The company I work for recently printed a book about traveling from a
woman's perspective. We have a series of books that are stories about
travelling experiences, and the editor of this book felt that women's
experiences traveling were enough different to warrant their own book.
The title of the book is Travelers' Tales: A Woman's World, and it is
edited by Marybeth Bond.
Here is a little blurb from the preface:
As I became aware of other womens' travel experiences, I also began to
be aware that women travel quite differently than men do, that we look
for different things, we stop for different reasons, our goals and
styles are different, and what we take from our travels is
different...
When we travel, we pause more to listen, assimilate, to move in and
out of the lives of those we meet on the way. Where women go,
relationships follow, from encouters with nature to special moments of
connection and friendship with others.
Sorry for the plug, but I thought reading some 50 or so women's
stories about traveling might be of interest.
Stephen
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
>From [EMAIL PROTECTED] Mon Sep 16 11:24:46 1996
From: "Eric Hepburn, ITC" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To: "'[EMAIL PROTECTED]'" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: RE: non-vegetarianism and environmental interest
Date: Mon, 16 Sep 1996 13:22:34 -0400
>
>Libby wrote:
>>I suspect that true vegetarianism is a bit of a luxury or, if it's not by
>>choice, a sure way of developing malnutrition.
>
Although I, on the other hand, am a vegetarian... I totally agree with
this statement. Vegetarianism IS a luxury, one belonging to those whose
can afford dietary choice. I think the most useful definition of
vegetarian, in the context which we normally mean it, is an individual
who has made a conscious choice to alter their diets in a manner which
excludes many or all animal products/bi-products. I think the key to
this definition is the conscious choice element. Clearly this implies
that those who are, for economic or environmental reasons, primarily
concerned with survival are not afforded the luxury of this choice.
Some will argue that all people should abstain from eating meat PERIOD.
However, I would argue that this absolute moral statement would hold
little weight for a tribal person trying to live through agricultural
famine and resorting to hunting local wildlife, or , closer to home, a
starving indigent on the streets of our own cities, begging for scraps
of food.. It is ridiculous to argue that these people, in circumstances
far less luxurious than our own, should suffer malnutrition or
starvation in the name of animal rights. For those individuals the true
laws of nature previal, eat what you can find or die.
As for myself, I would do no less. Were I removed from the luxurious
lap of western society, I would hunt and gather for food and I would
feel no remorse. I would, however, treat my prey with respect and
reverence. For my love of all life would remain, and while I still
remain in my luxurious surroundings I will remain a vegetarian.
>Eric
>From [EMAIL PROTECTED] Mon Sep 16 11:26:54 1996
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Date: Mon, 16 Sep 1996 10:29:05 -0700
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: Re: "Sisterhood"
I guess I should have been clearer in what I was getting at in my
original post: namely that claims to "sisterhood" erases the difference
among women--isn't that what Bridge Called My Back (edited by Cherrie Moraga
and Gloria Anzaldua) was all about, what much of the women's movement in the
US in the 80s and 90s is about?
Likewise, naming what "men" are and what "women" are does the same.
Who are the people who make up these two categories?
Determining how we relate to each other is part of the work of
environmentalism.
Katy Barber
>> In addition, is the seeming competition between women for men
>>limited to heterosexual women here? Or does it include all women regardless
>>of differences within that category?
>>
>>Katy Barber
>>
>
>I think that the competition between women is not limited to het women. I
>think the competition is also NOT for men. Not especially that is. Maybe
>for admiring from men? Certainly lesbian women (whom i have discussed this
>very subject with) also feel the anxiety of being judged by other women. I
>think the competition between women is largely between women and not to do
>with men. Certainly though I think it has to do with women's oppression by
>men and supported by women who have not questioned their upbringing.
>
>Women are taught to be self effacing. But women still are not imune to
>wanting to feel good about themselves so the competition is often to put
>other women down. Hence sisterhood is difficult. I think it may even be
>easier for het women as they at least have men who they needn't be
>competitive with.
>
>Kylie.
>
>
>[EMAIL PROTECTED]
>
>
>
