http://mailman.lbo-talk.org/pipermail/lbo-talk/Week-of-Mon-20040223/004494.html
from which -
i happen to think there is always space for that discussion and debate, and i would much prefer it if it was banalised by a recognition that racism and sexism permeates what we do here than to shift it into the realm of rhetorical insult (as if it is some kind of wilful malevolence), which is largely and unfortunately where it remains now. and, it's as insult that it becomes enjoyment and the basis for identification, both for those who do the calling and those who are called. that is, there should always be a debate and discussion on whether or not some comment or perspective is racist. what happens more often than not however is that discussion is halted, usually at the line of 'if a woman says x is sexist then it is true'; this is all too troubling so we should stop now; 'you are being racist when you say x'; 'you are/you aren't'; etc...
----------------
I have to agree.
I've followed this thread with interest and not a little dismay.
>From almost the start, it was clear to me Kelley was
simply having a little fun by writing in a style which
mimiced the speaking habits of people she knew
(family, friends, etc). I understood, after re-reading
for context and simply because I give Kelley the
benefit of the doubt, this was not a mean spirited,
elitist attack on rural or small town folk.
Quickly, the thread became mostly an exercise in language policing instead of debate on what constitutes racism or classicism and how best to recognize these ideas within ourselves and deal with them.
I have friends who'd never use 'n-word' (well, I've just increased the text search return count of this word for LBO-Talk) yet nurse a host of confused ideas about African Americans. Their language is fairly well scrubbed but the racialist ideas persist in one form or another.
I appreciate their efforts but would rather they were less self-congratulatory on the politeness of their word choices and more questioning of the unexamined assumptions each of us carries around on our backs every moment.
Some of these assumptions seem righteous - a belief, for example, that everything a Black person (any Black person) labels as racist must be so or, as Kell wrote, the false statement that 'if a woman says x is sexist then it is true'. The people who support such simplicity believe themselves to be on the side of the angels but are really no help to anyone.
As Kelley, (quoting Angela) posted, there is no life outside of ideology; none of us is immune. But corrective measures are possible; open debate, instead of condemnation, makes correction possible.
DRM