I think you make some good points. I was considering the issue, and
thought of an analogy which may or may not be appropriate. If a woman is
in a physically abusive relationship,many would agree that she should be
away from men for awhile. Since women are generally in at least a subtly
abusive relationship with patriarchy, it would therefore make sense that
they need to be away from men for awhile at times too. This may not be as
productive, however, as a union of all oppressed groups (minorities, poor,
non-heterosexuals, etc.) and I think that this is where most of the
emphasis should be placed.
***************************************
* Miguel A Ordorica *
* Washington State University *
* Department of Sociology *
* Office Wilson 237 *
* (509) 335-4595 (Office) *
* (509) 332-4442 (Home) *
***************************************
On Thu, 27 Aug 1998, Lori Anne Parker wrote:
>
>
> Miguel Angel Ordorica wrote:
>
> > While I agree, I feel it is important to remember that women are often
> > subconciously tainted by patriarchal thinking too- it would be hard to
> > characterize Margaret Thatcher, for example, as an enlightened feminist.
>
> And it is, in part, due to the aformentioned conditioning that many women may
> need women-only spaces for consciousness raising, etc. Ultimately, efforts
> together -- both women and men -- are necessary, of course. But there are
> times that women may need to be with other women in their political work. And
> only women. Though female relationships are also "tainted" by patriarchy, for
> some women, it is only through being with other women first and getting out of
> spaces where they may continually answer to men (even if the men aren't
> demanding it outright, but due to socially conditioned gender dynamics, etc.)
> that they are able too become fully empowered -- to reject certain patterned
> behaviors/responses to and with men, or to stop defining themselves in
> relation to men, etc.
>
> In my own experiences -- even the women that i might least expect to see this
> in -- when in mixed company, such as graduate seminars with lots of men will
> act in "feminine" ways. i.e. give men the floor, apologize for their ideas,
> etc. When no men are present behavior often changes dramatically. So the
> need for women-only spaces in order to get to a point where the above
> mentioned "feminine" actions are not as likely to happen in mixed company...
>
> But all the above does not at all mean that i am advocating an ecofeminist
> politic minus men. The opposite is true. But i value my women-only time.
> And when one thinks of commonly shared public space as non-neutral space, that
> is, "male" space, then the idea that women-only space is discriminatory is a
> strange critique to make. Also, what needs to be clarified is the fact that
> when i talk about "male" space i am not meaning that all you men out there
> behave in the same way, but i think it is important to remember that by being
> men there are certain privileges, etc. that you have that i do not.
> Similarly, the fact that i am white, regardless of the extent to which i
> change my behavior/idea in efforts to create a non-racist society, means i
> need to remember that day in and day out i recieve lots of privileges because
> of my skin. That the world is in so many ways "white" space. If I don't see
> this it is because i have the privilege of not seeing it. I am privileged to
> think of the dominant white reality as a nuetral, non-raced reality. I always
> carry these white privileges with me. Regardless of whether i want these
> privileges or not. So then a question of how i use these privileges to create
> something different......
>
> that's all for now -
>
> Lori Anne
>
>
