{'fraction_non_alphanumeric': 0.03896103896103896, 'fraction_numerical': 0.03463203463203463, 'mean_word_length': 5.3090909090909095, 'pattern_counts': {'":': 0, '<': 0, '<?xml version=': 0, '>': 0, 'https://': 0, 'lorem ipsum': 0, 'www.': 0, 'xml': 0}, 'pii_count': 0, 'substrings_counts': 0, 'word_list_counts': {'cursed_substrings.json': 0, 'profanity_word_list.json': 0, 'sexual_word_list.json': 0, 'zh_pornsignals.json': 0}}
Refining the Review of Whiteness: A Reply to Ratele, Stevens, and Steyn

We welcome the responses offered by Ratele (2007), Stevens (2007), and Steyn (2007) to our article reviewing whiteness. The commentaries provide a more nuanced and sensitive analysis of whiteness, particularly in relation to the history and context of South Africa. While whiteness studies is most certainly not the only, or even the most important, tool for understanding and opposing racism, the responses by Ratele (2007), Stevens (2007), and Steyn (2007) serve to bolster our conviction that a critical interrogation of whiteness is an important resource in continuing to develop effective approaches to anti-racism.