Relay-Version: version B 2.10 5/3/83; site utzoo.UUCP
Posting-Version: version B 2.10.1 6/24/83; site randvax.UUCP
Path: utzoo!watmath!clyde!burl!mgnetp!ihnp4!houxm!houxz!vax135!cornell!uw-beaver!tektronix!hplabs!hao!seismo!harvard!wjh12!genrad!decvax!ittvax!dcdwest!sdcsvax!sdcrdcf!randvax!edhall
From: edhall@randvax.UUCP
Newsgroups: net.singles
Subject: Re: Sex Roles
Message-ID: <1851@randvax.UUCP>
Date: Sun, 5-Aug-84 00:05:27 EDT
Article-I.D.: randvax.1851
Posted: Sun Aug  5 00:05:27 1984
Date-Received: Fri, 27-Jul-84 04:13:35 EDT
References: <2408@decwrl.UUCP>, <1843@randvax.UUCP>, <1272@qubix.UUCP>
Organization: Rand Corp., Santa Monica
Lines: 14

Steve objects to my example of slavery as a recent major social
change in something that was once thought of as immutable.
Roles, I'll agree, are far older, and are not just a part of
civilized humanity.  However, sex roles have shown a great
deal of variance between societies; such flexibility suggests
that they might be easier to change, not harder.

Nowhere did I speak against roles as such; I'd be hypocritrical to
say so after my posting on self-obsession (titled ``Re: never stop
fighting'').  However, I disagree with assigning roles on the basis
of sex.  I don't want to see roles destroyed, but I do want to see
people liberated to take on the role or roles they feel most
comfortable with.  And if that means evolving a whole new set of
roles, so much the better.