One View of the Convention

by leonie Morris and Lindy Cassidy

It wasn't what we expected; but it was perhaps what we should have expected—predominantly white, middle-class, over thirty and moderate. This majority was represented in workshops such as 'Women and the Environment', 'Women and Employment', 'Women and Education', 'Women and Pregnancy', and 'Rural Women' (run by Federated Farmers?) However, a vocal minority representing the Lesbian and Feminist movements made itself felt in workshops such as 'Lesbian Mothers' and 'Feminism and Socialism'.

Even though there was such a wide spectrum of political thought represented most women left the convention with not only a warmer, and more intense feeling towards their sisters, but renewed confidence in themselves and other women. Obviously not even well-thought-out organisation and Margaret Mead could unite 2,200 women with such extreme opinions and life styles. Why did the convention then achieve such warmth and unity?

Perhaps because everyone identified with each other in a common struggle against—not only some men and women, but a whole system which has as its basic structure stereo-typed and restrictive role functions. However, it must be admitted that the recognition of the system as the main oppressor was only directly touched on by a few groups. However, though the other groups did not expressly state this the recommendations they made involved a different structuring of the system eg. education system should be revised to eradicate sex-role stereo-typing and women should have their own trade unions. Thus, in the words of Sonja Davies, 'we should not change ourselves to fit society, but society to fit ourselves.'