Cohousing-L Mailing List: Re: Cohousing exclusiveness

[Paul Barton-Davis (pbd]

Jim writes:

>In my experience, the only real commonalties among people in cohousing
>are the following; an interest in living in cohousing, financially able
>to participate (unfortunately true in the pioneer stage), and have
>perseverance and determination (also necessary to live in cohousing). 
>In my community, there is in fact quite a diversity in religion,
>lifestyle, age, income, and philosophical views. So even the particular
>reasons for people being in the cohousing varies.  Much more diverse, I
>believe, than the suburbs where most people live, since people living
>there had a wide choice in selecting the neighborhood that matches their
>income level and other criteria.

Jim, why do you not consider the list you gave:

        1) an interest in living in cohousing
        2) financially able to participate
        3) perseverance
        4) determination

to be a fairly narrow "net" ?

If I trawled through all the people I've ever met, from kindergarten
through various jobs and neighbours, I'd bet no more than a couple of
percent of them would match these criteria. By contrast, an
overwhelming majority of them would fit the requirements required to
live in most suburbs, and most cities for that matter.

I agree absolutely that because of the breadth of choice when it comes
to selecting suburbs or other conventional neighbourhoods, many of
those places become quite narrow and somewhat exclusive (I live in
just such a place right now). However, just because some communities
have become quite "exclusive" according to some (good/bad/indifferent)
criteria (e.g. color of skin, income level, attachment to grass-only
yards, etc.) doesn't mean communities that don't "exclude" on those
criteria aren't exclusive on other grounds. The fact that a bunch of
internet-connected folk on a email list find common ground with the
above list doesn't mean it isn't a fairly fine filter on the
population as a whole.

--p