P.M. gets reaction from women

Press, 28 September 1976, Page 6

P.M. gets reaction from women

The broadside by the Prime Minister (Mr - Muldoon against women’s lib. last night has drawn forthright comment for and against. Some women in the audience at the National Council of Women conference were downright delighted.

Other reactions varied from wonder at talk of aggressive women from an “aggressive man.” to describing the Muldoon speech as “platitudes.” N.C.W. members in the audience said after the meeting that the Prime Minister’s comments had not been in the least bit contentious. Mrs Freda Cameron, president of the Christchurch branch of the N.C.W., refused to comment on the content of Mr Muldoon's speech Some members said they could understand his opinion, which thev felt was conservative. However, thev did not think he was virulent in his opinions. They said the liberation movement probably did need an aggressive spearhead, but thought the movement's radical exponents would probably tone their views down as they got older “We feel we have no need to be aggressive — we are fully liberated already.” said one woman. Another said Mr Muldoon's speech was ‘’tremendous."; and she agreed with everything he had said. Aggressive feminists do have a chip on their shoulder, and I would say they are un-1 happy, said another. The president of the j Christchurch branch of the j National Organisation of'

| Women (Mrs Barbara Smith)! . said she was not sure what' Mr Muldoon meant by an! 1 'aggressively liberated; > woman.” 1 “I believe lam liberated, [ but 1 don’t see myself as[ aggressive or unhappy. None ; .'of my friends fit that descrip- > . tion either." said Mrs Smith.) ; She felt that many women j i who were frustrated bv sex! role stereotyping did initially) . react aggressively. But they) i ( soon channelled this aggres-1 I sion into constructive outlets! i (such as politics and common- 1 tty activities. “Mr Muldoon prides him- ; .self on his aggressive' .approach to politics, thereby) t complying with traditional 1 ; sexist thinking that aggres-) Ision is appropriate for men, i but not for women. I “Women for too long have) accepted that to be feminine’ they must be submissive." I Mrs Smith said the libera-j , tion movement wished to see; both men and women ful-i I tilled as people. “The Prime Minister’s! I statement was full of plati-i tudes, which angered ill for) the National Party’s mani-j festo promises of action for| women’s rights,” said ai spokeswoman for the Abor-I tion Law Reform Association) , (Ms Jaqueline Steincamp). i 1 Ms Steincamp, who) attended the meeting, said) (that she was pleased that Mr)' 1 Muldoon had attended the:!

! meeting, but felt that it was! I a shame he did not under-) ) stand the many problems of | younger women. ! The convener of the Christ-1 church branch' of the; ! Women's Electoral Lobby; ■(Mrs C. Habgood) said that 1 I Mr Muldoon did himself a [disservice. A really secure) I male would never have felt) ■ threatened by so-called. ■ aggressively liberated: women His extravagent [description would apply to so I few as to be unworthy of : comment, and in no way i reflect the members of ) W.E.L., locally or nationally, !she said. He could be assured that ' there was no confusion i between equality of opportunity and interchangeability, . she said, although she did i admit he was correct- on one ; point — the “hopelessly tderilect housewife” was a Icasuality of modern Western ! civilisation, especially m New Zealand. I Mr Muldoon’s comments about the “aggressively j liberated woman” did not apply to members of the [Federation of University 1 Women, said the secretary of [ the Canterbury branch (Miss )C. Blair). “Our members do not fall ; into this category.” she said. . “The federation is trying to [get women with educations I to use them on boards, [ i bodies and in public life.” i