Re: Fw: [issues] Screenshots - on a lighter note
On Sun, 24 Oct 1999, Caitlyn M. Martin wrote: > Brendan/Coolian wrote: > > > >or do you think that forcing porn down people's throats is a good > > >thing? yes... let's desencitize that 74 year old lady trying to pick out a > > >nice desktop for the computer a young friend is setting up for her > > > > Who's saying any of that is happening. Grow some skin. > > I am! My Mom runs Linux. She's not 74, but she is definitely an older woman, > and I would *never* point her to themes.org. I know that she would find it > offensive. My mom runs Linux and she's not yet 70. I don't know how she'd feel about themes.org, but since she's on the list here, she can answer if she wants. :) -- _Deirdre * http://www.linuxcabal.net * http://www.deirdre.net "Mars has been a tough target" -- Peter G. Neumann, Risks Digest Moderator "That's because the Martians keep shooting things down." -- Harlan Rosenthal <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>, retorting in Risks Digest 20.60 [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://www.linuxchix.org
[issues] Slashdot on meeting women
Okay, Slashdot's getting lower and lower on my personal scale every day. http://slashdot.org/article.pl?sid=99/10/23/202252&mode=flat A brief quote: - Don't Waste Your Time on Geek Girls Here you are, an obsessed coder and all that, spending 2/3 of your waking time online and clicking on Slashdot five times a day. Wouldn't it be nice if you could find a woman who shares your interests? No! A woman just like you wouldn't be there for you when you wanted a hug. She'd be obsessively coding or posting on Slashdot herself, and would brush you off when you needed her. What you really want is a woman who will be there for you when you get tired of staring at your monitor and need some loving, but will leave you alone and not demand your attention when you're busy. You don't want a Geek Girl. You want a woman who is willing and able to meet a geek's needs, which is not the same thing at all. Men involved in activities that demand long periods of intense concentration (programmers, artists, writers, musicians, etc.) need women who will respect what they do and help them do it well, not women who compete with them. We need what are now called "old fashioned girls" who don't mind cooking our meals, rubbing our sore shoulders, and running our bath water for us. There are plenty of these women out there. They're as eager to find you as you are to find them. The trick is sorting through the 6 billion people on this planet to find the woman who is right for you instead of wasting your time on women with whom you cannot possibly build a long-term, mutually beneficial relationship. - I don't even know where to begin on this one. <#include rant_on_fscked_up_gender_politics.h> srl [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://www.linuxchix.org
Re: [issues] Slashdot on meeting women
srl wrote: Okay, Slashdot's getting lower and lower on my personal scale every day. http://slashdot.org/article.pl?sid=99/10/23/202252&mode=flat A brief quote: - Don't Waste Your Time on Geek Girls Here you are, an obsessed coder and all that, spending 2/3 of your waking time online and clicking on Slashdot five times a day. Wouldn't it be nice if you could find a woman who shares your interests? No! A woman just like you wouldn't be there for you when you wanted a hug. She'd be obsessively coding or posting on Slashdot herself, and would brush you off when you needed her. What you really want is a woman who will be there for you when you get tired of staring at your monitor and need some loving, but will leave you alone and not demand your attention when you're busy. You don't want a Geek Girl. You want a woman who is willing and able to meet a geek's needs, which is not the same thing at all. Men involved in activities that demand long periods of intense concentration (programmers, artists, writers, musicians, etc.) need women who will respect what they do and help them do it well, not women who compete with them. We need what are now called "old fashioned girls" who don't mind cooking our meals, rubbing our sore shoulders, and running our bath water for us. There are plenty of these women out there. They're as eager to find you as you are to find them. The trick is sorting through the 6 billion people on this planet to find the woman who is right for you instead of wasting your time on women with whom you cannot possibly build a long-term, mutually beneficial relationship. - I don't even know where to begin on this one. <#include rant_on_fscked_up_gender_politics.h> srl [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://www.linuxchix.org I have said enuff, but if you want to see sad things, just take a look at the marketing of foreign women, the modern day descendants of the "Asian Brides". It is usually too depressing to think about. But this slashdot stuff is like it. I giggle, but it can get sort of demeaning. But these "alternative sourcing of 'traditional women' " are out there..." Have Fun, Sends Steve
