us. You are beyond brave and brilliant! This forum has literally IN Counraged me. Thank you for your freshness, power, and passion. You and the many voices on this Wire have helped me to remember that I am… who I’ve been waiting for!

  38. Toyia Zachery on November 3, 2012 at 8:43 pm

    I am incredibly grateful to you and the work that you are doing on behalf of the women who need you most. Women like me who have found it hard at times to verbalize and articulate the pain that is seeded when we are routinely and unjustly treated like Jezebles and the host of other controlling images used to subjugate us. You are beyond brave and brilliant! This forum has literally IN Counraged me. Thank you for your freshness, power, and passion. You and the many voices on this Wire have helped me to remember that I am… who I’ve been waiting for!

  39. Toyia Zachery on November 3, 2012 at 8:43 pm

    I am incredibly grateful to you and the work that you are doing on behalf of the women who need you most. Women like me who have found it hard at times to verbalize and articulate the pain that is seeded when we are routinely and unjustly treated like Jezebles and the host of other controlling images used to subjugate us. You are beyond brave and brilliant! This forum has literally IN Counraged me. Thank you for your freshness, power, and passion. You and the many voices on this Wire have helped me to remember that I am… who I’ve been waiting for!

  40. Toyia Zachery on November 3, 2012 at 8:43 pm

    I am incredibly grateful to you and the work that you are doing on behalf of the women who need you most. Women like me who have found it hard at times to verbalize and articulate the pain that is seeded when we are routinely and unjustly treated like Jezebles and the host of other controlling images used to subjugate us. You are beyond brave and brilliant! This forum has literally IN Counraged me. Thank you for your freshness, power, and passion. You and the many voices on this Wire have helped me to remember that I am… who I’ve been waiting for!

  41. Dabeiba on November 4, 2012 at 12:15 am

    Although I am not a black woman, I am a woman of color who has left academia with more knowledge, but in many ways traumatized, which has worked to silence me. I am not as eloquent with my words but want to thank you for the truths you have written. Your decision to write publicly again gives me hope.

  42. Dabeiba on November 4, 2012 at 12:15 am

    Although I am not a black woman, I am a woman of color who has left academia with more knowledge, but in many ways traumatized, which has worked to silence me. I am not as eloquent with my words but want to thank you for the truths you have written. Your decision to write publicly again gives me hope.

  43. Dabeiba on November 4, 2012 at 12:15 am

    Although I am not a black woman, I am a woman of color who has left academia with more knowledge, but in many ways traumatized, which has worked to silence me. I am not as eloquent with my words but want to thank you for the truths you have written. Your decision to write publicly again gives me hope.

  44. Dabeiba on November 4, 2012 at 12:15 am

    Although I am not a black woman, I am a woman of color who has left academia with more knowledge, but in many ways traumatized, which has worked to silence me. I am not as eloquent with my words but want to thank you for the truths you have written. Your decision to write publicly again gives me hope.

  45. Minkah Makalani on November 4, 2012 at 12:32 am

    Dr. Lomax, thank you for telling your story and shining the light in the darkness. And side note, it’s clear Mr. Lee got some serious problems.

  46. Minkah Makalani on November 4, 2012 at 12:32 am

    Dr. Lomax, thank you for telling your story and shining the light in the darkness. And side note, it’s clear Mr. Lee got some serious problems.

  47. Minkah Makalani on November 4, 2012 at 12:32 am

    Dr. Lomax, thank you for telling your story and shining the light in the darkness. And side note, it’s clear Mr. Lee got some serious problems.

  48. Minkah Makalani on November 4, 2012 at 12:32 am

    Dr. Lomax, thank you for telling your story and shining the light in the darkness. And side note, it’s clear Mr. Lee got some serious problems.

  49. ETHA GRAY on November 4, 2012 at 10:44 am

    Dr. Lomax,
    You have, in your article, so brilliantly displayed the importance of a higher education. Because, in dealing with the subject of your article, I would have had to take him to my school and given him a rating he could have taken to his grave. You finese and self control is beyond belief, and so admirable. In my world, especially after the second email, when I finished renaming him,(do have many in my vocabulary) he would never again, wanted to see my face, hear my name, or even dream of me without serious flashbacks.

