On Tue, 25 Oct 1994, Brian A. Luke wrote:
> Yes, this clarifies a realization I was coming to. As I said from
> the beginning of the discussion of the vegie issue, the fundamental
> point there is whether farmed animals are oppressed. That's the issue
> that divides us, but instead of focussing on that, our discussion
> continually returns to how we feel about someone standing up for
> animals (meat-eaters feeling not welcome at vegetarian conferences,
> meat-eaters feeling like the vegies are "holier-than-thou," etc.)
I hesitate to comment on this because I was not on the list at the
beginning of this discussion. But, Brian, I wonder if it is possible to
define the "issue" so definitively in this case. It seems to me that
what is going on here is that people are operating within constructed
worldviews which differ in some significant respect, even as they overlap
in others.
Specifically, presumably everyone on this list is here
because they see some kind of connection between the social oppression of
women and our domination and destruction of the planet. Beyond that, we
may not agree on how these concerns are connected to other issues --
e.g., the oppression of "other" groups besides women (even who can be
considered oppressed) or the oppression of farm animals. So, for you to say
"the fundamental point here is whether farm animals are oppressed" -- is
really a statement about what *you* see as the fundamental point. Others
may see the something else as the "real" issue. This is precisely what
makes conflicts over environmental *and* gender *and* oppression issues
so difficult to deal with. You cannot even get people to easily agree
over what the conflict is about let alone get them to start discussing it
in some logical manner.
>
> To some extent I facilitated this misplaced focus by bringing up how
> vegies sometimes feel surrounded by dead flesh. I did this out of
> desperation after a long personal history (and a short history on
> this list) of finding people unwilling to straightforwardly discuss
> the situation of farmed animals and our responsibility for that as
> consumers. But, that was a mistake--if people don't want to discuss
> something, they won't. It's apparently time to let it go, on this
> list anyway. So, onto sexuality:
It is not that you are mistaken to state your perception of the "real"
issue, it is just that we may all need to be very patient with one
another and very clear about defining the issues as well as looking for
answers.
Jayne
