Literacy workers are, I think, frequently caught in the bind of wanting to justify the importance of funding for literacy programming and so inflating the promise of literacy, although workers know that for real change to happen literacy is not enough; much more needs to change in many women's lives. Literacy workers do not want to destroy learners' dreams and hopes, but if women are to gain real power through literacy we must offer programmes which assist learners in understanding society rather than offering false promises that if they improve their literacy skills their lives will be transformed.

_____________________________________________________________________

For you to do:

Here are two more examples of the 'promise of literacy' for you to consider.

Look at the Coors advertisement below, which was issued in 1995. What strikes you about this presentation of the value of literacy?

*1995 COORS AD

Secondly, if you saw the movie 'Stanley and Iris', starring Robert de Niro and Jane Fonda, think about its theme. (If you have not seen it, when you have time rent the video, which should be easily available, and watch it, looking especially at its message about literacy.) In the movie Iris is literate and works in a factory. When she teaches Stanley to read (which she is able to do remarkably quickly using the Laubach approach), he can succeed as an inventor. Literate, he can now take her away from the factory to a new life. Think about what the film tells you about the different possibilities for men and women when they are literate.

Comments

The latest Coors ad is a perfect example of the promise of literacy and the insignificance of all the other taken-for-granted factors in a woman's life which limit what she can be and do. 'Nothing imprisons a woman more than a lack of basic literacy and skills.' What about men's violence, or the lack of childcare, or the lack of access to transportation, or poverty? Will illiteracy allow women to 'ultimately, set themselves free?' or will women simply feel more to blame because, if they worked harder, they would have better reading skills and get a job? Low wages, high unemployment and the gendered labour market don't enter into the picture. Then of course questions of race and class are left out of the picture too. Which women, after all, fought for and won for themselves the vote 75 years ago in the United States?

'Stanley and Iris' seems to me to be a rather vivid account of the way in which women's lives are seen as dependent on men. Iris is the helper who enables Stanley to reach his 'true' potential. When Stanley succeeds then Iris doesn't need to work _ what more need she seek? So many stereotypical assumptions are here about men's and women's roles! Literacy changes your life, but only if you are a man!

_____________________________________________________________________