    I commend you, my young sister, you do have class. Ii seriously hope that you could use some of your skills in teaching others how to help other young sisters and brothers to developi that king of class. I could have used that teaching, coming along. Stay strong, remain who you are and stand on your belief. I am deeply happy to have read your article. FYI: If possible, please go to: http://www.smashwords.com and look at some of my books. Especially, Surviving the Storm, a true accounting of a woman who has suffered a lifetime of abuse of every ilk, and survived.

  50. ETHA GRAY on November 4, 2012 at 10:44 am

    Dr. Lomax,
    You have, in your article, so brilliantly displayed the importance of a higher education. Because, in dealing with the subject of your article, I would have had to take him to my school and given him a rating he could have taken to his grave. You finese and self control is beyond belief, and so admirable. In my world, especially after the second email, when I finished renaming him,(do have many in my vocabulary) he would never again, wanted to see my face, hear my name, or even dream of me without serious flashbacks.

    I commend you, my young sister, you do have class. Ii seriously hope that you could use some of your skills in teaching others how to help other young sisters and brothers to developi that king of class. I could have used that teaching, coming along. Stay strong, remain who you are and stand on your belief. I am deeply happy to have read your article. FYI: If possible, please go to: http://www.smashwords.com and look at some of my books. Especially, Surviving the Storm, a true accounting of a woman who has suffered a lifetime of abuse of every ilk, and survived.

  51. ETHA GRAY on November 4, 2012 at 10:44 am

    Dr. Lomax,
    You have, in your article, so brilliantly displayed the importance of a higher education. Because, in dealing with the subject of your article, I would have had to take him to my school and given him a rating he could have taken to his grave. You finese and self control is beyond belief, and so admirable. In my world, especially after the second email, when I finished renaming him,(do have many in my vocabulary) he would never again, wanted to see my face, hear my name, or even dream of me without serious flashbacks.

    I commend you, my young sister, you do have class. Ii seriously hope that you could use some of your skills in teaching others how to help other young sisters and brothers to developi that king of class. I could have used that teaching, coming along. Stay strong, remain who you are and stand on your belief. I am deeply happy to have read your article. FYI: If possible, please go to: http://www.smashwords.com and look at some of my books. Especially, Surviving the Storm, a true accounting of a woman who has suffered a lifetime of abuse of every ilk, and survived.

  52. ETHA GRAY on November 4, 2012 at 10:44 am

    Dr. Lomax,
    You have, in your article, so brilliantly displayed the importance of a higher education. Because, in dealing with the subject of your article, I would have had to take him to my school and given him a rating he could have taken to his grave. You finese and self control is beyond belief, and so admirable. In my world, especially after the second email, when I finished renaming him,(do have many in my vocabulary) he would never again, wanted to see my face, hear my name, or even dream of me without serious flashbacks.

    I commend you, my young sister, you do have class. Ii seriously hope that you could use some of your skills in teaching others how to help other young sisters and brothers to developi that king of class. I could have used that teaching, coming along. Stay strong, remain who you are and stand on your belief. I am deeply happy to have read your article. FYI: If possible, please go to: http://www.smashwords.com and look at some of my books. Especially, Surviving the Storm, a true accounting of a woman who has suffered a lifetime of abuse of every ilk, and survived.

  53. EmAyCee on November 4, 2012 at 11:25 am

    I wonder what response the women in @Shaynes life have about not only his book but his most recent post. Do his ‘close female friends ” support him without critique or honest commentary?? And most importantly what does Mama’nem say about his post??

  54. EmAyCee on November 4, 2012 at 11:25 am

    I wonder what response the women in @Shaynes life have about not only his book but his most recent post. Do his ‘close female friends ” support him without critique or honest commentary?? And most importantly what does Mama’nem say about his post??

  55. EmAyCee on November 4, 2012 at 11:25 am

    I wonder what response the women in @Shaynes life have about not only his book but his most recent post. Do his ‘close female friends ” support him without critique or honest commentary?? And most importantly what does Mama’nem say about his post??