Re: [issues] Objectification (was screenshots et al)
On Sun, 24 Oct 1999, Steve Kudlak wrote: > This seems like silly humour to me. I would to see the original articles, if > someone is going to present a critique. I don't knowI mean some things seem more of a composite of Anthro/Women's Studies 316 discussion related to a few books, in particular one (Nisa) examining the native South African !Kung population, who had very laxed sexual taboos compared to our own, and no concept of virginity, and close to no domestic violence... quite a few things were going well for the Kung, and maybe they just didn't have some of the wierd hangups that we do... compare that to our next work about conservative islamic society where 14-24 year old women regularly marry men 5-10 years older than they are, because... there needs to be proof of virginity, and a bride absolutely must be virginal or the whole familly's honor is screwed over... I think America and the emerging global culture is somewhere in the middle of those two... but which one would work for us? > over done like, conflict. SO I am reluctant to ask when people say "pedophilia" > do they sleeping with(having as lover) a 17 year old, a 17 years old female > human 17 year old female human 17 year old guy human, 17 if you are more than I was thinking more in terms of older men who want a virginal young girl (no matter what age), if you absolutely have to break into legalism pick an age of consent law, most of them seem fairly rational and cover logical exeptions well... a few are restrictive, but it's never been my biggest worry... I think it kind of applies to geek culture... thinking about the Infoseek CEO's adventures a few weeks ago and /.'s apparent obsession with subservient non-geek women, it seems like "issues" is a fine place to talk about it... as well as allong the lines of "objectification" and I'd rather chat about this stuff with my peers, rather than anthro grad students or professors... (which takes a greater time investment and doesn't bring up many fresh ideas) -mekD [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://www.linuxchix.org
Re: [issues] Slashdot on meeting women
On Mon, 25 Oct 1999, Steve Kudlak wrote: > > A woman just like you wouldn't be there for you when you wanted a hug. > > She'd be obsessively coding or posting on Slashdot herself, and would > > brush you off when you needed her. What you really want is a woman who You know what's funny -- This artical doesn't really bother me..After reading it, I probably woudln't *date* Roblimo, but seeing as he's both male and married, this probably wasn't a great fear anyway. I guess I don't see it as any more of a problem than pages on how to get geek girls or guys. Some folks (both male and female, straight and gay) want an SO who holds down the fort and plays more of a support role than anything else. If they can find someone who doesn't mind this, more power to them... The important thing being that this artical is more about personal lives than public lives, I guess... hmm..am I missing something? Vinnie (not living up to the rfl name? :) ) [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://www.linuxchix.org
Re: Fw: [issues] Screenshots
Consider also the fact that not everyone browsing these themes is an adult. I have a 9 year old daughter who has been using linux for two years now and sets up her own gui. So far, she hasn't done anything too incredibly fancy, but she's learning fast, and eventually she'll want to try some of these themes. I know I wouldn't be too comfortable with her browsing some of the subject matter she'd be likely to encounter. I can teach her not to click on something that says "over 18 only" - we've had that discussion and so far she's followed the rules - but if it's scattered around randomly, how can she feel welcome there? In this case, it doesn't matter how thick or thin skinned she is... Personally, I don't have any problem with the fact that porn exists and that some people enjoy putting it in there themes or whatever else they want. I don't enjoy it, but I accept the fact that many people do. The point is, and I think the point that people