On Sun, 5 Feb 1995, Adelaide Chichorro Ferreira wrote:
> James Roper wrote:
>
>
> "Now, out of curiosity, is this kind of a discussion a "male thing" or do
> women out there have any problems with this issue?"
>
>
> This is the first time I participate on this debate. I was quite
> silent till now and all I know is that I wouldn=B4t have come to the decisio=
> n
> of saying something about this issue if Jim hadn=B4t asked the question
> above. It=B4s rather strange, but that=B4s how it is... By the way, let me
> present myself: I=B4m from Portugal and I work at the University of Coimbra
> at the department of German Studies.
>
> I think we=B4re dealing with different views of nature. One that is
> particular to men, another one that is more typical of women. And the views
> we have about reality are always conditioned by our own ways of looking at
> it. Men have had a different pair of glasses throughout history: nature is
> for them a place of struggle and fight. Women don=B4t necessarily see things
> this way. Women have been telling their kids stories where lots of animals
> appear. If we consider the mythology of story-telling, animals are seen in
> a humanized condition. They talk, they play with each other, they are nice
> and friendly, etc... Lots of women, especially those that have something to
> do with educational activities, tend to see animals (maybe rather naively)
> as, above all,living things, not as some sort of target to get hit or to
> get used for some purpose. Well, I do eat meat, although much less than
> some years ago, but I know I wouldn=B4t bear killing an animal. So that=B4s
> where men are normally needed. What I want to say is that we cannot blame
> them altogether for having a different view of reality, I guess.
>
> Once I wrote an article for the portuguese press about hunting. We
> have about 300 000 hunters in our country in a population of 10 million
> people. I said that hunters could not divide the whole country just among
> themselves, which is still happening, because in my opinion they were a
> minority. That is: they should only kill 1/33 of the total number of
> rabbits in Portugal. What I wanted to say was: just because they were
> "active" (they also get very visible publicly) it did not mean that women
> (who have to stay at home with the kids while their men go hunting, and who
> normally don=B4t have the possibility of honestly saying how they feel about
> it), did not have the right to "use" nature in their own particular way,
> that is, just to enjoy the existance of living beings.
> I think we have to try and harmonize these different views of
> nature, and to try and give more visibility to the somewhat "silent" one.
> But it is not easy, as it is also "natural" that women tend to remain
> silent. I mean, silence does not mean agreement, but how can silence be
> heard in a democracy?
>
> Adelaide Chichorro Ferreira
>
>
>
>
>
Adelaide, hi there! My name's Julie, and in response to your letter
above, I have a few questions and points to make:
First, when you say you "wouldn't bear killing an animal. So that's
where men are normally needed," the way you used the word "men" is
suspect. It sounds like you are referring to "men" as a sex, where,
probably you should refer to "men" as a group of humans (womyn and men)
whom think a certain way (namely, a patriarchal/status quo way). Shouldn't
you be challenging the system and status quo to make change and not
categorize womyn and men by their "typical" way of seeing the world?
Sociology through evolutionary environmental influences may have an
influence on the differences in thinking styles generally associated with
men and womyn, but this does not sanction typifying the two sexes
distinctly. Womyn and men do not think in terms that would obviously
classify them as either male or femyle.
I agree, we cannot blame men as a sex, totally, for the typical
patriarchal mindset that they largely helped set in motion, but we can
challenge this tired mindset that dominates much of the world's people today.
Accepting the argument of gender differences totally as a result of biology
will not help fight/pacify the beastly system engraved so deeply in our
sociology today.
Glad to read some of your ideas,
Julie
>From [EMAIL PROTECTED] Tue Feb 7 13:23:54 MST 1995
id <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>; Wed, 08 Feb 1995 08:55:55 +1300
; 8 Feb 95 08:54:57 +1300
Date: Wed, 08 Feb 1995 08:54:08 +1300
From: "STEFANIE S. RIXECKER" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Cairo Network restructuring/Forwarded
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Organization: Lincoln University
This message didn't get through the system the first time around, so
I'm forwarding it to the list now. Stefanie/
* Written 8:34 AM Feb 7, 1995 by dhunt in igc:icpd.general */
/* ---------- "Cairo Network Restructure" ---------- */
February 6, 1995
TO: Members (and friends) of the U.S. Network for Cairo Coordinating Committee
FROM: Administrative Committee
SUBJECT: Network Transition
As authorized by the Network Coordinating Committee
at the meeting its November 1994, the
Administrative Committee has concluded its
negotiations and discussions regarding
disposition of funds and merger with the
Citizens Network for Sustainable Development. At
its final meeting on Wednesday, February 1, 1995
the Administrative Committee voted unanimously to complete
its transition into the Population, Women, and Development Working
Group of the Citizens Network.
Per action of the U.S. Network for Cairo Administrative Committee
and the Citizens Network for Sustainable Development Executive Committee:
1. The U.S. Network for Cairo will become the Population, Women
and Development working group of the Citizens Network, maintaining
separate fiduciary arrangements with the Tides Foundation. Details
of these financial arrangements will be negotiated with Tides and the
CitNet so as to minimize administrative charges by Tides.
2. All funds and property remaining in US Network for Cairo
accounts will be transferred to and become the Population,
Women, and Development Working Group (Working Group). Use of
these funds is limited to support of:
-- compensation for a part time convenor
to support Working Group activities at $15 per
hour for up to 40 hours per month including expenses;
-- a periodic newsletter or other information
dissemination mechanisms specifically focused on the
implementation of the ICPD Programme of Action and
related topics;
-- projects that:
> monitor implementation of the ICPD Programme
of Action around the world and in the
US;
> provide fora for the discussion of issues
related to Population, Women and
Development;
> monitor and work for inclusion of the goals,
objectives, policies, programs, and other
understandings embodied in the ICPD Programme
of Action in other United Nations
and U.S. domestic policies and programs; and
> advocate and support broad based NGO
participation in all aspects of the development,
implementation, and assessment of programs related
to the ICPD Programme of Action and related issues
regarding Population, Women and Development.
3. An Interim Executive Committee is to be established for the
Working Group. this committee shall be composed of three to five
individuals identified by the Administrative Committee at its final
meeting. One of these individuals will be Nancy Hirshbein, a member of
the U.S. Network Administrative Committee. Sometime during the coming
year, volunteers will be sought for a Working Steering Committee open to
all, and for a permanent Executive Committee of three to five members of
the Working Group.
4. The Working Group will be represented by one individual on
the CitNet Executive Committee.
5. U.S. Network funds will be available to pay for individual
memberships in the CitNet for any current U.S. Network members who
express a desire to participate in the CitNet through return of a post
card to be mailed with the final Network mailing in February 1995. The
Working Group will probably be soliciting institutional membership
renewals in the near future.
6. Rev. Douglas B. Hunt has been engaged as the transition Convenor
for the Population, Women and Development Working Group. Rev. Hunt may
be reached at 301-593-4724 (phone & fax); pager: 301-421-0401, at the
Church Center for Sustainable Community, 1820 Sanford Road, Wheaton,
Maryland 20902-4008.
I am hoping to get the final Network Mailing out with more details
and an intro to the CitNet in the next two weeks. I will be calling
on all of you for help, support, and information in the coming months
so that the spirit Cairo and the agreements reached there can find real
implementation both here and around the world.
Peace,
Doug Hunt
