Coming-of-Age Novels for Conservative Students

The following discussion of coming-of-age novels suitable for use with
conservative freshmen occurred on WMST-L in August 2000.  It gave
rise to debate about teaching gay/lesbian novels in such a course. 
For additional WMST-L files now available on the Web, see the
WMST-L File Collection.

Can anyone think of a farily recent coming-of-age novel like Girl
Interrupted or Bastard Out of Carolina that is more upbeat?  Should
appeal to fairly conservative freshmen women; female protagonist having
no same-sex relationships.  Preferably written by a woman but not
absolutely essential.  Could be a kind of genre-bending creative memoir
but not a straight autobiography.  Thanks!

Lisbeth Gant-Britton
Kalamazoo College
lbritton  @  kzoo.edu

The Girls' Guide to Hunting and Fishing
Melissa Bank
----------------------
Cyndi Bunn
Women's Studies at Duke University
Box 90760
Durham, NC  27708
phone 919.684.4052
fax 919.684.4652
cpbunn  @  duke.edu

Try Dharma Girl.  I think the author's name is Chelsea Chain (or something
like that).  It's about a young college graduate who goes back to Iowa to
find the commune where her war resistant parents raised her until she was
two or three.  A very good read.

Liz Gotthelf
blizzard71  @  hotmail.com

Lisbeth,
    Why is "no same-sex relationships" on your wish list?  Assuming you're
talking about sexual relationships (and not friendship among women), I'm
still wondering why you think first-year students wouldn't be able or
willing to read about this aspect of life.  After all, its much more common
than most people realize.

Glynis Carr
Bucknell University

>     Why is "no same-sex relationships" on your wish list? 

I believe Lisbeth mentioned that this was a class for conservative freshmen.
Teaching such a demographic myself, I know the species well enough to agree
with her. There are a few topics that turn these kids *cold* on a dime --
including abortion and homosexuality.   Whether or not G-L-B relationships
are common is beside the point. I took Lisbeth's post to mean that she's
trying to focus on one issue in particular, without bringing in lots of
other issues. And also that she's trying to introduce her students to some
feminist concepts without triggering their massive hostility.  It turns
their brains off like a lightswitch when you alienate them with "offensive"
material right away. She has a better chance of getting past their
resistance and getting them to start thinking in woman-friendlier terms if
she chooses materials that don't turn them off.  Besides, to these students,
it would only be received as a stereotype -- feminist is just another word
for lesbian. The vast majority of them, from what I've seen, hold this to be
true!

Lisbeth has a right to teach her class any way that she believes is
conducive to learning.  If that means not provoking them with multiple
hot-button issues at once, then I agree with her. And I'm hoping to hear
some suggestions to her question, because I might use them myself.

Ilana Nash
American Culture Studies
Bowling Green State University

>I took Lisbeth's post to mean that she's
>trying to focus on one issue in particular, without bringing in >lots of
>other issues.

I must say that I object to this very way of thinking in academia.  I
suppose, then, that race and class should not take the focus away from the
"issue" of being a female?  It makes no sense.  When will it become common
practice to not force people to choose which of their oppressions is most
important?  A black lesbian's "women's issues" are intrinsically tied in
with racial and sexual identity issues.  For that matter, so are a white
lesbian's, or a black straight woman's or a white straight woman's, etc.
The mechanisms of oppression that keep females from power are the same as
those that promote racism, homophobia, elitism, etc.

>She has a better chance of getting past their
>resistance and getting them to start thinking in >woman-friendlier terms if
>she chooses materials that don't turn them off.

But isn't the whole point of signing up for a women's studies class to
_learn_ what has been missing from one's other classes?  and in that case,
aren't students, even conservative ones, _expecting_ that what they formerly
held to be status quo will be challenged in many different ways?  Otherwise,
all women's studies classes would be a bunch of white, upper-middle class
females congratulating themselves on their enlightenment because they have
an orgasm, or a job, or a black friend.  Women's studies classes SHOULD be
uncomfortable, even for freshmen, even for conservatives, even for...you get
the picture, because oppression on ANY basis IS AN UNCOMFORTABLE TOPIC.

