Ujwala and Samuel--

I thought about this topic deeply yesterday.  I am so glad that Ujwala 
has said what she said, otherwise I'm like a voice crying in the 
wilderness, as scripture would have it.

The language is different and meanings are understood differently by 
men and women. The "presentation of self" is different.

I'm usually on the emotional/analytic side of discussions, and this is 
a different female way of responding in discussions.  My impression is 
that the standard mode of discussion as experienced by men, and as put 
forward in psychology  textbooks, is for  emotions/analysis to be put 
at two ends of a spectrum.  Men and women are then placed somewhere on 
this line.

I have often/many times/some times been thought of as overly emotional 
and consequently not listened to by men.   True story.  That male way 
of listening lost me a bundle of money once..  The lawyer didn't listen 
to me, was surprised by an outcome, and had to admit he had been wrong. 
   This has happened also on NIFL list servs.  It's  DEEPLY DEEPLY 
STUPID, especially in a field with many women, not to access women's 
way of seeing, observing, and concluding.  I was once ridiculed for 
this by a man, and I had to deck him, verbally, to get him to listen to 
me.  Fortunately, neither a job nor money nor romance  hinged on this 
encounter.

I just looked for an article(Chronicle of Higher Ed) about Laurel 
Ulrich, 67, a history scholar and now a university professor at 
Harvard--the top place  in Harvard's academic hierarchy.  She is 
married, has 5 children and  grandchildren.  She speaks as a woman, 
illustrating how by following a woman's way she made it to the top of 
the heap at the University just down the street from me. Example:  she 
took her  dissertation topic from the surrounding countryside of New 
Hampshire, because she didn't want to be away from her children.   On 
one of my trips around the neighborhood I saw where she and her husband 
live, and I will write her a letter.  Believe, me, she will immediately 
be asked for speeches on the  women's lecture circuit.

That's enough for now.  Thanks, Ujwala, and thanks Samuel.

Andrea






On Mar 24, 2006, at 2:59 AM, Ujwala Samant wrote:


> Andrea and Samuel,

>

> I agree with what Andrea says.

>

> 1. It's not even looking for men's attention, but more

> than that the 'space' is more evenly distributed. In a

> mixed/male-directed conference, floor space is often

> taken over by men. And since adult education has a lot

> of male gurus, women's space is clearly delineated.

>

> 2. Very few true 'minglers' are organised. The evening

> drinks and cheese receptions are so outdated and de

> passe, that I end up trying to organise something

> myself which involves meeting people I want to meet

> and talk to. It is always a pleasure to meet and talk

> to people one knows as names on the various listservs.

> Our field is dwindling even if the need for our work

> is on the rise, and the better we know our colleagues

> (male and female), the better for the longevity of our

> profession and our learners.

>

> 3. Even the kind of food served is different. When we

> had a female president of an organisation in NJ whose

> board I was on organised lunch we could tell the

> difference: The meat heavy or premade sandwiches were

> gone. In their place was a smaller, but nicer

> selection of hot and cold platters to choose from and

> vegetables and fruit were not mere garnishes or an

> unrecognisable green mass to be sidelined. Over food,

> people actually find the time to sit down and talk to

> their colleagues and find out what is happenening in

> the field. In the case of We Learn, such mingling and

> catching up with old friends was encouraged and space

> was provided to do just that. Most times our

> conferences are packed (as We Learn was) and the

> inclusion of such time was invaluable.

>

> 3. I think more of us (men and women) ought to attend

> We Learn, they would enjoy it and see a different sort

> of conference, one on which future (and larger)

> conferences could be modelled. The only other meeting

> that came close to We Learn was one organised in

> Portland.

>

> 4. There were some 'greats' there at last year's

> conference. And despite that, there was less/no top

> down hierarchy one sees when conferences are

> male-focused.

>

> 5. Another important point: the serious inclusion of

> adult learners. As someone pointed out, We Learn

> includes adult learners. I've made this point before

> that we tend to now pay lip service to our adult

> learners. We either romanticise them or distance them.

> We do not really listen to them. And a lot of it is

> because of the circumstances our field is in: policy

> dictates it, funding demands it. At We Learn, awards

> were not important: their voices and opinions were.

>

> These are my impressions from last year and which is

> why I regret having missed it this year. Just to be

> clear, this was not a wishy washy, coffee klatch

> conference. I'd recommend more people attend it to

> find out.

>

> Warm regards,

> Ujwala

>

> --- Andrea Wilder <andreawilder at comcast.net> wrote:

>

>> Wow, Samuel, that's a hard one!

>>

>> I bet an all male conference would seem different,

>> too--let's trade

>> observations

>>

>> OK--female conference-others chime in.

>>

>> 1)	flowers, music, food

>> 2)	A sense of being sisters--there are givens that

>> we all share, so

>> laughter can be shared laughter.  Mothers  and their

>> relations to

>> children and bringing up children,  particularly

>> girls, in a dangerous

>> world that can turn on you suddenly.

>> 3)	Movement of the family literacy model from mother

>> reading to child

>> to all the things mothers write  in the home that a

>> child can

>> copy--this is kind of an insider's view of the

>> home--one of the

>> presenters made that link.  Two very well known

>> family ltiteracy

>> studies have been written by women, and they take in

>> this wider view.

>> Also, ethnographic studies.

>> 4)	Discussions of and acceptance of women's

>> sexuality is usually pretty

>> tamped down in mixed gender conferences.

>> 5)	A feeling of  goodness and wholeness drew us

>> together.

>> 6)	We have common hurdles in living, in

>> achievement--common experiences

>> that  unite women.

