Re: [issues] Places, issues and all the rest...Maybe the Wst CoastIS THE Best Coast.
Steve Kudlak wrote: > This is a touchy issue, because if one woman said: "Don't do that", it might > actually stop things. Or something like" Or it's not worth fight over" > Instead they back out of the way and let the guys duke it out. Or /she/ might get hit. Have you thought about /why/ they (we) back out of the way? Because we're at least as scared as the guys. > Only difference I think is that it IS FAIR FOR ME TO ASK THEM TO ACCEPT MY > CLOTHING. I may joke about "suits" but they are no less a human being. I only > ask the same. To me it seems they are glorifying stupidity. But the convenient > way is to remove myself from it and do to some place better. It is the never > teach a pig to sing thing... It is the never-teach-a-pig-to-sing thing. Have you considered the possibility that they might be /afraid/ of you? Afraid of the symbolism of your appearance, perhaps. Afraid of your intellect, perhqps? Afraid of the freedom-to-wear-what-you-wish? These are all possible. You have mentioned that you dress as a biker - well, I tend to be afraid of people who dress as bikers, because my experience is that I am more likely to be (physically) hurt by a biker than I am to be hurt by a suit. I have been told by a friend that she was intimidated by my reputation as an intellectual - she thought I'd be patronising, that we'd have nothing to talk about, that the kind of thing that interests her would bore me silly. Now, I don't /agree/ with that, but I have to accept that that viewpoint exists. And there's a LOT of people who really hate wearing ties and smart clothes. Some of them envy people who can get away without it. So some of what you're experiencing may be envy - not just prejudice. 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
Re: [issues] Something I've observed
Deirdre Saoirse wrote: > > On Mon, 1 Nov 1999, Cat wrote: > > > On Sun, 31 Oct 1999, Deirdre Saoirse wrote: > > > > > Nothing stops the conversation around here faster than some CMOTW [1] > > > (who obviously doesn't get it) posting a lot of things that create what > > > is basically noise. And then everything stops. > > > > I absolutely agree with your observation. Notice how we never got > > anything really resolved about the themes.org issue? T Exactly. And as Cat said, our energy went into explaining to whatsisface rather than to the actual topic. > > Then it stopped, mostly because we had one audience member whose liberal > > use of the term PC and ubiquitous posting made it impossible to talk to > > anyone but him! > Right. What I'm saying is that unless we recognize that this will happen > over and over and over and that we need a better sense of deja vu, we'll > have other discussions sidetracked and killed. I think what we might need to do to resolve it is to resolve to ourselves NOT TO EXPLAIN things to people who come in late... or who don't understand. Of course, this is ME saying this - and we've all seen me derail myself with long and involved explanations. I think I'm going to have to stop doing that and simply go on with the discussion instead - perhaps with a note to the individual after an explanation to go check out the archives. Might this help? A resolution on the part of core participants in the discussions to stay ON topic...? > But I think it was more the railroading, the getting sidetracked by > comments from men. I think that is a problem of female acculturation that > I really hadn't even noticed before. I have. We /defer/. We're usually unconscious of this deference - but it happens in all walks of life (at least in Australia). As soon as a guy opens his mouth, we tend to defer our conversation and modify it to be more interesting to him. Certain classes of men are aware of this and work to avoid it - and we have a good selection of men who do that on this list. (THANK YOU!!) Others may be aware of it and use it, or are unaware of it and just bull on with the assumption that if we wanted to speak up we would. > > 1) overpowering the conversation, in the kinds of ways Deirdre has > > described; or, > > 2) joining the discussion in a careful, thoughtful manner, as in the cool > > ones Deirdre mentions in the next paragraph. > > > > Both types seem to be aware that they are treading in territory where they > > are not on center stage. What is it that makes one accept that and > > function respectfully and constructively, and the other trample over > > everything in sight to take back the center? > > I don't know. The respectful ones know - consciously or unconsciously - that women are accultured to defer to men, and are careful - consciously or not - to back off enough to let us speak freely. The others are only aware that 'this is a place where things don't happen like they normally do' and want to set things 'right'. I think, anyway. 'Right' being the usual circumstance - where things of interest to them are discussed. This is, of course, just theoretical. Feel free to tell me I'm being an idiot. :) > > > I don't want to diss all the men on the list; some of the ones who've > > > been around a while are VERY cool. I'm not going to mention names because > > > I know I'd forget someone. :) > > > > I'm glad you put this here. I definitely have been very impressed with > > the tenor of most male contributions to this list. > > Agreed. Oh HELL yes! > > And I found I had nothing to say. I was disgusted, but I couldn't really > > get it out onto the screen. I don't want to help him. He is free to do > > whatever he wants, but why is he asking me to help him do it so it won't > > offend women in the community? I mean, what is he after? Encouragement? > > Chris, I must admit, is also a friend of mine. I wouldn't have > suggested he come here because I know him well enough to know the outcome. > I don't know why he asked and it still boggles my mind that he thought we > would be a sympathetic audience for that sort of question. Unconscious assumption that women help and defer to men, perhaps? 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
Re: [issues] Places, issues and all the rest...Maybe the Wst CoastISTHE Best Coast.