have been trying to get across in their posts is this: There is a place for everything. Themes that are "adult" in nature belong categorized as such... and themes that are not adult in nature shouldn't include adult content. Porn (whether "hardcore" or "softcore" or whatever variety), out of context, is offensive to most people. Example: If you find an explicit picture tucked in someone's dresser drawer or in their bathroom newspaper rack, your reaction to it is going to be a lot different than if you found the same picture taped to their front door or pasted in their car windows. These examples may seem absurd, but placement of these pictures on themes.org (and I'm not putting down themes.org in particular, this just seems to be the instance that sparked the discussion) isn't much different. Well, that's my 2 cents ;-) Michelle (aka "Astraea") -Original Message- From: Deirdre Saoirse <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Date: Monday, October 25, 1999 3:07 AM Subject: Re: Fw: [issues] Screenshots - on a lighter note >On Sun, 24 Oct 1999, Caitlyn M. Martin wrote: > >> Brendan/Coolian wrote: >> >> > >or do you think that forcing porn down people's throats is a good >> > >thing? yes... let's desencitize that 74 year old lady trying to pick out a >> > >nice desktop for the computer a young friend is setting up for her >> > >> > Who's saying any of that is happening. Grow some skin. >> >> I am! My Mom runs Linux. She's not 74, but she is definitely an older woman, >> and I would *never* point her to themes.org. I know that she would find it >> offensive. > >My mom runs Linux and she's not yet 70. I don't know how she'd feel about >themes.org, but since she's on the list here, she can answer if she >wants. :) > >-- >_Deirdre * http://www.linuxcabal.net * http://www.deirdre.net >"Mars has been a tough target" -- Peter G. Neumann, Risks Digest Moderator >"That's because the Martians keep shooting things down." -- Harlan Rosenthal ><[EMAIL PROTECTED]>, retorting in Risks Digest 20.60 > > > >[EMAIL PROTECTED] http://www.linuxchix.org > [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://www.linuxchix.org
Re: [issues] Women and the Open Source Community (was screenshots)
On Sat, 23 Oct 1999, TeknoDragon wrote: > On Sat, 23 Oct 1999, Nils Philippsen wrote: > > > I don't think it is valid to say that just because s.th. is "culture", > > that it's right. > > likewise it's not valid to refute any cultural mechanism... I see this > often in religious arguments... and well, the refutation of all > social/psychological devices as worthless is ethnocentric, unfortunately > that perspective might as well deem the idea of ethnocentricism as an > informal fallacy is popycock... I didn't mean that. If someone wants to belive in a certain religion, that's fine. But to shove religion down people's throats whether they want it or not is not my thing. That "law/justice positivism" (wording?) thing is what bothers me. Culture _can_be_ good (in many cases it is), but it needn't be. Nils -- Nils Philippsen / Vogelsangstrasse 115 / D-70197 Stuttgart / +49.711.6599405 [EMAIL PROTECTED] / [EMAIL PROTECTED] / [EMAIL PROTECTED] The use of COBOL cripples the mind; its teaching should, therefore, be regarded as a criminal offence. -- Edsger W. Dijkstra [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://www.linuxchix.org
Re: [issues] Women and the Open Source Community (was screenshots)
On Sat, 23 Oct 1999, Nicole Zimmerman wrote: > I'm not sure if that's quite right... but it is REALLY easy for the man > to divorce women (like if they don't bear children) but very difficult > to go the other way (the man has to be a pretty big bastard). Kinda depends on what country you look at, I think. > > I don't think it is valid to say that just because s.th. is "culture", > > that it's right. > > Oh, that's not what I'm saying. I'm saying that we can't really say it's > 100% wrong for women to follow the Muslim system of "purdah" (veiling > and seclusion) and so forth just because we think our society "works > better" and whatnot. I didn't want to say that neither. What's wrong is if people are oppressed to do this. I'm a Christian but I have a problem with e.g. that our constitution states religious freedom in our constitution when in fact Christian churches are supported and others are hindered (not much but one can see it). > That, however, does not make some of the behaviour toward women in such > cultures correct, nor does it mean women here are treated 100% with > respect 100% of the time. Nod. Nils -- Nils Philippsen / Vogelsangstrasse 115 / D-70197 Stuttgart / +49.711.6599405 [EMAIL PROTECTED] / [EMAIL PROTECTED] / [EMAIL PROTECTED] The use of COBOL cripples the mind; its teaching should, therefore, be regarded as a criminal offence. -- Edsger W. Dijkstra [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://www.linuxchix.org
