bill blanton writes:
>I think you are right. The joke posting "disturbs the old activity and
>aggravates its
>>latent inner contradiction."
>However, I understand Mary's response/answer to make an object of his
>utterance. The objectification created the disturbance.
(actually, the "joke" created the disturbance. Mary merely pointed it out)
> If Mary had not
>objectified his utterance, the community may not have been disturbed.
>Mary and others have been "addressing the community and members of the
>community have been answering.
as if Mary were not a member of the community, yes? as if those who
question the tolerance are
not also members of the community. it's a linguistic turn that positions
difference, you see?
>In turn, members of the XMCA community have
>been learning and reflecting on new understandings and tools.
>
>bill blanton
bill (blanton, that is)
i think that had "mary not objectED to the utterance," the so-called
community might have
persisted in its most comfortable zone, which is the dismiss those
offenses that call
to mind issues of centrality and privilege. certainly i am quick to delete
the offensive posts,
having "LEARNED" that it is simply not worth the energy to object to
particular assumptions of inclusion
that are, inevitably, exclusive...
the community is ALWAYS disturbed with the input of patriarchal
assumptions,
but those who are most disturbed have perhaps also adopted a habit of
biting our tongue,
knowing the futility of trying to raise, yet again,
the issue of privilege.
i would personally love to HOPE that some kinds of understandings have
been generated here,
but in my experience, it is only a matter of time before this is
designated as an "incident" that has not effectively altered
the community structure or tradition,
but merely been tolerated as a part of that "feminist" thing ...
i want to believe that this has been disruptive in the AT sense of the
word that bill baroway wants,
but my suspicion is that it has been mostly irking and likely to be
dismissed in favour
of the traditional rhetorics that dominate monologues here.
ah but that's MY cynicism, i speak for myself, of course.
the thing is, and i wrote about this in the article that was mentioned,
that to interrupt tradition is to call forth a problematic identification,
one that is not easily examined
in the realms of a community that thrives on its traditions.
in other words,
it all might have been somewhat discomforting, but in the long run,
nothing is likely to change in the xmca community because a minority
perspective rarely - if never - succeeds in
influencing a majority position.
change is loss, and other than annoyance and frustration,
i've not witnessed any gestures towards a "giving up" of privilege in
order to alter the traditional discourse that
dominates xmca.
Raymond Williams has written rather brilliantly on the functions of
tradition in community,
... has anyone here read R. Williams?
diane
************************************************************************************
"Things do not change: people change."
Henry David Thoreau
*************************************************************************************
diane celia hodges
university of british columbia, centre for the study of curriculum and
instruction
vancouver, bc
mailing address: 46 broadview avenue, pointe claire, qc, H9R 3Z2
This archive was generated by hypermail 2b29 : Fri Feb 01 2002 - 01:00:08 PST