Notes from the planning meeting for The Scholar and the Feminist conference, June 3rd, 1992, page 2

Download: Transcript

Pages: 1 2 3 4 5 View All

Show transcript

          3. Discussion of Topic, and "Audience"

Leslie suggested for discussion "The Women's Movement and its
Relation to the State." Judith Russell said that the focus on government is a
good idea, for it looks to the future rather than the past, but it may be better to
look at things in a broader perspective. It may be more important to address
the public's attitudes regarding "women's issues." Judith expressed some
concern over the fact that the definition of today's movement is unclear. In
order to talk about the way anything is related to the Women's Movement, we
must first define it. Rachel Rosenbloom emphasized the point that we should be
talking about many different "women's movements," and not one "Movement"
to address the needs and concerns of many women.

Lynn Chancer suggested that a focus on "women and the state", would
keep add theoretical interest.

Terry Rogers and Chris Grillo both felt that the question of the state's
importance in the lives of American women should be discussed, and asked if
the conference should have a national or a comparative focus. Chris Grillo
suggested workshops on what women want in America, and elsewhere. Terry
Rogers noted that the Roper Organization's On-Line Data base contains a lot of
information. Bob Shapiro has access to this data base.

Rosalind Rosenberg said one question to discuss at the conference would
be: Do women politicians really make a difference, or are they like all of the
others? Leslie noted the Center for American Women in Politics has done
studies that indicate that women who are conservative Republicans are more
liberal on social issues than men who are conservative Republicans, and so on
across all ideological fronts. We could draw on the Center for the American
Woman in Politics for speakers.

Liz Schneider asked who the audience for the conference usually was,
and whether, given the decline in attendance, we should reach for a broader
audience. The conference, she said, has seemed to be academically aimed. is
there a desire to do something different? To find a link between theory and
practice? is choosing a theoretical topic (such as women and the state) such a
goodidea?  

Leslie said that her own preference was for a conference with more of a
"how to" component: how do women get power, and how should they use it?

Lynn Chancer agreed that this was important, but didn't think theoretical
questions were contrary to pursuing such questions: they're not dichotomous.

Valerie Green cautioned that we should not think in terms of only two
sets of participants- academics and politicians- but also of activists. This would
allow a younger generation of women to participate, and also be more
attractive to students. Rachel Rosenbloom emphasized the importance of
diversity in the planning process, Leslie agreed and asked that committee
members invite other people to participate.

Vivian Taylor prefers the idea of "Women and State" rather than Women
and Politics, as it is more inclusive of different groups of people. Perhaps we
can address activism with an academic perspective, for the activists are the