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 KAA02960; Wed, 19 Apr 2000 10:29:05 -0400 (EDT) Date: Wed, 19 Apr 2000 10:29:05 -0400 (EDT) Message-Id: <2.2.32.20000419142312.006e3d10@mail.teleport.com> 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: Sylvan Rainwater <sylrain@teleport.com> To: Multiple recipients of list <nifl-womenlit@literacy.nifl.gov> Subject: [NIFL-WOMENLIT:667] Re: Men's involvement X-Listprocessor-Version: 6.0c -- ListProcessor by Anastasios Kotsikonas Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" X-Mailer: Windows Eudora Pro Version 2.2 (32) Status: OR At 08:56 PM 4/17/2000 -0400, Laura Hauser wrote: <SNIP> >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. Certainly it is true that we don't want to paint ourselves into corners or trap ourselves into boxes. And I hope that no one is suggesting that we permanently segregate literacy classes or anything else. But as I said earlier, I do believe that there are times when a separation can be useful. This is particularly true for a one-down or marginalized group, to find a place of safety to define an identity. Identity is a tricky thing. It can, of course, become a limiting label, as you point out. But it can also be a source of strength and help in analyzing the sources of our oppression. The Consciousness Raising groups of the 70s helped women figure out that they weren't all individually crazy, but were in common impossible situations caused by some institutional structures. That knowledge helped us make some changes in our own personal lives and in the the life of the society. 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). > It is being done during adolescence for the same reason -- to establish a separate identity. We all need to have that sense of separateness, as well as the sense of community. I think we all keep making alliances and then rebelling against them, finding commonalities and differences in all sorts of situations. I don't see it as strictly an adolescent thing. I certainly didn't have it all together when I reached the magical age of 21. I guess what I'm saying is that I don't see separatism as an either/or thing, but as a both/and. It can be incorporated into an inclusive endeavor, I think, as a step along the way. Sylvan Rainwater . Portland, OR USA . sylrain@teleport.com -------------------------------------------------------------- "The future masters of technology will have to be lighthearted and intelligent. The machine easily masters the grim and the dumb." --Marshall McCluhan, 1969
This archive was generated by hypermail 2b30 : Tue Jan 16 2001 - 14:46:36 EST