regard@ttidcc.UUCP (Adrienne Regard) (07/11/85)
This is one of those interesting observations on "the workplace" that come up which has at least two distinct different sides. Women, entering traditional "men's" territory, often take on the coloration of the men, as a survival technique. What happens is that the false coloration continues to be validated for quite some time until there is a great enough number of women present to begin changing the actual environment itself, and then the men begin (again) to notice changes happening within their environment which never would have occurred if the women hadn't joined up. And then the "advisability" of allowing those "different" creatures to come on board is raised again, without realization that it means a greater freedom for the ruling class, as well. Women can bring their "woman's perspective" which is simply a side of human being that men have had socialized out of them. It isn't a human side that men don't _have_. No real point in leaving it at home. I've always wondered why _anybody_, male or female, would consider it a good idea to have one's emotional limbs lopped off, like an overgrown tree, so their shape would then conform to the corporate box structure, rather than expect, and create, a situation where one's limbs can be used to an advantage, personally or professionally. I know _why_, of course: trying to deal with every Tom Dick and Harry as if they were whole, growing and living things is more time and energy consuming than if they are similar wooden boxes, but my more rebellious self insists that, in their heart of hearts, Tom is very different from Dick, and Harry. They just pretend to buy the stereotype (in others, as a convenience) all the while practicing their own little idiosyncracies every day of their lives. Women shouldn't try so very hard to fit in to the structured workplace created by expectations they had no part in. The workplace will change to fit them, somewhat, too. It isn't the emotionalism of either the male or the female that is "inappropriate" or "wrong". It's merely inconvenient for some other people at some times, and to hell with them mostly. Why continue to support a system that is dehumanizing? More money? Nah.