Re: [issues] Women and the Open Source Community (was screenshots)
On Sat, 23 Oct 1999, Cat wrote: > On Sat, 23 Oct 1999, Nils Philippsen wrote: > > > On Thu, 21 Oct 1999 [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: [snip] > > > I hope you will also speak out whenever you hear males being sexist - > > > > In general yes. Sometimes (depends on if the person put down can handle it > > by herself), I just lean back, watch the battle and applaud afterwards :-) > > To be serious: not every person wants to get unsolicited assistance in > > such cases. > > > I would personally find it more important for men to object to the sexism > that takes place out of women's earshot. I can defend myself, true, > and I would prefer to do so rather than have some guy jump in and do it > for me (in most cases). The place to combat it would be behind the > scenes. If there weren't sexism out of earshot, then people wouldn't have > to watch what they say, or be careful when members of the opposite sex > were actually around, wouldn't you agree? Um, didn't think of that when I wrote my response... nobody's perfect -- I'm far from it. I recall a situation when I was serving my military duty where two people (a man and a woman) were talking about "kicking spouses if they don't work as expecte". I didn't stand up then, but I also didn't when someone else was promoting capital punishment to be reinstated here in Germany. Some of them were my superiors and I had little self-confidence back then. Nils -- Nils Philippsen / Vogelsangstrasse 115 / D-70197 Stuttgart / +49.711.6599405 [EMAIL PROTECTED] / [EMAIL PROTECTED] / [EMAIL PROTECTED] The use of COBOL cripples the mind; its teaching should, therefore, be regarded as a criminal offence. -- Edsger W. Dijkstra [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://www.linuxchix.org
Re: [issues] Slashdot on meeting women
On Mon, 25 Oct 1999, Vinnie Surmonde wrote: > > > A woman just like you wouldn't be there for you when you wanted a hug. > > > She'd be obsessively coding or posting on Slashdot herself, and would > > > brush you off when you needed her. What you really want is a woman who > > I guess I don't see it as any more of a problem than pages on how to get > geek girls or guys. Some folks (both male and female, straight and gay) > want an SO who holds down the fort and plays more of a support role than > anything else. If they can find someone who doesn't mind this, more power > to them... aha. i think you've hit on something. I kinda find it offensive for anyone to more-or-less openly seek someone to be hir maintainer-of-all-things-domestic-and-emotional. And, gender politics being what they are, it's most often men looking for this from women. THere are women who do the same, only in reverse. I think it's part of being a responsible adult to take care of your own life-- from doing the laundry to maintaining emotional well-being. It's fine to have some support in that. For me, it's *not* a goal to spend so much time geeking that i need someone else to write the rent checks and wash the dishes. IMO, any geek--- male, female, or otherwise--- who aspires to this almost deserves to be single. Who wants to date someone who spends so much time on projects that they have no time for an SO? just my $0.02, srl [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://www.linuxchix.org
Re: [issues] Slashdot on meeting women
On Mon, 25 Oct 1999 10:48:53 -0700 (PDT), Vinnie Surmonde <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> said: >You know what's funny -- This artical doesn't really bother me..After >reading it, I probably woudln't *date* Roblimo, but seeing as he's >both male and married, this probably wasn't a great fear anyway. Maybe I'm giving Roblimo more credit than he deserves, but I saw it as a rather funny satire. Kelly [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://www.linuxchix.org
Re: [issues] Slashdot on meeting women