  56. EmAyCee on November 4, 2012 at 11:25 am

    I wonder what response the women in @Shaynes life have about not only his book but his most recent post. Do his ‘close female friends ” support him without critique or honest commentary?? And most importantly what does Mama’nem say about his post??

  57. thebewilderness on November 4, 2012 at 5:32 pm

    You know what happens when a man starts talking about how all your friends come to him with questions about your relationship with him?
    Enormous gigantic red flag begins to wave.
    There is a book called “Why Does He DO That” that should be required reading for every teen girl and woman in the world. This guy is in there.

  58. thebewilderness on November 4, 2012 at 5:32 pm

    You know what happens when a man starts talking about how all your friends come to him with questions about your relationship with him?
    Enormous gigantic red flag begins to wave.
    There is a book called “Why Does He DO That” that should be required reading for every teen girl and woman in the world. This guy is in there.

  59. thebewilderness on November 4, 2012 at 5:32 pm

    You know what happens when a man starts talking about how all your friends come to him with questions about your relationship with him?
    Enormous gigantic red flag begins to wave.
    There is a book called “Why Does He DO That” that should be required reading for every teen girl and woman in the world. This guy is in there.

  60. thebewilderness on November 4, 2012 at 5:32 pm

    You know what happens when a man starts talking about how all your friends come to him with questions about your relationship with him?
    Enormous gigantic red flag begins to wave.
    There is a book called “Why Does He DO That” that should be required reading for every teen girl and woman in the world. This guy is in there.

  61. Veronica on November 4, 2012 at 7:45 pm

    UNBELIEVABLE — Dr. Lomax, you have all of my support. There seems to be an epidemic of sociopathy related to the retention of male power, which some black males are quick to sexualize as a way to shame black women and assert dominance.

    Shayne has proven your point with his ridiculous comments. Please prepare yourself to take the necessary measures to secure restraining orders against this man if he becomes more aggressive with you or your family. He clearly needs mental help.

  62. Veronica on November 4, 2012 at 7:45 pm

    UNBELIEVABLE — Dr. Lomax, you have all of my support. There seems to be an epidemic of sociopathy related to the retention of male power, which some black males are quick to sexualize as a way to shame black women and assert dominance.

    Shayne has proven your point with his ridiculous comments. Please prepare yourself to take the necessary measures to secure restraining orders against this man if he becomes more aggressive with you or your family. He clearly needs mental help.

  63. Veronica on November 4, 2012 at 7:45 pm

    UNBELIEVABLE — Dr. Lomax, you have all of my support. There seems to be an epidemic of sociopathy related to the retention of male power, which some black males are quick to sexualize as a way to shame black women and assert dominance.

    Shayne has proven your point with his ridiculous comments. Please prepare yourself to take the necessary measures to secure restraining orders against this man if he becomes more aggressive with you or your family. He clearly needs mental help.

  64. Veronica on November 4, 2012 at 7:45 pm

    UNBELIEVABLE — Dr. Lomax, you have all of my support. There seems to be an epidemic of sociopathy related to the retention of male power, which some black males are quick to sexualize as a way to shame black women and assert dominance.

    Shayne has proven your point with his ridiculous comments. Please prepare yourself to take the necessary measures to secure restraining orders against this man if he becomes more aggressive with you or your family. He clearly needs mental help.

  65. Michael on November 5, 2012 at 9:59 am

    Powerful, courageous, revitalizing words. Thank you for writing about and through the dark days of this experience. We need you (and others) doing what you are; unfortunately your experience testifies to that need. Keep doing what you are, professor.

  66. Michael on November 5, 2012 at 9:59 am

    Powerful, courageous, revitalizing words. Thank you for writing about and through the dark days of this experience. We need you (and others) doing what you are; unfortunately your experience testifies to that need. Keep doing what you are, professor.

  67. Michael on November 5, 2012 at 9:59 am

    Powerful, courageous, revitalizing words. Thank you for writing about and through the dark days of this experience. We need you (and others) doing what you are; unfortunately your experience testifies to that need. Keep doing what you are, professor.

