Text 1

The Feminist Movement and Working-Class Women

by Dina Wills

    The modern Women's Movement first started in America in 1964 has changed the thinking of women and the attitudes of men towards women. But even today there still exists a conflict of values between the feminists and the working-class women. The following passage discusses the issue.

    "I'm not a women's libber, but..." is the opening line of many conversations in which women talk about not getting fair pay, an equal chance for a job, decent working conditions, or the respect given to male workers in the same job. Even in 1989, 25 years after Betty Friedan's The Feminine Mystique signaled the start of the modern Women's Movement, many still believe these are their own personal problems, not the result of our economic and social systems. They don't want to be called "feminists" or "women's libbers." Yet, their anger at not being treated fairly means that they do expect to be given opportunities and responsibilities equal to those men get.

    All women who called themselves feminists could agree on some points. "The personal is political" meant that women's inequality compared to men was not just an individual problem, but happened because the U.S. social, political and economic systems were stacked against them. Legal restrictions, such as laws forbidding women from lifting more than 30 pounds, kept them out of lucrative jobs considered "men's work." Women found it hard to get credit in their own names or to obtain loans to start a business or buy a home. In community property starts, a husband could manage the family finances alone, while his wife could not. Women often were not admitted to law and medical schools; if they did get in, they faced stinging discrimination from teachers and fellow students. The cultural norm insisting that a woman should take a man's name when she married often was enforced as though it were a law; few considered the tremendous psychological shift that occurs when a name is changed.

    Many women began to recognize that their struggles in relationships and jobs were not just their own personal failures, but were related to a cultural system designed to keep them in their place. Their reaction was anger at the patriarchal3 system. "The click" was a feminist term for that moment of sudden insight when a woman realized that she was, indeed, oppressed. For one woman, it happened when she was told by a solicitous male supervisor that in order to succeed in her job she would have to be "at least twice as good as any of the men." Click!

    With the fervor of the newly converted, feminists in the early 1970's believed that, if the feminist message of liberation from patriarchal oppression were heard, it would be accepted by any woman. However, exposure to the ideas of the Women's Movement wasn't enough to make every woman a feminist. Some working-class American women were antagonized by the attitudes feminists expressed towards the family, traditional feminine styles of dress and speech, women's paid work, and sexual freedom in relationships and childbearing.

    Part of this problem was a matter of class. In those early years, the Women's Movement was a middle-class movement, as it often was accused of being. It was begun by women with education who understood how the system worked and could take the time to try to change it.

    The values expressed were middle-class and often clashed with the realities of working-class women's lives.

    Besides misunderstanding the importance of truly equal job opportunities, some working-class women had good reason to be cynical about the cries of "liberation" and "equality" they heard from the Women's Movement.

    The issue of paid work for women versus volunteer work and unpaid work in the home was a highly divisive one in the early days of the movement. The vocal feminists quoted in the mass media sounded as though they believed that a woman who didn't work for pay wasn't realizing her full potential. Many of them also argued that some way should be found to pay women for housework, but that idea wasn't given wide coverage in the media. The concept of women having a choice about whether to work for pay or not was a middle-class idea; working-class women usually worked, from necessity. To them, not having to work sounded more like liberation.

    The tone feminists used in delivering the message that women should work for pay bothered some people. In 1973, Social Research, Inc., of Chicago surveyed 410 women in eight cities; one of the areas they probed was the women's response to the Women's Movement. (They referred to it as "Women's Lib," a term usually used by opponents of the movement, showing either their ignorance or bias.) SRI found the working-class women in their sample (two-thirds of the total) had a stronger sense of being oppressed and victimized than the middle-class women, but didn't believe the Women's Movement offered them any help. They saw it as a contributor to the problem by putting pressure on them to have a job, when they had very little choice in that matter anyway. They did have jobs, which they would have given up gladly if they could have afforded to stay home without making money. The working-class women in this study resented what they considered to be the authoritarian attitude of leaders of the Women's Movement, "an attempt by Lib leaders to tell other women what they ought to do, feel, be proud of, or ashamed of." Similar attitudes were found by the writers who interviewed individual women.

