Feminist Spirituality

PART 2 OF 3

Thanks to all who have suggested readings and ideas!  What a beautiful
treasure trove you all are.  I wanted to address Judith Laura's comment:

"But I think to say that the initial change must be within oneself is
similar to saying that the persecuted must change, rather than the 
persecution must change (stop!).  IOW, before the we can change 
within, the outside socio-political base for religion needs to be 
dealt with. Exposing this socio-political base is, imo, an appropriate 
approach for women's studies courses."

Of course exposing the socio-political base is the point of women's studies. 
Yet surely when we are looking at people who have been wounded--not only by
religion but institutions including the family--it's not sufficient to say
"let's apply pressure to those institutions and somehow that will address your
pain."  It reminds me of a post a few weeks ago about where to draw the line
with students who "spill" their stuff to us in Gender Studies classes.  It seems
to me that recommending counseling, which I surely do and have done, is only one
recourse.  What else can we share with them to help them find their path? 
That's the spirit in which I am approaching this new class. 

How can feminism change the self, in other words.  What do we get out of it as
"practitioners," if you will, besides rocks to throw at monuments to sexism?  If
the personal is political, and I believe that it is, than how is my personal
reorganized by my political?  If feminism doesn't provide a pathway to healing
the self as well as addressing structural inequity, well, what's to attract the
new generation?

dyb

Diana York Blaine, Ph.D.
Senior Lecturer
The Writing Program and Gender Studies
University of Southern California
dblaine AT usc.edu
http://www.dianablaine.com

"Serving the Moon Goddess since 1961"

I would like to bring to your attention a new website, which is interfaith in
nature: Womens Bible Legends which can be found at www.womensbiblelegends.com.
Some of the concerns about feminist spirituality which have been adressed on
this list are discussed there as well. I happen to be an advisor to this
website, and one of its goals is to have Christian and Jewish women relate to
the gospels/Book of Genesis on a personal level by writing or retelling
biblical stories. It is not a religious list and the people involved are
mostly well known academics in their respective fields. Naomi

Naomi Graetz
Ben Gurion University of the Negev
graetz AT bgu.ac.il
-----------------------------------
Author of 
The Rabbi's Wife Plays at Murder (Shiluv Press, 2004) 
Orders: graetz AT bgu.ac.il
Unlocking the Garden: A Feminist Jewish Look at the Bible, Midrash and God (Gorgias Press, 2005)
Online orders: www.gorgiaspress.com
S/He Created Them: Feminist Retellings of Biblical Tales (Gorgias Press, 2003)
Online orders: www.gorgiaspress.com
Silence is Deadly:Judaism Confronts Wifebeating (Jason Aronson, 1998) 
Online Orders   http://www.rowmanlittlefield.com/

Dear Colleagues,

Diane's statement below generated a passionate response from me.

Quoting Diana Blaine <dblaine AT USC.EDU>:

> How can feminism change the self, in other words.  What do we get out of it
> as "practitioners," if you will, besides rocks to throw at monuments to
> sexism?  If the personal is political, and I believe that it is, than how is
> my personal reorganized by my political?  If feminism doesn't provide a
> pathway to healing the self as well as addressing structural inequity, well,
> what's to attract the new generation?

Spiritual practitioners can be activists: activist mysticism, activist prophecy.
Spirituality can be practiced by oneself and in community--chanting, praying;
speaking in private and in public, writing and publishing from a position that
promotes love, justice, and joy. And, very importantly, not simply talking the
talk but walking the walk, in other words, being a spiritual activist in every
moment of one's life. This requires a soul-and-mind-inseparable-from-body
consciousness: it extends beyond intellectual concepts, beyond any kind of body
work, any regular attendance at a temple, church, or mosque.
Soul-and-mind-inseparable-from-body is a term that I use throughout my writing,
which is spiritual, intellectual, erotic, and very much of and from the body.

My understanding of religion is that it often devolves into doctrine, even
dogma, and that people in a religious community can end up letting words pass
over them lightly, like a lovely breeze that quickly passes by, or go in one
ear and out the other.