On Mon, 25 Oct 1999, srl wrote: > aha. i think you've hit on something. I kinda find it offensive for > anyone to more-or-less openly seek someone to be hir > maintainer-of-all-things-domestic-and-emotional. And, gender politics > being what they are, it's most often men looking for this from women. > THere are women who do the same, only in reverse. I'll definetly agree it's more prevelent (largely because it was the socially accepted 'norm' for years) amount heterosexual males. > I think it's part of being a responsible adult to take care of your own > life-- from doing the laundry to maintaining emotional well-being. It's > fine to have some support in that. For me, it's *not* a goal to spend so > much time geeking that i need someone else to write the rent checks and > wash the dishes. IMO, any geek--- male, female, or otherwise--- who > aspires to this almost deserves to be single. Who wants to date someone > who spends so much time on projects that they have no time for an SO? yeah, I pretty much agree. I certainly wouldn't *date* someone like that. I don't find it too offensive, though...it's when it's presented as the best or only way to be that it bothers me. And an argument could be made for division of labor -- i.e. I do the out-of-house stuff and you do the in house stuff or whatever..in other words, not necessarily not enough time for an SO, but 'these are all the things that need to be done. I'll do all of these if you'll do all of these' -- being read into the artical.. This was my /. quote today, though..it's bad when you find yourself wondering if a random database was trolling :) > The duration of passion is proportionate with the original resistance of > the woman. -- Honore DeBalzac Vinnie -- Reality is a formality, an agreed upon set of lies -- J.D. Catron Obligatory pathetic website at http://george.he.net/~drachen [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://www.linuxchix.org
Re: [issues] Slashdot on meeting women
vinnie wrote: > You know what's funny -- This artical doesn't really bother me..After > reading it, I probably woudln't *date* Roblimo, but seeing as he's both > male and married, this probably wasn't a great fear anyway. yeah, it didn't bother me either, and i think the reason is that it's completely upfront about what it is -- there's no implication that women can't possibly enjoy computers, for example, or even that all /. readers are male. it says right there at the top that he gets young (immature) male geeks asking him for advice a lot, and so he thought he'd offer some. so he goes ahead and espouses his views of the world... and again, he never says that women *should* live in the "clean-the-house, cook-the-man's-dinner" box. just that that's the kind of woman he wants (has?), and recommends for geeks. the fact that i disagree with that, and indeed most of what he says, and that i think he's giving some pretty bad advice to these kids, doesn't mean that i think he shouldn't post such things on the site he runs (i know, no one is suggesting that), or that i don't want to visit the site. it just means that i now think less of "Roblimo" as a person. no big deal, since i'll probably never meet the guy. maybe next time he writes an editorial i'll be less likely to read it. kelly wrote: > Maybe I'm giving Roblimo more credit than he deserves, but I saw it as > a rather funny satire. yeah, i don't know whether it was intended as satire... at first i thought maybe it was going to be, but then as i read it i became less sure. one thing i'm sure of is that there are some young immature geeks who are taking it completely seriously, and trying to apply his advice to their lives. that's a little sad, but again, not a reason (in my mind) to boycott the site... now, the one part which i found mildly offensive was his claim that geeks can't be supportive in a relationship. i was offended not because he was saying this about "girl geeks", but because he was also saying it about all geeks. and it's just plain false. my fiancee and i have been together for over six years, and although she's not as much of a geek as me, we are both extraordinarily supportive of each other. so if anything, i was offended as a geek, not as a feminist. (and yes, i do consider myself a feminist. i hope my not being offended in this case doesn't make me a bad feminist!) but i wasn't all that offended, partly because i think society as a whole has a lot worse stereotypes of what geeks are like, and so the possibility of adding "not supportive in a relationship" to that doesn't really worry me. plus of course, his audience isn't exactly a good cross-section of "society as a whole" anyway. ...derF\lieN Neil "Fred" Picciotto --- [EMAIL PROTECTED] --- http://www.derf.net/ [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://www.linuxchix.org
Re: [issues] Objectification (was screenshots et al)
