"A Special Third World Women Issue"

8/8/2019 "A Special Third World Women Issue"

http://slidepdf.com/reader/full/a-special-third-world-women-issue 1/19

Difference: 'A Special Third World Women Issue'Author(s): Trinh T. Minh-haSource: Feminist Review, No. 25 (Spring, 1987), pp. 5-22Published by: Palgrave Macmillan JournalsStable URL: http://www.jstor.org/stable/1395032

Accessed: 21/10/2010 16:12

Your use of the JSTOR archive indicates your acceptance of JSTOR's Terms and Conditions of Use, available at

http://www.jstor.org/page/info/about/policies/terms.jsp. JSTOR's Terms and Conditions of Use provides, in part, that unless

you have obtained prior permission, you may not download an entire issue of a journal or multiple copies of articles, and you

may use content in the JSTOR archive only for your personal, non-commercial use.

Please contact the publisher regarding any further use of this work. Publisher contact information may be obtained at

http://www.jstor.org/action/showPublisher?publisherCode=pal.

Each copy of any part of a JSTOR transmission must contain the same copyright notice that appears on the screen or printed

page of such transmission.

JSTOR is a not-for-profit service that helps scholars, researchers, and students discover, use, and build upon a wide range of

content in a trusted digital archive. We use information technology and tools to increase productivity and facilitate new forms

of scholarship. For more information about JSTOR, please contact [email protected].

Palgrave Macmillan Journals is collaborating with JSTOR to digitize, preserve and extend access to Feminist

Review.

http://www.jstor.org

http://www.jstor.org/action/showPublisher?publisherCode=pal

http://www.jstor.org/stable/1395032?origin=JSTOR-pdf

http://www.jstor.org/page/info/about/policies/terms.jsp



http://www.jstor.org/page/info/about/policies/terms.jsp

http://www.jstor.org/stable/1395032?origin=JSTOR-pdf




Trlnh T Mlnh-ha

It is thrtlltngto thtnk - to knowthat or any act of mtne,Ishat get twtceas muchpraise or twtce as muchblume.It isqutteexciting to holdthecenterof thenatzonalstage,with thespectatorsnot knowtngwhether o laughor to weep. ZoraNeale

Hurston, 'How It Feels to Be ColoredMe')

Words mpty out with age. Die andrise again,accordinglynvested

with new meanings, and always equipped with a second-handmemory. n trying o tell something,a woman s told,shredding erselfinto opaquewordswhile her voice dissolveson the walls of silence.Writing: commitment f language.The web of hergestures, ike allmodes'ofwriting,denotesa historical olidarityon the understandingthather storyremainsnseparableromhistory).She has beenwarnedof the tisksheincursby lettingwordsrunoff the rails,timeand againtemptedby the desire ogearherself o the acceptednorms.But wherehasobedience ed her?Atbest, to the satisfactionof a 'made-woman',

capableof achievingas high a masteryof discourseasthat of the maleestablishmentn power. Immediately ratified,she will, as yearsgoby, sink into oblivion, a fate she inescapablyshares with herforesisters.Howmany,already,have been condemned o prematuredeaths or havingborrowedhe master'sools andtherebyplayed ntohis hands?Solitude s a commonprerequisite, ven thoughthis mayonly mean solitude in the immediatesurroundings.Elsewhere, ineverycornerof the world, thereexistwomenwho, despitethe threatof rejection,resolutelywork towardthe unlearning f institutionaliz-

ed language,whilestayingalert to everydeflectionof theirbodycom-passneedles.Sturvival, s AudreLorde omments, isnot an acaimicskill ... It is learninghow to take our differencesand make themstrengths.For the master's tools will nsver dtsmantlethe master'shouse.Theymayallow ustemporarilyo beathimat hisowngame,butthey will never enableus to bringabout genuinechange'(1981:99).Themoreone dependsonthe master'shouseforsupport, he lessone

Faminist ew No 26 March1987

Dlffernce: 'A Speclal ThirdWorld Women lssue'



6 Femin?st Review

hearswhat he doesn'twant to hear.Difference s not differencetosomeears,but awkwardnessor incompleteness.Aphasia.Unableor

unwilling?Manyhave come to toleratethis dissimilarity nd havedecided osuspend heir udgementsonly)whenever heother scon-cerned.Such an attitudeis a step forward;at least, the danger ofspeakingorthe otherhasemergedntoconsciousness.Butit is averysmallstepindeed,sinceit servesas anexcusefortheircomplacent g-noranceandtheirreluctance o involvethemselves n the issue.Youwho understand he dehumanization f forcedremoval-relocation-reeducation-redefinition,he humiliationof havingto falsify yourownreality,yourvoice - youknow.Andoftencannot ay it. You ry

tokeepontrying ounsay t, for if youdon't,theywillnotfailto fillinthe blankson yourbehalf,and you willbe said.

