Relay-Version: version B 2.10 5/3/83; site utzoo.UUCP
Posting-Version: version B 2.10.2 9/5/84; site reed.UUCP
Path: utzoo!decvax!tektronix!reed!ellen
From: ellen@reed.UUCP (Ellen Eades)
Newsgroups: net.women
Subject: Re: Re: Career vs. Relationship?
Message-ID: <2448@reed.UUCP>
Date: Tue, 4-Feb-86 23:33:10 EST
Article-I.D.: reed.2448
Posted: Tue Feb  4 23:33:10 1986
Date-Received: Thu, 6-Feb-86 02:19:08 EST
Distribution: na
Organization: Reed College, Portland, Oregon
Lines: 74

>> Cheryl
> Ryan

>> I think that it is beautiful and wonderful for a man to give up his
>> independence, economic autonomy, career, and education for his woman.
>> I do *not* think that women should do this.
 
> Don't tell me; let me guess -- a man who feels this way about women is
> being sexist, right?
 
No.  A man who feels this way about women recognizes that women
are discriminated against and is willing to attempt to
compensate for this in his personal life and the personal life
of the woman he cares for.

>> It is beneath a woman's 
>> dignity to give up everything she stands for in the interests of an 
>> harmonious domestic life.
 
> Luckily, men's dignity is sufficiently low that this would not be 
> beneath theirs?

Given the things some men argue about in this newsgroup, I might
agree :-) but again no, *some* *rare* *men's* self-esteem is
high enough that they can do this without feeling that they have
made an intolerable sacrifice on behalf of the struggle for
equality.  Honest, it can be done.  I know of ONE person who is
doing it.

> Having said that, let me return to the Real World -- where I agree 
> with you to a large extent.
 
> When I first moved in with my wife...she was thoroughly subservient...
> Underneath the low esteem and politically-correct behavior 
> was a gifted person who had
> learned, years before, to keep her mouth shut and not give offense.
> While it may have been ironic that a man was responsible
> for raising her consciousness, it was not altruistic.
> ... I now have a peer partner who is noticably superior to 
> me in many ways, and is very interesting to be with.
> ... there's a good chance that we won't see our 10th
> anniversary because, as two independent people, we have pursued 
> our individual visions -- which would not have happened
> had she remained a mere camp follower, trudging along with me.
> ... What she became is
> nothing that I would have specified, nothing that I *could* have 
> specified.  It's likely that I'll lose her as a direct result.  
> But that's OK, too -- even as merely a friend, she will be
> much more important to me than would have been possible as a
> zombied housefrau.  And I'm sure we'll stay friends, regardless.

I have several reactions to this article.  The first is that I
hope Ryan remembers that he is probably not the only influence
upon his wife's changing consciousness, however altruistic his
intentions.  A woman who becomes liberated because her husband
wants a thinking "peer partner" is still quite dependent on him
for approval.  However, I am not saying this is the case.

I am glad Ryan is willing to part ways with his wife if that is
how things work out.  I find his attitude most refreshing.  I
hope that a solution can be worked out which benefits you both,
and your emphasis on "staying friends" makes me sure of it.

About four years ago (gods! has it been that long?) I was the
woman in a similar situation.  I'm glad that there are those 
who don't see marriage (or living together) as the be-all and
end-all of a relationship between two people.

Ellen
-- 
-    -    -    -    -    -    -    -    -    -    -    -    -
	"Who's been repeating all that hard stuff to you?"
	"I read it in a book," said Alice.
-    -    -    -    -    -    -    -    -    -    -    -    -