Relay-Version: version B 2.10 5/3/83; site utzoo.UUCP Posting-Version: version B 2.10.1 exptools 1/6/84; site ihuxf.UUCP Path: utzoo!linus!security!genrad!grkermit!masscomp!clyde!floyd!whuxle!pyuxll!abnjh!u1100a!pyuxn!pyuxww!mhuxm!mhuxl!ihnp4!ihuxf!features From: features@ihuxf.UUCP Newsgroups: net.women Subject: Re: Male/Female Roles Message-ID: <1974@ihuxf.UUCP> Date: Fri, 3-Feb-84 00:53:07 EST Article-I.D.: ihuxf.1974 Posted: Fri Feb 3 00:53:07 1984 Date-Received: Tue, 31-Jan-84 02:39:49 EST References: <301@houxu.UUCP> Organization: AT&T Bell Labs, Naperville, IL Lines: 23 I believe it was Margaret Mead who, during her anthropological field work in the 1920-30's, found that "feminine" and "masculine" traits depended on the particular society she found herself in. That is, what is considered feminine in one society would be definitely masculine in another. The interesting thing about it was that whatever was considered to be the higher-status occupation almost invariably was termed "masculine". As far as American sex-linked traits go, Larry's right, one cannot completely disregard biology. (Infant girls whose mothers are given testosterone during pregnancy turn out to be tomboys!) Still, I think that the range of behavior possible for humans can be more inclusive, more in tune with individual variations, than strict sex roles. And more freeing for an individual who finds herself outside of the accepted mode. "Not dainty by any means, but certainly very feminine*" M.A. Zeszutko AT&T Bell Labs, Naperville, IL *by my definition!