In Lisa Delpit's article, "The Politics of Teaching Literature Discourse," she explains the racism and the ability of a person to adopt different discourse communities.  She was reading Gee's article and was concerned by two major ideas.  She thought it was odd that just because the way a person has been brought up they are put into a specific discourse community.  This is because of their background.  She also found it hard that a group of people or an individual might be required to become part of a different discourse community.  This would cause that person to be forced to share their values and beliefs.  She notices this is mainly for the women and minorities, which play into the racism role.  Many women in older days were expected to fall into the discourse of what their husbands believed true, whether they agreed with the idea or not.  She brings up Bell Hooks, (which she did not capitalize in the book) and how she was one of the only blacks in her class, yet would write in her manner of speaking.  Her teacher and colleagues agree with this, and liked it, telling her to write more like this.  Overall, she does not so much agree with Gee when she analyzed his work.  She feels this makes it so that people can not as easily educate poor children or children of color.  Teaching should not be exciting for the teacher, and want to teach any child no matter what race or how rich or poor they may be.

     In Geneva Smitherman's article, "God Don't Never Change":Black English from a Black Perspective, she explains basically what it is like to be black with a 'black english background.'  This is not widely accepted, and she talks about how other people expect everyone to write the same way as the 'white english.'  There are a lot of grammatical and punctuation errors in her writing if you follow the way I was taught in English class.  She makes a statement on page 192 of a boy turning in his paper about his thoughts on the Vietnam War.  His grammar is not what would be expected of the English teacher, and is handed back to him.  Geneva finds this horrific, because she said the teacher is not teaching what is at hand.  The grammar should not be the first thing noticed, but the thoughts of the boy, and how he feels within his writing.  He is expressing his feelings through his own 'voice' even if it is grammatically incorrect.  He writes the way he speaks.  At the end of her article she explains what is expected of 'speaking proper.'  A rich man could be singing one thing about God, yet a poor man could be singing another in the same tone of voice, yet they both mean something completely different in the way they speak.

     Out of the two articles, I personally like Geneva's article the most.  I liked it, because I was reading someone speaking through a different voice, even if it might not be correct punctuation or grammar in my eyes.  Everyone is different when they speak or write, and she owns up to her writing.  It makes me realize the teachers in her writing seems almost racist, because she tells the college student to redo his paper, because of his grammar.  This is the way he speaks on a normal basis, being this is the way he writes.  He is still expressing his thoughts and feelings as well as all the other students, just in different spelling, and sentence structure.