    Louise Kapp Howe interviewed several beauticians for Pink Collar Workers. One became very upset when Howe asked if her husband ever helped around the house. "No, and I wouldn't want him to. I'd rather do my own cooking and my own housekeeping. I don't believe in women's lib. And I don't believe in all that crap-making a husband do half the work." She was typical of other interviewees who believed that a woman's role was to stay at home, if possible, and take care of the children, though the overwhelming odds were that most of these women worked outside their homes at repetitious, boring, and sometimes dangerous jobs. They usually regarded their husbands' jobs as the primary ones and their own as secondary to their vocation of homemaking, no matter how important their income was to their family's economic well-being.

    "Oppression" didn't mean the same to these working-class women as it did to an academic Marxist feminist or a member of NOW. To working-class women, oppression was what the system did to both women and men, not just something men in a patriarchal, capitalist system did to women. They saw the men's role as harder than theirs, even when they worked outside the home, too. Therefore, they found it hard to join the Women's Movement in anger directed at men in general.

Feminist values and working-class women

    It was in this area of family, relationships with men, and childbearing that the strongest discrepancies were found between feminist values and those expressed by the working-class women who were interviewed by the writers. The working-class woman gave her family much higher priority than her job ― it was her major source of self-esteem. Many early feminists considered the family a trap that kept women in bondage. Some, such as Shulamith Firestone in The Dialectic of Sex, suggested alternative ways of rearing children collectively. These feminists did not seem to value children, and the working-class women resented it.

    The feminist preoccupation with not being seen as a sex object was another point that led to misunderstanding. A feminist in the early 1970's might refuse to wear skirts or other traditionally feminine clothing, wear a hair style she could care for herself, and never wear make-up. Working-class women lived in a culture where such unorthodox dress could send an unpleasant message. As one woman put it, "A 'liberated' working-class woman may be considered a slut."

    Beauticians interviewed by several writers pointed out that they had one of the best jobs for a working-class woman. One said, "You don't understand how many of us go into beauty work because we want to be independent. We can have a shop at home ─ be our own boss, be there when the kids come home from school, and keep ourselves together if the old man cuts out." Another told Howe, "You can't tell me it's bad for a woman to care about her appearance. I do, and I think I'm as liberated as anybody."

    For these women who rarely had a choice about whether or not to work for pay, "equal pay for equal work" could have been an idea they shared with feminists. Why didn't they join with the Women's Movement to demand employment equality with men? Two reasons emerge from the interviews.

    Equal employment opportunity first was mentioned at a union rally in 1887; the idea has been part of working women's lives for more than 100 years. Low-income women have gone on strike and asked for better wages and working conditions for many years. They didn't see this as an issue the Women's Movement could claim as its own, but as a separate one with a long history of rebuffs and setbacks.

    Second, while they could agree with "equal pay for equal work" in the abstract, there was a strong feeling expressed that, given any problem with the number of jobs available, a man always should be given a job so that he could support his family. They recognized the hardship this worked on a single woman, but, with their emphasis on family relationships, they believed the policy of giving men preference for jobs and better pay was the best course for society as a whole. They saw little chance the system would change so that women could get and keep jobs paying enough for a family to live on; they had been fighting that system for a long time.

    Nancy Seifer interviewed several women who had personal contact with feminists who were union organizers and political workers. These feminists overcame the barriers of misunderstanding, and the women they came in contact with had favorable opinions of the Women's Movement. However, the women who got all their information about the Women's Movement from the mass media failed to see what it had to offer them.

    Now that the movement has produced major changes in opportunities for women, why do so many women, of all classes, colors, and incomes, repeat, "I'm not a feminist, but..." as they talk about changes that still need to be made? Perhaps one answer lies in the impact made by the fierce rhetoric of the early Women's Movement, especially its radical wing. Many people still associate the word "feminist" with man-hating, lesbianism, contempt for motherhood, and a demand that everyone work for pay.

    A stronger reason may lie in the value differences discussed by these working class women who were interviewed 15 to 20 years ago. "What do women want?" has no one answer, because women have diverse needs and values. The Women's Movement believed all women were sisters, with fundamental rights and ideas on which every one of them could agree. The problem was that this led to a high intolerance for diversity of opinion in the early Women's Movement. Feminists have become more tolerant, but too many women still may think they're being told "what they ought to do, feel, be proud of, ashamed of."

