From: et@madmax.aa.nps.navy.mil
Newsgroups: soc.feminism
Subject: Re: Why she took my name/ narrow minded views..
Date: 30 Jul 1992 20:52:48 GMT
Organization: University of California, Berkeley
Distribution: world
NNTP-Posting-Host: remarque.berkeley.edu
Originator: muffy@remarque.berkeley.edu

In Article: 4522 of soc.feminism
Margot (mprisco@cat.syr.edu) writes:

> ... This is why it is so important
> that we change the way women are perceived by the media, for example.
> As long as images like the beer commercials ("Think I'll
> have a cold beer and...women!!") persist, so will oppression of
> women.

IMO, blaming beer commercials for the oppression of
women is quite shallow.  Beer commercials persist,
because majority of the people respond to these
commercials. Simply put, they work succesfully in
economic terms.  Yes, I agree that these commercials
feed back and play a limited role in perpetuating the
objectification of woman. However, if beer commercials
are banned from airways, we might see topless women
working/posing in liquor stores or serving liquor in
bars, etc:-)

We live in a society in which economic activities are,
in general, based on cash profit.  We strongly believe
in "free markets", we believe in competition
wholeheartedly, we applause  when the "winner" takes
it all.  We silently accept the whole spectrum of
domination, discrimination, exploitation of majority
of people in regardless of their sex by "owners",
"managers", "bosses" in our lives.  But we seem to
object only to beer commercials, which are just simple
reflections of our economic system.  The ship has big
holes all around its haul (sp?), water is gushing in
and it is sinking down, but we only see a vase
sliding off the dinner table and try to save it:-)


In Article: 4548 of soc.feminism, Cindy Blank-Edelman  writes:

>> .....
>> To clarify: let's say that an organization has instituted
>> participatory democracy and consensus-style decision making.  Yay.
>> The organization has a meeting.  Because of their previous
>> positions, all of the women at the meeting are referred to as
>> "secretaries", and called by their first names, while all of the
>> men are referred to as "bosses" and called "Mr. Last Name".

> In the above workplace scenario,
> because of previous workplace tradition, all of the women are still
> referred to as "Honey" and all of the men are referred to as "Sir".
> (Whether or not this is likely in a workplace that has instituted
> participatory democracy is not relevant to my point.)  I don't see how
> one could assert that the women's opinions will be taken as seriously
> as the men's in this case, nor that this naming tradition will not
> affect the workplace democracy. 

You seem to be quite biased in your example and seem 
to miss the point.  I am sure that nobody calls a
congresswoman or a woman CEO  or a woman teacher "honey". 
As far as I can see  women who hold certain "powers"
or something to say/allowed to say in what they do  are
usually taken as seriously as any other man.

I also think that your understanding of _workplace
democracy_ is quite different than that of mine. You
even surprisingly find it irrelevant to the
discussion.  Workplace democracy could be based either
on consensus, in which decisions have to be taken
unanimously/without active disagreement,  or on a
simple majority, in which everybody has a single
vote.  In such an environment, a woman secretary would
not "beg" to be taken seriously. She has to either
convince others/be convinced by others about the
subject matter,  or cast her vote like anybody else.

> The hierarchical nature of the previous workplace has been
> preserved in the naming traditions of the current one.  The
> question is: will the naming tradition die out in such a
> setting and give way to workplace democracy?  Or will the
> recently established democracy die out and give way to the
> hierarchical workplace that the naming tradition
> represents?


IMO, the naming tradition is definitely going to die
out.  Again,  I believe that although the symbols have
some feed-back  on the underlining substantial
matters/values, their  effects are limited and they
eventually follow the substance.

> Isn't it possible that the naming tradition *is* a "subtle form of
> this oppressive, authoritarian behavior"?  You are saying we should
> recognize these types of oppressions, yet you are unable to recognize
> this one and fight against it.  Why?

No, it is not. I am talking about the subtle forms of
oppressive, authoritarian behaviors in substance; such
as our acceptance of free-markets, hierarchical
managements, individualism, competitive sports etc.
without almost any doubt or any question.

> My not voting for a year probably would not make a difference in the
> political life of this country as a whole.  It probably wouldn't
> bother me personally for just a year, either; there are still ways for
> me to be involved in the political process.

> But if the vast majority of women decided not to vote, that would be a
> different story.  And if I decided never to vote again, that would
> also be different.  Both of these cases are more analogous to the
> naming issue. 

IMO there is almost no  analogy between last names and
voting in the elections. Again,  "last name" is a
symbol, whereas voting may have substantial
consequences which symbols are created/destroyed for.
It is like you are arguing about what a banner should
say prior to  a demonstration, while others are voting
to ban all kind of demonstrations:-) Right to
protest/demonstrate is quite substantial, like global
acceptances of workplace democracy, and
non-hierarchical decision making structures.

BTW, let's be aware of the fact that, voting for a
president or voting for someone who will make
decisions "for you" is nothing but perpetuating 
hierarchical power structures in a quite subtle
form:-)

Ismail.



-- 
Post articles to soc.feminism, or send email to feminism@ncar.ucar.edu.
Questions and comments may be sent to feminism-request@ncar.ucar.edu.  This
news group is moderated by several people, so please use the mail aliases. Your
article should be posted within several days.  Rejections notified by email.