George,

Uriah Fields raises an important issue relating to race--the fact that it's really just a social construct, used to reinforce social stratification. His post caused me to consider how things might be different if we adopted the approach of the (now only online) magazine "Race Traitor" to both racism and sexism.

"Race traitor" has historically meant someone who is black and has in some way betrayed the cause of blacks. The magazine uses it in a different way---to mean a white person who doesn't want to be "white"--that is, to claim white privilege. For example, the magazine has suggested that the best response a white person can make to another telling a racist joke is NOT moral outrage or denunciation, but saying to the joke teller, "I guess you're assuming I'm white." Responding with outrage says "yes, you and I are white, but I"m morally superior to you." Responding by questioning the assumption of racial identity, says something else. It says "I don't chose to claim my white privilege--I'm not one of you." This is really hard to do--try it!

As Uriah points out, race is not a genetic reality, but a social construct. Genetically, we are the products of our ancestors' physical environments, but our "race" is the product of our own cultural environments. Why should our ancestors' physical environments continue to impact our relationship with others today? It shouldn't.

In the context of Hillary's misogynist heckler, I doubt we'll hear a man respond to another man's offensive remark with "I guess you're assuming I'm a man". But imagine if Hillary, instead of talking about sexism, had responded:

"Thank you! This is exactly why I am running for president. Too many people in America, like this man here, cannot afford to buy an iron. When I am president, every American who wants an iron will be able to afford one. Every child in America will learn to use an iron. No American will ever again suffer the indignity of a wrinkled shirt, as this man has suffered. Thank you for bringing this important matter to our national attention."

Yes, it's silly. But, imagine how the crowd's (and the nation's) perceptions of this man would have changed. Imagine if, instead of confronting, we were to reframe by refusing to acknowledge that someone has attempted to put someone "in their place." This would be a refusal to grant that person the power gained through misogyny and racism. What if, instead of fighting racism and sexism, we just refused to allow people to use it to hurt us?

I doubt we will, as a nation, adopt Uriah's suggestion that we start calling Obama white, when he is equally white as he is black. We're too tied to our belief systems and social hierarchies. But imagine if we did?

Imagine if, instead of pretending to be "colorblind," we became "colorful" -- challenging our own, and others, internalized racism (and sexism) and its assumptions, assumptions of which we are all too often not even aware, and which continue to harm all of us, from within and without.

Valerie L'Herrou (Electronic Mail, January 21, 2008)