On conflict

Mon Apr 25 08:10:48 PDT 2005

        I am assuming Masud that this note was not just intended for Raffi but for the list, so I will respond.  I think that when one starts a thread thought with  "I don't understand women", the statement begs for you to open to understanding.  There are many things that I feel lack understanding in your note.  First that you assume it is women that you don't understand when it is Therese that you are having the communication with.  If it is as you state a more global issue, your ability to communicate and understand women, then I think it would be helpful for you to look for clarification on this with women.  Your note to Raffi felt like it had a conspiritorial tone to it.  Are you trying to bond over your inability to understand women or bond over how difficult it is to undrstand women or over how difficult women are?  I have seen in some of the communications around this thread that some appear to like to stir up the pot a bit and see what brews.  I suppose that and a gizillion other things may be in play.
        I will say that the statement " People who do not acknowledge conflict are living in denial...end of statement."  is at best judgemental and a dismissal.  If Therese says she is not experiencing this as a conflict she is not.  I can only assume the conflict is within you.  My perception of Therese's note was that she was drawing a non-negotiable boundary.  In my experience people who draw boundaries with that conviction do not feel conflict about them.
        There are some less reactionary threads that can be talked about here.  How men and women internatlize oppression is one but that can be expanded to include how people internalize oppression.   I think this ties in with the Armenian Genocide discussion that was weaving its way through this.  I live in a town surrounded by three Native American reservations.  I see everyday the breakdown of communication between people who have been oppressed and the community who is forced to carry the identity of the oppressor.  My experience is that I can only listen and recieve information from Native people.  There is no discussion to be had.  I see my job as being a receptacle for grief.  I don't do anything with the grief but receive it and perhaps reflect the grief.  I can't deny the experience or the perceptions of the experience.  I can only acknowledge the grief I can see that it caused and what was lost.  I don't conspire with the grieved to identify a bad guy.  In the Native / non-Native scenario I am identified because of race as the oppressor.  I don't not have to accept that identity and I don't let the assignment of that identity get in the way of my ability to aid in the processing of grief.  I may not be able to develop and grow a deep relationship with the person because I need to be visible and that requires people to be present with me in the moment.  That is my personal requirement for intimate relationships. So I often don't get to have a friendship but friendship is not required to process grief.
        Ralph offered a limmerick with a warning that some might find it offensive.  When Therese responded he apoligized and  moved on.  He provided a receptacle for the grief.  He listened, that is all it takes.  He doesn't have to agree with Therese's take on it to apologize.  He doesn't have to understand her particular set of experiences that lead her to her take.  She has a take and he ackowledged that her take has as much validity as any take by apologizing.
        I worked as a union carpenter back in the 1970's.  It was a time when there were few women out there and typically only one women on a crew of men.  It is difficult in that situation to not feel like you are being harrassed.  I had no experience being inside of men's culture that way and everything felt like I was being hazed and that they were trying to get me to quit.  One day I was going to leave at the end of the work day.  I went to grab my tool box that weighed 60-75 lbs.  You grab that kind of weight with quite a bit of force.  Anyway when I grabed it and pulled it towards me I nearly pulled my arm out of the socket as my co-workers had nailed it to the deck.  Needless to say I was pissed and my shoulder was really hurting.  I walked off that job and never went back.  I had had it and actually felt that I was in danger.  There is a lot that can go wrong on a construction site and I did not feel like anyone had my back.
        I held on to my interpretation of the truth for many years.  Then one day I was watching a bunch of boys playing, one was my son, and I realized that what those men were doing was a kind of inititiation rite. They were just being guys. I feel pretty sure that every man on the crew had gone through some kind of similar initiation experience. If I had stayed and laughed I would have gotten to be one of the guys.  Knowing what I know now of the experience I realized that the best thing for me to do was to leave.  I was never going to be comfortable with being a guy.  I don't have to understand guys or to judge them.  I just have to know that being a guy is not a good fit for me.  I am at my best when I work in a climate that allows for  womens' culture to just florish.  I was never going to be my best in mens' culture, even though I think those men would have eventually accommodated how I needed things to be different.
        So Masud, I quess my intention in this communication to you is know yourself.  Know yourself and know when and what allows you to be your best self.  You can use that in situations that are difficult for you and that you find difficult to understand or foreign to your experience.  It is all about you.  It is all about your perceptual box and the tools in it that you have to work with.  It is all about you being the agent of change you want to see in the world.  It is about you understanding how you can interpret your experiences so you find yourself on the path you need to be.
pat black
Date:    Sun, 24 Apr 2005 16:22:45 -0600
From:    Masud Sheikh <masheikh at COGECO.CA>
Subject: To Raffi: On Conflict (mainly)

WARNING: The poster of this note will use the law of two feet and walk
away immediately after posting this note. (And who can quibble with laws,
even if they are followed only in the letter, and not in the spirit?)
Anyone feeling angry would  only be in a one-sided conflict - it will feel
like tilting at windmills.

Raffi, Therese wrote:

>>Raffi, you refer to a 'somewhat heated conflict' between Masud and I.
>>I was not, not am I now, in conflict with Masud.
>
>

Do you understand women, Raffi? I don't. Yesterday, Therese wrote a long
note accusing me of many things, but still feels that there was no
conflict.

Now, a pontifical statement from me: Conflict is wonderful to ackowledge,
since it can allow deeper levels of understanding and communication to
emerge. People who do not acknowledge conflict are living in denial...end
of statement.
Masud

*
*
==========================================================
OSLIST at LISTSERV.BOISESTATE.EDU
------------------------------
To subscribe, unsubscribe, change your options,
view the archives of oslist at listserv.boisestate.edu:
http://listserv.boisestate.edu/archives/oslist.html

To learn about OpenSpaceEmailLists and OSLIST FAQs:
http://www.openspaceworld.org/oslist