Kuloco, hooks

“Getting a bit of the Other, in this case engaging in sexual encounters with non-white females, was considered a ritual of transcendence, a movement out into a world of difference that would transform, an acceptable rite of passage. The direct objective was not simply to sexually posses the Other; it was to be changed in some way by the encounter.” (368)

While reading the first few pages of this article, I kept waiting for a “but,” or a “however,” or something that would refute hooks’ argument. Despite my hope that it would eventually come, I got to the last page and ended just, if not more, confused than when I started. There should probably be a rule about what you can and cannot read simultaneously, such as bell hooks’ “Eating the Other: Desire and Resistance” and Robert Jensen’s “Getting Off.” After finishing the latter for CMC 200, I don’t know how to interpret hooks’ theories. When I looked hooks up on Google, I was shocked to read the description of a female African-American feminist.
In his book, Jensen discusses the exploitation and objectification of women as a result of masculinity and pornography. Somewhat similar, hooks discusses the Other as a sexual object, “existing to serve the ends of white male desires.” However, while Jensen aims to solve the issues of objectification, hooks seems to be more accepting. Hooks tells an anecdote about All-American boys planning to have as many sexual encounters with as many girls from other racial or ethnic groups as possible. Instead of arguing the thought process behind these actions, she provides excuses for the behavior—even though it seems to go against every aspect of feminism.
The way I understand it, these sexual encounters are for the white male’s benefit alone; the female Others are being sexually exploited during the white male’s quest to be changed in some way by their “primitive” nature. It is entirely plausible that I may be interpreting the ideas behind this article completely wrong. However, as an African-American female, I would think that hooks would be highly critical of this behavior. Instead, she discusses the tradition, commodity culture and transgressions as rationalization for the actions of white males.
Again, this entire post could be completely irrelevant due to a lack of comprehension and understanding of the material. If that is the case, I would be significantly less confused. However, I guess I’ll find out in class tomorrow.