  68. Michael on November 5, 2012 at 9:59 am

    Powerful, courageous, revitalizing words. Thank you for writing about and through the dark days of this experience. We need you (and others) doing what you are; unfortunately your experience testifies to that need. Keep doing what you are, professor.

  69. Maurice Clark on November 7, 2012 at 3:19 am

    I am wholly receptive of these here ideas. It is incredibly necessary that you not only speak to my female counterparts of any cultural lean, but also continue to speak courageously to Black men first and men of any cultural background as well…

  70. Maurice Clark on November 7, 2012 at 3:19 am

    I am wholly receptive of these here ideas. It is incredibly necessary that you not only speak to my female counterparts of any cultural lean, but also continue to speak courageously to Black men first and men of any cultural background as well…

  71. Maurice Clark on November 7, 2012 at 3:19 am

    I am wholly receptive of these here ideas. It is incredibly necessary that you not only speak to my female counterparts of any cultural lean, but also continue to speak courageously to Black men first and men of any cultural background as well…

  72. Maurice Clark on November 7, 2012 at 3:19 am

    I am wholly receptive of these here ideas. It is incredibly necessary that you not only speak to my female counterparts of any cultural lean, but also continue to speak courageously to Black men first and men of any cultural background as well…

  73. Melissa on November 7, 2012 at 11:02 am

    Wow, Tamura, I just read your book review, and it is wonderful. You have every right to be outraged, and you express your outrage eloquently. (Just the quote about tennis vs. WNBA uniforms was enough to set me off. Really, mansplainer of feminism? Who are YOU to tell those ladies what they should be wearing??) The trope that the only power women hold is their ability to be beautiful, sexy, and on display is played, boring, and needs to die.

    Thank you also for being so open about the backlash that you experienced. I’m sorry that you have to stand on the vanguard against these harassing methods used to silence the opinions of women, and especially black women, but I thank you for standing there and standing up.

    If I may be so bold as to offer advice, Stephen Pinker has some good words in his book The Better Angels of Our Natures about the power of satire to dismantle establishments. (Although you do have to ignore Pinker’s own mansplaining on feminism, unfortunately.) Sometimes satire is the best course available to us for taking the legs out from under establishments while maintaining our own sanity.

    • Tamura A. Lomax on November 7, 2012 at 12:38 pm

      Thank you for reading and many thanks for your insight. Satire sounds like a great idea. I’ve responded at length below. Cheers!

  74. Melissa on November 7, 2012 at 11:02 am

    Wow, Tamura, I just read your book review, and it is wonderful. You have every right to be outraged, and you express your outrage eloquently. (Just the quote about tennis vs. WNBA uniforms was enough to set me off. Really, mansplainer of feminism? Who are YOU to tell those ladies what they should be wearing??) The trope that the only power women hold is their ability to be beautiful, sexy, and on display is played, boring, and needs to die.

    Thank you also for being so open about the backlash that you experienced. I’m sorry that you have to stand on the vanguard against these harassing methods used to silence the opinions of women, and especially black women, but I thank you for standing there and standing up.

    If I may be so bold as to offer advice, Stephen Pinker has some good words in his book The Better Angels of Our Natures about the power of satire to dismantle establishments. (Although you do have to ignore Pinker’s own mansplaining on feminism, unfortunately.) Sometimes satire is the best course available to us for taking the legs out from under establishments while maintaining our own sanity.

    • Tamura A. Lomax on November 7, 2012 at 12:38 pm

      Thank you for reading and many thanks for your insight. Satire sounds like a great idea. I’ve responded at length below. Cheers!

  75. Melissa on November 7, 2012 at 11:02 am

    Wow, Tamura, I just read your book review, and it is wonderful. You have every right to be outraged, and you express your outrage eloquently. (Just the quote about tennis vs. WNBA uniforms was enough to set me off. Really, mansplainer of feminism? Who are YOU to tell those ladies what they should be wearing??) The trope that the only power women hold is their ability to be beautiful, sexy, and on display is played, boring, and needs to die.

