Path: utzoo!attcan!utgpu!jarvis.csri.toronto.edu!mailrus!uwm.edu!gem.mps.ohio-state.edu!usc!orion.oac.uci.edu!uci-ics!gateway
From: geb@cadre.dsl.pitt.edu (Gordon E. Banks)
Newsgroups: soc.feminism
Subject: Re: how to bash feminism without really trying
Message-ID: <1989Oct25.155612.17285@cadre.dsl.pitt.edu>
Date: 25 Oct 89 17:26:00 GMT
References: <47228@bbn.COM>
Sender: tittle@ics.uci.edu (Cindy Tittle)
Reply-To: geb@cadre.dsl.pitt.edu (Gordon E. Banks)
Organization: Decision Systems Laboratory, Univ. of Pittsburgh, PA.
Lines: 49
Approved: tittle@ics.uci.edu

In article <47228@bbn.COM> rshapiro@BBN.COM (Richard Shapiro) writes:
>
>
>In article <8910192058.AA01304@cadre.dsl.pitt.edu> geb@cadre.dsl.pitt.edu (Gordon E. Banks) writes:
>>I would be interested in hearing about noncoercive methods of
>>accomplishing the goals of greater justice for women. 
>
>So would I. Unfortunately no one (on soc.feminism) has any to offer. I
>suggest we consider the possibility that there may not BE any. What,

Actually, I think you would be hard put to demonstrate that the gains
women have made in the past 10 years have been significantly helped by
coercive measures such as affirmative action.  What has changed is the
perception women have of themselves and their social interactions with
men and each other and the perception men have of women's roles and
rights.  The most effective measures have been educational and have
been by women and directed at other women.  The coercive measures you
speak of are largely instituted by men and directed at other men.  You
can also look at the feminist movement in other countries, very few of
which have any sort of affirmative action.  While I grant that the US
is ahead of most other nations (developed or not) in feminist
development, there are certainly examples where it is not.

>after all, are we asking for (those of us who support gender
>equality)? We're asking that a certain privileged group GIVE UP
>their privileges. Is it likely that this will happen voluntarily or
>even non-coercively? The situation in South Africa is worth
>considering in this context. People don't give up privilege without a
>fight. 

Not true.  There are always some people in a society who will fight,
but I don't think this is true of the majority, at least not always.
If people become convinced of the injustice of a situation, and the
moral power of the other side, they will cease fighting.  I think the
example of Gandhi in India will serve here, as well as MLKing in the
US.  I think South Africa is moving in this direction as well, and
will not end with a violent revolution.

>I think this misunderstands the intention of affirmative action. That
>a few individuals are helped here and now is really only a side
>effect. The real importance is in changing gender-based role models --
>the meaning of 'male' and 'female' for future generations is what's at
>stake here, not the immediate effects on a handful of individuals. In

That is happening anyhow, with or without AA.  All that is needed for
that is for a significant number of talented women to strive for a
goal.  In a society such as ours, it is impossible to stop a large
number of them from achieving their goals, regardless of a desire to
discriminate.  They might be hindered, but they won't be stopped.