On Mon, 1 Nov 1999 [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: > These are all possible. You have mentioned that you dress as a biker - > well, I tend to be afraid of people who dress as bikers, because my > experience is that I am more likely to be (physically) hurt by a biker > than I am to be hurt by a suit. I think the hurt, when it happens, is expected to be different ways. I tend to think of bikers as more visceral where I tend to think of suits as being people who work via the medium of paper. But I personally have had no bad experiences with bikers. In fact, one of my regular hangouts is something of a biker bar. Of course, they also have bicyclists. It was one of the great hangouts of the bike messenger tax day strike earlier this year. -- _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] Something I've observed
On Mon, 1 Nov 1999 [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: > > Right. What I'm saying is that unless we recognize that this will happen > > over and over and over and that we need a better sense of deja vu, we'll > > have other discussions sidetracked and killed. > > I think what we might need to do to resolve it is to resolve to ourselves > NOT TO EXPLAIN things to people who come in late... or who don't understand. > > Of course, this is ME saying this - and we've all seen me derail myself > with long and involved explanations. I think I'm going to have to stop doing > that and simply go on with the discussion instead - perhaps with a note to > the individual after an explanation to go check out the archives. I'm guilty too, but I think this is a good idea. > Might this help? A resolution on the part of core participants in the > discussions to stay ON topic...? You've got my vote. > > But I think it was more the railroading, the getting sidetracked by > > comments from men. I think that is a problem of female acculturation that > > I really hadn't even noticed before. > > I have. We /defer/. We're usually unconscious of this deference - but it > happens in all walks of life (at least in Australia). As soon as a guy > opens his mouth, we tend to defer our conversation and modify it to be > more interesting to him. I have noticed it in women, but never in myself. I was raised by my father, so got a very light dose of the "girl stuff." Still, it's an eye-opener. So to speak. Right now, my left eye is shut with antibiotic goo in it because I have Yet Another Corneal Infection. :( > Certain classes of men are aware of this and work to avoid it - and we > have a good selection of men who do that on this list. (THANK YOU!!) > > Others may be aware of it and use it, or are unaware of it and just bull > on with the assumption that if we wanted to speak up we would. Yep (to both). > > Chris, I must admit, is also a friend of mine. I wouldn't have > > suggested he come here because I know him well enough to know the outcome. > > I don't know why he asked and it still boggles my mind that he thought we > > would be a sympathetic audience for that sort of question. > > Unconscious assumption that women help and defer to men, perhaps? This would imply that Chris understands people better than he actually does. :) -- _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] Places, issues and all the rest...Maybe the Wst CoastISTHE Best Coast.
Deirdre Saoirse wrote: > On Mon, 1 Nov 1999, Steve Kudlak wrote: > > > Well let's see, my emotional,. really got the best of me, > > Steve, this list isn't about YOUR alienation, no matter how real it may > be. > > It's about OUR alienation. > > -- > _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 But that'sd theit is our coporoate culture many nbeisdes myself feel alienated from it. It beanr looksing into and changing ion many ways. Many more than jusy myself are alienated from it. My alienation is just an example. maybe flawed and emtiona but msny of us ant somrhting different and better. I don't feel my/feeling/others feeling are misplaced. Have FUn, Sends STeve [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://www.linuxchix.org
Re: [issues] Places, issues and all the rest...Maybe the Wst CoastIS THE Best Coast.
Kelly Lynn Martin wrote: > On Sun, 31 Oct 1999 21:29:17 -0800 (PST), Deirdre Saoirse <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> said: > > >Steve, this list isn't about YOUR alienation, no matter how real it > >may be. > > >It's about OUR alienation. > > Well, to an extent he's experiencing a lesser alienation female geeks > sometimes feel: alienation from more "traditional" female groups. > Now, most of us don't give a damn about those groups, but there are > some who might > > Kelly (who understands alienation better than anyone has any right > to...) > > > [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://www.linuxchix.org Tbhis is why companies azre dstroying ther enviroment/\. ZTHe single metric of masing money. DRESS CODES ARE STUPID. Just the sasme as judginh peloople by their looks. It is the same thing. Just that clothes are easier to change.. Thsat is it. Howe about code an exerckise code or like thode old codes aierplan stewardenesses. I may just just give up on this issue as it will just staty s flam,e war. It makes me physicalluy sick and will drive me to dirnk and dramamomr. ZzHave Fun, Sends Steve [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://www.linuxchix.org
Re: [issues] Places, issues and all the rest...Maybe the Wst CoastIS THE Best Coast.
