Skip to content
Call Us Today! 212-533-4646 | MON-FRI 12PM - 4PM (EST)
DONATE
SUBSCRIBE
Search for:
About Us
UNWLA 100
Publications
FAQ
Annual Report 2023
Annual Report 2022
Annual Report 2021
Initiatives
Advocate
Educate
Cultivate
Care
News
Newsletters
Sign Up For Our Newsletter
Join UNWLA
Become a Member
Volunteer With Us
Donate to UNWLA
Members Portal
Calendar
Shop to Support Ukraine
Search for:
Print
Print Page
Download
Download Page
Download Right Page
Open
1
2-3
4-5
6-7
8-9
10-11
12-13
14-15
16-17
18-19
20-21
22-23
24-25
26-27
28-29
30-31
32-33
34-35
36-37
38-39
40
their early lives as if childrearing required a lifetime’s sacrifice and full-time commitment. If the biological argument is true, one can further argue, why is it necessary to subject boys and girls to such system atic and forceful sex-role socialization? Why, if the differences are "natural,” must we constantly reprimand children with admonitions that boys-d on ’t-this and girls-don’t-that? Why, if the differences are rooted in our biology, do a large majority of individual women strive for achievem ent when so ciety offers opportunities for them to do so? Why has it been necessary to devote so much attention, energy and thought to solving the ’’woman q u estion ” - both among th ose who believe her place is in the home and th ose who believe her place is in the House;;; and the Senate — if nature has provided all the answers? The final irony of the biological argument is that it d o es not take biological differences seriously enough. Recent research has revealed that biological factors do help to determine personality traits; the traits of dominance and subm issiveness, for example, have been found to have large inheritable com ponents. But the effects of this biological potential could be detected only in males. The research data su g g e sts that on ly males in our culture are raised with sufficient flexibility, with adequate latitude given to their biological differences, for their "natural” or biologically determined potential to shine through. Females, on the other hand, are apparently subjected to an upbringing which so ignores their unique attributes that even the effects of biology seem to be swamped. Again, the important point is that our society treats the individual without regard to her uniqueness. She is perceived and reared only as a member of a group on the basis of som e assum ed average characteristic. As a result, sh e is not pre p a i d to realize her own potential in the way the values of indi viduality and self-fulfillment imply that sh e should. Even if it were conclusively proven that women have, on the average, a greater natural motivation to care for children, than do men, this would still not prove that all women will be nurturant and that all men will not. We know that a biological difference exists between men and women in height, and yet there are many short men and many tall women. No matter what biological differences there may be between the sex es, there will always be a great deal of overlap. There will always be even greater variation within a sex than there is between the se x es. Were our culture to permit boys and girls to exp ress and develop their "natural” potential, there would be the widest p ossible variation in outcom e consistent with the range of individual differences among people, regardless of sex. It is clear that the reactionary biological argument is irrelevant and that the liberal discrimination argument cannot fully explain w om en’s lack of achievem ent as professionals, scholars and artists — or, for the matter, as well-paid workers in the labor force. For answers to this question w e need to look deeper and harder at our society, at our child-rearing practices and at the myths our culture perpetuates. The forces under mining the ambitions and aspirations of fem ales begin to operate from the first day a female is born. They take the forms of sex-role conditioning, sex-role stereotyping and sex-role socializaton. Education — as practiced informally by parents and peers and formally by the sch ool system — is the primary channel through which th ese forces operate. Next month, the topic of this column will be sexism in educaiton and the current efforts to eliminate sex bias from the educational process. 26 НАШЕ ЖИТТЯ 1978 January 12th — Solidarity Day. The Executive Committee of Ukrainian National Women’s League of America asks all its members to part icipate in Solidarity Day — January 12th, — a day of our spiritual unity with victims of persecution underthe soviet regime. A young Ukrainian activist, Journalist Vjacheslaw Chornovil is the initiator of this memorial. This day not only marks the day of his arrest by the soviet state, but in effect the beginning of the liquidation of Ukrainian intell ectuals of the 60's. This day has become a day of protest for other persecuted Ukrainians, and they mark it with fast and writing of petitions. We, Ukrainians in the free world should join our brothers and sisters who are persecuted in the following way: 1. Make this day a day of fast 2. Write letters to the press and organizations concerned with freeing of political prisoners, as well as letters to Ukrainian prisoners, care of soviet agencies. 3. Explain to those around us — Americans — the horrible plight of Ukrainians in soviet prisons, medical in sane asylums. The Executive Committee of UNWLA. FIRST MAJOR NATIONAL STUDY OF ETHNIC MUSEUMS, LIBRARIES, ARCHIVES AND ART GALLERIES AT KENT STATE UNIVERSITY The Center for the Study of Ethnic Publications at Kent State University has been awarded a $37,761 grant from the U.S. Office of Education, Ethnic Heri tage Studies Program. ’’Preserving the Cultural Heritage: Ethnic Museums, Li braries, Archives and Art Galleries in the United S ta tes” is the title of the research project to be conducted by Dr. Lubomyr R. Wynar, project director, and Lois Butt- lar, assistant director. Dr. Wynar is Pro fessor of Library S c ien c e and Director of the Center for the Study of Ethnic Publi cations; Mrs. Buttlar is a librarian and a Ph.D. candidate in the C ollege of Edu cation at Kent State University. The major objectives of the project are to: 1) conduct the first com prehen sive national survey of ethnic museums, libraries, archives and art galleries in the U.S. in order to determine the nature and extent of their resources and special ser v ices to the community and educational institutions; 2) prepare a com prehensive guide to such ethnic institutions covering over 70 ethnic groups, which will serve as a major reference tool for teachers, li brarians and students of ethnicity in lo cating ethnic resources and materials. The new em phasis on cultural pluralism in American education is based on recognition and appreciation of the na tion’s rich variety of ethnic custom s, art, tradition, language and history. The preservation of the cultural heritage by individual ethnic groups in the United States is directly related to the re sou rces and programs of ethnic mu seum s, libraries, archives and art galleries in this country. Anyone interested in contributing to the project, or who has information about institutions which should be in cluded in this survey please write to: Dr. Lubomyr R. Wynar, Center for the Study of Ethnic Publications, School of Library Scien ce, Kent State University, Kent, Ohio 44242. Видання C оюзу Українок A мерики - перевидано в електронному форматі в 2012 році . A рхів C У A - Ню Йорк , Н . Й . C Ш A.
Page load link
Go to Top
1 
2-3 
4-5 
6-7 
8-9 
10-11 
12-13 
14-15 
16-17 
18-19 
20-21 
22-23 
24-25 
26-27 
28-29 
30-31 
32-33 
34-35 
36-37 
38-39 
40 
