The papers in this section review the status of women in different societies. Some are
revolutionary in ideology ( Israel, the Soviet Union and China), one is evolutionary ( Finland),
one is cross-cultural, and one is a historical view of the position of women in Colonial America.

The paper by Lantz et al. is an analysis of the power patterns between husband and wife, the
attitudes and behaviors toward premarital and extramarital sexual behaviors, and motives for
marriage are seen in Colonial magazines published in the preindustrial era of 1741-1794. The
data imply that power was normally vested in the male but that his authority was not always
exercised. Using subtle power, women exerted considerable influence during courtship and may
have shared equal influence in the areas of finance and morality. The pattern of romantic love
as the basis for marriage, at least among upper status groups, was common as part of a general
valuing of individualism. The data suggest that when someone deviated from the sexual norms,
the attitude toward women was one of sympathy and toward the male, ostracism. But with
respect to behavior, the women were physically punished or ostracized whereas the men were
not! Some patterns within the American family, some aspects of the status of women, some
moral distinctions, have origins predating our Industrial Revolution.

As we have seen, questions of the uniformity or diversity of social institutions and sex-role
distinctions have become significant feminist issues. This is simultaneously an important
theoretical question bearing upon the decisiveness of constitutional predisposition and human
plasticity. Barry, Bacon, and Child reviewed the ethnographic reports on 110 cultures, most of
them nonliterate. The response to very young children was dominated by their status as
"baby". 92% of the 96 cultures for which ratings included the infancy period were judged to
have no sex-linked differences in response to infants.

During childhood the overwhelming majority of cultures did make sex-linked distinctions.
Girls were most often pressured to become nurturant and responsible (and less clearly,
obedient), while boys were pushed to achieve and become self-reliant. There was very little
overlap in diverse cultures on those variables. Sex differences seen in our society, like those of
nonliterate people, are cultural adaptations to certain biological characteristics. But the
variability between and within cultures attests to a relativity or a functionalism of sex
differences. In this study, large sex differences were associated with economies that placed a
premium on strength, and cultures where large cooperative families existed. Thus, isolated
nuclear families (especially in industralized nations), are likely to be characterized by adults
able to take over the responsibilities of the other partner. The socialization of middle-class
American girls shows that to be largely true. But, as Bacon noted in the later paper, men and
women must also be prepared to fulfill tasks specifically associated with their sex. Overall, then,
socialization tendencies in this culture are complex and, since Colonial times, reflect both sex
categorization and a premium placed upon individuality.

Scandinavian sex-roles are usually regarded as progressive. Women's participation in the labor
force is common and child-care facilities and other helping institutions exist. In her paper,
Haario-Mannila reports the results of interviews with women in Helsinki. In spite of egalitarian
values, she found that within the home older divisions persist: women are responsible for

-193-