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: > Steve Kudlak wrote: > > > This is a touchy issue, because if one woman said: "Don't do that", it might > > actually stop things. Or something like" Or it's not worth fight over" > > Instead they back out of the way and let the guys duke it out. > > Or /she/ might get hit. Have you thought about /why/ they (we) back out of the > way? Because we're at least as scared as the guys. > > > Only difference I think is that it IS FAIR FOR ME TO ASK THEM TO ACCEPT MY > > CLOTHING. I may joke about "suits" but they are no less a human being. I only > > ask the same. To me it seems they are glorifying stupidity. But the convenient > > way is to remove myself from it and do to some place better. It is the never > > teach a pig to sing thing... > > It is the never-teach-a-pig-to-sing thing. > > Have you considered the possibility that they might be /afraid/ of you? > Afraid of the symbolism of your appearance, perhaps. > Afraid of your intellect, perhqps? > Afraid of the freedom-to-wear-what-you-wish? > > These are all possible. You have mentioned that you dress as a biker - well, > I tend to be afraid of people who dress as bikers, because my experience is > that I am more likely to be (physically) hurt by a biker than I am to be hurt > by a suit. > > I have been told by a friend that she was intimidated by my reputation as > an intellectual - she thought I'd be patronising, that we'd have nothing to > talk about, that the kind of thing that interests her would bore me silly. > Now, I don't /agree/ with that, but I have to accept that that viewpoint > exists. > > And there's a LOT of people who really hate wearing ties and smart clothes. > Some of them envy people who can get away without it. So some of what you're > experiencing may be envy - not just prejudice. > > 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 Well I am actually tall and big like a abiker. I certainly don't dress that way.. I am just too tired to deal with people's prehudices. A person who hates balcks sates: "Blacka re more likely to attack and rob him." Does that make him rigjht? It is fair for me to ask people to accept me as me. To accept others maile or female without prejudice.. Without regard to physical appearance that is all I ask for myself and others be thery fema.le, male, fat transgendered that is all I am saying. IT IS ECERYONE"S ALIOENATION. Remrember the r the lhgal mazim. Resist ther beginimgs. Oh "balacks look scaryThe wollds is too mean to make it worse. Pleanty are aliienated for those reasons it is not just mr. I wih to hsbr prople sccpted npt prejudrfrd. It is a sad smf dovlrmomg dsuy when thsat is done/ Qiick Some one send me an XXL T-shirt with a kitty on it. That might help. Hasve fun, Sends Steve [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://www.linuxchix.org
Re: [issues] Something I've observed
> As a result, I brought up the issue (rather regretfully) that we exclude > men altogether from the meeting as it changes the experience. I'm certainly not going to stop you from excluding men from your chapter meetings. I will not exclude them from the online forums, but I can see situations in which face-to-face meetings may be improved by enforcing an all-women rolecall. So, if you wish to exclude men from your chapter meetings, I think that's fair. It's unfortunate, but it would be unrealistic/idealistic/foolish of me to insist otherwise. - deb -- [EMAIL PROTECTED] [EMAIL PROTECTED] [EMAIL PROTECTED] [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://www.linuxchix.org
Re: [issues] Something I've observed
> > So, if you wish to exclude men from your chapter meetings, I think > that's fair. It's unfortunate, but it would be > unrealistic/idealistic/foolish of me to insist otherwise. > > - deb > True enough. I hope we never do this at the Ottawa meeting, though. I think the nice thing about the Linuxchix group is that it is a wonderful place for women to come together in a field which is primarily male-dominated. However, I find groups such as these tend to attract men who are very open-minded and supportive of women's rights in general, and I openly welcome them. Sometimes, mostly-female groups can attract men who are either trying to 'pick up' or who are looking for a fight. Other times they seem to attract men who are rather ignorant to the issues surrounding women, but this can be a good thing, as many of these men will walk away with a new awareness of said issues. The positive seems to overwhelm the negative, and I really like the diversity this group offers. I'm not saying that any women-only groups wouldn't have a lot going for them. But with the positive there would be negative as well. I think all-onesex groups who exclude the other sex can often lead to more sexism. Getting the boot just because I want to join a primarily male group may get me thinking that these men are a bunch of sexists and they want to keep their boy's club to themselves. So I can imagine how a man might feel being turned away from an all-woman's group. I might not feel that way if it was a male support group for prostate cancer survivors, but I think I might get offended if I was refused entry to a men's linux group, even if I was told 'there are lots of other groups out there you can go to, you know...' In short, I'm not coming down on anyone who wants to keep their chapter female-only. However, I think it's a shame to exclude people on the basis of their sex and I wouldn't want to see that happen locally. If it were me (and it isn't), I would let anyone in, regardless of their gender, and if they caused problems (like trying to hit on people, being outright obnoxious, etc) I would ask them not to come back. I know that the men at the Ottawa linuxchix meeting were definately an asset to our meeting. I don't believe many people looked at them and said 'they're male' or looked at me and said 'she's female'. Of course, we all knew each other's genders, but that didn't seem to factor in to our coversations. Take care, all :) Amanda K. [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://www.linuxchix.org