>>

>> 7)	I have to say that the managers of this

>> conference were extremely

>> skilled in how they structured it , for example,

>> workshop presenters

>> included all of us in perhaps introductions, or bad

>> experiences, or

>> good attributes or our experiences.  Also--needs

>> were taken care of

>> before they arose, for example, food was ready

>> before lunchtime, one

>> woman went around drawing chairs together in threes

>> so we could talk.

>> It was a lovely generosity.

>>

>> 8)	No sparring for men's attention!  There was one

>> guy there, i don't

>> mean to slight him, I think he came for a specific

>> presentation. Maybe

>> others will know.

>>

>> 9)	Adult literacy students came, were asked to come,

>> were included.

>> This was a deliberate "chain of life, let's hand on

>> our knowledge to

>> women coming after us"  attitude.

>>

>> I have to say, also, Samuel, that I went for 8

>> formative years to a

>> girls school, and  at our last reunion, in a

>> classmate's  home, the

>> husband (up on the 2nd floor) was startled, we later

>> learned, to hear a

>> good belly laugh that he associated only with men.

>> Two of our members

>> died this winter, so I called a reunion--I had a

>> shared  feeling that

>> we should have been there for our friends, just to

>> let them we loved

>> them,  and to wish them good luck on the voyage.

>>

>> ******************

>>

>> Does anyone know of any movies which show,

>> demonstrate this feeling of

>> sisterhood?

>>

>> Andrea

>>

>>

>> On Mar 23, 2006, at 11:46 AM, Samuel McGraw III

>> wrote:

>>

>>> Andrea et. al.,

>>>

>>>

>>> I would love to know of the "barriers that are

>> usually present in a

>>> male dominated conference."

>>>

>>> Thanks,

>>>

>>> Samuel McGraw III M. Ed.

>>> Program Coordinator

>>>

>>> Goodwill

>>> Tel: 206.860.5789

>>> Fax: 206.325.9845

>>> http://www.seattlegoodwill.org

>>> Because jobs change lives

>>>

>>>

>>> -----Original Message-----

>>> From: womenliteracy-bounces at nifl.gov

>>> [mailto:womenliteracy-bounces at nifl.gov] On Behalf

>> Of Andrea Wilder

>>> Sent: Thursday, March 23, 2006 6:59 AM

>>> To: The Women and Literacy Discussion List

>>> Subject: [WomenLiteracy 226] Re: WE LEARN

>> Conference

>>>

>>> All:

>>>

>>> I felt accepted as a woman.  The barriers that are

>> usually present in a

>>> male dominated conference weren't  there. So how

>> did this happen?

>>>

>>> 1)	Flowers, massage, great  food, live music.

>>>

>>> 2)	In the workshops I went to the  presenters

>> made it a point to

>>> have

>>> exercises which included all of  us.

>>>

>>> 3)	No female topics were off limits, I had the

>> feeling that some of

>>> the

>>> workshop leaders had seen it all--they were very

>> calm.

>>> Excellent role

>>> models.  I learned a lot about being a woman.

>>>

>>> Andrea	

>>> On Mar 23, 2006, at 2:27 AM, Ujwala Samant wrote:

>>>

>>>>> From some of us who missed the conference (last

>> year's

>>>> was super), how about those who attended giving

>> us the

>>>> highlights?

>>>> Thanks

>>>> Ujwala

>>>>

>>>> --- Bertha Mo <bertiemo at yahoo.com> wrote:

>>>>

>>>>> I work with students of color and female

>> students

>>>>> who have math phobia.  I'd like to know the

>> contact

>>>>> of the person who did the presentation on

>> algebra

>>>>> and manipulatives.

>>>>>

>>>>>   Best,

>>>>>

>>>>>   Bertie Mo, Ph.D., MPH

>>>>>

>>>>> Daphne Greenberg <ALCDGG at langate.gsu.edu> wrote:

>>>>>   It is now about a week and a half since the WE

>>>>> LEARN Conference and I know that a few of us on

>> this

>>>>> listserv were able to attend. I was thinking

>> that it

>>>>> may be helpful to those who did not know about

>> this

>>>>> conference, or could not attend to hear from

>> those

>>>>> of us who attended what they learned, why they

>>>>> thought it was or was not worthwhile going, and

>>>>> anything else.

>>>>> For those of you not familiar with this

>> conference,

>>>>> it is an annual conference focusing on women and

>>>>> literacy issues. Some examples of what I came

>> back

>>>>> with are a few tips about how to begin to talk

>> about

>>>>> racism in the classroom, how to stay safe while

>>>>> using the Internet, and alternative ways to

>> teach

>>>>> algebra with manipulatives. My most enjoyable

>>>>> session was one that was ran by the author

>> Judith

>>>>> Frank who read from and discussed her book

>> Crybaby

>>>>> Butch. I liked that session because I had read

>> the

>>>>> book (and highly recommend it) and it was great

>> to

>>>>> hear her perspectives of it.

>>>>> Any one else interested in sharing?

>>>>> Daphne

>>>>>

>>>>> Daphne Greenberg

>>>>> Assistant Professor

>>

> === message truncated ===

>

>

> __________________________________________________

> Do You Yahoo!?

> Tired of spam?  Yahoo! Mail has the best spam protection around

> http://mail.yahoo.com

> ----------------------------------------------------

> National Institute for Literacy

> Women and Literacy mailing list

> WomenLiteracy at nifl.gov

> To unsubscribe or change your subscription settings, please go to 

> http://www.nifl.gov/mailman/listinfo/womenliteracy

>