Witha kindof perverted ogic, they worktowardyourerasurewhileurgingyou to keep your way of life and ethnic values within theborders of your homelands. This is called the policy of 'separatedevelopment'n apartheidanguage.Tacticshave changedsincethecolonial times and indigenous cultures are no longer (overtly)destroyed preserve he formbutremovethe content, orvice versa).You may keep your traditionallaw and tribal customs amongyourselves,as long as you andyourown kindarecarefulnot to stepbeyondthe assigned imits.Nothinghasbeenleft to chancewhenoneconsiders he effortsmadeby the white SouthAfricanauthoritiesodistortanduse the tools of western iberalism orthe defence of theirracialisticallyndefensible ause.Sincenointegrationspossiblewhenterrorhas becomethe orderof the day, I (not you) will give youfreedom. I will grant you autonomy - not complete autonomy,however,for'itis aliberal allacy osuppose hatthosewhom reedom

is givenwill use it only as foreseen by those who gave it' (Manning,1968:287). (Confidentially, live in a state of intensefear, knowingthatwesterneducationhas taughtyou aggressionn equality.NowIsleepwith a gununder mypillowandlockthe gateat the top of mystairway; singlesecondof carelessnessmaycost memylife - forlifeanddomination resynonyms o me and I trembleat the slightestmovementof myservants.Better nternyou 'foryourowngood'thanbe internedor 'drivento the sea' by you.)Self-determinationeginswith thedivisionof theland onconditionhat Icutthecake)andIwill

makesureeachof yougetsthe parts/he deserves.Thedelimitation fterritories s myanswer o what Iperceiveassomeliberals'dream or'the inauguration, amely,of a system n whichSouthAfrica'smanypeopleswouldresolvethemselvesunreluctantly nto one' (Manning,1968:289).Thegoverneddonot(shouldnot)composea singlepeople;this is why I ameagerto show that SouthAfrica is not one but tenseparatenations of whichthe whitenation s the onlyoneto beskin-defined; the other nine being detexmined argely on the basis oflanguage - the Zulu nation, the Swazi nation, and so on). This



Difference,dentityand Racism 7

philosophy I will not call it 'policy'- of 'differentiation'will allowme to have bettercontrol over my nationwhile lookingafter yours,

helpingyoutherebygradually o standon yourown.It will enableyouto returnto 'whereyou belong'wheneveryou are not satisfiedwithmylaw andcustoms,orwheneveryouare nolongerusefulto me.Toobadif you considerwhathas beengivento you as the leftoversof mymeals.Call t 'reservesof cheaplabour'or 'bantustans'f you wish;'separatedevelopment'meansthat eachone of us mindsher/hisownbusiness Iwill interferewhen my rightsareconcernedsinceI repre-sent the state)andthatyour economicalpoverty s of your own mak-ing.As for 'the Asiaticcancer,whichhas alreadyeatensodeeply into

the vitalsof South Africa,(it)ought to be resolutelyeradicated' JanChristianSmuts,quoted by Fischer,1954:25).Non-whiteforeignershaveno partwhatsoevern my plansand I 'willundertakeo dtivethecoolies(Indians)out of the countrywithin four years'(LouisBotha,quotedbyFischer,1954:25).My 'passionate oncern or the futureofa European-typewhite society, and ... that society's tight to self-preservation's not a questionof colour feeling, but of nationalism,the 'Afrikanernationalismwhich) s a formof collectiveselfishness;but to say this is simply to say that it is an authenticcase of na-

tionalism' Manning, 968:278).

Wordsmanipulated t will. As you cansee, 'difference' s 'division' nthe understanding f many.It is no more thana tool of self-defenceandconquest.Youand Imightas wellnot walk intothis semantic rapwhichsets us up againsteachother as expectedby a certain deologyof separatism.Haveyou read the grievancessome of oursistersex-presson beingamong hefew womenchosen or a 'SpecialThirdWorldWomen's ssue',or on beingthe onlyThirdWorldwomanat readings,

workshopsand meetings?It is as if everywherewe go, we becomeSomeone'sprivatezoo. GayatriChakravorty pivakspoke of theirremarking,the maidsupstairs n the guest quarterswere womenofcolor' n a symposiumlS82:278);GloriaAnzaldua,of theirusingheras a token woman and her friend Nellie Wongas a 'purveyorofresource ists' (1981:167-8);MitsuyeYamada,of havingto startfromscratcheachtime, as if-shewere 'speakingo a brandnewaudienceofpeoplewho had never known an AsianPacificwomanwho is otherthan the passive, sweet, etc. stereotypeof the "Oriental"woman'

(1981b:71);AudreLorde,of the lackof inter-racial o-operation et-weenacademiceministswhosesole explanationor the issueremains:'We did not know who to ask' (1981:100);and Alice Walker,of thenecessityof learning o discern he truefeminist 'forwhomracismsinherentlyan impossibility' from the white femaleopportunist'for whom racism,inasmuchas it assureswhite privilege,is an ac-cepted way of life' (1980:137).The decisionyou andI are calledupontomake s fraughtwithfar-reachingonsequences.On heone hand, tis difficult for us to sit at table with them (the master andlorhis



8 Famin?stReview

substitutes) without feeling that our presence, like that of the native(who happens to be invited) amongthe anthropologists,serves to mask

the refine(I sexist and/or racist tone of their discourse, reinforcingthereby its pretensions to universality. Given the permanentstatus of'foreignworkers', we - like the SouthAfricanblackswho are allowedto toil on white territoriesas 'migrants',but aregotten ridof andreset-tled to the homeland area as soon as they become unprofitablelabourunits continue in most cases to be treated as 'temporarysojourners',even though we may spend our whole lifetime by their side pleadingacommon cause.

the white ranchertoldChatohe was too old to work for him any more,and Chatoand his old woman should be out of the shack by the next

afternoon because the rancherhad hired new people to work there.That had satisfied her. To see how the white man repaid Chato'syearsof loyalty and work. All of Chato's fine-soundingEnglishdidn't changethings. (SiLko,1978:57)

