If you want to be an ally to a marginalized group (e.g. queer people, people of colour, or women), but your support is conditional on every member of that group being perfect and above reproach, you are not an ally
People get stuff wrong; people get emotional—especially in cases of injustice
If your allyship can't survive that, you are not an ally
also accept that you might not get it sometimes no matter how well informed or involved you might think you are and that you still have no right to be filled with indignation that someone would question you
The more bank and prestige they get from their ally work, the quicker they are to pull rank if you say, "Hey, I'm disappointed with how you're looking at this thing right now."
It's why I've come to detest the term. I don't throw it around, and I'm fine if no one uses it to describe me, either.
@bgcarlisle I've found this is often the thing that makes new white allies drop out. It's major culture shock to realize that "respectability" and "civility" are largely a product of privilege; that people fighting for their lives often don't have the time or energy to couch their language in fluff. Most "allies" aren't ready for that level of deprogramming, and try to gatekeep rather than confront the product of white supremacy buried deep in their minds.
Scholar Social is a microblogging platform for researchers, grad students, librarians, archivists, undergrads, academically inclined high schoolers, educators of all levels, journal editors, research assistants, professors, administrators—anyone involved in academia who is willing to engage with others respectfully. Read more ...