Relay-Version: version B 2.10 5/3/83; site utzoo.UUCP
Posting-Version: version B 2.10.2 9/18/84; site oddjob.UUCP
Path: utzoo!linus!philabs!cmcl2!seismo!harvard!talcott!panda!genrad!decvax!harpo!whuxlm!whuxl!houxm!mhuxt!mhuxr!mhuxn!ihnp4!gargoyle!oddjob!london
From: london@oddjob.UUCP (David London)
Newsgroups: net.women
Subject: Imagine a non-sexist society...
Message-ID: <931@oddjob.UUCP>
Date: Mon, 19-Aug-85 18:05:38 EDT
Article-I.D.: oddjob.931
Posted: Mon Aug 19 18:05:38 1985
Date-Received: Fri, 23-Aug-85 07:08:57 EDT
Distribution: net
Organization: U. Chicago, Astronomy & Astrophysics
Lines: 52

<>
	A couple months ago I posted an article asking people to suggest what
sorts of qualities they imagined a non-sexist society to have. (I used the
phrase "the (philosophical) goals of feminism"). My thinking about this was
spawned by some articles posted by me, and responded to by a number of Jeffs,
among others, about individualism in today's society. I started thinking
about the more subtle changed in society which would occur with the 
realization of the goals of feminism. I asked about individualism, socialism,
and other isms which I now forget. Needless to say (perhaps), there were
no replies. Either the article was unclear (although, upon re-reading, it
seems pretty obvious to me what I was getting at), or people are not really
interested in thinking and intellectual argument/discussion, preferring to
rant and rave about silly topics like PMS and TP (be it testosterone 
poisoning or toilet paper).
	Nevertheless, undaunted, I'll try again. This time one of Sunny's
comments caught my eye - she suggested  : that men are horrible 
people because (among other things), they will comment about a woman's 
"fuckability". It is obvious that this sort of thing takes place and it is 
clear that this sort of behaviour is a reflection of men's attitudes towards 
women. Furthermore, this is a bad attitude, one which must be changed. 
However, in our "utopian" non-sexist society, it seems to me that this
sort of thing would still take place. There would be differences - 
1. It would be completely non-intrusive.
2. It could just as likely be in mixed company as in the company of men or 
   women only.
My idea is that part of this is a sort of "sexual play", and that this would
remain in a non-sexist society. I.e. there is nothing wrong with treating 
someone as a sex object as long as that's not the way you treat them at all
times. 
	This is part of what I'm getting at in my question. In a non-sexist 
society, certain behaviour which is considered sexist now (because of the 
inequality of men and women in society) would *not* be sexist; in fact it
would be acceptable.
	There are other things: I think that, of necessity, a non-sexist 
society must be a socialist society, at least to some extent - certainly 
socialized medicine and socialized education are necessary. The reason for
this is that equality can only come in a society in which people think of the
society first, and the individual second. (I talked about this at great 
length in some earlier postings).
	On second thought, I guess that there are two questions that I'm
asking: 
1. What are the necessary conditions for a non-sexist society to evolve?
2. What would be some of the more subtle changes which would take place
   in a non-sexist society?

					David London
					..!ihnp4!oddjob!london

P.S. Unfortunately, I'm only going to be on the net for another week and 
a half, after which I'm moving to Vancouver, where I have a position in the
physics department of U.B.C. Perhaps some kind soul can supply me access
to the net there?