On Sun, 24 Oct 1999, TeknoDragon wrote: > The idea of viriginity, for instance, is of apparent utmost importance to > a great portion of our cultural bretheren (usually males). ...in women, but not in themselves. :) Fortunately, I'm a widow. I'm exempt from having to be a virgin. :) > Is it a wonder that we've got so many stinking pedophiles in the > US? Waifish models and toothpick superstars that try to look like they're > 12 don't really give me any right sense of an equal, loving, and > supportive partner. Unless you happen to like your partner gone from 5 am to late at night, worried constantly about their weight, etc. Male models seem to have it somewhat easier as it seems to be more often a second career. As a point: a woman I know is currently having health problems that would require surgery. She's a model, specifically a lingerie model, and the surgery is abdominal. She's worried that the surgery would end her career, but if she didn't have it, it may end her life. How's that for choices? I can't imagine having a job like that, I really can't. -- _Deirdre * http://www.linuxcabal.net * http://www.deirdre.net "Mars has been a tough target" -- Peter G. Neumann, Risks Digest Moderator "That's because the Martians keep shooting things down." -- Harlan Rosenthal <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>, retorting in Risks Digest 20.60 [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://www.linuxchix.org
Re: [issues] /. Uncle Robin's Advice for Lovelorn Geeks
On Sun, 24 Oct 1999, Lynn Siprelle wrote: > *snort* this is hysterical. My dh is a telco/router guy and I'm a web > designer/entrepreneur/programmer/really-just-want-to-be-a-housewife-at-this-poin > t-but-can't-put-the-damn-mouse-down gal. When we lost our DSL connection > for two weeks (and thus the ability to both be online at once) we had to go > back to sharing a computer and it nearly ended our marriage. Thank GODDESS > US Worst got us back up. IP masquerading leads to marital harmony: film at 11. -- _Deirdre * http://www.linuxcabal.net * http://www.deirdre.net "Mars has been a tough target" -- Peter G. Neumann, Risks Digest Moderator "That's because the Martians keep shooting things down." -- Harlan Rosenthal <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>, retorting in Risks Digest 20.60 [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://www.linuxchix.org
Re: [issues] /. Uncle Robin's Advice for Lovelorn Geeks
On Mon, 25 Oct 1999, helen newman wrote: > this point has really stuck with me. i think in many cases it can be > wrong, but more importantly i think this point sums up the problem with > this article. it assumes that all men want need in life is some bimbo > woman that he cant talk to but cooks and cleans for him. this is the > opposite i have found in my life. I have had relationships with geeks and non-geeks and found those with geeks to be more satisfying. For one, I once had the reverse: a guy who stayed home and cooked and cleaned. We really didn't have a whole lot in common, though we did love each other. But things fell apart. > the underlying premise of the /. article is that a geek man needs a > woman to look after him is flawed. it places women back into the > fifties ideal of the nuclear family. Remember that the guy in question was RAISED during the Ozzie and Harriet regime. I think this offers some perspective on where he's coming from. -- _Deirdre * http://www.linuxcabal.net * http://www.deirdre.net "Mars has been a tough target" -- Peter G. Neumann, Risks Digest Moderator "That's because the Martians keep shooting things down." -- Harlan Rosenthal <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>, retorting in Risks Digest 20.60 [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://www.linuxchix.org
Re: [issues] Slashdot on meeting women
On Mon, 25 Oct 1999, Vinnie Surmonde wrote: > On Mon, 25 Oct 1999, srl wrote: > > aha. i think you've hit on something. I kinda find it offensive for > > anyone to more-or-less openly seek someone to be hir > > maintainer-of-all-things-domestic-and-emotional. And, gender politics > > being what they are, it's most often men looking for this from women. > > THere are women who do the same, only in reverse. I must state in my own defense that I wasn't seeking it, it just landed in my lap. > > I think it's part of being a responsible adult to take care of your own > > life-- from doing the laundry to maintaining emotional well-being. It's > > fine to have some support in that. For me, it's *not* a goal to spend so > > much time geeking that i need someone else to write the rent checks and > > wash the dishes. IMO, any geek--- male, female, or otherwise--- who > > aspires to this almost deserves to be single. Who wants to date someone > > who spends so much time on projects that they have no time for an SO? You know, I need a housekeeper. Vinnie can confirm this: I'm not domestic. It's not that I don't have time for an SO, it's that I'm a wanna-be neat freak who just shifts responsibilities all the time. >From the other side of this, in respecting that I need this, I always have the option to *hire a housekeeper.