    Though divided by race, class, culture, and many beliefs, women need to keep trying to understand each other. A fragmented sisterhood never will make as many changes as one that is a strong mosaic of women who respect each other's differences, but can work together toward common goals.

(1912 words) TOP

课文一

女权运动与劳动阶级妇女

黛娜·威尔斯

    1964年源于美国的现代妇女运动改变了妇女的思维方式,改变了男人对女人的态度。但时至今日女权主义者与劳动妇女阶层之间在价值观念上仍存在着冲突。以下便探讨这个问题。

    妇女们谈论没有得到公平合理的报酬、平等的工作机会，体面的工作环境，或是干与男同事同样的工作却没有得到同样的尊重时，常说的第一句话是，“我并不是妇女运动的成员，可是……。”甚至在1989年，即贝蒂·弗莱丹发表标志现代妇女运动开始的《女性的奥秘》之后25年，许多人仍然认为，这些都是她们个人问题，而不是我们的经济与政治体制造成的结果。她们不愿他人称自已为“女权主义者”或“妇女解放运动者。”然而，她们对于没有得到公正待遇的忿愤，说明她们期望获得和男人一样的机会与责任。

    所有称自己为女权主义者的妇女在某些问题上均达成共识。“个人问题也是政治问题”意味着，与男人相比时妇女所遭受的不公平待遇不仅是个人问题，而且是不利于她们的美国社会、政治与经济体制造成的。法律上的种种限制，诸如禁止妇女干搬运30磅以上的物件的活等，使她们无法获得被认为是男人干的、报酬不菲的工作。妇女们发现很难以自己的名字进行信贷业务或获得贷款做生意或买房子。在共同财产方面，丈夫对家庭开支一人说了算，而妻子却不能做主。大学的法学院与医学院往往不录取女生。如果她们能被录取，她们面对的是教师与男同学的夷鄙与歧视。妇女结婚后一定得从夫姓这样根深蒂固的文化准则，就同法律一样要人恪守。然而很少有人考虑到当一个人改姓后心理上的巨大变化。

    许多妇女已开始意识到，自己在人际关系与工作上的抗争并不只是个人的软弱无能，而与旨在使妇女禁锢在当前这种地位的文化系统有很大关系。她们对这种家长式的体制极为愤怒。“顿悟”是眼下女性常用的一个词汇，表现了妇女意识到自己的确处于被压迫的境地而豁然醒悟。对于一名妇女来说，当关心她的男上司告诉她，要做一名合格的雇员得比男同事付出多一倍的努力时，她顿时明白过来。顿悟！

    带着新焕发出的热情，20世纪七十年代早期的女权主义者相信，任何一个妇女听到要把妇女从家长式的压迫下解放出来的女权运动宣传，都会接受这种观点。然而，妇女解放运动宣扬这样的观点，不足以使每一名妇女成为女权主义者。女权主义者对于家庭、女性传统的服饰款式、言谈、妇女的工作报酬以及两性关系、性自由以及养育孩子等问题上的态度，使美国一些劳动阶级妇女甚为反感。

    造成这种状况的部分原因为阶级问题。在早期，妇女解放运动，象它常常被指责的那样，是中产阶级运动。它由受过教育的妇女发起。她们对这种体制非常了解，试图慢慢地改变这种状况。

    她们所表达的价值观为中产阶级的，与劳动妇女阶层的生活现实常产生矛盾。
　

    除了对真正平等的工作机会的重要性产生误解以外，一些劳动阶级妇女对从妇女解放运动那里听来有关“解放”和“平等”的口号，有充分理由持嘲讽态度。

    关于妇女家中工作领取报酬还是志愿者服务以及分文不取的问题，在运动的初期引起很大分歧。那些雄辩的女权主义者在大众媒体上反复地宣称，妇女不上班挣钱就无法发挥自身的全部潜能。她们中许多人也提出，应该找到使家庭妇女也获取报酬的办法，但这个想法在媒体中影响不大。妇女可以选择是否上班挣钱，这种观点是中产阶级妇女提出的。劳动阶级妇女通常是必须上班。对于她们来说，不用去上班听起来更像解放。