>Besides, to these students,
>it would only be received as a stereotype -- feminist is just >another word
>for lesbian. The vast majority of them, from what I've seen, >hold this to
>be true!

As well they should.  The only way to counteract the historical and
continued exclusionary tendencies in feminism is to bust the term wide open
- to begin accepting that "feminist" MEANS lesbian, straight, "masculine,"
"feminine," rich, poor, pro-choice, pro-life, black, white, asian, latina,
democrat, republican, mother, wife, lover, single person, religious,
atheist, etc. until what the term "feminist" comes to mean is "one who seeks
and finds her/his own ways to empower the many aspects that create and
mediate her/his status as a biological female, a self-identified woman, or a
male ally ."

JMHO
Jessica Matthews
juno.com

I agree with every single one of the ideals and philosophies Jessice wrote
about.  I do not, however, live in a world of ideals. I live in a world of
compromise, partiality, and constant negotiations.  Absolutely true that
discussing oppression is inherently uncomfortable; absolutely true that
"feminist" and "lesbian" are multivalent and broadly inclusive identities;
absolutely true that a woman's ethnicity and sexuality co-operate in her
identity-formation (as I well know from personal experience).  I spent
several semesters trying to enact my ideals in classrooms dominated by
*flagrantly* hostile, highly defensive, conservative freshmen.  Every one of
the ideals outlined by Jessica only further alienated the students; their
attitude was "to hell with this, I don't need to know this liberal crap."
SLAM went the doors into their minds, and they spent the semester glaring at
me from under their baseball caps, arms crossed, slouched in their seats in
a posture of disrespect.

Jessica asks, "But isn't the whole point of signing up for a women's studies
class to  _learn_ what has been missing from one's other classes?" In a
word: no.  That's the whole point of why WE teach women's studies classes;
it is not remotely the point for the majority of students who enroll in
these classes (on my campus anyway). Here, the university requires that
every student pass a class about cultural diversity. "Intro to Women's
Studies" fulfills that requirement. So lots of freshmen sign up because
"they have to," and it fits their schedule. Others sign up thinking that
it's going to be a nice, tidy little history class, where they get to hear
the same stories about Harriet Tubman that they did reports on in junior
high school.  Having their intelletual consciouses radically blown open is
in no way what they expect or want.  Nor are they prepared to receive it.

The level of education has an impact upon what is appropriate. Only when
students have achieved mastery of fundamental building blocks are they ready
to contemplate several issues in conjunction. The rudimentary foundations
must be built first -- "how to think kindly about feminism" and "how to
think kindly about homosexuality" are two separate lessons, and IMHO must be
taught accordingly to the very young, and the very conservative. Young
conservatives are already on their guard when they enter a
diversity-oriented class. They've heard all their authority figures
attacking Leftist concerns their whole lives long.  They show up ready for a
fight.  To force them to feel uncomfortable only provokes them to start
swinging punches (metaphorically).  What it boils down to, for me anyway, is
that I really want them to come away with something.  The more I offend
them, the less they come away with.  So I try to not overload them with too
many controversies _in the same assignment_.  In Lisbeth's case, she is
asking for a film suggestion. The object here is to get viewers to identify
with the protagonist, and thus learn to feel allegiance w/ her and to "root"
for her in the struggle against a patriarchal hegemony. This is already a
feminist agenda.  I would happy, as a teacher, if that result occurred.  But
if the protagonist belongs to a "sick, sinful group" (which is how the VAST
majority of my students view non-straight people) then the students will
rigidly refuse to even consider being sympathetic with her.

I think diversity-oriented teachers sometimes get swept away by their
visions and their goals, and forget the fine art of standing in their
students' intellectual shoes. Religious zealots carrying pamphlets scare
people away, whereas a better approach is to relate to the person you are
trying to win over, and work on _bridging_ their mentality with yours -- not
polarizing them further. Conservative freshmen are not, I think, the
appropriate audience for the full force of our agenda, all at once.

The broad vision extolled by Jessica is something I personally cannot
communicate to conservative freshmen.  That vision, which I share, is
composed of a highly intricate complex of related philosophies -- the
rudiments of NONE of which are known yet to my students. My only hope for
"success" is to train their intellects very gradually, so that each premise
is firmly established.  Linking comes later -- at the end of the semester,
or ideally, in a more advanced class. We cannot accomplish anything
grand-scale in a single brief semester.

