Return-Path: <nifl-womenlit@literacy.nifl.gov>
Received: from literacy (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by literacy.nifl.gov (8.10.2/8.10.2) with SMTP id f0UH0q925464; Tue, 30 Jan 2001 12:00:52 -0500 (EST)
Date: Tue, 30 Jan 2001 12:00:52 -0500 (EST)
Message-Id: <005d01c08add$f29f3720$0d00000a@deborah01>
Errors-To: alcrsb@langate.gsu.edu
Reply-To: nifl-womenlit@literacy.nifl.gov
Originator: nifl-womenlit@literacy.nifl.gov
Sender: nifl-womenlit@literacy.nifl.gov
Precedence: bulk
From: "Deborah Schwartz" <deborah@alri.org>
To: Multiple recipients of list <nifl-womenlit@literacy.nifl.gov>
Subject: [NIFL-WOMENLIT:1171] Re: "those now described as white"
X-Listprocessor-Version: 6.0c -- ListProcessor by Anastasios Kotsikonas
X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 5.50.4133.2400
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Content-Type: text/plain;
Status: O
Content-Length: 4820
Lines: 99
Dani and others,
I appreciate your thoughtfulness and your information regarding the
construction of "race." I had a similar reaction to the question posed by
Andrea re: when are we going to get rid of the word? (race that is).
We may get rid of the word- we certainly have played, and some would say
evolved, in terms of what we call ourselves and others in relationship to
our ethnic identity- but what we haven't gotten rid of is the power and
privilege that is associated with being on one side or the other of the race
line. We may work to dissolve or deconstruct the social construct of race,
but it won't happen till we work to dissolve the power differentials
attributed to people who belong- by societal definitions- to a particular
race.
In other words, we may rid our vocabulary of the word race, yet we are still
left with the word, and the very real experience (personally and
historically) of racism.
Deborah Schwartz
Adult Literacy Resource Institute
Boston, MA 02215
----- Original Message -----
From: "Dani Moore" <dani@unc.edu>
To: "Multiple recipients of list" <nifl-womenlit@literacy.nifl.gov>
Sent: Tuesday, January 30, 2001 10:47 AM
Subject: [NIFL-WOMENLIT:1168] Re: "those now described as white"
> I, too, appreciated the conference's opening panel and learned a lot
> during discussions, workshops and other panels at the conference. Thanks
> to Daphne and others whose hard work and commitment made the conference
> possible. I'm interested in discussing more about the conference than
> the whiteness question, so I encourage others to suggest more topics.
>
> However, I wanted to offer my two cents on whiteness. I'm most persuaded
> by arguments that frame the question differently-- not more names for
> white or better defining who white people are. I know about some of my
> ancestors from Ireland, England and Scotland, and I know it's possible
> there are more racial and cultural influences in my family background. I
> seek to undermine white supremacy, but it's difficult, and I also have
> trouble with naming people who look somewhat like me and benefit from
> white privilege in the U.S. Authors like Noel Ignatiev ("How the Irish
> Became White") and David Roediger (ed., "Black on White: Black Writers
> on What it Means to Be White") have informed my views and I think their
> contributions to the dialogue on race compelling, provocative and
> useful.
>
> As James Baldwin wrote in 1985, "As long as you think you are white,
> there's no hope for you." Ignatiev argues that the white race is neither
> a biological nor a cultural formation; it is a strategy for securing to
> some an advantage in a competitive society. Roediger maintains that
> whiteness is not merely oppressive and false, it is nothing but
> oppressive and false.
>
> And I don't think we'll be getting rid of the word "race" anytime soon.
> What would be our reasons for doing so?
>
> Some of these ideas are outlined at
> http://www.postfun.com/racetraitor/features/thepoint.html
>
> What do others think?
> Best to all,
> -.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.
> Dani Moore dani@unc.edu 919.962.1542
> Training and Technical Assistance Coordinator
> Student Coalition for Action in Literacy Education (SCALE)
> http://www.readwriteact.org/
>
>
>
> Daphne Greenberg wrote:
> >
> > A few years ago, 3 women and I worked on a proposal to study the
additional difficulties women who have low literacy skills have when they
are abused and are trying to navigate the beaurocratic system to get help
(whether it is a shelter, restraining order, etc). Because we felt that
women from differnt cultures have different experiences (and of course a lot
of similar experiences), we decided to look at 3 groups-Latina women,
African American women, and White women. We struggled with the labels we
used, because Latina and African American described origins and not just
skin color, while White only described color. We were not able to come up
with a label that we could all feel comfortable with.
> > By the way, Laura brought up this issue during the question and answer
period after the panel, and it met with dead silence. It might be because
her question was the first one, it also might be that people found it too
loaded?
> > Daphne
> > >>> hauserl@mail.dekalb.public.lib.ga.us 01/29/01 19:51 PM >>>
> > One thing that struck me listening to the very good, opening panel
> > presentation was the inadequacy of the word white to describe a race. I
> > think it is as inadequate as black for denoting skin or culture. I'd
> > appreciate a discussion about other words we might consider using to
> > designate the amazingly diverse appearance, attitudes, and experience of
> > those now described as white.
> >
>
This archive was generated by hypermail 2b30 : Fri Jan 18 2002 - 11:32:08 EST