    女权主义者在表述妇女应该上班挣钱的观点时所用的口吻，使一些人迷惑不解。1973年，芝加哥的社会研究所在八个城市对410名妇女进行过调查。对其中一个地区的调查是要了解妇女对妇女运动的反应。(调查人员把它称为“妇女解放运动”，这一术语常为妇女运动的反对者使用，表现了他们的无知或偏见。)社会研究所人员发现，被抽样的劳动阶级妇女(占总数三分之二)感觉她们比中产阶级妇女所受的压迫要深、更没有自由，同时也不相信妇女运动能给予她们帮助。她们认为运动会使这个问题恶化，给她们增加压力，促使她们上班，而她们在这个问题上没有多大的选择余地。她们是有工作，但如果能无需上班挣钱而在家吃穿不愁，她们会非常乐意放弃这份工作。在此次研究调查中，劳动阶级妇女非常讨厌她们认为的妇女运动领导人表现出的独裁主义态度，“妇女解放领导人试图告诉妇女她们该做哪些、该怎样感受、该为哪些事情感到自豪、哪些事情该感到羞耻。”文章作者个别采访妇女时也发现有类似的态度。

    露易斯·凯普·豪为《粉领工人》杂志采访过几位美容师。一个妇女被问到她的丈夫是否帮做家务时，她显得非常不高兴。“不，我不要他干。我宁可自己做饭、打理家中里里外外。我不相信什么妇女解放。我不相信所有那些扯淡──什么让自己丈夫做一半家务。”在被采访者中，她是较典型的，她认为如有可能女人就是要呆在家中照料孩子，因为妇女在外面干的大多数工作机械重复，令人乏味，有时非常危险。无论她们的收入对改善家庭经济状况多么重要，她们总是认为丈夫的工作是首要的，而自己料理家务的活是次要的。

    对于这些劳动阶级妇女来说，“压迫”与从事学术研究的马克思主义女权主义者或全国妇女组织成员所指的“压迫”，并不是同一回事。劳动阶级妇女所指的压迫，是这个制度对男人和女人做了些什么，并不仅指在这个家长式的、资本主义的制度下男人对女人做了什么。即便她们也在外面工作，她们还是把男人的作用看得比自己的要大。因此，她们通常难以参加针对男人的妇女运动。

  女权主义者的价值观与劳动阶级妇女

    正是在家庭，与男人的关系以及生儿育女这些问题上，女权主义者的价值观与文章作者所采访的劳动阶级妇女所表达的价值观之间出现严重的分歧。劳动阶级妇女把家庭远远地置于工作之上──这是她们获得自尊的主要源泉。许多早期的女权主义者认为家庭是一个桎梏，禁锢了妇女。她们中的一些人，如舒拉密丝·弗尔斯通在其《辩证的性别》中便提出集体轮流抚养孩子的办法。这些女权主义者似乎不太重视孩子，而劳动阶级妇女对这种做法却十分厌恶。

    女权主义者过分注意别人将自己视为性对象，是导致误解的另一方面。二十世纪七十年代初，女权主义者拒绝穿裙子或其他的传统女性服装，蓄留唯有自己才能护理的发式，从来不使用化妆品打扮自己。劳动阶级妇女则生活在视奇装异服为逆忤的文化环境中。正如一位妇女所说的那样：“被解放了的劳动阶级妇女有可能被看作生活放荡的女人。”

    曾被几位作者采访过的一些美容师指出，对劳动阶级妇女而言，她们有最好的职业。其中一人说道：“你不知道，我们多少人干美容这一行是为了要自立，我们在家中就拥有门店，自己做老板，能在家中等着孩子上学归来，如果男人失业了，日子还能过得下去。”另一位女士对豪这样说，“你总不能说女人关心自己的容貌是错的吧。我就关心自己的容貌，而且我认为我和别人一样解放。”

    对于这些很少有机会决定上班还是呆在家中的妇女而言，“同工同酬”可能就是她们与女权主义者共同的想法。而她们为什么不参加妇女运动要求得到与男人一样平等的就业机会呢？采访中发现两个方面的原因。