The lines are an excerpt of Leslie MarmonSilko's 'Lullaby'. Fromthe South African reserve to the American Laguna Pueblo Reserva-tion, the story changes its backdropsbut remains recognizable in themaster's indifference to the lot of his non-Europeanworkers. Yet, onthe other hand, you and I acquiesce in reviving the plot of the story,hoping thereby that ourparticipationfromthe inside will empower usto act upon the very course of its events. Fools?It all depends on howsharplywe hone ourselves on the edge of reality;and, Iventure to say,we do it enough never to lose sight of ourdistinct actualities. Silence asa refusal to partake in the story does sometimes provide us with ameans to gain a hearing. It is voice, a mode of uttering and a responsein its own right. Without other silences, however, my silence goes

unheard,unnoticed; it is simplyone voice less, one morepoint given tothe silencers. Thus, no invitation is declined except in particularcir-cumstances where we feel it is necessary to do so for our own well-being. What does it matter who the sponsor is? Every opportunity isfitted for consciousness raising; to reject it is almost tantamount tofavouring apartheid ideology. White and black stand apart (armedlegislationversus triballaw) and never the twain shall meet. Therethematter rests. Crossed fears continue to breed wars, for they feedendlessly on each other until no conversation can possibly be carried

out without heaping up misunderstandingKs.t is, indeed, much easierto dismissor eliminate on the pretext of difference (destroy the otherin our minds, in our world) than to live fearlessly with and within dif-ference(s).

'What'sthe difference?' as if I cared?or yes, I mean it, help me see?Shall I quench my thirst gazing at the plums while waiting for myhelper to come by and pluck them off the branchesfor me? Do I really



Difference, Identity and heis?n 9

-

Stills frcsn:thefilm Reassemblage



10 FeZministReview

askfor differenceoramI justsaying t's notworthtrying o findout?Oneof theclassicalquestionsourmaleworld eadersusedtothrowout

in interviewswith feministswas: 'Ifwomenareto be men'sequals,how it is that historyremains o shortof femaleleaders'names?' In

otherwords,'Tellme,whatiswomen'scontributiono History?')Yes,

and I also rememberVirginiaWoolf's bishop who convincinglydeclarednthepapers hatitwas impossibleoranywoman,past,pre-sent, orto come,to havethe geniusof ShakespeareWoolf,1929:48).Fromthe male reader-leader's tandpoint,again, the great malewriter-leaders matchless.Such a narrow-mindednessmay soundquiteoutmoded oday,forsexismno longerexpresses tselfblatantly

as it oncedid . . . andone somehow feelssorry' orthesemenwhosepowerextendswellbeyond hefrontiersof theirterritories utwhosefieldofvisionendsatthefenceoftheirownyard.Yet, t isthissame g-noranceandnarrow-mindednesshatliebehindanswers imilaro theone quotedabove fromacademic eministson the scarcityof Third

Worldwomen's voices in debates: 'We didn't know who to ask.'Historians ave, forseveraldecadesnow,beenrepeatinghatHistorywitha capitalH doesnotexistandthatit has neverconstituted he aprzorz reasoning f theirdiscoursebut,rather, ts result.Likethe an-

thropologicaltudy whose informationmay always be reordered,

refuted or completedby furtherresearch,the historicalanalysis snothing other than the interpretationor even transformationofdocuments ivenandfrozen ntomonuments.Therewriting f historyis thereforean endless task, one to which feminist scholarshave

devotedmuchof their energy.The morethey dig into the mazeofyelloweddocumentsand look into the non-registeredacts of theircommunities,the more they rejoice upon discoveringthe buriedtreasures f women'sunknownheritage.Such indingsdonotcomeas

a godsend; heyaregained hroughgenuinecuriosity,concernand n-

terest.Whynot go andfind out for yourselfwhen you don'tknow?Why et yourselfbe trappedn the mouldof permanent choolingandwaitforthedeliveryofknowledgeasa consumerwaitsforher/his up-pliers'goods?Theunderstandingf difference s a sharedresponsibi-lity, which requiresa minimumof willingnessto reach out to theunknown.AsAudreLorde ays:

Womenof today are still being called upon to stretch across the gap of

male ignorance, and to educate men as to our existence and our needs.

Thisis an old and primarytool of all oppressorsto keep the oppressedoccupied with the master's concerns. Now we hear that it is the task

of black and third world women to educate white women, in the face

of tremendous resistance, as to our existence, our differences, our

relative roles in ourjoint survival. This is a diversion of energies and a

tragicrepetition of racist patriarchalthought. (1981:100)

Onehasto be excessivelypreoccupiedwiththe master's oncerns,indeed,totryto explainwhywomencannothavewritten theplaysof



Dtfference, Identtty and Ractsm 11

Shakespearen the age of Shakespeare', s VirginiaWoolfdid. Suchawaste of energy is perhapsunavoidable t certainstages of the strug-

gle; it need not, however, be overprolonged.

