Re:"Unbase" CoHousing | <– Date –> <– Thread –> |
From: Joani Blank (jeblank![]() |
|
Date: Wed, 18 Oct 1995 02:48:12 -0500 |
I'm entirely with you, Dan! Problem for me is with the word "base"--it's so, well, base. I think there's a lot of room for wonderful, challenging, and lively diversity in the simplist, or most traditional, or most Danish-like, even if it's made up of mainstream types (do we really mean "boring?"), who would be living in middle class isolationist suburbs, but for the off chance that they got a whiff of cohousing at just the right (read new-home-seeking) time in their lives. Sure, we are likely to broaden the attractiveness of cohousing to the largest numbers of people if we reach out to mainstreamers. But this is not a reason think that specialty cohousing cannnot develop side by side with the mainstream kind (and you didn't say that.) It's just that it's problematic when the only co-housing group available within 200 miles of where I want to live specializes in people that are not-me. Joani Blank Doyle St. CoHousing and Old Oakland CoHousing p.s. One kind of diversity I hope that most communities ALWAYS maintain is age diversity. Could it be cause I'm getting up in years, and because I never want to live away from babies and toddlers?
- (no other messages in thread)
Results generated by Tiger Technologies Web hosting using MHonArc.