This is especially true in a town like mine where "subtle" attacks against
gays happen every single day. In a community where the commonest bumper
stickers are anti-choice and anti-gay (like the utterly delightful specimen
I saw the other day: "How to get to Heaven: turn right, and go straight"),
freshmen are starting under a handicap of hatred for any kind of
"difference."   My only hope for expanding their minds is not to threaten
them with too much radicalism all at once. It only makes them more
intractable.  And the damage can be permanent.

Perhaps it's also a matter of pedagogical style. Some teachers are very good
at turning outrage and hostility into a lively, productive class discussion.
I do not have that gift, or that desire.  I prefer to foster an atmosphere
of harmony and moderation because that is what works best for me. Other
teachers of diversity to conservative freshmen might thrive in a more
confrontational atmosphere, and that is their prerogative. But the style I
am suggesting is entirely valid for some of us -- is, in fact, the only way
we can feel that we're accomplishing anything.

And back to the original intent of this thread: I entirely support Lisbeth's
right to search for a video that invokes only one apsect of our ideology/ies
at a time. Perhaps she, like I, has enough experience w/ conservative
freshmen to know how she can best succeed with them. Any strategy that works
for WS teachers, and helps them to realize their personal goals (no matter
how modest those goals may seem to some others) is worth supporting.

Ilana Nash

Ilana wrote:  "Conservative freshmen are not, I think, the
appropriate audience for the full force of our agenda, all at once."

Ilana, what is "our agenda?"  Is it something everyone in women's studies
shares, without having to spell it out?

Daphne

---------------------------------
daphne.patai  @  spanport.umass.edu

[Much of Ilana Nash's second message quoted here]

I just thought I'd pass along something I was reading eariler today re:
these bits of Ilana's post in the hope that some who aren't familiar with it
might find it interesting and useful.

"Confrontational Teaching and Rhetorical Practice," Virginia Anderson. The
citation on the copy I read was _CCC_ 48.2/May 1997

regards,
Robert Fanning
rfanning  @  wvu.edu

As someone who attended a conservative liberal arts school as an
undergraduate not far from Bowling Green many years ago I am quite
disappointed to see homophobia still so prevalent and so avoided and both
these subjects are worthy of more  discussion on this list as a
pedogalogical, moral and political issue.  As one of the few out students, no
people,  on my campus as an undergraduate I would have been very relieved if
any of the professors would have been brave enough to teach a course that
included  lesbian content as would the many other students who were too
afraid to come out. In addition, perhaps we should be affirming to students
and ourselves that the act of women loving women and a critique of
heteropatriarchy is  fundamental to a notion of sisterhood/feminism.

Elizabeth S. Dettmer
cositas1  @  aol.com

"The unconscious wants truth. It ceases to speak to those who want something
else more than truth."  Adrienne Rich

Having just read Ilana Nash's response to teaching about "homosexuality" on
her conservative campus after i have already sent a very "conservative"
response to this issue  I feel compelled to re-respond more forcefully. As I
have stated earlier I was one of those  out lesbian students  at one of these
conservative liberal art schools (in Richmond, Indiana) two decades ago. In
fact,  I was one of the only people not so intimidated to be out, student or
faculty, and I can not disagree  strongly enough with your position. It is to
students like myself who endured constant harassment ( and continue to do so
today on your campus)  but continued to fight for our visibility and others
that you owe  a moral and political obligation to present lesbian images and
authors many of who founded and fought for feminism. If it was not for my
continued efforts to fight for women's issues and my refusal to not
compromise my position/ideals  despite the  threats I had to endure there
would be no Women's Studies at this school today no thanks to the female and
(closeted) lesbian professors who were constantly telling me to not be so
radical and to those who catered to the feelings of these sheltered
conservative students.  To teach your class "according to the very young and
the very conservative" is not only to completely negate the reality of not
just Queer students and practically everyone else but is to negate your own
moral and political authority and the entire project of "Women's Studies."
I do not wish to teach students "how to think kindly about feminism" nor
"how to
think kindly about homosexuality" nor are they  two separate lessons but if
you wish to  approach these students carefully having a "real" gay person
talk about her/ his reality or showing the film "It's Elementary", a film
that shows how young children can be more open minded than adults on gay
issues, may be a good beginning. There is of course also the group Parents
and Friends of Gay People who talk to classes. Even a mainstream film
like Fried Green Tomatoes introduces some notion of women's
friendship which needs to be linked to lesbianism. There are many many
ways to reach/teach conservative students if people want to.  I do not
believe one has to sacrifice some issues and it is so often gay ones
(or racial or radical ones) to reach many of these students.  Don't
sell out those people out there who are looking to you to uphold those
ideals.

