Do Women in Science and Technology Need the Women's Movement?

Abstract

Not so many years ago, an educated, well-intentioned friend dismayed me when he said, Women don't need a revolution to get equal pay and equal job opportunities. This commotion about Women's Liberation--who does the dishes, who raises the kids--is simply beside the point. The economic issues are the only ones that really matter. Although my friend has since changed his mind about the women's movement, his comment raised a question which continues to frustrate me. I wonder if economics does not sometimes obscure the other factors necessary for women's total liberation. Particularly disturbing to me is the fact that women pursuing careers in technology and science and benefiting most from women's improved economic opportunities are probably the least politicized, the least feminist group of educated women. Because the economic situation for women has improved, some of the goals of the women's movement have changed. The economic picture for women is unquestionably better than it was, say, in 1960. More of us are working: about 41 percent of the workers in America are women. As we find places for ourselves within the existing power structure--as managers, cabinet members, elected public officials, or college professors--the talk within the movement is less about sisterhood and more about successfully learning the rules for acquiring power. This shift in emphasis within the movement, however, makes us vulnerable to some staggering losses. The ERA is in serious danger; the right to abortion may be revoked. Whereas the Phyllis Schlaflys and Anita Bryants run effectual political campaigns, the women's movement splinters, inviting its neutralization. One of our losses, I suggest, is that women in technical fields have not identified with the struggle for liberation because these women feel no economic oppression. On the contrary, ambitious women looking for careers in technology are told that their opportunities are unlimited.