Gandhi and King were activist prophets. Practicing what they preached. The
theologian Matthew Fox notes that feminism is a prophetic movement and names
Adrienne Rich, for example, as a prophet. (See his book Original Blessing.)
Wayne Teasdale, a lay monk, writes about the importance for society of being a
mystic in the world, which, for him, means being at once a social and a
spiritual activist. (See his book A Monk in the World.) The historian Karen
Armstrong writes about the divinity of human beings. (See her book Buddha.) To
be human is to be numinous. Sadly, religion, as an often stony social edifice,
separates the numinous from the human.

Healing the self sounds sentimental to intellectuals. As a spiritual activist, I
say, It's the only way to go. The world transforms because individuals do, and
I don't think that that's any more strange an idea and feeling than believing
that blood-shedding revolutions change the world. Healing the self is more
radical, as it operates in the roots of daily life--in the family, on the job,
in leisure hours. Healing as transformation takes faith, and faith is an act of
imagination. What if half the people on Earth were healing themselves,
soul-and-mind-inseparable-from-body? Imagine the effects. A foundation in that
kind of radical reality is one reason why feminist thinking and practice can be
so energizing and transformative, in one's home life, in the classroom, and in
public spheres, whether they are the books that we publish, the greetings that
we give people on a walk in our neighborhoods, or the language understood by
others in our bodies' gestures and alignments wherever we are on this planet.


Joanna Frueh
Professor of Practice
School of Art
Olive and Speedway
University of Arizona
Tucson, AZ 85721
www.joannafrueh.com

In a message dated 3/11/2008 10:51:51 PM Eastern Standard Time, 
dblaine@USC.EDU writes:

 Of course exposing the socio-political base is the point of women's
 studies.  Yet surely when we are looking at people who have been
 wounded--not only by religion but institutions including the
 family--it's not sufficient to say "let's apply pressure to those
 institutions and somehow that will address your pain."

Above is part of your response to my post. Responding, I want to
clarify: My point was not that the ONLY appropriate action was to try
to change institutions and that no inner work is appropriate. Far from
it. My point was/is, that when it comes to religion/spirituality,
before attempting to change anything--within or without--we (and I'm
including students here) need to UNDERSTAND the underpinnings of those
institutions. I say this here because there is an attitude on the part
of some feminists and some involved in women's studies to think of
feminist spirituality as an "escape" from political investigation or
action. So when you or others advocate feminist spirituality as inner
work as a remedy for students' feeling overwhelmed by what needs to be
done, I want to caution that you don't skip steps that involve looking
at, for example, biblical texts that imo oppress women, attitudes and
"rules" in various religions that oppress women, and the history,
archeology, and anthropology showing the suppression of
personification, imaging, and worship/veneration of the divine as
female. In my experience, when women first learn about this
information, the response is often anger and disillusion (with
established religion). So , INITIALLY, venturing into feminist
spirituality, imo, cannot appropriately be viewed as a balm to
frustrations with what needs to be done in society to set things
right. Rather, it may add to the frustrations. However, it is also
very very true that after the anger, after the disillusion, learning
about what I have listed a few sentences ago can lead to a new,
deepening spirituality. For some this leads to Goddess, for others
this leads to liberating the religions they are already in.  This is
for most a deeply gratifying--and yes, healing--experience.  What I
want to discourage is jumping to this experience without first dealing
with the feminist analyses of religion. This may provide momentary
relief, but if one doesn't understand WHY one is, for example,
honoring Goddess rather than the biblical male God, the relief is
brief, in fact, empty, and one is apt to soon wander into spiritual
paths that are just as oppressive as those left behind.

My feeling is that providing the scholarly background I described
above is appropriate for women's studies. My experience (in a
non-academic setting) with women who have been exposed to this
material is that they will themselves (or together with others in the
class) find their way to the inner spiritual work--or the group
spiritual work, once they have absorbed the analytical, factual
material. I think that introductions to inner or group work is
appropriate to include in your classes (assuming your institution has
no problem with it), but imo it preferably isn't the only aspect (or
certainly not the first approach) having to do with feminist
spirituality that is used in your courses.

Judith
http://www.judithlaura.com/

--- jfrueh AT UNR.NEVADA.EDU wrote:
Spiritual practitioners can be activists: activist
mysticism, activist prophecy.
Spirituality can be practiced by oneself and in
community--chanting, praying;
speaking in private and in public, writing and
publishing from a  position that
promotes love, justice, and joy. And, very
importantly, not simply talking the talk but walking
the walk, in other words, being a spiritual activist 
in every moment of one's life.<end quote>

Granted that  it is most common in our North American
society to view religion as belief or dogma, but  I
think it's important to note that  the Christian
perspective on religion is not the only one. 
Spirituality in many religions is actually about what
you *do* not what you *believe*. Words and dogmas thus
may exist but are secondary to what you actually get
off your butt and achieve.

