Minutes of the third planning meeting for Scholar and Feminist X, 1982, page 2

          - 2 _

differences between those who have some control in generating their income and
those who have less control; for example, there is a difference between a sales-
person who works from his/her home, who generates a task and is paid on commissions,
and a secretary or clerk who works from the home performing tasks given from

the office paid by the piece.

As in the prior two meetings, the issue of the electronic cottage was discussed
with many of the same questions raised, including a critique of the privatization
of the home and the limiting of women's action to the domestic sphere (especially
in light of the fact that historically women have had the most impact on society
when they have had access to the public sphere). On the other hand, several
people suggested that the availability of a computer in the home for work
purposes allows more flexibility and may make it possible to work part of the
time at home and part of the time in the office as one wished. Childcare
arrangements may be less problematic if work can be done in the home. The impact
of technology on men's life was raised. It was suggested that some men will want
to work in thehome, and thus the domestic sphere would not be only reserved

as a workplace for women, and that a result may be more equal relations within
the home as well as society. A question was raised, however, as to whether the
increased presence of men in the home was necessarily desireable. Others reminded
the group that not all homes were nuclear traditional in structure.

Significant implications of computer technology for education were presented.
Despite teachers‘ fears of computers, students benefit from the use of computers
in the educational process. They can learn at their own pace and the computer
is programmed to give the student positive, helpful feedback. The computer can
also function to keep the teacher "off the student's back."

Other positive aspects of computer technology were raised. Two examples were:
that computer language reflects no gender or ethnic bias, and that with knowledge
of how to operate computers women and disadvantaged groups could gain access to
information and, therefore, power.

At the close of the meeting, people spoke of several reasons for taking a critical
look at technology as it is currently being developed and implemented. It was
proposed that it is important for feminists to analyze what new types of power
relations are made possible by the new technology.

NOTE TO ALL PARTICIPANTS: Come to the next meeting (October 28 at 4:15 pm) with
a few questions that you might like to see the conference itself address. Discussion
of these questions will be our agenda for the meeting.

Present: Alice Amsden, Annette Baxter, Bettina Berch, Leslie Calman, Sally Chapman,
Lee Coppernoll, Betty Corbett, Sally Cummins, Eva Eilenberg, Wendy Fairey, Jane

Gould, Ruth D. Handel, Jamie Horwitz, Janie Kritzman, Maria La Sala, Julie Marsteller,
Nancy Miller, Esther Rowland, Sue Sacks, Quandra Stadler, Norma Stanton, Mary

Ellen Tucker.