> I completely applaud Piercy's attempts to portray a society that gives
> equal opportunities to everybody, but I think that some of the strategies
> she depicts for achieving this are questionable. And I really think you
> need to think again about your statement - Equality in the social sense has
> never meant erasing difference -. Never is a long time - what is the
> history of the discourse of equality?
Right then, I'll amend that. Social equality -should- never mean
erasing differences. It's probably less objectionable when explicitly
phrased as an opinion, which is was meant to be. And I do stand by
it--I'm not familiar with the entire history of the theoretical
discourse on social equality, but I do know that the practical
struggle for social equality (at least in the US, apologies for my
limited reference frame) has historically been about equality of
opportunity, not about forcing sameness. Or maybe I only see it that
way because that's the only kind of fight for equality that I could
respect.
-- Susan
susan@apocalypse.org
----------------------------------------------------------------------
"To me, words like "homophobic," "sexist" and "patriarchical" are just
that - meaningless crap invented by the Thought Police."
"I really wish I lived in your world, John."
"no you don't, because then it would be just you and him, 24/7."
-- John Appelbaum, Ny Martin, julia starkey
This archive was generated by hypermail 2b29 : Thu May 25 2000 - 19:06:29 PDT