racist rhetoric

[Gary Palmer]

Regarding Larry's points,

I feel a little like the elephant's child getting dragged into the Limpopo
River. I knew if I didn't want to enter an extended discussion, I should have
shut down my mail program immediately. I appreciate Larry's thoughtful
comments and I agree that one should not duck the issues with students. I
knew, too, that the word "attempt" might become a problem. It was not an apt
choice. Let me just say that I was not attacking the person -- only the
rhetoric, and in spite of the points raised I continue to see it,  in the
given context, as inappropriately presented.

Gary

Larry Gorbet wrote:

> Gary Palmer <gbp at nevada.edu> wrote
>
> >I agree with Rudy that come-ons such as "Are blacks genetically
> >programmed for promiscuity?" are inappropriate in that they attempt to
> >elevate racist stereotypes to the status of a scientific problem and
> >thereby foster the very stereotypes that they purport to question.
>
> I have tremendous respect for Gary, but I beg to disagree here.  The
> quoted question does not in my view qualify as a "come-on", for
> several reasons.  Putting my linguistic anthropology hat on
> seriously, I'll note where it appears --- in a fairly serious online
> publication, not in a tabloid newspaper; that has implications for
> the backgrounds, and reading and critical thinking skills of those
> who will see it.  Second, it is followed within about three seconds
> of online reading time by text that makes it clear that the quoted
> material is not an assertion but a question that is addressed in the
> list about which the article is written.  And that in turn is
> followed, on the same page, by an article (in a larger typeface, by
> the way than the alleged come-on) that describes what the list in
> question is like.  If were truly a come-on, it would make it easy to
> join the list itself and would not bother giving information that
> would discourage many from joining it (which it does, in my opinion).
>
> The principal point of that article is that such controversial
> questions are discussed on the Evolutionary Psychology list and that
> the list (it is claimed) manages to address them without the usual
> degree of simple personal invective that too often typifies
> discussion of such issues.  It seems to me that the position that
> Gary and others are taking is that discussion of such issues should
> be limited to *assuming* their utter lack of merit and then moving on
> to the power issues etc. in which they play a part.  Rhettorically,
> this just doesn't work if your audience doesn't already know/believe
> that the question has an obvious answer that's the same as the one
> you would give.  I teach an introduction to general anthropology and
> see one of my primary responsibilities there as helping the students
> *see for themselves* why, for example, many racist propositions lack
> merit (and, especially, are based on false presuppositions).  I don't
> see how I can do this by ducking the questions or *simply* attacking
> those who ask them.
>
> The question quoted *is* a scientific problem at least in the sense
> that "Do languages of tribes in the Amazon only have 25 words?" is a
> scientific question:  carefully acquired and analyzed information may
> allow us to answer it (and/or show that the question assumes things
> we can demonstrate not to be true).
>
> I would also question whether Gary's use of the term "attempt to
> elevate..." is appropriate, since it clearly attributes motives which
> the immediately available evidence makes at least questionable.
>
> I confess that my willingness to respond to this thread is surely
> itself an emotional response to what I see as an eagerness to not
> only believe but publicly claim that people we don't know and about
> whom we are unwilling to learn even a little from easily available
> evidence are somehow evil-doers.  To me, that's the same gullibility
> that provides fertile ground for the socially and personally damaging
> -isms we work hard to combat.  Casual misrepresentation or
> representation with inadequate evidence of others' positions also
> damages our credibility to represent in any way the languages and
> cultures not our own which are our professional domains.  I am
> particularly dismayed that several here have virtually boasted that
> they hadn't bothered to read what they were at least indirectly
> attacking.
>
> >On
> >the positive side, the incident provides a good classroom example of the
> >pragmatic language-and-power issues that provide much of the subject
> >matter of linguistic anthropology.
>
> As does the response of linguistic anthropologists to it.
>
> - Larry
> --
> Larry Gorbet                         lgorbet at unm.edu
> Anthropology & Linguistics Depts.    (505) 883-7378
> University of New Mexico
> Albuquerque, NM, U.S.A.
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: gbp.vcf
Type: text/x-vcard
Size: 338 bytes
Desc: Card for Gary Palmer
URL: <http://listserv.linguistlist.org/pipermail/linganth/attachments/20000907/20f9f446/attachment.vcf>