Conference turris::womannotes-v2

    
    Bonnie,
    Sounds like some of the 'namecalling' here......
    "how can you consider yourself a 'feminist' if you don't (vote,
    lobby, support pro-choice causes, pick your word...)
    Women, and men, certainly label things/people/events for
    convenience, clarity, and sometimes unfortunately out of
    anger, spite, or ignorance.  
    Sounds like this woman was put down by those who wanted
    to change her, but were not patient/tolerant enough to
    help her, guide her, accept her.  Too bad...
    Then of course there are the connotations that just
    seem to go with some words...lesbian is one, chicano
    is another, alcoholic is another, there are lots more...
    words that can be accurately used to describe someone
    but which have 'hidden meanings' as well.  
    And yet some folks don't see the power of language...
    
    strange...
    
    deb
    

    Deb,
    
    You've hit on what I reacted to in this note. I think of the
    tension between mothers who are employed and mothers who
    are home with their children. There have been recent newspaper
    articles about mothers who refused to include children of
    mothers who were employed outside of the home in activities
    with their children. I've also had mail from women who felt
    their personal views were too conservative for this forum
    and were leaving because of the reactions they feared if they
    expressed what they really felt. I also know that many more
    radical women don't have much patience with much of what
    is discussed in this file. I don't think that womannnotes can
    be all things to all women, that is not my point here. What I
    am interested in is how we as women can communicate with and
    respect the opinions of other women who we disagree with.
    
    Bonnie

    Bonnie:
    
    I don't know "how" we can communicate, but I do know "why" we don't:
    
    	Because whatever our beliefs - radical, traditional, whatever -
    	we, *each of us*, lack confidence in the rightness of our
    	beliefs for *us* for *right now*, and when someone else
    	believes differently we feel "she couldn't possibly be right,
    	because if she is then I'm wrong, and I couldn't bear to be
    	wrong (although really, secretly I know I must be, because
    	ain't I a woman)."
    
    I think it takes courage on the part of individual contributors as well 
    as thoughtfulness on all our parts to make this communication work.  I
    don't see much in this notes file of either the very traditional or the
    very radical points of view, and I think we're blaming, just a little,
    the wrong people:  where is the courage of the people who are not
    noting because they think this file is too, too something for them?
    
    I do think that the very radical points of view would be challenged and
    flamed much more than we would the very traditional, because there is
    more stimulation of fear and anger in radical points of view, and I'm
    afraid we'd be a little bored and condescending to traditional points
    of view.  I'd like to see them all here, however.
    
    Briana (who hasn't heard anything radical in along time!) 

    Sometimes I think to myself "I'm not a *real* feminist, I'm not
    working hard enough at it to be a *real* feminist".  It feels to
    me like an honorary title you have to earn (and just imagine what
    it takes to become a "radical feminist"! ;)....
    
    My "label" blind-spot in the (primarily valuing differences) notesfiles
    I read and participate in occurs around the "flippant/thoughtful"
    dichotomy.  I tend to label people in my head sometimes according
    to how they sound.  People earn the two primary titles of "flippant"
    and "thoughtful".  "Flippant" is a hard one to unearn, in my head,
    because when people go against the flow of the discussion, and are
    flip, or disrespectful, or downright ornery, in what could be an
    otherwise productive communication experience, that bothers me.
    Of course, if someone writes thoughtful stuff, and then writes silly
    stuff in silly topics, that's okay.....but when people detract from
    the seriousness of a topic, or pull in red herrings and "steal the
    limelight" from the initial topic, I find it hard to palate, and
    it just kind of sticks in my craw.  
    
    That's really the only example right now I can think of relative
    to notesfiles where I define, or label, and it may well be to my
    detriment to put people in labeled folders, but there doesn't seem
    to be a whole lot I can do about my thinking processes at that level.
    
    I was talking to a friend last night and asking them how they describe
    people to other people.  Invariably, their definition had much fewer
    labels and words than mine.  I mentioned one mutual friend.  They said,
    "She has a nice smile, and a nice laugh, and her eyebrows go up when
    she's happy so her smile lights up her face.  She's very smart."  That
    was the entire description.  The rest that was in his head was totally
    nonverbal. Maybe I could take a cue from someone like that, but we both
    agreed it would be difficult to alter the way we thought or "stored"
    subjects. 
    
    My labels in life consist primarily of 
    "nice" / "not nice"
    "open to new ideas" / "closed" (or "stuck")
    "intelligent" / "not intelligent" (which is not a bad thing)
    "attractive" / "average"  (there are VERY few ugly people, really)
    "fun" / "stuffy" (or "stuck")
    "comfortable" / "uptight"
    
    interesting topic.....!
    