'Whydo We have to be concernedwith the questionof ThirdWorldwomen?After all, it is only one issue amongmanyothers.' Delete theword Third Worldand the sentence immediatelyunveils its value-loadedcliches.Generally peaking,a similar esult s obtained hroughthe substitutionof words ike ractst for sex?st,or vice versa, and theestablished image of the lthtrd World Wornan n the context of

(pseudo-) eminismreadilymergeswith that of the Nattte in the con-text of (neo-colonialist)anthropology.The problemsare intercon-nected. Here,a plural,angryreplymaybe expected:what else do youwish?It seemsas if no matterwhat Wedo Wearebeingresented.Now,'in response to complaintsof exclusionarypractices, special care isalways taken to notify minorityorganizations nd women of color ofconferences,planningmeetings, ob openings,andworkshops' Pence,1982:46).Once again, re-read he statement with the master'svoiceand with 'woman' in place of 'minority'.Much remainsto be saidabout the attitude adopted in this 'special care' progrsammend its(unavowedor unavowable) ntent. Viewing he question hrough heeyes of a white sister, Ellen Pence thus writes:

Gradually, I began to realize the tremendous gap between my rhetoric

about solidarity with Third World women and my gut feelings . . . Our

idea of including women of color was to send out notices. We never

came to the business table as equals. Women of color joined us on our

terms . . .

I started seeing the similarities with how men have excluded the

participation of women in their work through Roberts Rules of Order,

encouraging us to set up subcommittees to discuss our problems but

never seeing sexism as their problem. It became clear that in many

ways I act the same way toward women of color, supporting them in

dealing with thetr issues . . . I'm now beginning to realize that in many

cases men do not understand because they have never committed

themselves to understanding and by understanding, choosing to share

their power. The lessons we've learned so well as women must be the

basis for our understanding of ourselves as oppressive to the Third

World women we work with. (1982:46-7)

No matterwhich side I belong o, once I step down into the mudpitto fight my adversary, can only climbout from t stained.This s thestory of the duperwho turns her/himself nto a dupe while thinkings/he has made a dupe of the other. The close dependency thatcharacterizes he master-servant elationshipand binds the two toeach other for life is an old, patent fact one can no longerdeny. Thus,insofaras I understand ow 'sexismdehumanizesmen', I shallalso see



12 Femtntst u

how 'my racismmust dehumanizeme' (Pence).The inability o relate

the two issues and to feel them 'in my bones', as some native Englishspeakerswould say, has allowed me to indulge in the illusion that Ishall remain safe from all my negg4rs' problans and can go onleadingan undisturbed, ecure life of my own. Hegemonyand racismare, therefore, a pressing emiriist ssue; 'as usual, the impetuscomesfrom the gnssroots, activist women's movement'.Feminism,as Bar-baraSmithdefines t, 'is the political heoryandpractice hat strugglesto free all women . . . Anything ess than this vision of total freedom snot feminism,but merelyfemale self-aggrandizement'1982:49).

Onegives 'specialcare'to the old, to the disabled,andto all those whodo not match he stereotypeof the realwo/man.It is not unusual o en-countercases where the sense of specialness,which comes here withbeing the 'first' or the 'only' woman, is confused with the con-sciousnessof difference. One cannot help feeling 'special'when onefiguresamong he rare ew to emergeabovethe anonymous rowdanderuoys the privilege of prepanng the way for one's 'unfortunate'sisters.Basedon what other women are not (capableof) doing,such arewardeasily creates a distance - if not a division - between I-who-have -made-it ndYou-who-cannot-make-it.hus,despitemy rhetoric

of solidarity, inwardly esistyour entrance nto the field, for it meansStiU fom Naked Spaces- Livir



IXfferenpee,dent?>tynd Ransm 13

competition,rivalryand,sooneror later, the end of my specialness.shall,therefore,play a doublegame:on the onehand, oudlyassertmy

right, as a(nexemplary)woman, to haveaccess to equalopportunity;on the other hand, quietly maintain my privileges by helping themaster perpetuate his cycle of oppression.The reasoning holdstogetheronly as longas he doesnot betraymein my own game;andforthat . . . I ambound o breathe he sameair hebreathes,nomatterhowpolluted t turnsout to be. Mystory,yoursperhaps,MitsuyeYamada's,who describesherself as:

an Asian American woman thriving under the smug illusion that I was

not the stereotypic image of the Asian woman because I had a careerteaching English in a community college. I did not think anything

assertive was necessary to make my point . . . it was so much my

expected role that it ultimately rendered me invisible .. . contrary to

what I thought, I had actually been contributing to my own

stereotyping . . . When the Asian Americanwoman is lulled into

believing that people perceive her as being different from other Asian

women (the submissive, subservient, ready-to-please, easy-to-get-

along-with Asian woman), she is kept comfortably content with the

state of things. (1981a: 36-7)

And AdrienneRich's,who perceivesherspecialnessas follows:

My own luck was being born white and middle-class into a house full

of books, with a father who encouraged me to read and write. So for

about twenty years I wrote for a particularman, who criticized and

praised me and made me feel I was indeed 'special.' The obverse side

of this, of course, was that I tried for a long time to please him . . .

We seem to be special women here, we have liked to think of

ourselves as special, and we have known that men would tolerate,

even romanticize us as special, as long as our words and actions didn't

threaten their privilege of tolerating or rejecting us and our work

accordingto t)wetrdeas of what a special woman ought to be.

