|
You quote Ruth Pierson in terms of the requirement that feminism moves beyond a woman-centred perspective to collective action against systemic male dominance. This is where I identify my disagreement with you - and I believe that disagreement comes out of our different definitions of feminism rather than out of anything you actually do in your literacy practice! I would work instead from Sue Wise's (1991) requirement that feminism be "concerned with adopting a moral-political stance to questions of power and powerlessness." (p. 248) I am more comfortable with that definition because I don't believe that collective action against male-dominance is the defining characteristic of feminism. If that is the case, then action defined in relation to racism, class oppression, heterosexism, and discrimination based on abilities cannot be understood as feminist unless it is somehow articulated to male dominance. That requirement has been critiqued by women who do not have the privilege of fighting out of only one position - their position as [white, middle-class, formally educated, heterosexual] women - and by women who are not willing to put the reality of male dominance above the reality of white supremacy or capitalist oppression. Also, the reality of many women's lives do not allow for them to participate in collective action. They may be too involved in simple survival to expend the time, energy, and resources required. Their concerns may not be included by those who have defined the basis of unity on which collective action in their area is being undertaken. They may not be able to get up the stairs to the meeting. They may not be able to hear the discussion or, if they can hear it, it may not be framed in language that they understand. I don't think we can exclude these women from feminist action because of the circumstances of their lives. I also don't want to exclude your literacy practice because you are not using a women's studies or gender studies curriculum. I strongly believe that the way in which you have defined your woman-positive teaching is feminist. I can't accept that the only way that writing group would have been feminist is if you had imported your own curriculum into a space where it was unwanted or inappropriate! And I am wondering if what makes your practice more feminist at the end of this project than it was at the beginning is that you have become very conscious not only of the process of what you were doing but the consequences as well. It seems to me that you took your feminist theory and your feminist activity . from outside the classroom and applied it to your work in a community college classroom. On the basis of that application, you decided to do your work in a way that you felt both respected the women students' experience and did not enhance your already dominant position as teachers. You gave them as much room as you could to talk with each other honestly and to explore their own understanding of their lives in the context of what they came to class to learn. You did not exercise your power to put forward a feminist agenda, an agenda that I believe might have resulted in cultural imperialism - what Iris Marion Young (1990, pp. 39-65) outlines as one of the five faces of oppression. I believe that your woman-positive approach a feminist activity. I agree that it was not feminist activity as you came to define it during this project and I respect that we don't agree about this. I also look forward to your exploration of how you can become more pro-active on your own terms. References: Wise, Sue. (1991). Becoming a feminist social worker. In Liz Stanley (Ed.), Feminist praxis: Research. theory and epistemology in feminist sociology (pp. 236- 249). London: Routledge. Young, Iris Marion. (1990). Justice and the politics of difference. Princeton: Princeton University Press. ________________________________________________ |
| Back | Contents | Next |