In Solidarity,

Elizabeth S. Dettmer J.D.
cositas1  @  aol.com

Not real recent, but Annie Dillard's An American Childhood meets the
criteria you're looking for.  She grew up in late 50s, early 60s, but there
are good, subtly wrought feminist themes that would probably work well with
conservative, white, middle to upper class women.  PLUS--it is beautifully
written.

Christy Rishoi, Ph.D.
Jackson Community College
christy_rishoi  @  jackson.cc.mi.us

No, Daphne, I was talking about the goal of getting students to learn that
feminism and homosexuality are not poisonous concepts.  As I said frequently
throughout my post.

Ilana

 ----- Original Message -----

 > Ilana, what is "our agenda?"  Is it something everyone in women's studies
> shares, without having to spell it out?

Elizabeth, I *do* teach courses with homosexual content.  My post clearly
said that.  It also said that I try not to combine lesbian content plus
another controversial issue in the same assignment at the beginning of the
semester.  I know many teachers here at BG who include homo- and bisexuality
in their classes on diversity.    I'd even go so far as to say that most of
us do.

Ilana
----- Original Message -----

>I would have been very relieved if
> any of the professors would have been brave enough to teach a course that
> included  lesbian content as would the many other students who were too
> afraid to come out.

> Elizabeth S. Dettmer

 Leaving behind the theory for a moment and returning to the practicality of
Lisbeth's request:  I recently saw the 1993 film _Just Another Girl on the
IRT_, and think it's a great portrait of an African-American girl in New
York, who is going through major changes in her last year of high school,
and of her interactions with boyfriends and girl friends.  It does have one
scene involving a birth that is very hard to watch, so is not entirely
upbeat, but mostly the film is very positive and winsome, and it has a
"happy ending."

The most appealing thing about the heroine is her self-confidence and her
love of herself.   It's not an unrealistic fairy tale about girl power,
though. Her limitations are illuminated as well, and what emerges is a
really well-drawn character study of a strong, positive young woman who is
actually more immature than she thinks she is.

Hope this suggestion helps.

Ilana

How about:

"How to Make an American Quilt" by Whitney Otto
                 List Price: $6.99
                 Mass Market Paperback (April 1992)
                     Ballantine Books; ISBN: 0345370805
                     Other Editions: Hardcover

It provides insight concerning the lives of the quiltmakers, depicting
the various problems they encountered with their husbands, etc.
And the underlying story is about a young woman grappling with the issue
of commitment to marriage.

Betty
_________________________________________________________
Betty Glass, Humanities Bibliographer
Getchell Library/322
1664 N. Virginia St.
University of Nevada, Reno
Reno, NV  89557-0044

email: glass  @  unr.edu

office: (775) 784-6500  ext. 303
   FAX: (775) 784-1751

> On Thu, 10 Aug 2000 16:10:41 -0400 Lisbeth Gant-Britton <lbritton  @  KZOO.EDU>
>  wrote:
>
> > Can anyone think of a farily recent coming-of-age novel like Girl
> > Interrupted or Bastard Out of Carolina that is more upbeat? 

Lisa Dettmer's comment about being the only out person in her
undergraduate classes, etc., especially her disappointment about the
homophobia evident in many women's studies classes, was my point in
raising the question I did last week. I'm reminded of an excellent
article, written long ago by (I think) Barbara Hillyer, entitled
"Teaching the Feminist Minority." I think it is *crucial* that we also
teach to this minority group, not only or even primarily catering to
the more conservative students who are so numerous today.  A critical
question would be:  are we creating classrooms where students holding
a wide variety of beliefs are both comfortable and challenged
intellectually to grow.....