View Single Post
Old 12-10-2009, 04:33 PM   #2
evolveme
Member

How Do You Identify?:
honeysuckle venom
Preferred Pronoun?:
a pistol and a sugar cane
Relationship Status:
I promise to aid and abet
 

Join Date: Nov 2009
Location: in between poems where ceilings are floors and joe ghost floats achromatic toward day
Posts: 514
Thanks: 229
Thanked 736 Times in 228 Posts
Rep Power: 503698
evolveme Has the BEST Reputationevolveme Has the BEST Reputationevolveme Has the BEST Reputationevolveme Has the BEST Reputationevolveme Has the BEST Reputationevolveme Has the BEST Reputationevolveme Has the BEST Reputationevolveme Has the BEST Reputationevolveme Has the BEST Reputationevolveme Has the BEST Reputationevolveme Has the BEST Reputation
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Jess View Post
I sincerely thank you for expressing your opinion, evolveme. I will agree with you on the notion that yes, we all "should" be able to discuss "anything". I will however have to agree to disagree with you, in that I "do" think often times a "safe" space must be created for purpose of connecting with folks who are uniquely similar.
But, see, Jess, I never said they shouldn't exist, I only said that they weren't for me, and I went on to explain why I found them problematic. Further, "safe space" is a fallacy, even in a virtual, text-based world. Given that we're abiding the TOS, we really are all in charge of ourselves here and how we manage our own sense of "safety."

Quote:
Originally Posted by Jess View Post
I quite simply, do not see it as a "bad thing". If in my "taking a backseat", as it may be interpreted by some, has aided in my learning how another group thinks then I do not see anything "bad" in that.
I cannot imagine how anyone could interpret this position as a bad thing.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Jess View Post
<snip>
I am not sure I agree with the "limited inclusion" theory. In that, as I interpret it.. "you can speak here, but only in the words "we" choose" as for me, that seems far more "silencing".
I hope this isn't how you read Dear Femme. The idea is more that, if you're willing to engage with me, personally (because I'm the only one who has either been inclined or willing to do it) I'd like to talk about the ways that we sometimes believe we are being supportive (usually with rote language), but that given a second look, it can read as dismissive to a feminine person. If this has "felt silencing", I think it has more to do with an automatic defensiveness that our words were not heard the way we intended than to any real effort to silence. There is no effort to silence. (On the idea of silencing, I have a lot to say, but haven't made it to the Negotiating Silence thread yet.) And I did and do recognize your intention, but delivery does matter.

To wit:

I can't know if you're reading me in the tone with which I'm attempting to engage, but this conversation and you, as a deeply feeling and truly intelligent member of my community matter to me. I see how other femmes write a lot of "gently/s" and utilize emoticons when they do this, but that isn't who I am. I'm a straight shooter. I need you to know that this doesn't mean I do not respect you or that I don't feel I have nothing to learn from you. I do, and I'm sure I do.
__________________
Class, race, sexuality, gender and all other categories by which we categorize and dismiss each other need to be excavated from the inside. - Dorothy Allison
evolveme is offline   Reply With Quote
The Following 3 Users Say Thank You to evolveme For This Useful Post: