i agree. it was a little too opaque.
>you describe one as a "woman" and the other as a "black
>>woman" I call it the "ampersand" problem. try to be conscious of doing it
>>when i'm talking or typing. see Maria Lugones and Elizabeth V. Spellman,
>>Gender & Race: The Ampersand Problem in Feminist Thought. _Innessential
>>Woman_ Elizabeth V. Spellman
>
>?? The former could have been latino, could have been native american,
>could have been west asian mixed-quote-race. You can't really tell
>everyone's so-called race by glancing at them and not meeting them.
true. however, it's email, so things get misread. she caught me on doing the same, even though i'd later typed, "men and women of color and white women" later on, because i had typed "people of color and women" earlier, she plucked that out and called me on it.
i understand, though. i get upset with the way some issues are portrayed. she's just making people aware of the issues as best she can and, for her, this is probably a hostile place.
> I'll stop talking about this local stuff on this economics/academics
> listserve now.
hope not!
kelley
> I do know that this white officer had racist intent when he singled out
> the second woman to attack. Picture more predominantly euro-american
> backup officers standing nearby with snapping german shepherds. I know it
> when I see it. to not mention her race would be racist. I also saw them
> completely fabricate two serious false charges and try to screw up the
> life of the only african-japanese-brazilian american present (who I
> appreciate because he actually accomplishes things rather than discusses).
>.
>>also,
>>
>>_Feminism and 'Race'_
>>Edited by Kum-Kum Bhavnani
>>
>
>
>_________________________________________________________________
>Get your FREE download of MSN Explorer at http://explorer.msn.com/intl.asp