    1887年的一次工会集会上，人们首次提出平等就业机会的观点。过去的一百多年里，这个观点一直是劳动妇女生活中精神支柱的一部分。多年来，低收入妇女举行罢工，要求提高工资与更好的工作条件。但她们并没有把妇女运动提出的平等就业机会的主张看作是自己的事。由于长期以来这种要求一直遭到断然拒绝和以失败告终，因此就被看成可望而不可即的事了。

    其次，在抽象意义上赞成“同工同酬”观点的同时，她们强烈地感受到一点：即使就业再难，也得给男人一份工作使其能养家糊口。她们意识到此举给一个女人带来的困苦。但是，从家庭关系的大局着眼，她们亦认为在就业方面给予男人优先权及高薪是整个社会解决此问题的最佳办法。至于这个制度会发生变化，妇女能就业，挣的钱足以维持一家的生计，对此她们不抱什么希望。

    南希·塞菲采访过几位曾与从事工会工作与政治活动的女权主义者有过私下接触的妇女。这些女权主义者克服了误解的障碍，她们所接触的妇女对妇女解放均持赞许的态度。然而，这些妇女对妇女运动的所有认识是从大众媒体上得来的，她们看不到运动会给她们带来什么益处。

    既然这场运动在为妇女提供机会方面带来了重大变化，那么，为什么谈到还需要促成更多的变化时，不同阶层以及不同收入的妇女有那么多人异口同声地说：“我不是一名女权主义者，可是……”？也许答案在于早期妇女运动，尤其是运动的激进派发表过火的言辞留下的影响。许多人把“女权主义者”一词与仇视男人、搞女子同性恋、讨厌做母亲以及要求人人上班挣钱等联系起来。

    一个更有说服力的原因，可能是15到20年前采访过的劳动阶级妇女曾讨论过的价值差异。“妇女们想要什么？”这个问题不止一个答案，因为她们有各种不同的需要以及不同的价值观念。妇女运动认为所有的妇女都是姐妹，对基本权利和思想都持赞同的态度，问题是：这种情况导致了妇女运动的早期人们非常不能容忍各种不同意见。女权主义者现在变得开明多了，但许多妇女可能仍然认为有人还在告诉她们“该做什么，该怎么感受。什么是该感到自豪的，什么是该感到羞耻的。”

    虽然妇女们的种族、阶层、文化和信仰各不相同，但是她们需要增进彼此的了解。能尊重彼此的差异但又能为共同目标一起工作的一个坚强的密切协作的女性共同体，总是要比松散的女性组织带来更多的变化。

返回

Text 2

Free But Not Equal

    It was July 19,1848. Five women were meeting in Seneca Falls in upstate New York. They had come from many parts of the country to prepare a statement that would be presented at a special mass meeting the following day.

    "The history of mankind is a history of repeated injustices on the part of man toward woman," the statement began. "To prove this, let these facts be known."

    After hours of serious discussion, the five women put together their list of facts. It stated: man had forced woman to obey laws he had passed and in which she had no voice; he had taxed her to support a government which recognized her only when her property could provide it with income; he had denied her the chance of obtaining a better occupation or profession by denying her a better education; in her relationship with her husband, she must promise to obey him, thereby accepting him as her master with the right to take away her liberty and the right to punish her as he saw fit; by his superior attitude, he had destroyed her confidence in her own powers and had lessened her self respect. The five women agreed that each of the situations listed must be changed. Each objected to the traditional relationship between men and women.

    The leader of the group, Elizabeth Candy Stanton, believed it was essential to add one more point to this list. Mrs. Stanton had already gained a national reputation as a leading rebel in the fight for women's rights. Now, she wanted to go one step further.

    "We must demand and get the right to vote," declared Mrs. Stanton. "Without the vote, we have no share in the nation's political system. And, without that political right, we will never be free!"

    The other women, moved by Mrs. Stanton's fiery words, voted to add her statement on women's suffrage to their list of facts. And, the following day, before a cheering audience of three hundred women and men, the entire list was accepted as the first platform of the newly born women's rights movement.

