|RE: Diversity, what diversity?||<– Date –> <– Thread –>|
|From: Rob Sandelin (Exchange) (RobsanExchange.MICROSOFT.com)|
|Date: Tue, 2 Jul 1996 17:12:56 -0500|
I find this whole thing very amusing for some reason. I met some folks from a mennonite church who bought a retirement complex, and are remodelling into what they call cohousing. It will have a commonhouse room, and they will share a garden and some other common elements, hold individual titles, etc. However, their little development is ONLY open to members of their specific church. The commonhouse will also serve as a place of religous study. When I mentioned the word religous, in the same paragraph as cohousing some folks go ballistic. This is amusing to me too. I also get great amusement from folks who are currently living in a cohousing development who claim loudly that "we aint no intentional community, were cohousers, as if cohousing was somehow unique or separate. As time goes on, the models of how we live together will increase. Some folks will choose their neighbors based on whatever criteria they find important. I have done some consulting work with a group of women who want to create a lesbian cohousing group....No men, not even boys, allowed. I also had a conversation with a very wealthy white male who was interested in a republican country club sort of cohousing. So, maybe someday, cohousing will come in more flavors than ice cream. I for one think that's great. Rob Original Message----- Sent: Tuesday, July 02, 1996 2:53 PM Subject: Re: Diversity, what diversity? At 04:15 PM 7/2/96 -0500, Tony G. Rocco wrote: >Greetings, cohousers: > >I just wanted to relay an interesting experience I had >last night talking to the hopeful founder of a new >cohousing community in San Francisco. (...) > >Here are some of the conditions being considered for >the cohousing community: > >* A committment to not having any children, ever. > Well...my first thought is, "here's an organization that won't outlive its founders". The second is perhaps a little less than complimentary, and has to do with removing certain traits from the gene pool. It "ain't my thang", and I'm not sure I have a whole helluva lot in common with people who are intolerantly "fundamentalist anything". Usually they haven't thought through *all* the consequences of their core premises, at one level or another. So I'll vote with my feet, and in spite of the fact it's in my area, not involve myself with them. One thing positive I have to say for them is that they're honest about their agendas. I don't agree with them, but I admire their honesty. I say let the market decide. If they can find enough militant, childless vegans with sufficient capital to buy housing in San Francisco, let 'em. Personally, I think they're taking "market segmentation" a bit too far to be successful. Just my $0.02, as always. Loren Loren Davidson loren [at] wombat.net http://www.batnet.com/beauty/ The First Amendment went too far. It should have said, "Congress shall make no law".
Diversity, what diversity? Tony G. Rocco, July 2 1996
- Re: Diversity, what diversity? Loren Davidson, July 2 1996
- RE: Diversity, what diversity? Rob Sandelin (Exchange), July 2 1996
- Re: Diversity, what diversity? Tony G. Rocco, July 2 1996
- Re: Diversity, what diversity? Jerry Callen, July 2 1996
- Re: Diversity, what diversity? Bob's Cohousing Mailbox, July 3 1996
- Re: Diversity, what diversity? Daniel Nachbar, July 3 1996
Results generated by Tiger Technologies Web hosting using MHonArc.