Cohousing-L Mailing List: Re: Spirituality, Consent, and Cohousing

[Dave Crawford (davec]

Stuart Staniford-Chen (stanifor [at] cs.ucdavis.edu) wrote on October 17, 1995

>> Ouch.... [then Stuart explained his feelings about the conference closing
are complex, and expresses support for the organizers of the conference.] << 

Dave Crawford, here. 

Stuart, I'm very sorry my post lead you respond starting with "Ouch."  I
share your concern that the important, good work the conference organizers
should be recognized as such.  Guess I used examples from reports of the
conference closing too much, in making a point about group pressure
distorting consensus.  

On spirituality, my thinking and feeling is also complex, and not fully
represented in my post.  I focused on the negative (saying, don't do
spirituailty without consent) because I saw so many responses on the subject
that ignored that important issue.  And I concur that consensus on a closing
ritual would be harder at the conference.  Still, I'd like everyone to try.  

My intent is _not_ to suppress spiritual expressiveness, but to be sure it
happens when it fits the people present and fits the moment.  Both community
and spiritual expressiveness will benefit, I believe, if a ritual is
spontaneous, rather than being a thing "we do" at closings, etc..  Sorry the
conference closing (which I'm certain I would have enjoyed too) got hit hard
in my post.  

Below is the post I sent to members of our group, to preface my argument
that our spiritually expressions flow from open spirits, not just from the
"wave of group pressure" that's inherent at meeting closings, etc..  

As I reread it now, I'm more than ever struck with how yin-yan tricky but
rewarding it is, trying to move anything ahead within a consensus process. 
And It's most fun, I'm convinced, if equal energy is spent eliciting
opposing points of view.  

---- Strange but wonderful days, to all; ----
------ Dave Crawford  October 17, 1995 ------

----------------       ---------------  -------------
[The following went to members in my own cohousing group Oct 17, 1995.]

I sent to cohousing-L (the Internet discussion forum) a long post that I
believe is thoghtful and hope is helpful.  But now I'm concerned you and
others in our group might read it as too highly critical of the
spiritual/ritual practices that have occurred in our group.  (Especially as I
used the "Stepford cohousing group" pseudonym following John Hunter's
precedent.)  

I'm not highly critical.  Just think we need to refresh our awareness of
potential group pressure for initiating "spiritual-type" rituals at closings,
etc.; I don't see any big problem.  

In my final editing, as I now regret, I cut a sentence about how I expected
our group would talk briefly about being very careful of having rituals
coming at us on a "wave of group pressure", and we'd easily work it out.  I
remember we have already reached a policy decision on spiritual activities
which I consider adequate. 

I do think we should, on "rituals" and probably just in general, review
what's "consensus" and what's really just going along.  I'll propose that an
upcoming general Memebership meeting mignt adopt the following: 

When proposing activities that smack of spiritualism or ritualism, we'll all
be very careful that each person can be heard.  Each person will pledge to
not suppress questions (or derision, if that comes up) due to fear of group
pressure.  

I think there is a necessary discipline to keeping spiritual expressions
sincere.  I think that means spontaneous, versus mechanical, ritualism.  And
this discipline need not block but should improve both playful
experimentation with ritual and serious expression of celebration, anxieties,
whatever.  

My hope: paying attention to _carefully_ seek true, un-pressured consent for
rituals will let each person look inward, to see what this moment together
means --silly or profound as it happens.  If everyone feels free to express
that meaning, I believe it will enrich us all.

So suppression of "spiritual expressiveness" isn't my point at all.  I
appreciate each proponent's enthusiasm and generally enjoy our
"pan-traditional ritualist" activities.  I just want to make sure that we
(myself included) aren't creating a "wave of group pressure" pushing
activities that some members may like a little less of.  Also I bet we'd all
like to be sure we aren't starting to take ourselves too damn seriously. 

--- Dave ---