    The rebels from Seneca Falls moved out to fight the battle for women's rights. They talked; they argued; they paraded; they made speeches. But, throughout the East, they lost every attempt to gain for themselves the right to vote.

    However, something amazing happened in the western territory of Wyoming. In 1869, the Wyoming Territorial Council quietly passed a bill giving the women of the territory the right to vote. Only a token few voted in the elections of 1870; but, in later elections, more and more exercised their political rights.

    To the surprise of many men, the women of Wyoming proved that they were well qualified to handle their new rights, without neglecting their children or their homes. Unfortunately, most men in other parts of the country did not think this way, so they fought to prevent the same action from taking place in their own states.

    For the next thirty years, the battle for women's suffrage went on. For most of those thirty years, except in a handful of western states, the battle was a losing one. Attempts were made every year in the United States Congress to pass a women's suffrage bill; every year, they failed.

    When the United States entered World War I, the national women's groups gave their entire support to the war effort. Not only did this give women the opportunity to provide essential help in a time of crisis, but it also helped them gain recognition as a valuable asset to their country.

    Finally, on August 26, 1920, the battle was won. The passage of the Nineteenth Amendment to the U.S. Constitution gave 17 million American women the right to vote.

    Seventy-two years after Mrs. Elizabeth Candy Stanton first voiced her demand for women's suffrage, women were finally getting a taste of political power. But most of the other changes sought by the first women's rights platform in 1848 were still to be won.

    After the passage in the Nineteenth Amendment, women did not automatically take a place alongside men in high political office or in top industry positions. They did move out into the world of work in far greater numbers, not necessarily because men welcomed them, but because the country needed their labor.

    By 1941, with America's entrance into World War II, a labor force was needed to build planes and guns and tanks for the nation's fighting men. Very often, that labor was made up of women, who worked successfully in dozens of essential occupations that had always been considered "man's work."

    The women did their jobs well, but they only needed to look inside their pay envelopes to see that their income was far less than a man's income for the same work. And, of course, as soon as the men came home from war, most women were fired.

    Certain areas were still open to women. They could teach or work in offices, factories, and service jobs, but usually at pay far lower than that earned by men for the same work.

    Just as disturbing to many working women was the attitude of men toward them. A woman might be qualified for a position in the field of law, medicine, or engineering. But she knew that any job she got in her chosen profession, if she could find one, would be at a level far below her skill and training.

    Women with superior scores in civil service tests found that men with lower scores got the best jobs. Women who were qualified for management jobs or important assignments were not given them because of the attitude of so many men: "Who wants to work for a woman?"

    In occupations of every kind, women faced discrimination just because they were women. Men, but not women, were permitted to smoke on the job; women, but not men, were told what to wear; women, but not men, were denied the right to return to their jobs if they took sick leave. And always, women were paid anywhere from one-third to one-half less than men for doing the same job.

    By the 1960s, almost 45 percent of the women in the United States were working at some occupation outside the home. In spite of their numbers, most of them were aware that they had made only a token advance. It seemed that little had changed since that day in 1848 when five rebels protesting the relationship between men and women, had written the first women's rights platform.

    The period of inactivity in the women's rights movement came to an end in the 1960s. During these years, many people were moved to action in a wide range of social and political problems, and many women turned again to the active search for equal rights.

    Thousands of women in dozens of cities across America joined in parades, mass meetings, and demonstrations to repeat the same demands they had been making for years: equal job and education rights; free day care centers for the children of working mothers; an end to the traditional relationship that insisted that man must support the family while woman must stay home and care for the children.

    The National Organization For Women, NOW, was formed to carry on the fight for women's rights.

    "The time has come," said the leaders of NOW, "for true equality for all women in America and for a fully equal partnership between men and women. The time has come for an end to discrimination against women in government, industry, the professions, the churches, the political parties, the labor unions, and in every other important field of American life."

    More important, the leaders of NOW, and of other women's rights groups, are concerned about educating people away from the traditional roles in which society has placed men and women. According to them, this traditional role of education begins almost at birth. Boy babies are given toy trucks to play with; girl babies are given dolls. Boys are asked to do certain "male" jobs while girls are encouraged to "play house." Books and TV show boys taking part in exciting adventures while girls seem to be left out. Now and then, a girl may be pictured as doing something daring or brave, but her presence is only a token one.