(1979: 38-9)

There is morethan one way to relate the story of specialness.I mayorientmyselftoward he sameend by choosinga reasoning ompletely

opposite to the one mentionedabove. Not only do I like to think ofmyselfas specialbut also as free-handed.Weall have the potential obe special,I say, why not work for it? Let meselect those withwhomIwould ike to sharemyblessings.Thusweavingmy cocoonandclosingmyself snugly,I then turn to my sisters andkindly urge themto pro-ceed alike:weave yourown/let it tie you in/incomfort/and shallhelpyou gain/that special/ohspe-cialrec-og-ni-tion.Have you read ZoraNeale Hurston's The "Pet" Negro System'?The policy of 'separatedevelopment'means that we may all bloom in our garden. It also



14 Famtvn?st evww

meansthatI am tolerated n my differenceas long as I confotmwiththe establishedrules. Don't overstep the line. Consideredboth a

dangerous species (remember the Yellow Peril in politicians'discourses nd the descriptions f warlikesavages n colonialreports;more ubtlyexpressedoday,the fearresurfaces nlywhensomeThirdWorldrepresentativesbecomestoo outspoken)and an endangeredspecies(sufferingpatheticallyroma 'lossof authenticity'), amtore-main behindthe safety grille for the visitors'security and marvel.Specialness s a soporific oothes,anaesthetizesmy senseof justice; tis, to thewo/manof ambition,as effectivea drugof psychologicalelf-intoxicationas alcohol s to the exiles of society.Now,I am not only

giventhe permissiono openup and talk,I amalso encouraged o ex-pressmy difference.Myaudienceexpects anddemandst; otherwisepeoplewouldfeel as if they have been cheated:We didnot come toheara ThirdWorldmember peakabout he First(?)World,Wecame olisten to thatvoiceof difference ikelyto bringus whatwe canwt ave,and to divertus fromthe monotonyof sameness.They,like theiran-thropologistswhosespecialty s to detectall the layersof my falsenessandtruthfulness,are in a positionto decidewhat/who is authenticand what/whois not. No uprootedperson s invited to participatenthis 'special' wo/man'sssue unless s/he makesup her/his mindandpaintsher/himself hickwith authenticity.Eagernot to disappoint,trymybestto offermy benefactors ndbenefactresseswhat theymostanxiouslyyearn or:the possibility f a difference,yet, a differenceoran otherness hat will not go so far as to questionthe foundationoftheir beingsand makings.Their situationis not unlike that of theAmerican ouristswho, looking or a changeof sceneryand pacein aforeign and,such as, for example,Japan,strikeout in searchof whatthey believeto be the 'real'Japan - most likely shapedafter the vi-sionof Japanas handed o themand reflected n televisionfilmslike

Shogun,orthat of theanthropologists, hose conceptionof 'pure'an-thropologynduces them to concentrateon the studyof 'primitive'('native', indigenous', or to use more neutral, technical terms:'nonstate','nonclass') ocieties.Authenticity n such contexts turnsout to be a product hat one can buy, arrange o one's liking,and/orpreserve.Today, he 'unspoiled' artsof Japan, he far-flung ocationsin the archipelago, re thosewhich tourismofficialsactivelypromotefor the more adventuresomevisitors. Similarly,the Third Worldrepresentativewhomthe modern ophisticated ublic deallyseeksis

the unspoiledAfrican,Asianor Native American,whoremainsmorepreoccupiedwith her/his mageof thereal native- the truly differentthan with the issues of hegemony, racism,feminismand social

change whichs/he lightlytoucheson in conformanceo the reigningfashionof liberaldiscourse).A Japaneseactually ooksmoreJapaneseinAmericahan n Japan,butthe 'real' ype of Japanism ught obe inJapan.The less accessiblethe product 'made-in-Japan',he moretrustworthyt is, andthe greater he desireto acquireandprotect t.



Difference, Identtty and Rarism 15

Difference as uniquenessor special identity is both limiting anddeceiving.If identityrefersto the wholepatternof samenesswithin a

humanife, thestyle of a continuingmethatpermeatesall the changesundergone,then difference remainswithin the boundaryof thatwhich distinguishesone identity from another.This means that athea7+t, mustbe X, Y mustbe Y, and X cannotbe Y. Thoserunningaroundyelling X is not X, and Xcan be Yusually andin a hospital,a'rehabilitation'entre,a concentration amp, or a res-er-va-tion.Alldeviationsfromthe dominantstreamof thought,that is to say, thebelief in a permanentessence of wo/manand in an invariant butfragile dentity,whose 'loss'is considered o be a 'specificallyhuman

danger',can easily fit into the categoriesof the 'mentally ll' or the'mentallyunderdeveloped'. t is probablydifficultfor a 'normal',pro-bingmind o recognize hat to seekis to lose,for seekingpresupposesseparationbetween the seeker andthe sought,the continuingme andthe changes t undergoes.What f the popularized tory of 'identitycrisis'proves o be onlya storyandnothingelse?Can dentity,indeed,be viewed otherthan as a by-product f a 'manhandling' f life, onethat, in fact, refersnomoreto a consistent patternof sameness' hanto aninconsequential rocessof otherness?Howam I to lose,maintainor gaina (fe/male) dentity when it is impossible or me to take

up apositionoutside this identityfromwhich I presumably each in andfeel for it?Perhapsa way to portray t is to borrow hese verses fromthe Cheng-tao-ke:

You cannot take hold of it,

But you cannot lose it.

In not being able to get it, you get it.