    Thank you also for being so open about the backlash that you experienced. I’m sorry that you have to stand on the vanguard against these harassing methods used to silence the opinions of women, and especially black women, but I thank you for standing there and standing up.

    If I may be so bold as to offer advice, Stephen Pinker has some good words in his book The Better Angels of Our Natures about the power of satire to dismantle establishments. (Although you do have to ignore Pinker’s own mansplaining on feminism, unfortunately.) Sometimes satire is the best course available to us for taking the legs out from under establishments while maintaining our own sanity.

    • Tamura A. Lomax on November 7, 2012 at 12:38 pm

      Thank you for reading and many thanks for your insight. Satire sounds like a great idea. I’ve responded at length below. Cheers!

  76. Melissa on November 7, 2012 at 11:02 am

    Wow, Tamura, I just read your book review, and it is wonderful. You have every right to be outraged, and you express your outrage eloquently. (Just the quote about tennis vs. WNBA uniforms was enough to set me off. Really, mansplainer of feminism? Who are YOU to tell those ladies what they should be wearing??) The trope that the only power women hold is their ability to be beautiful, sexy, and on display is played, boring, and needs to die.

    Thank you also for being so open about the backlash that you experienced. I’m sorry that you have to stand on the vanguard against these harassing methods used to silence the opinions of women, and especially black women, but I thank you for standing there and standing up.

    If I may be so bold as to offer advice, Stephen Pinker has some good words in his book The Better Angels of Our Natures about the power of satire to dismantle establishments. (Although you do have to ignore Pinker’s own mansplaining on feminism, unfortunately.) Sometimes satire is the best course available to us for taking the legs out from under establishments while maintaining our own sanity.

    • Tamura A. Lomax on November 7, 2012 at 12:38 pm

      Thank you for reading and many thanks for your insight. Satire sounds like a great idea. I’ve responded at length below. Cheers!

  77. Tamura A. Lomax on November 7, 2012 at 12:21 pm

    Thanks everyone. I truly appreciate the engagement. It’s been liberating to “break into voice” again, as well as absorb the beauty that is yours. I’ve learned plenty from this experience. At the top of my list is this: remain true to your truth, voice and passion in all that you do. I did that. It cost me. However, what’s the cost for those who remain silent, who choose respectability and fear over critical movement against the status quo? I’ve never been one to feed the status quo, nor do I plan to ever be.

    My review was critical, not (simply) personal (because contrary to what’s been said by the author, our scholarship, and the political stances therein, are indeed personal–for those of us who dare do this work for reasons beyond trickery and capitalism). For me, feminism is a way of life, a way of living, and a form of survival–not my hustle. A huge part of my feminist politics is speaking my truth the way I want to speak it. No one gets to dictate that for me. To be sure, I’m charting my own course. And, I truly believe that the universe will make room for it. In some small ways it already has.

    When I initially wrote my review, many were angered that I’d include a personal text in a scholarly essay–for a scholarly journal. The inclusion of the personal text was read as “unscholarly” and “too personal” (how ironic!). Yet, the text was a text sent by the author about a text he wrote! As scholars, we are all deployers and critics of texts. That’s what we do; what we signed up for. Text messages are texts; modern day letters, notes, data, etc. Thus, they are significant and acceptable scholarly sources, particularly when directly related to the text(s), research, data, etc. in question, and especially in our current age of new media. Interestingly, now, we see texts deployed as adequate intellectual sources all of the time–in research, media, speeches, etc.

    To be sure, trailblazing takes courage, uncomfortability, and innovation. My unapologetic quest toward truth and truth speaking demand all of the above and then some. So the author was correct on this single matter: “You can’t find another review out there like yours…” Indeed.

  78. Tamura A. Lomax on November 7, 2012 at 12:21 pm

    Thanks everyone. I truly appreciate the engagement. It’s been liberating to “break into voice” again, as well as absorb the beauty that is yours. I’ve learned plenty from this experience. At the top of my list is this: remain true to your truth, voice and passion in all that you do. I did that. It cost me. However, what’s the cost for those who remain silent, who choose respectability and fear over critical movement against the status quo? I’ve never been one to feed the status quo, nor do I plan to ever be.

