Return-Path: <nifl-womenlit@literacy.nifl.gov> Received: from literacy (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by literacy.nifl.gov (8.9.3/8.9.0.Beta5/980425bjb) with SMTP id LAA07042; Tue, 18 Apr 2000 11:40:41 -0400 (EDT) Date: Tue, 18 Apr 2000 11:40:41 -0400 (EDT) Message-Id: <s8fc4973.040@langate.gsu.edu> Errors-To: alcrsb@langate.gsu.edu Reply-To: nifl-womenlit@literacy.nifl.gov Originator: nifl-womenlit@literacy.nifl.gov Sender: nifl-womenlit@literacy.nifl.gov Precedence: bulk From: "Daphne Greenberg" <ALCDGG@langate.gsu.edu> To: Multiple recipients of list <nifl-womenlit@literacy.nifl.gov> Subject: [NIFL-WOMENLIT:664] mixed groups X-Listprocessor-Version: 6.0c -- ListProcessor by Anastasios Kotsikonas Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII X-Mailer: Novell GroupWise Internet Agent 5.5.2.1 Status: OR Laura, I am currently reading about women and literacy and the following excerpt jumped out at me, after I read your posting: "An emerging perspective (e.g. MacKeracher 1993; Shore et al., 1993; Tisdell, 1995) suggests that, rather than having separate programs for women, the goal should be to provide an educational environment that reflects the multiple perspectives-gender, ethnicity, class, age, sexuality, and/or physical abilities-that individuals bring to learning settings. These two perspectives reflect differing feminist positions; those advocating 'women only' programs share similarities with radical feminism, whereas those calling for representation of multiple perspectives more closely resemble the ideas of socialist feminists (Blundell, 1992)." This excerpt was taken from page 45 of Women and Literacy: Guide to the Literature and Issues for Women-Positive Programs, by Susan Imel and Sandra Kerka (ERIC ,1996). Daphne Greenberg Center for the Study of Adult Literacy Georgia State University University Plaza Atlanta, GA 30303-3083 Fax: 404-651-1415 Ph: 404-651-0400 E-mail: alcdgg@langate.gsu.edu >>> hauserl@mail.dekalb.public.lib.ga.us 04/17 8:57 PM >>> I am enjoying the opportunity to consider the various points of view and personal experiences shared around the issue of female only groups and instruction. I'm speaking just now not as a professional but as a person still trying to consciously create myself, and as a mother of college aged people who tell me bi-sexuality is definitely seen by many as the pc lifestyle of choice on campuses today. I find it interesting and telling that we are having this discussion without much acknowledgement or consideration of the value and merit of mixed-gender groups, classrooms, treatment etc. More than ever I value the opportunities to be with others like me--whether I define myself by genitalia, behavior, interests, emotional tendency, etc., but I equally value groups that offer me a nudge, a contrast, a challenge, or provocation by exposing me to people other than the way I define myself in that moment and place. What seems true to me, and what I want to present for response, is that at any moment and place we are limiting ourselves and our options and opportunities if we see ourselves as defined by gender, age, literacy level, native language, size, hair style, race etc. While that limiting may bring some sense of relative safety or ease with it, it ultimately stiffles us and frames too narrowly how we see ourselves and how we allow others to see us. It reminds me of pre-adolescence when kids, especially girls, want to dress alike, talk alike, etc. It is "cute" at that stage. In adults it indicates to me a fear, injury, or narrowness of definition that lacks the attributes of maturity. We may need to use gender-0only situations in moments of extreme duress, but to structure it into adult education seems to short circuit an essential part of what we are attempting to engender (pardon the pun). At 11:42 AM 4/13/00 -0400, you wrote: >Last night I had a conversation with my husband which is interesting in light of the recent listserv discussion on men's involvement. >He is an ER pediatrician and a 6 year old girl came in after being raped. The good news is that she was able to identify the rapist and after being caught, he confessed to the rape. Plus, as my husband put it, he found so much evidence during the exam, that there will be no question as to the guilt of the perpetrator. Anyway, he goes on and on about the terribleness of it all, and all the great, compassionate things that he did to help the girl get through the awful exam. Then he told me how the police officer came in and took pictures. I asked if the officer was a female. He said no. I said that I was surprised, and then asked him if there were any female doctors on board when the girl came in. He said yes. I then asked why they weren't sent in to do the exam. He explained that they don't always do that-that they only do it if the child is an adolescent, or if it is requested. My reply was that many don't know to ask. At this point, he had this great look of pain! > and anguish and was very upset. He reminded me how he volunteered to take extra courses on sexual abuse and felt that he had been extremely compassionate, and I agreed with him. I just told him that often it is easier if a woman does the exam. He wondered if compassion wasn't more important than gender and reminded me of two horror stories that I experienced with two different female ob/gyn doctors who did not show any compassion to me during my own traumatic events. >So, I am still left wondering. I know that there are men on this listserv (some have posted, some have not) who are very committed to helping women in adult literacy classrooms. The pain that I felt and saw in my husband's face, and the rejection that I know some men feel during these discussions, make me think-are we saying that men should not be in the classrooms doing stuff around women's issues? Or are we saying that although men can and should do this type of work, there is also a time and place for female only instruction? >I can see an argument both ways-someone who has been traumatized by a man, may not be able to be fully present when a man leads a curriculum unit on violence. However, maybe it is a good lesson-to see that not only are all men not violent but there are some that are very vocal about not being violent. Also, what if the learner was traumatized by a female? Does this mean that the ideal teacher would be a male for this particular student? What if the learner was traumatized by both males and females? >It is all very complicated.... >Daphne > >Daphne Greenberg >Center for the Study of Adult Literacy >Georgia State University >University Plaza >Atlanta, GA 30303-3083 >Fax: 404-651-1415 >Ph: 404-651-0400 >E-mail: alcdgg@langate.gsu.edu > > Laura Hauser Literacy Services Officer DeKalb County Public Library 215 Sycamore Street Decatur, GA 30030 Why should society feel responsible only for the education of children,and not for education of all adults of every age? -- Erich Fromm phone: 404 370 8450 x2240 fax: 404 370 8569
This archive was generated by hypermail 2b30 : Tue Jan 16 2001 - 14:46:36 EST