 Speaking from my own perspective, which is Jewish,
traditional religious perspective may have certain
requirements of belief (like one can't believe that
God is a person, or embodied in any way, or more fewer
than one ), but they are fairly minimal, and
completely lag behind the obligation to perform God's
commandments, which include not only praying three
times a day, and refraining from labor on the sabbath
and shrimp, but also includes things like paying one's
workers on time and adequately, respecting one's
parents (and what that means is explained quite
explicitly), and putting up a railing on your roof so
that people can't fall off of it accidentally.
While certain other traditions (ahem) were wont to
scorn this as dry legalism, it does have the benefit
of meaning that spiritual practice does indeed require
one to go out and improve others'lot *as a spiritual
practice*. And in fact, that such "tedious details"
*are* the spiritual practice.

I am fairly certain, that this is also the case in
Islam and a number of other religious traditions,
although practitioners of those religions will have to
correct me if I am wrong.

Alana Suskin
alanamscat AT yahooth.com

Dear Alana,

Thank you for the particulars of walking the walk in the religion that you
practice. Indeed, it would be great to hear from other people with both the
same and other practices. I understand that speaking of practice in such a way
goes outside of WMST-L, but scholarship and our own lives do go together.

Joanna Frueh
Professor of Practice
School of Art
Olive and Speedway
University of Arizona
Tucson, AZ 85721
www.joannafrueh.com

So what exactly is spirituality? It seems to be more or less everything. It's
chanting, it's praying, it's speaking in private and in public, it's writing
and publishing from a position that promotes love, justice, and joy. What
exactly is it about all those activities that makes them spiritual? And what is
it that being spiritual makes them? Being a spiritual activist extends beyond
intellectual concepts, beyond any kind of body work, any regular attendance at
a temple, church, or mosque...so it's everything and at the same time it's
beyond everything. How does it manage that? And what, exactly, is it? What is
it for writing to be spiritual, intellectual, erotic, and very much of and from
the body?

What does it mean to be a mystic in the world, what does it mean to be at once
a social and a spiritual activist? In what sense are human beings divine? What
does it mean to be numinous? What does 'to be human is to be numinous' mean?

It all sounds very resonant and deep, but it seems to have no actual meaning at
all.

I can't help thinking that feminism needs rigor a lot more than it needs
hand-waving about spirituality. It's so easy to dismiss women if they get
identified with woolly empty pretty feel-good verbiage.
------------------------------
Ophelia Benson, Editor 
Butterflies and Wheels
www.butterfliesandwheels.com<http://www.butterfliesandwheels.com/>
------------------------------

  Hello, Ophelia and All,

  I've developed what I said in my post to WMST-L in my writing, in which what
  I've said briefly here on the list becomes defined, described, explained, and
  researched.

  Books include:
  Erotic Faculties (1996)
  Monster/Beauty: Building the Body of Love (2001)
  Swooning Beauty: A Memoir of Pleasure (2006)
  Clairvoyance (For Those In The Desert): Performance Pieces, 1979-2004 (2008)

  All best wishes,

  Joanna Frueh
  Professor of Practice
  School of Art
  Olive and Speedway
  University of Arizona
  Tucson, AZ 85721
  http://www.joannafrueh.com/

Hi Joanna,

So it's not possible to define spirituality briefly? It takes a book? But lots
of people seem to know what it means - at least, lots of people seem to use it
readily, indeed enthusiastically. Yet when I try to figure out from the
context what it is they're talking about, I can't. It seems to be just Nice
Stuff. But what kind of Nice Stuff, I can't figure out.
------------------------------
Ophelia Benson, Editor 
Butterflies and Wheels
www.butterfliesandwheels.com<http://www.butterfliesandwheels.com/>
------------------------------

This probably is a bit off the subject of spirituality, but I think any
course on women and religion should at least mention Mary Daly's work,
especially _The Church and the Second Sex_, and  _Beyond God the Father_.


