To the editor: First, thanks to the L.A. Times for doing its daily service to the Republican Outrage Machine by publishing the op-ed article, “The pernicious myth of a Caucasian race.” I can just here the cries: “Look what those crazy liberals are saying now!”
Second, I am very confused. I thought we were not supposed to use “white” as a racial descriptor because it connotes purity and therefore superiority. Now “Caucasian” is off-limits. What to call myself?
I am a bit pink and some light tan, but some may not want to be smeared with that Cold War-era “pinko” term. Also, light tan is a bit close to “brown,” which I seem to recall might be verboten too.
Gee, it’s hard to be a good liberal.
David Weaver, San Juan Capistrano
To the editor: Professor Joel Dinerstein attacks the fancies built upon the notion of race and racism, a subject explored by Ashley Montagu in his 1942 book, “Man’s Most Dangerous Myth: The Fallacy of Race.”
He doesn’t touch upon the central disproof, the acknowledgment and admission in 1942 by the Red Cross that although the four blood types found in humans vary in percentages through all ethnological groups, they are acceptable for transfusion, essential to enlarging the blood bank needed during World War II in order to save wounded soldiers from death.
Jascha Kessler, Santa Monica