    My review was critical, not (simply) personal (because contrary to what’s been said by the author, our scholarship, and the political stances therein, are indeed personal–for those of us who dare do this work for reasons beyond trickery and capitalism). For me, feminism is a way of life, a way of living, and a form of survival–not my hustle. A huge part of my feminist politics is speaking my truth the way I want to speak it. No one gets to dictate that for me. To be sure, I’m charting my own course. And, I truly believe that the universe will make room for it. In some small ways it already has.

    When I initially wrote my review, many were angered that I’d include a personal text in a scholarly essay–for a scholarly journal. The inclusion of the personal text was read as “unscholarly” and “too personal” (how ironic!). Yet, the text was a text sent by the author about a text he wrote! As scholars, we are all deployers and critics of texts. That’s what we do; what we signed up for. Text messages are texts; modern day letters, notes, data, etc. Thus, they are significant and acceptable scholarly sources, particularly when directly related to the text(s), research, data, etc. in question, and especially in our current age of new media. Interestingly, now, we see texts deployed as adequate intellectual sources all of the time–in research, media, speeches, etc.

    To be sure, trailblazing takes courage, uncomfortability, and innovation. My unapologetic quest toward truth and truth speaking demand all of the above and then some. So the author was correct on this single matter: “You can’t find another review out there like yours…” Indeed.

  79. Tamura A. Lomax on November 7, 2012 at 12:21 pm

    Thanks everyone. I truly appreciate the engagement. It’s been liberating to “break into voice” again, as well as absorb the beauty that is yours. I’ve learned plenty from this experience. At the top of my list is this: remain true to your truth, voice and passion in all that you do. I did that. It cost me. However, what’s the cost for those who remain silent, who choose respectability and fear over critical movement against the status quo? I’ve never been one to feed the status quo, nor do I plan to ever be.

    My review was critical, not (simply) personal (because contrary to what’s been said by the author, our scholarship, and the political stances therein, are indeed personal–for those of us who dare do this work for reasons beyond trickery and capitalism). For me, feminism is a way of life, a way of living, and a form of survival–not my hustle. A huge part of my feminist politics is speaking my truth the way I want to speak it. No one gets to dictate that for me. To be sure, I’m charting my own course. And, I truly believe that the universe will make room for it. In some small ways it already has.

    When I initially wrote my review, many were angered that I’d include a personal text in a scholarly essay–for a scholarly journal. The inclusion of the personal text was read as “unscholarly” and “too personal” (how ironic!). Yet, the text was a text sent by the author about a text he wrote! As scholars, we are all deployers and critics of texts. That’s what we do; what we signed up for. Text messages are texts; modern day letters, notes, data, etc. Thus, they are significant and acceptable scholarly sources, particularly when directly related to the text(s), research, data, etc. in question, and especially in our current age of new media. Interestingly, now, we see texts deployed as adequate intellectual sources all of the time–in research, media, speeches, etc.

    To be sure, trailblazing takes courage, uncomfortability, and innovation. My unapologetic quest toward truth and truth speaking demand all of the above and then some. So the author was correct on this single matter: “You can’t find another review out there like yours…” Indeed.

  80. Tamura A. Lomax on November 7, 2012 at 12:21 pm

    Thanks everyone. I truly appreciate the engagement. It’s been liberating to “break into voice” again, as well as absorb the beauty that is yours. I’ve learned plenty from this experience. At the top of my list is this: remain true to your truth, voice and passion in all that you do. I did that. It cost me. However, what’s the cost for those who remain silent, who choose respectability and fear over critical movement against the status quo? I’ve never been one to feed the status quo, nor do I plan to ever be.

    My review was critical, not (simply) personal (because contrary to what’s been said by the author, our scholarship, and the political stances therein, are indeed personal–for those of us who dare do this work for reasons beyond trickery and capitalism). For me, feminism is a way of life, a way of living, and a form of survival–not my hustle. A huge part of my feminist politics is speaking my truth the way I want to speak it. No one gets to dictate that for me. To be sure, I’m charting my own course. And, I truly believe that the universe will make room for it. In some small ways it already has.