    -Jody
    

    I agree with Jody on the "I can't be a real feminist" problem. I
    believe in my life that I've done much that "traditional" views of
    women would not have allowed. Yet, because of deep seated feelings I
    have that do not correspond to the politically correct ideas of
    feminism, I feel I can not call myself a feminist.

    It seems that once the war has begun you find you must be friend or
    foe with no inbetween allowed. I have to laugh at the idea of a
    woman being told she's not "lesbian enough" because she is not
    politically active. To me, the very act of being openly homosexual
    is political in our culture.

    But back to labels. How do I label myself?

    Mixed up, confused, insecure, aging hippy, student, musician, woman
    and all around neurotic. I may have left a few out. liesl

    
    i know this is a tangent...but those two words again...
    politically correct...such an oxymoron...
    
    Back to the issue...I think Jodi hit it on the head with
    the comment about how difficult it is to change the way
    we store our thoughts/impressions.  I think we all tend to
    compartmentalize things so they are easier to deal with, 
    retrieve, etc.  By doing that in our thoughts we tend to
    also allow ourselves to do that in speech, ... again 
    a difficult thing to change.  
    As for the notesfile itself...I think we should be
    as open to radical/traditional/middle of the road views
    as possible.  If someone says they don't note because their
    views are not 'mainstream' we should each suggest they try
    again...after all what is mainstream today *wasn't* 20
    years and many speeches ago.  We all benefit, and grow, 
    from hearing *all* viewpoints, even those with which we
    don't agree.  It is difficult, particularly in this
    electronic forum to get all the perspectives...,....
    
    sorry, I don't have any solutions,...just ramblings...
    
    deb
    

I was once was talking with a small group of people when a woman told me,
flat out, that I was not a feminist.  She didn't realize she was talking about
me, for the comment was made about a group of people I fall into but she
didn't realize I fell into.  I looked at her and asked "Am I not a feminist?"
(We had been discussing some views of women in society.)  She said "Well
of course *you* are, I'm not talking about you", and continued her diatribe.

Her generalizations made me angry at first, then they made me laugh, because
her contradicting herself made me realize how ridiculous both her labels and
her generalizations were.

But since then I haven't ever called myself a feminist.

D!

(The base note comes back to a posting a made earlier about "Feminism is 
the theory, lesbianism is the practice" I think.)

    re:.8
    
    If participating in "recreational" notesfiles is "suicidal", and
    you consider =wn= to be a recreational notesfile, then why are you
    here now??
    
    The new policy clearly allows recreational noting by virtue of its
    encouraging employees in the everyday use of the company's products.
    That's one. Two, =wn= is *not* a recreational notesfile. It's a
    Valuing Differences notesfile, and any Valuing Differences program
    is considered to be in direct support of the company's business.
    Just because we men aren't the *subject* (at least, in any direct
    sense) that this conference revolves around doesn't mean that we
    cannot partake of it as a Valuing Difference activity. Valuing
    Differences is just as important for the majority as for the minority
    (and, in one sense, it's *more* important, given that it's the
    majority that usually needs to learn to value the differences).
    
    Sigh. Apparently, this new policy isn't doing the job it was intended
    to, which is to make things clearer. Some people are apparently
    more confused than they were before...
    
    --- jerry

    Re. -.8 (Eagles)
    
    Ah, but Eagles, you ARE a protected species, just like everyone
    else in Digital.  You just stopped reading the new policy too soon.
    Continue reading in the same paragraph you quoted, and you'll see,
    "Digital also permits access to these systems to communicate matters
    of opinions and common interests."  And later on, in the following
    paragraph, "Conferences created to communicate matters of opinion
    and common interests...must be open to all employees."
    
    There is, however, a qualification to this:  "...these conferences
    may not be used to promote behavior which is contrary to the company's
    values or policy (i.e., they may not promote discrimination, disrespect
    for the individual, violence, etc.)"
    
    Karen
    
    Karen

    Please start a new note if you want to continute to discuss the
    new policy.
    
    thanks
    
    Bonnie J

Labels.  Very interesting subject...

I'm really wary of labels these days.   I don't really like to label
myself much if I can avoid it.  What's the difference between the
following two groups of self descriptions?

{ Group 1}

I'm a software engineer.
I'm a juggler.
I'm an American.
I'm a Green.
.
.
.

{Group 2}

I work as a software engineer.
I like to juggle.
I live in the Unites States.
I'm attracted to Green politics.
.
.
.

