Classic and Contemporary Poetry: Explained

In "Ms.", Janice Mirikitani confronts issues of privilege, race, and feminism, exploring the tension between a woman of color and a white woman who insists on being addressed as “Ms.” Through this interaction, Mirikitani delves into the intersections of gender and race, revealing the frustration of a speaker who feels that mainstream feminist issues often fail to address the systemic oppression experienced by women of color. The poem critiques the limitations of a feminism that centers only on gender, ignoring the compounded struggles faced by marginalized communities.

The poem opens with a confrontation: “I got into a thing / with someone / because I called her / miss ann / hearst / rockefeller / hughes / instead of ms.” This line immediately establishes a tone of tension and conflict. By referring to the woman with names that evoke wealthy, powerful, white American families, Mirikitani places her in a position of privilege, suggesting that her concerns are far removed from those of the speaker. The use of “miss ann,” a term historically associated with wealthy white women who were oblivious to the struggles of others, underscores the woman’s privileged position. The speaker’s resistance to calling her “Ms.” signifies a deeper rejection of a superficial feminist solidarity that does not consider the speaker’s own racial and socioeconomic struggles.

The speaker’s reaction—“I said / it was a waste of time / worrying about it”—reflects her frustration with what she perceives as trivial concerns. For the speaker, the insistence on being called “Ms.” seems inconsequential compared to the real struggles she faces. This response highlights a disconnect between the concerns of privileged women and those of women who face intersecting forms of oppression. The speaker implies that the insistence on titles and terminology does little to address the real issues affecting women of color, such as economic exploitation, racial discrimination, and historical injustice.

As the poem progresses, Mirikitani describes the reaction of the woman who insists on being called “Ms.”: “Her lips pressed white / thinning words like pins / pricking me—a victim of sexism.” This imagery conveys the woman’s sense of righteousness, as if she believes her insistence on correct terminology makes her a true advocate against sexism. However, the speaker feels “pricked” by these words, which seem sharp and pointed, rather than inclusive or empathetic. This description suggests that the woman’s feminism feels invasive and painful, as if she is imposing her beliefs without acknowledging the speaker’s perspective. By describing herself as “a victim of sexism” in this context, the woman reduces the speaker’s lived experiences to a common denominator of gender, ignoring the additional burdens of race and class.

The speaker then expresses her own anger and resentment, revealing a deeper conflict that goes beyond titles: “I wanted to / call her what / she deserved / but knowing it would please her / instead / I said.” This line suggests that the speaker wants to retaliate, to call out the woman’s privilege in a way that would truly express her frustration. However, she refrains, recognizing that doing so would play into the woman’s desire to feel attacked or victimized. Instead, she chooses to expose the hypocrisy and privilege inherent in the woman’s feminism, shifting the conversation away from titles and toward the systemic inequalities that benefit her.

The poem shifts to a powerful critique of privilege, with the speaker addressing the woman directly: “white lace & satin were never soiled by / sexism / sheltered as you are by mansions / built on Indian land.” Here, the speaker contrasts the woman’s privilege with her own struggles, pointing out that her life of luxury has insulated her from the harsher realities of systemic oppression. By mentioning “mansions / built on Indian land,” Mirikitani reminds readers of the colonial history and racial injustices that have enriched white families at the expense of Indigenous people. This critique challenges the woman’s understanding of oppression, pointing out that her feminism does not account for the history of dispossession and exploitation faced by communities of color.

The speaker continues to expose the woman’s privilege, invoking the horrors of slavery, exploitation, and servitude: “your diamonds shipped with slaves from Africa / your underwear washed by Chinese laundries / your house cleaned by my grandmother.” These lines reveal the layers of oppression that have directly benefited wealthy white women, whose luxury and security have been built upon the backs of marginalized communities. By listing these injustices, the speaker highlights the limitations of a feminism that overlooks the historical exploitation of people of color. Her grandmother’s labor, and the labor of countless others, has contributed to the very lifestyle that allows this woman to ignore her privilege and focus on a narrow form of feminism. These lines emphasize that, for the speaker, true feminism must confront these intersections of race, class, and gender.

The speaker’s frustration reaches its peak in the final lines: “so do not push me any further. / And when you quit / killing us / for democracy / and stop calling ME gook, / I will call you / whatever you like.” These closing words serve as a powerful rebuttal, expressing the speaker’s anger at being subjected to racial slurs and violence under the guise of American “democracy.” The phrase “killing us / for democracy” highlights the irony of a nation that promotes freedom and equality while perpetuating violence and discrimination against people of color. The racial slur “gook” starkly reminds the reader of the racial violence and dehumanization faced by Asian Americans, particularly in the context of American military interventions in Asia. By juxtaposing the woman’s concern with being called “Ms.” against the real, life-threatening racism faced by the speaker, Mirikitani underscores the profound divide between their experiences.

The poem’s closing lines are a declaration of the speaker’s autonomy and resistance: she will not address the woman by her preferred title until there is an acknowledgment of and an end to the systemic racism that harms her and her community. By refusing to conform to the woman’s demands, the speaker asserts her right to be recognized on her own terms, challenging a feminism that centers only privileged voices. Mirikitani’s poem thus becomes an assertion of intersectional awareness, a demand that any true feminist solidarity must confront the full spectrum of oppression, not just those issues that affect the privileged.

In "Ms.", Janice Mirikitani critiques a form of feminism that fails to address the interconnected realities of race, class, and gender. The poem’s speaker challenges the narrow perspective of privileged women who seek equality while benefiting from systemic inequalities. Through her powerful language and imagery, Mirikitani demands a broader, more inclusive feminism that acknowledges the complex histories and struggles of marginalized communities. Ultimately, the poem is a call for solidarity that goes beyond surface-level issues, urging a redefinition of feminism that fully confronts the realities of oppression faced by women of color.

Copyright (c) 2025 PoetryExplorer

Discover our Poem Explanations and Poet Analyses!

Other Poems of Interest...