From: goid@zooid.guild.org (Will Steeves)
Newsgroups: soc.feminism
Subject: Feminist Identity De (1)
Date: 23 Jul 92 17:11:42 GMT
Organization: The Zoo of Ids

sandoval@unlinfo.unl.edu (steve sandoval) writes...
(discusses the theory of feminist identity development...)
SS> --To the women of soc.feminism:  do you agree with their
SS> stage theory of feminist identity development?

Well, even though your wording seems to exclude replies by men, you
are destined to get more responses from other men.

As for my opinion about the theory ...I do not agree with it because
it seems much too contrived and seeks to place people into
"ideological boxes" into which a person is supposedly to be
identified.

Not only that, but the theory seems to indicate that a woman will
improve herself, once she becomes a feminist, a statement which I
HARDLY consider scientific, but which I in fact consider QUITE biased.

SS> --To the pro-feminist men of soc. feminism:  Have you gone
SS> through a similar developmental phase in your development?

Well again, although you are excluding the opinion of men who are not
pro-feminist, you shall get an Equalist's opinion, anyway...

Before answering the question of "what stage" someone is at, I would
like to ask why this theory ONLY includes feminists?  Indeed,
Masculinists and Equalists will conceivably have gained some
revelation as well, or is that impossible because the WHOLE theory is
based upon the "revelation" being that of realising the "patriatchal
dominance of society," and that lot...

At any rate, while I did "accept" society as it was for most of my
early life, during university, and especially during my tenure at SAC,
I came across multitudes of slightly-less-than-moderate to downright
extreme and radical feminists who preached of the moral superiority of
women, the moral inferiority of men, the "need" for discriminatory
programmes to combat discrimination (they didn't use such words,
obviously...) and on and on.

At that point, to use the terms of the theory (although as I said, I
do not agree with it because of its exclusivity and its oversimplified
nature), I was beginning my "revelation".

But at that time, I was not an activist at all... The event that
sparked it, was the loss of my child (I may consider it in these
terms, but I am NOT attempting to say that abortion should or should
not be "a right" ; I am just stating the fact of what happened to me,
and my feelings regarding it) and the subsequent desertion of me by
the "mother" many months later, when it was obvious that I had not yet
gotten over it.

At any rate, although the theory is presently quite lacking, it CAN be
improved, and part of that improvement should include not being so
exclusive about the nature of "revelation" (it is NOT always a
feminist revelation) and not attempting to declare that feminist
activism will necessarily result in a woman's positive character
development.  (That DOES seem rather in the line of propaganda, IMHO)

---
Will Steeves, goid@zooid.guild.org                        "Neil Hull is GOiD"
ZOOiD BBS, Toronto, Ontario - The Zoo Of Ids
(416) 322-7876
---
 * SLMR 2.1a * Macauley Culkin is the Antichrist.

--
Post articles to soc.feminism, or send email to feminism@ncar.ucar.edu.
Questions and comments may be sent to feminism-request@ncar.ucar.edu.  This
news group is moderated by several people, so please use the mail aliases. Your
article should be posted within several days.  Rejections notified by email.