When you are silent, it speaks;

When you speak, it is silent. (Tseu, 1970:121, xxxiv)

Difference n such aninsituablecontext is thatwhichunderminesthevery ideaofidentity,deferringo infinitythe layerswhose totalityforms I'.Itsubverts he foundationsof anyaffirmation rvindicationof value, and cannot,thereby,ever bear in itself an absolutevalue.Thedifference(within)between difference tself andidentity has sooftenbeenignored,andthe use of the two termsso readilyconfused,that claiminga female/ethnic dentity/differences commonly anta-mount to reviving a kind of naive 'male-tinted'romanticism.If

feminism s set forth as a demystifyingorce,thenit willhave to ques-tionthoroughly he belief in its ownidentity.Tosuppose, ike JudithKeganGardiner1981:348-9,my italics), that 'the conceptof femaleidentityprovidesa key to understandinghe specialqualities of con-temporarywritingbywomen . ., the diverseways inwhichwritingbywomendiffersfromwritingby men',and to 'propose he preliminarymetaphor"female dentity is a process" orthe mostfundamentalofthese differences'does not, obviously,allow us to departradicallyfrom the master's ogic. Such a formulationendeavours o 'reach a



16 Feminist Review

theory of femaleidentity. . . thatvariesfrom themale model', andtodemonstratehat

primary dentity for women is more flexible and relational thanfor

men. Female gender identity is more stable than male gender identity.

Female infantile identifications are less predictable than male ones . . .

thefemale counterpart of the male identity crisis may occur more

diffusely, atadifferentstage, ornotatall. (Gardiner,1981:354, my

italics)

Itseemsquite contentwith reformshat, at best,contributeo the im-

provement nd/orenlargement f the identityenclosurebut do not, inanyway, attemptto remove ts fence. The constantneedto refer tothe 'malemodel' for comparisons navoidablymaintains he subjectundertutelage.Forthe point is not to carve one's space in 'identitytheories hat ignorewomen'and describe omeof the faces of femaleidentity, saying,like Gardiner:I picturefemale identityas typicallylessfixed, less unitary,andmore lexiblethanmale ndividuality, othin its primary ore and in the entirematurational omplexdevelopedfromthis core' (1981:353),butpatiently o dismantle he very notion

of core (beit staticor not) and identity.

Woman an neverbe defined.Bat, dog, chick,mutton,tart. Queen,madam, ady of pleasure.MISTRESS.elle-de-nuit, woman of thestreets, fruitwoman, allen woman.Cow, vixen, bitch. Call girl,joygirl, workinggirl.Lady and whore are both bred to please.TheoldWoman mage-repertoireaysShe is a Womb,a merebaby'spouchor'nothingbut sexuality'. She is a passive substance,a parasite,anenigma whose mysteryproves to be a snare and a delusion.She

wallows in night, disorder, mmanenceand is at the sametime the'disturbingactor(betweenmen)'andthe key to the beyond.Thefur-therthe repertoireunfolds ts images, he moreentangledt gets in itsattemptsat capturingHer. 'Truth,Beauty,Poetry - she is All:oncemoreall underthe form of the Other,All except herself',SimonedeBeauvoirwrote (1970:223).Yet, evenwith or becauseof Hercapacityto embodyAll, Womans the lesser man,and in the milieuof athlete-mindedmen,the expression you are usta woman' s stillresentedasoneof the worst nsults.Wo- ppended o man in sexistcontexts snot

unlikeThird World,Third, Minority or Colour affixed to woman inpseudo-feministcontexts. Yearning for universality, the genericwoman, like its counterpart, he genericman, tends to efface dif-ferencewithin itself. Not everyfemale is 'a realwoman',one knowsthis throughhearsay . . Just asman providesan exampleof howthepartplayedby women has been ignored,undervalued,distortedoromitted throughthe use of terminologypresumedto be generic,woman moreoftenthan notreflects the subtlepowerof linguistic x-clusion,forits set of referentsrarely ncludes hose relevantto Third



Difference, Identity and Racism 17

World femalepersons'.All the WomenAre White,All theBlacks areMen,ButSome of UsAreBrave is thetitle givento ananthologyedited

by GloriaT. Hull, PatriciaBell Scottand Barbara mith.It is, indeed,somehowdeviousto think that WOMANlsoencompasses he bound-footedChinese, he genitallymutilatedAfricansandthe one thousandIndianswho committed uttee or widow(self-) burning or one royalmale.SisterCinderalla'soot is alsoenviablytiny but nevercrooked!And,Europeanwitches were also burntto purify the body of Christ,butthey donot pretend o 'self-immolation'. hird World,therefore,belongsto a categoryapart, a 'special'one that is meant to be bothcomplimentaryndcomplementary,or Firstand Secondwent outof

fashion, leavinga serious ack behindto be filled. To survive, ThirdWorld must necessarilyhave negative and positive connotations:negative when viewed in a vertical ranking system'underdeveloped'ompared o over-industrialized,underprivileged'withinthe alreadySecond sex, andpositivewhen understood ocio-politicallyas a subversive,'non-aligned'orce. The emergenceof animmenserepressedVoice into the worldwide political arena hasalreadypromptedJuliaKristeva o ask: 'Howwill the Westgreet theawakeningof the 'third world' as the Chinese call it? Can we