The first group, there is assumption, I think, that "I" is what I do
and what I think.  The second groups just describes myself without
such an assumption.  Is this important?

I think that when I identify too strongly with some label, then there
is an automatic separation between the group I identify with and
anyone outside that group.

I guess the question for me is:  Am "I" the collection of opinions I
have, the self images I have (which are very tied to labels I have
about myself), this body, these memories, these feelings, hopes,
fears, etc?

Opinions change very easily (at least for me).  Self images can vary
easily (someone can say something complimentory or critical and my
self image can vary widely),  every cell in my body is reborn every
seven years.  My memories changes and are influenced by my feelings
and opinions.  My feelings change very rapidly.  Doesn't seem to be
much very solid there to me.

When I think of myself as the collection of my thoughts (opinions and
self-images), it is a very fragile thing.  When my own feelings,
thoughts, actions do not match my self-image, then conflict arises.
So if I am feeling anger and I have an image of myself as a nice guy,
then I am very uncomfortable and try to deny what I am feeling (for
example).  When I label myself and get investing in belonging to some
group or the other, then I can make  myself a prisoner to the approval
of the people in that group (in my own mind and perhaps in theirs).
The freedom to be is lost I think.  The freedom to be comfortable with
whatever arises slips away in concerns about whether I will be found
in agreement with the values, opinions or the group, with my own self
image with myself.  So, there is no longer complete freedom to see
what is actually there.

This is a big problem today I think.   We seem to invest so much
energy in carrying forward our own opinions and protecting our
fragile self-images instead of listening to what other people are
saying and really experiencing the moment.  I wonder if it is possible
to let go of, to loosen up the bonds of some of these self-images,
desires for approval, thoughts of how I should be?

I see people seeing this and rejecting it and creating yet another
system full of opinions, labels, self-images, and group standards.
And the original ideals, goals, values are lost and the newly formed
group becomes just the same problem all over again.  Someone talked in
another note about rejecting traditional values and wanted to belong
to an elite group of people who belonged to the non-traditional group
by changing their physical appearence.  How could the original problem
be addressed without creating a new group, a new system  of how you
should be?

I don't want to be different.  I don't want to have the approval of
group X or group Y (actually, I still do but I don't want to be this
way ;-), I don't want to have endless self-images that I am struggling
with all the time.  I just want to be free to be the most helpful
person I can, momemt to moment, free to feel, to think, to examine, to
question, to love people, life, the universe no matter what the
situation I find myself in.  Even that is a self-image!  Very tricky!

peace,
john

There seems to be a consistent feeling to the people who claim you're not
"really" a lesbian/feminist/black/caring parent/careerperson/whatever...  

The people making the accusation seem (IMO?) to feel that they have had to take
an unpopular stand in the struggle/fight, to make a lot of sacrifices and/or put
up with a lot of contempt and aggravation for the sake of the label [usually
associated some cause, actually].

They're proud of their position.  And they may feel (fear?) that someone who,
*in their opinion*, hasn't had to suffer or sacrifice or work just as hard 
isn't really committed to their position.

It's often a good way to get an extremely angry response from the person 
accused. Sometimes it causes them to work harder for the cause just to
'prove' their dedication.  It can also backfire and alienate them entirely if
they feel the accusation is unjust....

OK.  What is it about this moderator ...

	_First_ she calls herself a "nerd" (which is quickly affirmed by 
        	another moderator :-).    

	_Then_  she's a "slut" looking for one night stands (which is 
        	later narrowed to one night stands with a Joe-person).

My only question : 

Is being a nerd _and_ a slut  Politically Correct  for a feminist ? 

						    :-),
					            nancy b.

    Well, the only reason I was able to confirm the "nerd" bit is that
    there are subtle signs by which we can recognise one another even in a
    crowd of non-nerds.
    
    						=maggie;')

    Well, the only reason I was able to confirm the "nerd" bit is that
		                                    ^^^^^^^^^^ 
    there are subtle signs by which we can recognise one another even in a
    crowd of non-nerds.
    
    						=maggie;')

    Oh boy, is that done with a true /false test? YAN, liesl

	> and recipient of mail from one of your more vocal militant 
	> members in this file, I'd appreciate the opportunity to...

	Whenever I see "militant" used as in the above, I always
	think it carries a negative connotation, like

	"...ooooh those nasty women who dare to speak their minds on
	 whatever subject they please."

	Often, I think the person would have preferred to use the
	term "bitch", but didn't.

							nancy b.