Brendan/Coolian wrote:
>
> >Do you honestly think that sexism doesn't exist? Or that it does but it
> >is not a problem worth talking about? You have not stated this sentiment
> >in so many words, but you do seem to be expressing it. Is this intended?
Ok. I'm going to say all this again.
> But we try to deny our sex. We try to take everything to this
> ultimate "neuter" level, which cannot exist.
We've addressed this issue.
Repeat: We do not want to make things neuter. We are WOMEN, and MEN, and
PROUD of this.
What we WANT is to figure out if there is a problem, and if so, what it
is.
> Forcing people to be something they do not
> want/can't be is absolutely outrageous and ultimately, we'll find out how
> many people we forced into positions of power who couldn't do the job.
We don't want to do this. What we do want is to figure out what *artificial*
limits there are, and how to remove those.
Note: a firefighter who cannot lift a firehose is a natural limit. A
firefighter
who can't get a job because the uniform doesn't fit her breasts is an
artificial
limit. Can you understand this difference?
> But still we force the neuter. We force the opportunity to drop
> the standards and show how wonderfully noble we can be. THAT is what is
> offensive. The fact that we give in is what makes me want to spit.
We're not doing this. We're not arguing for it. I think *you* are swinging
as far off the topic as you're accusing most of us of doing. You seem to be
assuming that we're trying for the politically-correct. We're not. Please,
please listen.
> So, to sum up what the hell I'm saying is: we have to try to
> understand each other first, rather than trying to change it immediately
> without first understanding the reasoning behind the other's position
> first.
Yup. And this is what we've been TRYING to do. To figure out IF there is
an artificial limit imposed on women who want to go into computing, what
it is, and how we can remove it with least upset/damage/harm to anyone.
Which means, we need to try to understand. And we need to talk. And yes,
some of this conversation will be things some of the people on the list
don't want to hear.
> Because there's a difference between being PC and trying to just
> follow what you feel is right. PC is a set of rules that society has
> decided on to avoid prosecution, to avoid protest. But that doesn't mean
> they are right at all.
And politically correct stuff makes me sick too. *we* *don't* *want* *PC*.
We want to figure out what the problem really is, and address the real
problems, if they exist, and intelligently.
> I feel sexism exists, but I think we have to choose our battles,
> and sometimes we just have to wonder if being a bastard and fighting before
> we can figure out another way is just more than a little ignorant.
Um. We're doing the figuring out, and battle-choosing. Except that some
people in the list, such as you, Brendan, *appear* to have decided we're
attacking you. Uh. We're not. We're trying to /think/ and to /talk/. And
we would welcome intelligent discussion and input from you. But please,
PLEASE, look at what we're really talking about, not what you assume we're
saying.
Jenn V.
--
Humans are the only species to feed and house entirely separate species
for no reason other than the pleasure of their company. Why?
[EMAIL PROTECTED] Jenn Vesperman http://www.simegen.com/~jenn/
************
[EMAIL PROTECTED] http://www.linuxchix.org
