 |
 |
hi I think there is a need to contextulaise both Mairian and Sarah's points.Identity politics does face a danger of accumulating a collection of oppressed identities which in turn give rise to a hierarchy of oppression. However such scaling can be divisive and immobilizing.The danger vested in such identity politics is that both difference and identity get organised into hierarchies. The right to speak therefore, becomes a matter of collecting oppression indicators. If one can establish the authenticity of one's victimisation, one will have both moral and political rights.While I appreciate the anxieties in fighting politically as a collective identity, I know that for continuous and inevitable fragmentation of identities will makes the task even more difficult in a country like mine, where as it is there are far too many marginalised categories fighting for social justice and equality. Therefore the significant question is whether one can speak about differences without drowning in a tide of hierarrchies of oppression/impairments/disabilities One way in which we might make some progress is by analysing the voices. Who is speaking for whom? I know this stance assumes that each individual should speak for the category of difference that they are seen to represent within the community, which again is fraught with difficulties. I do look forward to some direction on this very significant issue. ________________End of message______________________ Archives and tools for the Disability-Research Discussion List are now located at: www.jiscmail.ac.uk/lists/disability-research.html You can JOIN or LEAVE the list from this web page.