Relay-Version: version B 2.10 5/3/83; site utzoo.UUCP Posting-Version: version B 2.10.1 9/27/83; site hplabsb.UUCP Path: utzoo!watmath!clyde!burl!ulysses!harpo!seismo!hao!hplabs!hplabsb!pc From: pc@hplabsb.UUCP (Patricia Collins) Newsgroups: net.women Subject: Re: Feminism and a double standard(?) Message-ID: <2117@hplabsb.UUCP> Date: Tue, 28-Feb-84 15:42:20 EST Article-I.D.: hplabsb.2117 Posted: Tue Feb 28 15:42:20 1984 Date-Received: Fri, 2-Mar-84 15:26:52 EST References: <3548@tekecs.UUCP> Organization: Hewlett Packard Labs, Palo Alto CA Lines: 29 re: Barbara Theus' comments The reason not to "take advantage" of your sexist colleagues is that your implicit acceptance of their definition of your role will come back to haunt you if you ever want to be "taken seriously." If the person who perceives you as a woman (girl?) first and engineer second happens to be higher than you in the corporate structure, you will find that you are evaluated first as a woman and second as an engineer. You may find that you are well liked and that you get less flack than a woman who is labelled a hard core feminist (read: no fun at all), but that you will be described as "cute; and she's not a bad engineer!" (tone: condescension). My colleagues who are not blatantly sexist seem to value friendliness, but don't look for flirtatiousness. Those who do want to see women (and men!) in terms of some sexual stereotype are not likely to turn that prejudice off when it comes time to consider people for leadership, creativity, technical expertise, and professional maturity. If there is any hope for getting what you want out of your career when you have to deal with double standards, it is by taking the reigns and redefining the rules. When it's clear that you are an engineer first (where your job is concerned), even the die-hards may eventually see you as you project yourself. [While the first paragraph comments are an attempt at objective realism, this last statement is admittedly optimistic.] Patricia Collins hplabs