(westerners)participate, ctivelyand lucidly, n thisawakeningwhenthe centre of the planetis in the processof moving oward he East?'(1980:139).Exploited, ookeddown uponand lumpedtogether in aconvenient term that denies their diversity, a group of POOR(neutralizednations),havingonce sided neitherwith the Occidentalliberaleconomy ypenorwiththe socialist ype, hasslowlytaken on athreatening ace by turning his denialto the best account.Weaknessbecomes strength, one may conclude, when (un)consciousnessemerges.It is not difficult,then, to understandwhy every unalignedvoiceshouldnecessarilybe either a personalor a minorityvoice. The(impersonal)majority,as logic dictates,hasto be the (aligned)domi-nant.NotesAlice Walker:

It is, apparently, inconvenient, if not downright mind straining, for

white women scholars to think of black women as women, perhaps

because 'woman' (like 'man' amongwhite males) is a name they are

claimingfor themselves, and themselves alone. Racismdecrees that if

they are now women (years ago they were ladies, but fashions change)

then black women must, perforce, be something else. (While they were

'ladies' black women could be 'women' and so on.) (1980: 133-4)

Yet, a morerevealingexampleof this exclusivemajoritymentalityis the story Walkerrelates of an exhibit of women painters at theBrooklynMuseum:when asked 'Arethereno black womenpaintersrepresentedhere?' (none of them is, apparently),a white womanfeministsimplyreplied: It'sa wornen's exhibit!'(1980:136).



18 Fexninist Review

What s woman?Longago, duringone of the forceful speeches shedelivered in defence of her people, SojournerTruth had been

requestedby a threatenedwhite doctor n the audience o proveto allthose presentthat she was truly a woman:

'There are those among us,' he began in a tone characteristic of

institutional training, 'who question whether or not you are a woman.

Some feel that maybe you are a man in a woman's disguise. To satisfy

our curiosity, why don't you show your breasts to the women (sic) in

this audience?' (quoted by Bell, 1979: xxv)

It seemed, ndeed, profoundlypuzzling or this man-child octor'smind o see the Woman or Breasts) n someonewho had 'neverbeenhelped into carriages, ifted over ditches, nor given the best placeseverywhere',who had 'plowed,andplanted,andgathered nto barns',and who, beyondmeasure, riumphantly ffirmed lsewhere: Lookatme! Lookat my arm! .. and no man could head me - and arn't I awoman!' (Truth, 1978: 335). Definitions of womn, womanhood,femininity, femaleness and, morerecently, offemale identity havebroughtabout the arroganceof such a sham anatomical uriosity -whoseneeds mustbe 'satisfied'- andthe legitimation f a shameless-ly dehumanizingorm of Indiscretion.Differencereducedto sexualidentity s thus positedto justify and concealexploitation.The Body,the most visibledifferencebetween men and women,the only one tooffer a secureground or those who seek the permanent, he feminine'nature'and 'essence', remains herebythe safest basisfor racistandsexist ideologies. The two merging themes of Othernessand theIdentity-Body re precisely what Simone de Beauvoirdiscussedatlength n 17ze econdSex, andcontinued o argue n the French ournal

she edited, QuestionsFeministes. The lead article written by theeditorial ollectiveunder he title of 'Variations n CommonThemes'explains he purposeof thejournal o destroy he notionof differencesbetween the sexes, 'whichgives a shape and a base to the concept of"woman"', s follows:

Now, after centuries of men constantly repeating that wewere

different, here are woman screaming, as if they were afraid of not

being heard and as if it were an exciting discovery: 'We are different!'

Are you going fishing? No, I am going fishing.The very theme of difference, whatever the differences are

represented to be, is useful to the oppressing group . . . any allegedly

natural feature attributed to an oppressed group is used to imprison

this group within the boundaries of a Nature which, since the group is

oppressed, ideological confusion labels 'nature of oppressed person' . . .

to demand the right to Difference without analysing its social

character is to give back the enemy an effective weapon. (1980:

214,219)





20 Feqninist Review

separation. But you fail to recognize that, as women, those differences

expose all women to various forms and degrees of patriarchal

oppression, some of which we share, some of which we do not ... Theoppression of women knows no ethnic nor racial boundaries, true, but

that does not mean it is identical within those boundaries. (1980: 95)

In other words,

to imply . . . that all women suffer the same oppression simply because

we are women, is to lose sight of the many varied tools of patriarchy.

(1980: 97)

Here you prob-ably mile, for none of us is safe from such a critique,including I who quote Lorde in my attempts at disentangling Dif-ference. The process of differentiation, however, continues, andspeaking near-by or together-with certainly differs from speaking forand about. The latter aims at the finite and dwells in the realm of fixedoppositions (subject/object difference; man/woman sexual dif-ference), tending thereby to valorize the privileged father-daughterrelationship.

