Cohousing-L Mailing List: RE: fifty plus cohousing

[TR Ruddick (truddick]

When I read these comments I am struck by what seems to be an implicit
assumption:
> Message: 3
> Date: Tue, 18 Feb 2003 13:55:04 -0500
> To: cohousing-l [at] cohousing.org
> From: "Sara A." <mabonwy [at] mindspring.com>
> Subject: Re: [C-L]_Fifty Plus Cohousing + ?
> Reply-To: cohousing-l [at] cohousing.org
> 
> At 07:17 AM 2/18/03 -0700, you wrote:
> >I would also say that for me, personally, there is something very
> >disturbing in the fact that people want to remove themselves from any
> >segment of the population, which seems to be a  growing movement in
> >American life.  For people to want to make sure that there are no old
> >people around would be just as disturbing.
> 
> My feelings exactly.
> 
> Sara

The assumption (or is it an assertion) is that everyone must live in close
proximity with all kinds of people, or else confess to having prejudicial
tendencies toward "removing a segment of the population" from their lives
as a whole.

I don't see any reason to make that assumption in all cases.  A person who
(using current example) doesn't want to live with children has not
necessarily removed that segment of the population entirely.  Children
might be a big part of that person's life--just not someone that the person
wants to live at close quarters constantly.

I don't believe it's defensible to bar people from cohousing for many
reasons, but children do imply a particular living environment that,
frankly, is irritating to some (not me, I have six--not all biological). 
Well, I would want my community to have a fair population of
children--others might not.  To me, diversity does not mean that we can't
choose our living environment in terms of noise, space allocation, safety
considerations, responsibility, and all the other burdens that children
bring.


_______________________________________________
Cohousing-L mailing list
Cohousing-L [at] cohousing.org  Unsubscribe  and other info:
http://www.cohousing.org/cohousing-L