Historically there are ties between the social gospel and the women's
suffrage movement -- Susan B. Anthony's motto was "resistance to tyranny is
obedience to God."

Heather Munro Prescott
Central Connecticut State University
prescott AT ccsu.edu

On Mar 12, 2008, at 8:08 PM, Ophelia Benson wrote:
>  But lots of people seem to know what it means - at least, lots of people
> seem to use it readily, indeed enthusiastically.
------------

I'm not sure this is true. I have given several professional development
opportunities for adult basic educators on the topic of embracing /
recognizing spirituality in their practice (teaching with whole person,
mind, body, spirit) and every single time, there's quite a struggle to
distinguish between spirituality and religion -- they are 2 very different
things in my mind -- often confused. I refer you to Exploring Spirituality
and Culture in Adult and Higher Education by Elizabeth Tisdell published by
Jossey Bass.

fyi - her background is in multicultural education and feminist pedagogy -
http://www.nl.edu/academics/cas/ace/etisdell.cfm

Mev Miller, Ed.D., Director
welearn AT litwomen.org

WE LEARN
Women Expanding: Literacy Education Action Resource Network
www.litwomen.org/welearn.html

182 Riverside Ave.
Cranston, RI 02910

Sure, but I meant just people replying on the list, not in general.

So religion and spirituality are two very different things in your mind, that
are often confused. Okay. I know what religion is; what is spirituality?

I have to say - from everything I've seen so far, it appears that no one knows
what it is. Certainly no one has said what it is. If it takes a *whole book* to
say what it is, maybe it's not a very useful term? Maybe it's just feel-good
fuzz? If a term is useful, it's generally possible to define it (in under
60,000 words). If a term can't be defined, can it really do anything other than
obfuscate?
------------------------------
Ophelia Benson, Editor 
Butterflies and Wheels
www.butterfliesandwheels.com<http://www.butterfliesandwheels.com/>
------------------------------

Consider using The Woman's Bible, a book that was written by a committee
of women organized by Elizabeth Cady Stanton. They comment on biblical
texts from "Genesis" to "Deuteronomy". A fascinating book. --Temma Berg

Temma Berg
Department of English
Gettysburg College
tberg AT gettysburg.edu

Ophelia questions the usefulness of the term spirituality, writing "I have
to say - from everything I've seen so far, it appears that no one knows what
it is. Certainly no one has said what it is. If it takes a *whole book* to
say what it is, maybe it's not a very useful term? Maybe it's just feel-good
fuzz? If a term is useful, it's generally possible to define it (in under
60,000 words). If a term can't be defined, can it really do anything other
than obfuscate?"

Maybe it depends. Maybe the term is useful for some people but not for
others.  (While for some, the term "spirituality" might obfuscate, for
others, the term might really resonate.)  I would suggest that part of
spirituality's definition is its slippery nature, its inability to be easily
pinned down and neatly defined.

AnaLouise Keating, Ph.D.
Professor of Women's Studies
Texas Woman's University
PO Box 425557
Denton, TX 76204-5557
akeating AT twu.edu or zami11 AT verizon.net

A society in crisis teaches itself to congeal into one story only, and sees
reality through very narrow glasses.  But there is never only one story.
Amos Oz

Ophelia --

I will take on your challenge and try.  Religion (pace those who say
that it's more about behavior in some traditions) is mainly about belief
in things unseen.  Personally I am an atheist and don't believe in any
religion.  But there is a dimension of life that is deeply symbolically
meaningful, emotionally moving and psychologically renewing and
restorative, and goes beyond everyday experience.  I am very much into
that dimension of life, and that is why I say I am "spiritual."  There
are values and things in the world that I treat with reverence.  I do
shamanic journeying and have very vivid visions, even though I don't
think these visions come from anywhere but my own psyche.  This is the
kind of experience that people mean when they say "mystical" or
"transcendental."  I get deep emotional feelings of awe and wonder
during rituals of many types, if they strike a chord with me.  I've had
this experience in *many* different religious and cultural settings.
Some people are very open to transcendantal experience, and that is what
I mean by the term "spiritual."  Some people have an affinity for such
experience; others are left cold by it and are completely disinterested,
whether or not they are "religious" in the normal way we use that term.
I'm postulating that one can be 1) religious and "spiritual"; 2)
religious but not "spiritual"; 3) "spiritual" but not religious.  I'm
not, BTW, saying that being spiritual is better than not being so.  It
feels to me like something I don't really have control over.  It is what
it is.

