On Fri, 13 Nov 1998, Christopher Niles wrote:
> It's interesting: While "rebellious" young "white" kids attempt to
> obliterate their whiteness by "attacking" thier own skin, many decidedly
> unrebellious Black folk, particularly women, strive to gain acceptance
> among both "white" folks and large numbers of Black folk, too, by
> whitening their skin and straigtening their hair.
>
Niles,
I'm confused. Why do you problematize the category "white" but accept the category "black"? I ask because you put "white" in scare quotes but then you capitalize "black." I don't see how there can not be such a thing as the "white" race while a "black" race exists. Please explain this. I assume that if the one is a racial myth, then the other must be as well. To say on exists but not the other seems to me inconsistent bordering on illogical.
And if we are going to say there is no such thing as "black" people" I can see that might cause problems for some people, who could think that such a move takes away their particular moral position. One comes across the same problem in feminist thought--Butler says there is no such thing as a woman, then other feminists get pissed off at her, because she has taken away the standpoint from which they can theorize their own oppression.
respectfully, frances