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!