deviant ones
	    I wrote this poem after a chance conversation with  a Aboriginal faculty member Shauneen Pete, who later joined my committee. We were talking about the joys of spending time outside,  the difficulty of speaking of  the wisdom we received from the land through which we walk, and ways in which we received that wisdom. It seemed that, 
	    we are 
	    
	      deviant ones
	    
	      whispering to 
	        one another 
	        in chance 
	        mailroom meetings
	      
	    silenced voices 
	      in 
	      (socially constructed) 
	      rationalist 
	      hallways 
	    While the conversation provided an important, (albeit small)   "crack in consent"
	      (marino, 1997, p. 17) (yes, my subject position existed!), it also affirmed that this subjectivity* was neither welcomed nor sanctioned in our place of employment. We both needed  to continue whispering – it seemed.
	    At that time, neither of us felt  safe enough to  speak explicitly with our students and colleagues about the possibility of derived knowledge (although she did slide in a comment once in awhile that left  a student with quizzical looks). I left the conversation, wondering: 
	    
	      Would  
	      it have been 
 easier 
to write this piece 
if I had brown skin? 
	    Might I then, 
	      in some places at least, 
	      be able to speak freely? 
	    Part of the problem has been that for a white woman living in Saskatchewan and working in an education faculty, there is (not yet) any visibly accepted  cultural or academic tradition that openly encourages explicit dialogue and knowledge-making with the more-than-human  worlds of plants, animals and rocks etc..
 of plants, animals and rocks etc.. 
	    Now, having moved beyond my own shamanophobia (Harner, 1988; Wallis, 1999) and  fear that  my learning would be automatically accused to be an act of cultural appropriation,  I have begun to speak. But when I do,  it is with the awareness  that I am still treading on dangerous ground. While my white skin offers the protection of invisibility that many of my Aboriginal colleagues cannot choose, in a culture dominated by assumptions of Western science, I remain, at least for now, an outsider. 
	    *note that the notion of subjectivity is dissociated from identity here (see glossary ), since I am working from a poststructural perspective only in this 'bit' of theorizing. In the context of this writing, it was discourses
), since I am working from a poststructural perspective only in this 'bit' of theorizing. In the context of this writing, it was discourses of feminist poststructuralism that I had most access to – discourses which  still tended to reinscribe humans at the centre and offered little or no space for  agency and intelligence of  other-than-human persons
 of feminist poststructuralism that I had most access to – discourses which  still tended to reinscribe humans at the centre and offered little or no space for  agency and intelligence of  other-than-human persons (for exceptions, see Armbruster, 1998; Bell & Russell, 2000). In other places (e.g. Buhner, 2004; Haraway, 2003; Harvey, 2006a, 2006b; Jensen, 2004; Smith, 2004, 2006) these spaces have been created.
 (for exceptions, see Armbruster, 1998; Bell & Russell, 2000). In other places (e.g. Buhner, 2004; Haraway, 2003; Harvey, 2006a, 2006b; Jensen, 2004; Smith, 2004, 2006) these spaces have been created.