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 f0UIlM929307; Tue, 30 Jan 2001 13:47:23 -0500 (EST) Date: Tue, 30 Jan 2001 13:47:23 -0500 (EST) Message-Id: <2.2.32.20010130184804.006d7464@mail.teleport.com> 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: Sylvan Rainwater <sylrain@teleport.com> To: Multiple recipients of list <nifl-womenlit@literacy.nifl.gov> Subject: [NIFL-WOMENLIT:1174] Re: "those now described as white" X-Listprocessor-Version: 6.0c -- ListProcessor by Anastasios Kotsikonas Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" X-Mailer: Windows Eudora Pro Version 2.2 (32) Status: O Content-Length: 1781 Lines: 39 At 10:47 AM 1/30/01 -0500, you wrote: <SNIP> >And I don't think we'll be getting rid of the word "race" anytime soon. >What would be our reasons for doing so? > <SNIP> Well, I don't know about the word, but the concept could use some work. "Race" is totally a construct that makes no logical sense, when you get down to cases. That is, it makes no biological sense. We use it loosely as a synonym for "ethnicity," which makes slightly more sense, but still is problematic. We overlay lots of cultural, economic, social, place of origin, religious, and other considerations on it. I remember a story told by a woman years ago who came from Jamaica to the U.S. Her skin is just about as black as can be. She checked "black" on the form where it asked about race, and the official objected. No, he said, you're not black, you're Jamaican. She looked at her arm, and back at him, and got really puzzled. I've always remembered that story. The official was evidently thinking of African American, not black, so it clearly had nothing to do with any biological reality. This woman said that in central and south America they just don't pay attention to race in the same ways that we do in the USA. It's understood that we're all mixtures and the different mixtures don't necessarily confer some special privilege. That's the crux of the race problem, after all. It's that some "races" are marked for special privilege and others are marked for deprivation. It's the same problem with language. The difference between a "dialect" and a "language" is that speakers of a language have a navy. It's all about economic and social and political privilege. --------------------------------------------------------------- Sylvan Rainwater . Portland, Oregon, USA . sylrain@teleport.com
This archive was generated by hypermail 2b30 : Fri Jan 18 2002 - 11:32:08 EST