Relay-Version: version B 2.10 5/3/83; site utzoo.UUCP
Posting-Version: version B 2.10.2 9/18/84 exptools; site ihuxf.UUCP
Path: utzoo!decvax!bellcore!ulysses!mhuxr!mhuxn!ihnp4!ihuxf!features
From: features@ihuxf.UUCP (aMAZon)
Newsgroups: net.women
Subject: Re: Career vs. Relationship?
Message-ID: <2785@ihuxf.UUCP>
Date: Wed, 22-Jan-86 11:46:24 EST
Article-I.D.: ihuxf.2785
Posted: Wed Jan 22 11:46:24 1986
Date-Received: Thu, 23-Jan-86 03:13:11 EST
References: <481@ssc-vax.UUCP> <2340@reed.UUCP> <2341@reed.UUCP> <1350@ames.UUCP>
Distribution: na
Organization: AT&T Bell Laboratories
Lines: 49

Kenn Barry (in response to Ellen Eades in response to Ann Muir Thomas)
writes:

> 	I suspect the expectation that women will follow their men is
> following the one-income household into history. When both halves of a couple
> are working, as is usually the case these days, it no longer makes sense that
> the family must always follow the husband's job.
...
>.... I apologize if I misinterpret, but when you speak of "turning the
> tables", you make it sound as though one of the reasons for your present plans
> is a desire to "win" in some sort of contest against men. If so, this seems
> less an escape from society's sexist attitudes, than a reaction to them that
> still pays homage to society's preconceptions of male/female roles. Anger at
> sexism is useful in pursuit of political goals, but it only gets in the way
> when making personal decisions like career vs. relationships. Being free
> of these sexist stereotypes means more than being able to flaunt them; it
> means being able to *ignore* them, to exorcise all their power to influence
> you in any direction. The courage to step out of one's defined role is only
> the first step. Real freedom is the ability to live one's life in complete
> indifference to these stereotypes, to be neither attracted nor repelled by the
> fact that some given type of behavior is "appropriate" to your sex.

It's all well and good for someone to say that women must
transcend sexual stereotypes; that it's okay for women to push
for equality in the workplace, but not at home; BUT my
experience has been that indeed "the personal is political".
By that I mean that one incident (maybe the beach harrassment)
is negligible, especially if "it happened to just me".  It's the
pattern that determines the extent of true equality.

It used to be acceptable to make sexist remarks in the workplace.
Innuendos were labeled "just harmless jokes, and anyway, what's
she so huffy about?  I didn't mean her."  That is now labeled
sexual harrassment.  If we'd all stayed in our corners, silently
fuming, nothing would have been accomplished.  It's because we
got together and found out that our personal experiences were
not limited to ourselves that we saw that the system, not
us, needed change.

To expect a double standard of the kind Kenn is proposing is
just as sexist as denying women equal opportunity.  There
is no reason why women should be held to a higher moral standard
than men.  If we are truly equal, that means _e_q_u_a_l, not
_s_e_p_a_r_a_t_e _b_u_t _d_i_f_f_e_r_e_n_t.

-- 

aMAZon @ AT&T Bell Labs, Naperville, IL; ihnp4!ihuxf!features
					 *open to possibilities*