Return-Path: <nifl-womenlit@literacy.nifl.gov> Received: from literacy (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by literacy.nifl.gov (8.10.2/8.10.2) with SMTP id j27FBuC19352; Mon, 7 Mar 2005 10:11:56 -0500 (EST) Date: Mon, 7 Mar 2005 10:11:56 -0500 (EST) Message-Id: <61064603.74945E68.0A349A3F@aol.com> Errors-To: listowner@nifl.gov Reply-To: nifl-womenlit@literacy.nifl.gov Originator: nifl-womenlit@literacy.nifl.gov Sender: nifl-womenlit@literacy.nifl.gov Precedence: bulk From: AWilder106@aol.com To: Multiple recipients of list <nifl-womenlit@literacy.nifl.gov> Subject: [NIFL-WOMENLIT:3171] What we see is who we are X-Listprocessor-Version: 6.0c -- ListProcessor by Anastasios Kotsikonas Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit Content-Type: text/plain; charset=iso-8859-1 X-Mailer: Atlas Mailer 2.0 Status: O Content-Length: 991 Lines: 14 Friends-- At one point last evening I was standing with two friends on one side of a luggage carousel at an airport. We were watching a woman holding a baby adjust the baby's snowsuit, with the help of another women and a man. As my friends and I were walking to the car we commented on this group. One of my friends said "I think it was two Moms," My other freind agreed. I was so surprised! I said "I think it could be a mother, her husband and an aunt." My two friends are lesbian, I am heterosexual. This morning I am quite struck by that conversation. I am also remembering the phrase "meaning-making system" that is often used in research, without any explanation of just what that phrase is referring to. Glib. Except in off-the-cuff situations like the above, or in very deep psychoanalytic sessions, I think it is not really possible to know what another's "meaning making" system is. Or, perhaps, when discussing a book, under the rubric "critical theory." Andrea
This archive was generated by hypermail 2b30 : Mon Oct 31 2005 - 09:50:23 EST