I do not accept the idea either that spirituality is identical with
religion or that it is devoid of any specifiable meaning.  However, I do
expect some to think that what I have described -- reverence, mystic
experience, awe, wonder -- happen to everyone given the right
conditions.  That hasn't actually been my experience in life.  What I
have seen is that some people respond frequently in this way, and others
very rarely if at all.  Many of the latter think the former are flakes,
unless they gain the status of a Ghandi or King.  

I'd love to hear others' version of this.

  -- Gina 

 
Religion/Spirituality 
The "spiritual" is distinguished from the worldly, from  material reality,
and emphasizes personal experience. It is an  expression of an individual's
relationship with the sacred, what is  perceived as something bigger and beyond
what can be seen, but can be  sensed and felt. Spirituality is a world view,
beliefs about the nature of the  human person, nature, humans' relationship to
nature, and ideas about the social  and cosmic order. "Spirit" is what connects
humans with the sacred. It evokes a  sense of mystery and wonder through which
human beings try to comprehend their  existence and give meaning and purpose
to their lives. Therefore,  spirituality in practice, involves facilitating
connection and union with the  sacred. Spirituality also involves efforts to
attain a  particular inner state: of peace, heightened consciousness, or 
enlightenment. But this too is related to the desire to understand and 
experience the sacred, however it is conceived.

Religion, in contrast, is a system, a social institution, a specific set  of
beliefs and practices, usually associated with an organized group. Most 
people think of religion in terms of doctrine, dogma, obligations and rules, and
as organized and formalized. Spirituality may be found and  expressed through
an organized religion, but not necessarily. Those who describe  themselves as
"religious" often talk about "spirituality" as "faith." When  people say "I'm
spiritual, but not religious," they are usually expressing  dissatisfaction
with organized religion, are not practicing a  "religion," or intend to set
themselves apart from organized religion. They  do hold a belief in something
"bigger than themselves,"  but the religion they were brought up with does not
meet their spiritual needs, is seen as oppressive, or contradicts their own 
views of themselves, of the world, and of the sacred. Many neo-pagan  goddess
venerators offer this as an explanation for why they chose to leave  "religion"
behind and explore alternative "spiritual" paths--they see mainline  religions
as patriarchal, sexist, and oppressive to women.
 
Spirituality is subjective, expressive, and experiential, and so one's 
spiritual life can take many forms, such as becoming part of a more formal 
religious community, through daily prayer or meditation, performing  rituals for
BOTH self and social transformation, or simply by acting with  compassion and
reverence in daily life. The point is to connect with/experience  one's idea of
the sacred and to express one's relationship with the sacred. 
Religion is certainly hard to define and conventional definitions are too 
limiting or biased, so most scholars of religion identify a religion around 
themes/patterns. The best way to define the term is to do so in context. Ask the 
people who practice the spiritual/religious tradition under study how they 
define it. The root word, however, means "to reconnect." So a religion is a
more  formalized and structured means to express one's spirituality.
Expressions of Spirituality: 
"A definition of enlightenment" 
"Subjective life, interiors, experiential" 
"God realized"; "forms our inner core of our manifested physical  life" 
"Definition of true inner meaning"
 
P.S. I think we would do well to avoid referring to spirituality as  "feel
good" or "fuzz." Also, while it may be difficult to articulate, but I've  found
that most people can and do make the distinction between religion and 
spirituality with ease, which is interesting from both a social scientific and a 
feminist standpoint.

Denise
University of  Connecticut
_Rhapsody313 AT aol.com_ (mailto:Rhapsody313 AT aol.com) 

The trouble with the idea that "part of spirituality's definition is its
slippery nature, its inability to be easily pinned down and neatly defined" is
that Women's Studies is an academic discipline, isn't it? I can see reveling in
resonant difficult-to-define words in some settings and institutions, but in
universities, not so much. An inability or refusal to define terms is not
exactly an academic virtue. And just to put it in crudely tactical terms, it's
not a good idea to identify women and their studies with refusal of exactitude.

Gina's definition is helpful. I think it's interesting to note, though, that
the feelings she cites are completely compatible with atheism, materialism and
naturalism. To put it another way, I'm quite prone to feelings of awe and
wonder myself, but I don't have anything I would call a spirit, so I'm not sure
'spiritual' is the best word for those feelings I don't know what is the best
word though.

