lordy lorde

Wow that woman is angry.

I think this is the third class in two years where Lorde has been part of the coursework. I'm not sure I remember her writing with/about so much anger before but then of course that is the title of the article ("The Uses of Anger: women Responding to Racism").

I've always had a problem with anger - other people's whether it's directed at me or elsewhere, and being/getting angry myself. Partly it's not appropriate for women to be angry...partly because I tend to take responsibility for whatever pain and injustice I experience. If it's my fault then I have no right to be angry. Besides, how can anger be productive?

Squeaky wheels aside, isn't there a saying 'you catch more flies with honey than vinegar"? But then is this a woman thing? These courses make me think too much. ;) Of all the people who try to get things done, which people pick which methods? Is it the powerless group that has to use honey? Those in power can stomp and storm and have their way by force?

Back to Lorde. . .

The part about "I can't afford it" and how it means different things to different people - i'm shocked that conferences don't offer such things as sliding scales and price breaks for people who need it. In the arts and homeschool and La Leche stuff I've done there has always been assistnace for people to participate who might not have sufficient funds. Maybe it's presumed that everyone in academia is rich - it seems to fit the stereotype. But of course, reality is student loans take years to pay off. And not everyone is tenure. And students present. And poor women/women of Color (Lorde's language) have as much and as much need to present at conferences. How can women's studies not see this? And for this year's frg - how can a woman who is struggling with childcare be hassled rather than offered assistance?

This article makes me think of the theory and practice debate. It's one thing to sit in a classroom and talk about racism, another to actually practice anti-racist behaviour. When I had dinner with some friends and the one woman's boyfriend was complaining about not being allowed to send peanuts in his kids' lunches and the inconvenience it causes him and how all those people with peanut allergies should just deal with it because it's their problem, not his, I saw how that could quickly be turned and applied to any other marginalized group. Afterwards one of the other people said to me it's the American way - the speaker is American and it's how they are socialized. I saw that as another label and not particularly useful. I'm allergic to peanuts, my sister carries an epi-pen for her peanut allergy - sometimes even inhaling peanut butter is enough to cause a very serious reaction. According to this type of thinking, we should just not go out into public. Apply this to anyone who has difficulty functioning in a society where the successful are white and male and there are a lot of people who just have to 'deal with it'. Not that being white and male is a surefire path to success, but it's a mighty privilege.

independently spiritual

Nasrulla's article made me happy. Especially the part where one of the women says 'Islam is in her heart'. Surrounded by all Western propoganda everywhere we turn, and all these WS courses where we talk about how damaging patriarchy is/has been to women it's nice to hear someone with the strength to (or at least appear to) make her own choice. She's decided that she can form her own interpretation and live how she chooses. She doesn't listen to the pressures to cover up nor has she completely given up her faith. I think this is a positive way to look at religion. There are messages each faith teaches. Each individual needs to be able to decide how she is going to incorporate these teachings into her own life. This freedom also allows an individual to pick and choose from the teachings of different faiths making her independently spiritual in a way - but that's a different course.

It must be hard to come from another culture to Canada. Especially a culture that has strict rules about appearance. Young women who choose not to wear hijab must deal with their parents, their communities, their peers. . . if they choose *to* wear hijab then they deal with stereotypes and stares.

I have four friends/acquaintances who've been on the Canada World Youth Exchange. One to Pakistan, one to Malawi, one to Thailand, and the last to India. All talked about the culture shock and withdrawal of living away from Canada - how participants came unglued, how one man became obsessed with coca-cola and wouldn't eat or drink the food of the area. I can only imagine what it would have been like for this person if he'd needed to leave Canada permanently and become a refugee or newcomer to his temporary home. It must be very very hard to leave your home, especially if you know there's no chance of going back.

To come to Canada and face the racism, however subtle or polite it is, really puts into perspective how difficult the situation back home must have been.

food-to-go

yikes! our group can get pretty excited.

This week we talked about mobile food stands based on Jessica Johnston's article about "Toronto's hot dog hegemony."

Yes, we spent too much time talking about it. One group member i though was going to lose it because we have an incredible amount of work left to do on our group paper and this article really doesn't look like it's going to contribute anything to our thesis. Still, it was an interesting read - light, accessible, current, and personal - 3 of us have lived in Toronto.

I said it was another part of white privilege - being able to get food you're familiar with wherever you go (not that I'd eat a hotdog mind you). I see Johnston's point - people in power decide the laws. They can claim they're for your own health and safety, but honestly they can say whatever they want. That's the thing about power. (I think the rest is something like absolute and corruption but that's another tangent. Must keep this blog on track or I'll never get the rest of my work done.)

Some group members tried to say that "all that ethnic food" is difficult to prepare, maintain safe temperatures, etc etc - basically saying that yes, the bylaw that makes only hotdogs available is a good one. I remember back in about 1990, living in Toronto, there were a couple of corn on the cob vendors. I never had any (too poor for such extravagance) but I always thought they looked like sunshine - bright yellow kernels, leaves pulled back and spread wide wide for effect. The barbecue steam was wonderful too. I was so hungry in those days. . .

I'm going to Toronto in a few weeks and I wonder what I'll see - I'm sure I'll see all manner of processed meat things, maybe a couple of veggie dogs. Pop. and Water. What would I like to see? Mmmmm if I could get some dahl in a pita I'd buy it. Same goes for hummus. Majadara? How about an apple, washed and ready to bite into?

I think there *is* a race issue involved. And I wish we would have had more time and maybe a class discussion on topics like this. Because the group really needed to let go of this for sake of the project I really don't feel like I really heard the other opinions or evidence to support their arguments and I don' t really feel that I got mine out clearly.