no one has suggested that the men on the list should leave.
somone mentioned the possibility of another list which launched into this
discussion about women-only spaces but no one has been talking about actually
changing *this* particular list.
just a point of clarification.
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
> In a message dated 98-09-02 10:11:43 EDT, you write:
>
> you say that it is not constructive to sit and bitch about men.
> >>
> Hi!
>
> I will contend that not only is sitting and bitching about men not
> constructive but is it unholy not making us feel whole! Because our bitching
> will never change them or us- actually helps us feel better to commesurate but
> does NOTHING to make the situation better. I will also contend that not only
> is it not constructive but also unholy. We need to be whole again - men and
> women together working together - wholistic relationships - we can still have
> our spaces - I agree, a space with just the girls but in an ecofem discussion
> list should not the place for it - it should be a space for reconstructing
> true whole relationships men and women and women and men . . . based on mutual
> understanding and respect.
>
> I respect your need for space and sisterhood - but if you promote reverse
> discrimination on the list - that is unconstructive - creating more of a
> problem will not solve the previous problem. But go ahead fill your needs -
> but don't blame all men for the indecencies of some! If these men are on the
> list - that means they care - they are our allies not our enemies - Because
> that could also apply to women!
>
> There is a lot of misunderstanding going on - I would like to discuss this
> misunderstanding about what obedience means in spiritual terms. Anyone
> interested?
>
> Here is the statement about obedience in Christian spirituality that has
> caused so much misunderstanding:
>
> St Peter says: Wives should be OBEDIENT to their husbands." He also adds,
> however, that "husbands must treat their wives with consideration in their
> life together, respecting a woman as one who, though she may be the WEAKER
> partner, is EQUALLY an heir to the life of grace."
>
> How do you feel about this statement? Does it scream sexists to you?
>
> My opinion:
>
> Obedience is a good thing - a form of discipline - what makes us different
> from other animals who act on instinct our ability to think through things and
> act with discipline.
>
> Weaker - I think back in history when this statement was made - women WERE
> weaker in many ways - now women are stronger - weaker still does not mean not
> as sacred.
>
> Equally an heir - He makes no qualms about that - equally as divine and heir
> to the life of grace - .
>
> The biggest problem is the misundertanding of the word Obedience. Some people
> hear that word and cringe - they think it means lose your freedom and become a
> subservient slave to anothers whim. I disagree - Obedience is a way to
> express love - you are offering something non-material to the person or entity
> you love - you are offering a bit of your freedom you become obedient to
> another in true love and will not just your freewill. Although I will always
> contend that you have free-will - but that obedience/discipline is about not
> misusing that will. When we serve each other we are expressing love (without
> the use of material things) we are not subordinate in any respect just
> humbling ourselves to each other as tolerant, loving creations.
>
> Love,
> Angela