    When I initially wrote my review, many were angered that I’d include a personal text in a scholarly essay–for a scholarly journal. The inclusion of the personal text was read as “unscholarly” and “too personal” (how ironic!). Yet, the text was a text sent by the author about a text he wrote! As scholars, we are all deployers and critics of texts. That’s what we do; what we signed up for. Text messages are texts; modern day letters, notes, data, etc. Thus, they are significant and acceptable scholarly sources, particularly when directly related to the text(s), research, data, etc. in question, and especially in our current age of new media. Interestingly, now, we see texts deployed as adequate intellectual sources all of the time–in research, media, speeches, etc.

    To be sure, trailblazing takes courage, uncomfortability, and innovation. My unapologetic quest toward truth and truth speaking demand all of the above and then some. So the author was correct on this single matter: “You can’t find another review out there like yours…” Indeed.

  81. Tarani on November 9, 2012 at 7:06 am

    Wow! Thank you so much for speaking your truth! As another black feminist scholar getting ready to put myself on the market and leaving my comfortable cacoon of support, I need you! And well! I am astounded (though, why should I really be surprised?) at the audacity of whatshiscornelwestface to come into this space, attempting to further undermine your voice by asserting that by virtue of it being black women who questioned your intentions somehow validates his own? As a self-proclaimed black male feminist, how can one be so will/woefully ignorant of the fact that these racist and sexist practices are reproduced systemically and yes, even perpetuated by black women ESPECIALLY in the gendered/patriarchal context of religion and religious practice. And what revolution of thought was ever done by doing as expected and following the practices of other scholarly authors who follow the status quo and you are indeed an inspiration “for those of us who dare do this work for reasons beyond trickery and capitalism.” I need to blow that up and say a prayer under it every day. Thank you.

  82. Tarani on November 9, 2012 at 7:06 am

    Wow! Thank you so much for speaking your truth! As another black feminist scholar getting ready to put myself on the market and leaving my comfortable cacoon of support, I need you! And well! I am astounded (though, why should I really be surprised?) at the audacity of whatshiscornelwestface to come into this space, attempting to further undermine your voice by asserting that by virtue of it being black women who questioned your intentions somehow validates his own? As a self-proclaimed black male feminist, how can one be so will/woefully ignorant of the fact that these racist and sexist practices are reproduced systemically and yes, even perpetuated by black women ESPECIALLY in the gendered/patriarchal context of religion and religious practice. And what revolution of thought was ever done by doing as expected and following the practices of other scholarly authors who follow the status quo and you are indeed an inspiration “for those of us who dare do this work for reasons beyond trickery and capitalism.” I need to blow that up and say a prayer under it every day. Thank you.

  83. Tarani on November 9, 2012 at 7:06 am

    Wow! Thank you so much for speaking your truth! As another black feminist scholar getting ready to put myself on the market and leaving my comfortable cacoon of support, I need you! And well! I am astounded (though, why should I really be surprised?) at the audacity of whatshiscornelwestface to come into this space, attempting to further undermine your voice by asserting that by virtue of it being black women who questioned your intentions somehow validates his own? As a self-proclaimed black male feminist, how can one be so will/woefully ignorant of the fact that these racist and sexist practices are reproduced systemically and yes, even perpetuated by black women ESPECIALLY in the gendered/patriarchal context of religion and religious practice. And what revolution of thought was ever done by doing as expected and following the practices of other scholarly authors who follow the status quo and you are indeed an inspiration “for those of us who dare do this work for reasons beyond trickery and capitalism.” I need to blow that up and say a prayer under it every day. Thank you.