* You know, someone who comes in and does the vacuuming (my apartment is so small there's really no good place to store one!). I think what's offensive is not that the person in question *needs* someone else's help, but HOW they solve the problem. > yeah, I pretty much agree. I certainly wouldn't *date* someone like > that. I don't find it too offensive, though...it's when it's presented as > the best or only way to be that it bothers me. Like I said, what bothered me is the how. I can have my entire apartment spiffed up in about an hour twice a week by a paid professional. Why would I want someone to dedicate their life to it? > And an argument could be made for division of labor -- i.e. I do the > out-of-house stuff and you do the in house stuff or whatever..in other > words, not necessarily not enough time for an SO, but 'these are all the > things that need to be done. I'll do all of these if you'll do all of > these' -- being read into the artical.. Then again, I have this insane desire to rearrange my living room in order to avoid working -- _Deirdre * http://www.linuxcabal.net * http://www.deirdre.net "Mars has been a tough target" -- Peter G. Neumann, Risks Digest Moderator "That's because the Martians keep shooting things down." -- Harlan Rosenthal <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>, retorting in Risks Digest 20.60 [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://www.linuxchix.org
Re: [issues] Women and the Open Source Community (was screenshots)
On Mon, 25 Oct 1999 20:43:02 +0200 (CEST), Nils Philippsen <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> said: >I didn't mean that. If someone wants to belive in a certain religion, >that's fine. But to shove religion down people's throats whether they >want it or not is not my thing. That "law/justice positivism" >(wording?) thing is what bothers me. Culture _can_be_ good (in many >cases it is), but it needn't be. I am a firm believer in the theory that there exists an absolute theory of morality. What I do NOT do is blindly assume that my culture's theory of morality is any better an approximation than that of any other culture. If I condemn a culture's theory of morality, I do so on its face, rather than simply because it differs from my own. Every cultural group should be free to make its own choices amongst morally neutral practices (the classic example of this being whether one cremates or buries one's dead); but no cultural group has any right to maintain a morally reprehensible cultural practice, with no regard given to whether the practice itself is consider morally justified within that culture. Kelly [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://www.linuxchix.org
[issues] Re: Responsible Adolts. WARNNG: RANT
On Mon, 25 Oct 1999 15:02:50 -0400 (EDT) srl <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > I kinda find it offensive for anyone to more-or-less openly seek someone to be hir > maintainer-of-all-things-domestic-and-emotional. Some people *want* that - on both sides. I don't understand it, but some people seem to like that white picket fence stuff. > And, gender politics being what they are, it's most often men looking for this from >women. Gender politics be d*mned. There's no gender monopoly on having "bad" reasons to want a partner. > THere are women who do the same, only in reverse. Yup. > I think it's part of being a responsible adult to take care of your own > life-- from doing the laundry to maintaining emotional well-being. Uh oh. Cliched phrase hits a nerve. Brace yourselves people, this could be ugly. This intro line was written after the rant below - here-in, the rant: RANT Yes mommy (gotta love that sarcasm). "Being a responsible adult" is a phrase I singularly dislike. It pretty much translates to "I think you should behave like this and if you disagree with me you're just a little child". It tends to be used by those who think we should be "normal". "Get a haircut and get a real job" is a more "offensive" (but probably more honest and direct) form of the same clause. Ever seen someone jump from a bridge? Anyone you know ever swing themselves from the ceiling? Ever consider doing it yourself? Ever have a conversation with somebody clinically depressed? Every wonder after