Should you visit San Francisco one day, be sure to be there sometixnein late January or February, for you will be witnessing one of themost spectacular festivals celebrated in America. Chinatown, whichuntil recently was the 'wickedest thoroughfare in the States', the taintof 'America's dream town', a vice-ridden and overcrowded ghettowhere tourists rarely venture, is now the not-to-be-missedtourist at-traction, an exotica famed for its packed restaurants, its Arientaldelicacies, its glittering souvenir-crammed shops and, above all, itsmemorable Chinese New Year celebration. Over and over again, the(off-)scenerepeats itself as if time no longer changes. How is theparadeborn? Whwre nd in what circumstances was it invented? 'Back home'- whose spirit this parade pretends to perpetuate - did the Chinesecelebrate their New Year squeezed up along the sidewalks with severaldozen of hefty policernen fAxnerican and Chinese almost alike) perch-ed high on foot, on horseback and on motor bikes (no Chinesepoliceman, however, has been seen on horsebackor on a motor bike) toguard (what is supposed to be) their parade, shoo them, push thexn

back, or call tkm to order if they happen to get off the line while wat-ching the procession? What do you think the motives are behind suchan ostentatious display of folklore/ of arrogance and coercive power(besides the invariable it-is-for-your-own good answer Order usuallyprovides you with)?ForI myselffail to see any sign of 'celebration' inthis segregated masquerade, where feasters are forcibly divided intoactors and spectators, while participation exclusively consists ineither exhibiting oneself exotically on the scene, or watching the ob-jects of exhibition distantly off the scene. ChineseNew Year thus takes



Difference, Identity and Racism 21

on a typical dualistic westernface. Preserve theform of the old in thecontext-content of the new; this is what decoration means. Power ar-

rogates to itself the right to interffiere n every mass event that takesplace, and thefeast no longer belongs to thepeople, whosejoint merry-making cannot be viewed other than as a potential threat to Power.Tell me, where are those public celebrations described in touristguides, that 'spill onto every street in Chinatown and transform thesquares into fairgrounds'?

Notes

Trinh T. Minh-hais a writer, film maker and composer. She has contributedwritings in the areas of theory and criticism, film, music, feminism and ThirdWorld iterature.Her work also includes the books Unart sans oeurre,AfricanSpaces (in coll.), Woman, Native, Other(forthcoming) and En min?ules (abook of poems), and the films ReassembZge and Naked Spaces - Living tsRound. She presently teaches in the Department of Cinema at San FranciscoState University.

References

ANZALDUA, Gloria (1981) 'Speaking in Tongues: A Letter to 3rd WorldWomenWriters' in MORAGA nd ANZALDUA1981).

DE BEAUVOIR,Simone (1952, rpt 1970) The SecondSex New York:Bantam.BELL, Roseann P. et al (1979) eds Sturdy Blgk Bridges: V?sions of Blgk

Women n Literature New York:Anchor Press/Doubleday.BLICKSILVER,Edith (1978) ed The Ethnic Amertcan Woman Dubuque,

Iowa: Kendall/HuntPublishers Cie.

FISCHER,Louis (1954) Gandhi: H?sLife and Messagefor the WorldNew York:The New American Libraryof World LiteratureInc.

GARDINER, Judith (1981) 'On Female Identity and Writing by Women',Critical Inquiry Vol. 8, No 2.

HULL, Gloria T., SCO1F, Patricia Bell and SMITH, Barbara (1982) eds ButSome of Us are Brave New York:The Feminist Press.

KRISTEVA, Julia (1980) 'Women Can Never Be Defined', trans. Marilyn A.August in MARKS nd DE COURTIVON1980).

LORDE, Audre (1981) 'The Master'sTools Will Never Dismantle the Master'sHouse' in MORAGA nd ANZALDUA1981).

MANNING, Charles A.W. (1968) 'In Defense of Apartheid' in MOOREandDUNBAR 1968).

MARKS, Elaine and DE COURTIVON, Isabelle (1980) eds New FrenchFeminwm Amherst: University of Massachusetts Press.

MOORE, Charles D. and DUNBAR, Ann (1968) eds Africa Yesterday and To-day New York: Bantam.

MORAGA, Cherrie and ANZALDUA, Gloria (1981) eds This Bridge CalledMy Back. Writings by Radical Women of Color Watertown, Mass.:Persephone Press.

PENCE, Ellen (1982) 'Racism - A White Issue' in SCO1T nd SMITH1982).



22 Fexninist Review

QUESTIONSFItMINISTES(1980) 'Variationson CommonThemes', in MARKS

and DECOURTIVON1980).

RICH,Adrienne (1979) OnLies,Secrets ndSilce New York:W.W.Norton&Cie.SILKO,Leslie Marmon (1978) 'Lullaby' n BLICKSILVER1978).

SMITH,Barbara (1982) 'Racism and Women's Studies' in HULL,SCOlT and

SMITH1982).SPIVAK, Gayatri Chakravorty (1982) 'The Politics of Interpretations'

Critical nquiryVol. 9, No. 1.

STERNBURG,Janet (1980) ed 17weWrxvternHerWorkNew York:W.W.Nor-

ton &Cie.TRUTH,Sojourner 'Speech of Woman'sSuffrage' in BLICKSILVER1978).

TSEU, Lao Cheng-tao-keuoted in WA1TS1970).WALKER,Alice (1980) 'One Child of One's Own: A Meaningful Disgression

Withinthe Work(s)' n STERNBURG1980).

WATTS, Alan W. (1958, rpt 1970) Nature,Manand WomanNew York:Vin-

tage Books.WOOLF,Virginia (1929) A Roomof One'sOwnNew York: Harcourt Brace

Jovanovich.YAMADA,Mitsuye (1981a) 'Invisibility Is An UnnaturalDisaster: Reflections

of An Asian AmericanWoman'in MORAGA nd ANZALDUA1981).

YAMADA,Mitsuye (1981b) 'Asian Pacific AmericanWomenand Feminism'in

MORAGA nd ANZALDUA1981).

Documents

"A Special Third World Women Issue"