> >> i am finding that you are asking me to jump through hoops or pass little
> tests.
sister kelly,
here is what i think is happening. i put out a statement about anti-whiteism as a much more useful paradigm than anti-racism for theorizing about race and practicing a better "racial" politics as a part of a larger anti-authoritarian tendency. phase one of this thread saw some people ridiculing me and some people offering useful commentary or asking questions. phase two saws lots of interesting but evasive commentary that did not do much to address the question on the table (with a couple of exceptions). i attepted to keep folks on-topic in phase two but without much success. it sems the more i have tried to get back to the basic question, the more surreal--and unproductive--the conversation has become.
i really am not trying to make you jump through hoops. i do think that this thread has become a bit baroque--and yes, i do think the unbearable whiteness of academic discourse is manifesting itself here--such that it is getting harder to hear what anybody is really saying.
>
> there's a reason for my insistence on analyzing race/class/gender/sexuality
> together, whenever possible. there are good reasons for doing so.
aucan doute!
> i will chill a bit and get back to the rest of your post.
damn, girlfriend. i did not mean to get you so reved! but thanks for the thoughts. lets keep talking...
chris