Path: utzoo!attcan!uunet!aplcen!uakari.primate.wisc.edu!sdd.hp.com!ucsd!orion.oac.uci.edu!ucivax!gateway
From: wilber%aludra.usc.edu@usc.EDU (John Wilber)
Newsgroups: soc.feminism
Subject: Re: Who is on this newsgroup?
Summary: Who's being pressured?
Message-ID: <11247@chaph.usc.edu>
Date: 7 Aug 90 21:01:18 GMT
References: <1990Jul30.160819.1101@msuinfo.cl.msu.edu> <4949.26b7a175@vax5.cit.cornell.edu> <1305@mtxinu.UUCP>
Organization: University of Southern California, Los Angeles, CA
Lines: 27
Approved: tittle@ics.uci.edu
Nntp-Posting-Host: zola.ics.uci.edu

In article <1305@mtxinu.UUCP> uunet!mtxinu!ed@ncar.UCAR.EDU (Ed Gould) writes:

>Why do you presume that "feminist" and "homemaker" are necessarily
>mutually exclusive?

Of course they are not as long as the definition of "feminist" is "a
person concerned with the rights of women" and not "Militant
man-hating socialist lesbians advocating special sex-based
privileges".

>To my mind, feminism does not object to one
>becoming a homemaker,

The "right-thinking" ones don't, but there are people out there
calling themselves "feminists" who would object.

>it objects to the notion that a woman is (or
>might be or would be) expected or pressured to become a homemaker.

>That pressure is real, whether it be subtle, societal expectation
>or conditioning, or explicit.

So is the pressure exerted by the parents of children who are
described as some kind of political activists before they are mature
enough to understand the issues.  Without parental conditioning, I
doubt there are many/any 10-year old feminists, bigots, socialists,
capitalists, hare krishnas, moonies, or cub scouts.