The eroticisation of ‘the other’ has come full circle it seems. The earliest point in circle is the sort contained in Anton Gill’s work on the sexual side of British imperial history. In his work Gill refers to Edward Sellon. Sellon was an officer in the 1840s in the British Indian Army. He was also an anthropologist. Gill quotes the anthropologist-officer on his views about the joys of the colony: “I now commenced a regular course of fucking with native women. They understand in perfection all arts and wiles of love, are capable of gratifying any tastes, and in face and figure are unsurpassed by any women in the world…. It is impossible to describe the enjoyment I have had in the arms of these sirens” (1995: 37). It is uncanny how this sounds almost exactly like parts of Paul’s essay. For the white army man and anthropologist it is native women who understand the arts and wiles of love and it is their figures that are beautiful. For the young African male student it is coloured women who are sexually better than black and African women, being more willing to give feedback on his performance, besides being romantic and beautiful.
The reference to anthropology leads Gill to discuss another ‘scientist’, Richard Burton. He was a “great explorer and linguist” and “one of the leading lights in the nascent science”, according to Gill. Besides telling us, as we have been told before, that Burton “discovered” Lake Tanganyika, Gill states that Burton reached a scientific conclusion that “debauched women prefer Negroes on account of the size of their parts”. Burton’s purpose in describing those women who might prefer Negroes as debauched is of course not concealed at all. It works to the same intended effect as this sentence: “I measured one man in Somaliland, who, when quiescent, numbered nearly six inches” (Gill 1995:39). From this scientific sample of black penises Burton does not blink as he makes the incredible claim that the one Somali man is clear evidence of the length of penises of the Negro race. The problem with this may not be clear until where he says that this is also a characteristic “of African animals; e. g. the horse”. The aim in this proof is contained in the reference to the size of the genitals of African animals immediately after the spurious evidence of the size of Negro penises. Fanon, among many others, has shown that in white minds the black is penis and an animal. Also
Arnfred Page 148 Wednesday, March 3, 2004 2:38 PM
Kopano Ratele
of interest here is Gill’s comments on all this “scientific” work: Burton’s “observations are not wrong”, Gill is moved to tell us. “The science of penis-measuring is called phalloplenthysmography, and it has established that the black penis is indeed on average a little larger than the white” (1995:39).