    Girls are often encouraged to train for traditional "women's" occupations while boys have their choice of the "superior" professions. And the girl who chooses to do something outside, or in addition to, the traditional house-wife-mother role is often considered somewhat unusual.

    Believers in women's rights know that in time the hundreds of laws that discriminate against women will be changed. They also know that the final fight for women's rights will have to be carried on, not through the courts, but through the re-education of men and women to their own needs and the roles they choose to play. Only when women, and men, too, can pick occupations and life styles according to their own needs and life desires, and not according to what is traditional in society, will the battle for women's rights be won.

(1530 words)  TOP

课文二

自由但不平等

    那是在1848年7月19日。五名妇女聚集在纽约州北部的塞尼卡福尔斯。她们来自全国各地，准备一份在第二天一次特殊的群众集会上宣读的宣言。


   “人类史是一部男女不平等的历史，”宣言这样开头。“为证明这一观点，诸位请看如下事实。”

   

    经过几个小时的认真讨论，这五名妇女列出事实清单，清单上写道：男人强迫女人服从自己制定的法律，而服从者别无选择；男人向女人征税，以维持一个只有当女人的财产能供其机构运转时才认可她的政府；男人通过剥夺女人接受良好教育的机会而使她无法获得体面的职业或职务；在与丈夫的关系问题上，她必须作出服从丈夫的承诺，因而将他看作是自已的主人，丈夫拥有剥夺她的自由的权利以及认为合适就可以惩罚妻子的权利；丈夫高高在上，摧毁了妻子对自身能力的自信，并降低了女人的自尊。这五名妇女一致认为：以上列举的每一项必须要改变。每一项均反对男人与女人之间的传统关系。

    小组组长伊丽莎白·坎迪·斯坦顿认为，有必要在清单上再加一条。斯坦顿夫人作为一名为妇女权利而斗争的运动领导人已经蜚声全国。此次，她要采取进一步的行动。

    “我们必须要求并获得选举权，”斯坦顿夫人声称。“如果我们没有选举权，我们在国家的政治制度中就没有发言权。没有这种政治权利，我们就永远不自由。”

    其他妇女被斯坦顿慷慨激昂的言辞所打动，同意将她关于妇女投票权问题的话写入那份清单里去。第二天，整张清单被300名欢呼雀跃的在场男女听众接受，被视为新生的妇女权利运动的第一份纲领性文件。


    从塞尼卡福尔斯归来的叛逆者开始为妇女的权利进行斗争。她们与人交谈，与人辩论，组织游行，发表演说。可是在整个东部，她们为自己争取选举权的每一个尝试都失败了。

    然而，在西部怀俄明，令人惊奇不已的事情发生了。1869年，怀俄明地区议会悄悄通过了赋予该州妇女选举权的法案。在1870年的几次选举中虽然只有几名妇女象征性地参加了投票；可是后来的选举中，越来越多的妇女行使了她们的政治权利。

    使许多男人感到惊讶的是，怀俄明的妇女证明了自己非常称职地行使新权利的同时，并没有置孩子与家庭于不顾。不幸的是，在这个国家其他地区的大多数男人认为这种做法行不通，因此他们竭力阻止类似的情况在自己的州里发生。

    在后来的30年时间里，争取妇女获得选举权的运动一直在进行。这30年的大部分时间里，除了西部少数的几个州外，这场运动均告失败。在美国国会，人们每年都试图通过妇女选举权法案，可是年复一年，她们均以失败而告终。