the fact why you didn't spot the obvious pain? I can tick all those boxes and I'm telling you that there's more to it than "maturity". I translate your statement as "I don't want to deal with peoples emotional cr*p.". I don't blame you, neither do I. On the other hand I consider dealing with it a valuable contribution to the world. There are people who cope badly with life socially, emotionally or financially, but who do a good job & contribute to society in other ways. There are also people who are "nurturers" who get satisfaction and fullfilment from propping up those people. I often see self righteous "offended" peoples comments and I wonder: How many of those people cry themselves to sleep at night every night and how often have they considered ending it all to be out of everybodys way. Labelling people who fail to maintain their own emotional equilibrium or keep a tidy house as immature makes the problem worse. Want to let them sink or swim on their own? Fine. Just don't go throwing them heavy weights and don't stop others from jumping in after them. I don't live in that self-loathing hell anymore, but the pain left deep scars so please forgive me if my response is a little rabid. BTW: thinking that you should have saved someone after the fact isn't so hot either. END RANT It's at this point that I take my medication and calm down :) > It's fine to have some support in that. For me, it's *not* a goal to spend so > much time geeking that i need someone else to write the rent checks and > wash the dishes. I don't think it's a "goal" for anybody. Some of us are just less addicted to it than others. Some of us have more hangups about money than others. > IMO, any geek--- male, female, or otherwise--- who aspires to this almost deserves >to be single. Somewhat judgemental don't you think? I doubt anyone actually "aspires" to this. I know some (apparently) happy, successful people who see each other for only an hour or so each day. I also know some unhappy people in this same situation. > Who wants to date someone who spends so much time on projects that they have no time >for an SO? Somebody who likes a lot of time to themselves for one thing or another. Somebody who likes to go out a lot with their friends and can do without the baggage. Somebody with their own projects. Somebody who takes in stray cats. Somebody who's prepared to put up with it for some other perceived benefit. Somebody with any other inscrutable motivations I haven't thought of. A masochist of some description? > just my $0.02, ditto For the record: My fiancee "writes out the rent cheque" (because I'm bad with money - traditionally, I cope with this by working harder and earning more) and does most of the vacuming & dusting. I do the washing, pick stuff up off the floor and drive her around. We each complain about what the other doesn't do. Sometimes I don't pay her enough attention. Sometimes she interrupts me too much. We eat far too much fast food because neither can be bothered cooking. Sometimes we both wonder why we're in this relationship, but right now I just wish I was at home with her instead of travelling on business. ( I also miss my linux machine, but not as much ;-) ) [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://www.linuxchix.org
Re: [issues] /. Uncle Robin's Advice for Lovelorn Geeks
Deirdre Saoirse wrote: > > On Sun, 24 Oct 1999, Lynn Siprelle wrote: > > > *snort* this is hysterical. My dh is a telco/router guy and I'm a web > > designer/entrepreneur/programmer/really-just-want-to-be-a-housewife-at-this-poin > > t-but-can't-put-the-damn-mouse-down gal. When we lost our DSL connection > > for two weeks (and thus the ability to both be online at once) we had to go > > back to sharing a computer and it nearly ended our marriage. Thank GODDESS > > US Worst got us back up. > > IP masquerading leads to marital harmony: film at 11. Oh *HELL* yes. Without our local LAN, we'd go nuts! Roll on IPv6 - we're all set up for it already... 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 Vespermanhttp://www.simegen.com/~jenn/ [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://www.linuxchix.org
[issues] reminder about Ottawa chapter mailing list
Hi. I just thought I'd send out a quick reminder that the Ottawa LinuxChix chapter has a mailing list. Info on subscribing is available here: http://www.linuxchix.org/docs/chapters/ottawa.html I'm not sure whether everyone in the Ottawa area (who is interested) has subscribed to it yet. - deb -- [EMAIL PROTECTED] [EMAIL PROTECTED] [EMAIL PROTECTED] [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://www.linuxchix.org