  84. Tarani on November 9, 2012 at 7:06 am

    Wow! Thank you so much for speaking your truth! As another black feminist scholar getting ready to put myself on the market and leaving my comfortable cacoon of support, I need you! And well! I am astounded (though, why should I really be surprised?) at the audacity of whatshiscornelwestface to come into this space, attempting to further undermine your voice by asserting that by virtue of it being black women who questioned your intentions somehow validates his own? As a self-proclaimed black male feminist, how can one be so will/woefully ignorant of the fact that these racist and sexist practices are reproduced systemically and yes, even perpetuated by black women ESPECIALLY in the gendered/patriarchal context of religion and religious practice. And what revolution of thought was ever done by doing as expected and following the practices of other scholarly authors who follow the status quo and you are indeed an inspiration “for those of us who dare do this work for reasons beyond trickery and capitalism.” I need to blow that up and say a prayer under it every day. Thank you.

  85. Katie on November 10, 2012 at 9:35 pm

    I have nothing to say that’s not been said more eloquently above, but want to add my voice to the many that are supporting and applauding your elegant defense against these sexist, racist fools. Shame on those who have tried to silence you, and whose actions have made life difficult for you these last few years. I hope you continue to write publicly, but even if you choose not to, my very best to you.

  86. Katie on November 10, 2012 at 9:35 pm

    I have nothing to say that’s not been said more eloquently above, but want to add my voice to the many that are supporting and applauding your elegant defense against these sexist, racist fools. Shame on those who have tried to silence you, and whose actions have made life difficult for you these last few years. I hope you continue to write publicly, but even if you choose not to, my very best to you.

  87. Katie on November 10, 2012 at 9:35 pm

    I have nothing to say that’s not been said more eloquently above, but want to add my voice to the many that are supporting and applauding your elegant defense against these sexist, racist fools. Shame on those who have tried to silence you, and whose actions have made life difficult for you these last few years. I hope you continue to write publicly, but even if you choose not to, my very best to you.

  88. Katie on November 10, 2012 at 9:35 pm

    I have nothing to say that’s not been said more eloquently above, but want to add my voice to the many that are supporting and applauding your elegant defense against these sexist, racist fools. Shame on those who have tried to silence you, and whose actions have made life difficult for you these last few years. I hope you continue to write publicly, but even if you choose not to, my very best to you.

  89. Tia Oso on November 12, 2012 at 10:23 pm

    Soror, your voice, intellect and perspective are much needed and I look forward to reading more from you. If I may use the vernacular, you “roasted that fool”, and he thoroughly deserved it.

  90. Tia Oso on November 12, 2012 at 10:23 pm

    Soror, your voice, intellect and perspective are much needed and I look forward to reading more from you. If I may use the vernacular, you “roasted that fool”, and he thoroughly deserved it.

  91. Tia Oso on November 12, 2012 at 10:23 pm

    Soror, your voice, intellect and perspective are much needed and I look forward to reading more from you. If I may use the vernacular, you “roasted that fool”, and he thoroughly deserved it.

  92. Tia Oso on November 12, 2012 at 10:23 pm

    Soror, your voice, intellect and perspective are much needed and I look forward to reading more from you. If I may use the vernacular, you “roasted that fool”, and he thoroughly deserved it.

Follow The Feminist Wire

Arts & Culture

  • Two Poems by Tsitsi Jaji tumblr_m0jjzqsYiq1qbh27fo1_500

    By Tsitsi Jaji   Pause. (For All the Madibas)*   There is a breath before the pendulum rends its center, A breath before what leapt comes back to its ground.     There, men and women in chains broke rock, forcing it to deliver         .   [...]

  • Fiction Feature: from “Kill Marguerite,” by Megan Milks Milks-avatar-magicked-out

    By Megan Milks   This excerpt from the short story “Kill Marguerite” takes place after the protagonist, Caty, has already beat Level One and killed Marguerite, her arch-enemy.   Level Two: The Trampoline     BEGIN>> The trampoline is this big old trampoline in Matt and Curtis Wheeler’s backyard, and [...]

  • Video Feature: List of Demands: Because Existing is a Privilege by Nicole Shantè White nicole white photo

    By Nicole Shantè  White   This creative visual addresses queer invisibility by encompassing the intricacies of the Gay Liberation manifesto and the Black Panther Party’s manifesto. Originally inspired by Sofia Snow’s “List of Demands: Because Existing is a Privilege, emerging author Nicole Shantè White uses the bed as a metaphor [...]