Thank you very much for this excellent article.
Yes, Union’s departure and Klum’s (Hough’s) attitude(s) are a microcosm for the larger white supremacist context: white women are elevated at the expense of women of color, and in particular black women. The attitude reflects the larger necessity of pushing color down with the heavy foot of white (female) supremacy so that they are (falsely) elevated.
I often wonder what will happen if the scapegoat is removed: imagine that, for all these years (and in the larger picture, centuries) your success was intrinsically — possibly entirely — dependent on being a WHITE woman. What would happen if the real source of success was removed — ie, the ladder of POC ‘s bent spine — and these women were to deal directly with their mediocrity or outright failure?!
From this, we know exactly why they must continue to push down Union: their ‘success’ is dependent upon keeping true achievement under their feet.
The success of white women is intrinsically linked to the failure of black women and other WOC, and without it, they must truly achieve. I think that, deep down, many of them know they simply cannot compete on an even playing field given that they cannot have any idea what an even playing field looks like in the context of the last few centuries.
White privilege is so profound that they cannot afford to look at how much is given for free, at POC expense, and how little is actually earned. This realization is much too ugly for the ‘pretty’ role into which white women, generally speaking, are cast, and most of them clearly cannot accept this ugly reality.