    美国卷入第一次世界大战后，全国的妇女团体都尽全力支持美国参战。这使得妇女们不仅得到了在危机时刻提供重要帮助的机会，同时还有助于她们获得作为国家重要群体的认可。

    在1920年8月26日，这场运动最终获得胜利，美国宪法第十九修正案通过，1700万妇女获得选举权。

    伊丽莎白·坎迪·斯坦顿夫人第一次喊出给予妇女选举权后72年过去了，妇女们最后尝到了政治权力的滋味。但是1848年妇女第一份权利纲领所追求的大部分变革仍未实现。

    在第十九修正案通过后，妇女们并没有自动地与男人一块在政坛上或企业的高层中任职。她们大批大批地出来工作，并不是因为男人欢迎她们，而是因为国家需要她们的劳动。

    到了1941年，美国参加第二次世界大战,需要劳动力来为参战的部队制造飞机、大炮和坦克。这些劳动力通常就由妇女组成，她们在十几个一直认为是“男人干的”重要工种中干得相当出色。

    尽管妇女们活干得不错，可她们只要往工资袋里瞧一瞧，就知道她们干同样的活比男人拿的钱要少得多。当然，男人从战场一回来，大多数女人就被解雇了。

    一些领域仍对女人开放。她们可以做教师，在办公室、工厂、服务行业工作。可是在做同样工作的情况下，她们的报酬通常比男人的低得多。

    同时困扰许多劳动阶级妇女的，是男人对女人的态度。某一妇女可能适应于做法律，医疗或工程方面的工作，可她的心里明白，她在择业时所得到的工作(假如她找到一份的话)远用不上她培训后获得的技能。

    在公务员测试中分数高的妇女发现分数低的男人得到了最好的工作。适合管理工作或重要岗位的妇女未获得这些工作，是因为许多男人持这样的观点：“谁会愿意给女人干活？”



    无论何种职业，妇女仅仅因为她们是女人而遭受歧视。男人但不是女人，可以在上班期间抽烟；女人，而不是男人，被告知要穿什么样的衣服；女人，而不是男人，如果她们请了病假就被剥夺了重返工作的权利。而且，无论在哪里工作，妇女做同样的工作，领取的报酬只是男人的三分之一到一半。

    到了二十世纪六十年代，差不多45%的美国妇女在外面从事某一种职业。尽管她们人量众多，她们中大多数人清楚，自己仅获得了一种象征性的进步。自1848年五名对男人与女人之间的关系提出反对意见的叛逆者写下第一份妇女权利纲领的那天起，妇女的状况没有发生多大的变化。

    二十世纪六十年代，妇女权利运动不活跃的时代结束。那些年里，许多人在社会与政治一系列问题上采取行动。许多妇女再次积极探寻平等权利。

    在全美的十多座城市里，成千上万的妇女一起参加游行，群众集会和示威，表达她们多年来孜孜以求的目标：平等的工作与教育权利；为女工设立免费日托孩子的中心；结束男人挣钱养家、女人照料家务孩子的传统关系。

    同时成立了全国妇女组织(NOW)，把争取妇女权利运动继续下去。

    全国妇女组织领导人说道：“所有美国妇女真正平等以及男女之间完全平等的一天来到了。在政府机构、企业、职业、教堂、政党、劳动以及美国社会生活所有重要领域，结束歧视妇女的做法的一天到来了。”

    更为重要的是：全国妇女组织以及其他的妇女权利团体的领导人，非常关注教育人们摒弃社会对男人与妇女所定的传统角色的问题。她们认为：教育的传统角色几乎自婴儿呱呱坠地就开始了。男婴的玩具为汽车；女婴的为洋娃娃。男孩子要做的是“男性”的活，而女孩子则鼓励其做“过家家”的游戏。书本与电视表现的是男孩参加令人兴奋不已的冒险活动而女孩则似乎被排除在外。有时候会出现女孩在做乖巧的或勇敢的事的画面，可是她的这种表现只是象征性的 。

    人们常鼓励女孩子接受妇女的传统职业培训，而男孩可选择“高人一等”的工作。女孩选择在外面做事，同时又扮演传统的家庭主妇的角色，这常常被认为多少有些不同寻常。

    从事争取妇女权利运动的人士相信，数百份歧视妇女的法律最终将被改变。她们也很清楚，争取妇女权利的最后胜利不是通过法院，而是通过根据男人和女人的需要及他们所要扮演的角色进行再教育。只有当妇女，也包括男人根据他们的自身的需要与生活愿望，而不是根据社会传统习俗选择职业，争取妇女权利的斗争才能取得胜利。

返回