GT – Trampolín Requisitos de edad

When asking boys whether race played a role in defining who they were as boys, many of the participants interviewed implied that race did not matter. It seemed that for some boys they positioned themselves as boys, not as black or white. These boys seem to be drawing on what Childs (2002) refers to as the colour-blind discourse. As previously mentioned, colour- blindness or as Frankenberg (1993, in Childs, 2002) critically refers to it, colour-power evasiveness, refers to the process where race is viewed as insignificant and the importance of the individual is emphasised. This colour-blind discourse is evident in the following extracts,

P6B: It just does not make sense because they are all the same, and they don‟t like // ya, it is all about getting drunk on the weekend and getting girls

P1B: I don‟t think it‟s a huge deal\ I see myself as a boy just as any other Indian or

white boy\ so that‟s my opinion

P4W: Well to me it does not make a difference. If you ask me, what do you like about being a black guy, if I was black then I would also have a lot to tell you. I would have a lot to tell you about that. So I don‟t think white guys are better than being black. It‟s just different growing up // different cultures and stuff like that. I would not say it is better

In these extracts, P6B, P1B and P4W provide non-judgmental views of different race groups. It seems that for all three boys, the race group to which they belong does not play a significant role in how they see themselves as boys. In the case of P6B, he seems to have positioned himself in line with hegemonic constructions of masculinity that promote risky behaviour and getting girls. It seems that for P6B, boys indulge in risk-taking behaviours irrespective of race. Both black and white boys drink and chase after girls. P1B seemed to provide quite a progressive account, describing himself just like any other Indian or white boy. P4W also provided quite a politically correct perspective. That is, by utilising the words „different‟ instead of „better‟ it seems that he is quite aware of not being perceived as racist. It seems that especially within the context of the focus group, none of the boys wanted to be perceived as racist. However, on a critical note, the problem with colour-blind discourse is that it ignores the power and privilege which has characterised race relations in this country. Drawing on Guinier and Torres‟s (2002, in Childs, 2002) argument, with specific relation to the context of South Africa, it is impossible to be colour-blind in a colour-conscious society like South Africa. It seems that with specific reference to the focus group, by attempting not to appear racist, issues of race were ignored in hope of providing socially accepted views to

134 the group. As much as these narratives appear to be progressive on the surface by ignoring race altogether, the positive aspects of the boys‟ race in shaping their masculinity, such as their culture, are also lost. Finally, the way in which both P1B and P4W have drawn on categories of race to describe different boys, reflects the process whereby pre-existing essential differences between racial groups produce different types of masculinities (Govender, 2006).

During the focus group, P5W talked to the way in which he and P6B were similar due to their shared class status. That is, instead of focussing on race as playing a part in identity construction; he argued that due to them going to the same school, their racial difference did not matter.

P5W: Well there are similarities between me and {P6B} we‟re both privately schooled so\ I suppose when we speak of our specific generation there are similarities\ coz we‟re both being educated in the same way\ or mostly the same way\ so our actions and stuff like that will be pretty similar

This extract highlights the role of class in the construction of masculinity. That is, where boys come from similar class backgrounds, racial difference seems to be unimportant. In such a way, P5W perceives himself to be similar to P6B, due to them sharing the same education and class position. This finding is in line with Motesemme‟s (2000, in Gibson & Lindegaard, 2007) argument that the importance of race in shaping masculinity fluctuates from context to context. That is, as evident in this extract, the fact P5W is a white boy and P6B is a black boy is inconsequential. However, on a critical note, this extract also highlights the previously mentioned colour-blind discourse (Childs, 2002), as much as racial differences seem not to matter, within a context like South Africa in which race has been and still is constructed as extremely significant, this narrative seems problematic.

Even though some of the boys presented more politically correct views pertaining to racial difference, others were more explicit in communicating their thoughts on the differences between race groups.

P6B: It is different because white guys are different to black guys in – especially in South Africa

135

P5W: You know black people there‟s a lot of things that they believe in that we deem ridiculous. But obviously…we can‟t voice our opinions about that. So there‟s a big difference culturally

Both extracts reflect the way in which society has constructed race groups in particular ways. That is, it seems for P6B, black and white boys are different, especially as a result of the impact of South African society, both past and present. Even though he did not go into detail or explain in what way black and white boys are different, based on the history of the country, it can be argued that these boys experienced extremely different situations, standards of living and opportunities as a result of the colour of their skin. Where black boys were ostracised, disadvantaged, stigmatised and had to endure structural inequalities, white boys enjoyed the privileges and the opportunities that came with being white (Duncan, 2003). His comment that white and black boys are very different can be argued to be quite an honest one. That is, instead of attempting to deny the realities of racial difference, he non-defensively communicated the realities of the South African situation.

P5W, on the other hand, appears to have positioned himself in line with hegemonic standards of masculinity in which white boys are perceived as exemplifying an ideal form of masculinity. The use of the word „ridiculous‟ when describing the beliefs of the black race group reflects the internalisation of racist attitudes promoted during the Apartheid regime. That is, during this time, black masculinity was constructed as a non-hegemonic and subordinate form of masculinity. P5W appears to view black people‟s cultural practices as barbaric, uncivilised and out-dated. He wants to criticise black people‟s cultural practices, but is afraid that he is going to be perceived as racist. It can be argued that the school culture is one which does not condone racist discourses. This argument is based on the school principles initial concern that communicating to the boys that the researcher needed specifically black and white boys would facilitate the awareness of racial difference. It seems that, especially within contemporary South African society, being perceived as racist is something that both white people and historically white institutions fear and attempt to avoid. The implications of being perceived as racist are evident in an article in the Weekend Argus (McIntosh, 2008). In 2004, due to expatriate Bronwyn McIntosh writing an internet article entitled Dangers of South Africa: Fear of Crime she was denounced as a racist by the former president Thabo Mbeki. In his ANC newsletter in October 2004 he drew further attention to the article by calling it racist. Similarly, the constitution of South Africa is one which contains a strong anti- racist component (Duncan, 2003). Post-apartheid South African society can therefore be

136 argued to be one in which no tolerance exists for people, especially white people, who are perceived as being as racist. However, his use of the word „we‟ reflects an attempt to collude with the researcher, being white, which allows the derogation of black cultural beliefs as „ridiculous.‟ In this way P5W also created a collusive position of racial superiority with the researcher.