About referring to spirituality as "feel good" or "fuzz" - I referred to
'spirituality' as feel good and fuzz - the word and the use of the word, not
the thing itself (whatever the thing itself may be).

------------------------------
Ophelia Benson, Editor 
Butterflies and Wheels
www.butterfliesandwheels.com<http://www.butterfliesandwheels.com/>
------------------------------

Thank you to all contributions about bibliographies and spirituality, it
is useful all the time!
Please reply to me if you want to share challenges in syllabi about it.

ppedroza AT keene.edu

My ideas about the conversation:
Is it not a theoretical core of feminism to construct and deconstruct
language? 
It is a challenge not having "a proper definition"- so what?- what about
situated knowledge?
Is it not a core approach in feminist pedagogy to review the
construction and validation of knowledge?

There are colonialist perspectives which erased "spiritual practices"
and transformed them in institutions- well, I reclaim my Mexican legacy
where spirituality is totally integrated to life experiences (of course
each Mexican can accept it or not- I don't represents "Mexicans")
Despite of disagreement, I consider Chicana feminism reclaimed the right
to have spirituality as political activism, and yes- I declare Gloria
Anzaldua as my theoretical mother about it, and in fact we are not
considered "new age women", even more- we/Chicana theorists are ignored
by a lot of feminist perspectives.
Also, I am a spiritual practitioner who could name my life, thanks to
black feminist theory, and Native Americans and Jewish, and more and
more---(curiously WE are "the others" anyway...so much whiteness
anyway...), and finally I grew up under the power of the virgin of
Guadalupe!- yes the political virgin, with all her contradictions!!!!,
what more can I tell you...hybridism, heterogeneity, diversity,
poli-values.
I teach feminist spirituality, just to challenge academy, to challenge
patriarchal discourses, to challenge whiteness and colonialism, to
challenge the dualism body/mind-  since Descartes-jut to point
history/herstory, (not to reject Descartes) to challenge ways of
knowing, to challenge the right to create and transform knowledge, and
take in account diversity and experiences.
Religion and spirituality can be mechanisms of oppression just like many
others, to face how they are in male dominance, o cultural dominance is
a political historical fact each can embrace in her/his own way.
Until today we do kill others if they don't celebrate Christmas, do we?
Of course, I love this topic, it is what I teach...

The path continues...

Patricia Pedroza
Spanish & Women's Studies
Keene State College
ppedroza AT keene.edu

Responding to Regina's wonderful take on the "spiritual response to life" -
while, in the past I have considered myself "religious" - I was brought up
Reform Jewish and have since wandered into lots of different paths - I now
see myself as "spiritual" and not actively part of any institutionalized
religion, preferring to do my "contact" with the "numinous" (such contact
otherwise known as prayer, meditation, what have you) at home.  This isn't
that far from the Judaism of my mother's side of the family, especially the
women, who observed Sabbath and celebrated the holidays, like Pesach
(Passover) in the home.  But wonder and awe - yes, same as Regina - and joy
and sense of connectedness of  being  have led me into activism, just as
much as my more explicitly political beliefs do.  If this sounds "vague" so
be it - but it brings me joy to "be" with others in that struggle (yeah,
"life is with people" for many of us who are Jewish, to cop a book title).
Others would simply call this "fellowship" (if they are religious) or chalk
it up to "sisterhood" or community but some of my best, most "spiritual"
moments are "in-the-midst" where we acknowledge our joy and love as well as
pain, injustice, and oppression.  I remember sitting with Carter Heyward
(who was "illegally" ordained a priest of the Episcopal Church - one of the
"Eleven" - illegal because she was a woman and lesbian).  We sat on the
grass in Boston in 1985 and talked about anti-Semitism and the Church, and
feminism, at the same time bringing each other the gift of our selves in the
world, which we struggle to make a "better" place.  In all this is something
called "spirituality" as I see it, which is not always only about individual
perception or search for connection with the  "divine." As Carter said, it's
also about "Presente!" - see Mudflower Collective book.

Barbara Scott Winkler, Director of Women's Studies, 
Southern Oregon University, on sabbatical 2007-2008 
winklerb AT sou.edu or winklerb AT charter.edu