[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
[Xmca-l] Re: What is a Pedagogy of the Oppressors?
- To: "eXtended Mind, Culture, Activity" <email@example.com>
- Subject: [Xmca-l] Re: What is a Pedagogy of the Oppressors?
- From: Annalisa Aguilar <firstname.lastname@example.org>
- Date: Tue, 6 Jan 2015 00:36:32 +0000
- Accept-language: en-US
- Authentication-results: spf=none (sender IP is ) email@example.com;
- In-reply-to: <BLU179-W808A9F22F2126B62F0355DA1590@phx.gbl>
- List-archive: <https://mailman.ucsd.edu/mailman/private/xmca-l>
- List-help: <mailto:firstname.lastname@example.org?subject=help>
- List-id: "eXtended Mind, Culture, Activity" <xmca-l.mailman.ucsd.edu>
- List-post: <mailto:email@example.com>
- List-subscribe: <https://mailman.ucsd.edu/mailman/listinfo/xmca-l>, <mailto:firstname.lastname@example.org?subject=subscribe>
- List-unsubscribe: <https://mailman.ucsd.edu/mailman/listinfo/xmca-l>, <mailto:email@example.com?subject=unsubscribe>
- References: <firstname.lastname@example.org>, , <CAF8DDy8VqGOh_P+iT9Ck5=rRwHo0iMnmTx0Z0DhV_iCtRK6tug@mail.gmail.com>, , <CO1PR02MB1755D4DBB75264876A24699A4580@CO1PR02MB175.namprd02.prod.outlook.com>, , <CAGaCnpz0s-Z32BuaqozzKRZXDaZPanpC1VOFLC1cO9Rs14B8rw@mail.gmail.com>, , <BLU179-W9C63C4BA55BEF23A023B1A1580@phx.gbl>, <email@example.com>, <BLU179-W808A9F22F2126B62F0355DA1590@phx.gbl>
- Reply-to: "eXtended Mind, Culture, Activity" <firstname.lastname@example.org>
- Sender: <email@example.com>
- Thread-index: AQHQKIVnpBdkJOWX0UWY4/IFpOlXLJyxYPOAgABMswCAACkHgIAAOmL8gAAlc4CAAARMIA==
- Thread-topic: [Xmca-l] Re: What is a Pedagogy of the Oppressors?
See, now I interpreted Peter's comments to mean that there are more than two points of view (as when I was considering "east/west;" "capitalism/communism;" etc). Like there are many points of view, perhaps uncountable.
I had said earlier that "a" pedagogy gets away from there being "one" or "the" pedagogy. I intuit that we shouldn't be reductive when it comes to understanding the mind of the oppressor; this is why I believe there are many pedagogies of oppression. There may be commonalities, but it is also possible that there are some factors present in one pedagogy that is absent in another, or present to a lessor degree.
I can accept that one who was oppressed can become an oppressor. That's the very predictable "violence begets violence" cycle, as you point out. That is "a" pedagogy.
It is hard for me to explain why anyone would punch anyone, because I've never entertained the desire to punch someone. However, I can understand that there must be emotions there, and I would like to try to understand them from the inside rather than rationalize them from the outside.
I don't like to explain violence as too much testosterone, because it seems sexist to me, it also makes it equivalent to someone "going crazy," "losing control," which brings to mind a need to control as a solution, or worse, "the" solution. This seems a replication of the same problem.
I would rather suppose that the violent person is hurting and acting out of hurt and fear, as a desire to protect oneself and to survive. That makes more sense to me. It may not be rational, but it makes sense to me why a person is violent.