Re: [issues] Something I've observed
I think we need to be careful about assigning the blame for our current unhappines about the way women are treated to unthinking, insensitive men. I wish it were so simple; but I fear the cause of the problem is far more complicated. Here are two illustrative examples from my own life: 1) When I was in seventh grade I *loved* my French class. I worked very hard, and was eager to go to class. One day the teacher asked a particularly difficult grammar question, and I proudly raised my hand and gave the correct answer. There were two popular girls sitting behind me, and one leaned over towards the other and whispered loudly, clearly intending for me to hear, "She *would* know the answer." At that moment I realized for the first time in my life that it wasn't always ok to be smart; in fact, if I was going to be likable, I was going to have to learn to keep quiet, and not to raise my hand when I knew the answers. The boys in the class probably couldn't care less whether I was smart, stupid, whatever. It was the girls who made my life so miserable in middle school, who made me aware of what a nerd I was. 2) I have a little sister, who was a real trouble maker when she hit her teens. But it wasn't the typical girl problems she was having. She couldn't care less about boys, she wasn't stressed over her weight, and popularity wasn't so important to her. Instead, she got in trouble with her teachers, she seemed to have about 5 times as much energy as she knew what to do with, she was sloppy with her school work, and her teachers sent home notes complaining that her handwriting was illegible. My parents responded by cracking down on her, scolding her, but that only made things worse. Then one day my dad had an epiphany - if my little sister were a boy, none of these problems would seems so bad; one would say, "boys will be boys" and just wait for the child to grow out of it. So my parents eased up on her, encouraged her to play sports to help get out the extra steam (she's meanwhile become a field hockey superstar), and while they didn't let her go wild, they eased up on her a lot. Sure enough, my sister did fine. She's now applying to colleges with the intention of being a math major. Let me note that my parents are raving liberals, and my mother is not at all a traditional female role model; yet it took them a long time to realize that the only way to succeed with my sister was to let go of the traditional expectation of what a girl should be/behave like. So don't be upset that after a few weeks of discussion, we haven't solved all of our problems. If such relatively brief discussions could come up with answers, the problems would have been fixed long ago. That's not to say we should stop talking - we just shouldn't get down on ourselves so fast. More importantly, by talking we reassure ourselves that we're not alone with our troubles and frustrations, and SLOWLY we may uncover some truths and some solutions. Finally, let the boys stay. How else are they ever going to learn to understand what we're angry about? How else are we ever going to learn that we're a lot more the same than we are different? Sure, sometimes boys say stupid things; but at least here someone will let them know when it happens. :) Ingrid [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://www.linuxchix.org
[issues] Deference
Deirdre Saoirse wrote: > On Mon, 1 Nov 1999 [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: > (Stuff about deference) I tend to defer to Ellen ( as friend who is a mathematician) on math. She tends to defer to me on biology and biiochemistry). Because of our areas of expertise. My wonderment is why certain things kind of always get believed. LIke why do guy Z(0verall) tend to get into the "Alpha Male with a "harm" when this is based on limited primmest studies. No one mentions other primates because it is is socially embarrassing. Conflict resolution via having sex. Bobobobos do this. Chimps often do things more violently., do they get mentioned more. In fact if one is male a book has statements about the natural violence of males act who female chimps act ass cheerleaders, The problem worth all this is that it id nice and clean cut and ignores a lot of primate behavior to project the desired behaviors on humans. THere are lots of close primate species to pick from The same way I say a every sloppy Discovery TV program on sexuality and it was mainly out to emphphasiae the status quo. It was pretty shoody. Now in linun/unix environments I have seen women d=given deference when they were the system admins or things like that that, an expert on some program or an acknowseleged authority// Have FUn. Sends Steve P.S. should this go to he grills group? [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://www.linuxchix.org
Re: [issues] Something I've observed
> > But I think it was more the railroading, the getting sidetracked by > > comments from men. I think that is a problem of female acculturation that > > I really hadn't even noticed before. > > I have. We /defer/. We're usually unconscious of this deference - but it > happens in all walks of life (at least in Australia). As soon as a guy > opens his mouth, we tend to defer our conversation and modify it to be > more interesting to him. > > Certain classes of men are aware of this and work to avoid it - and we > have a good selection of men who do that on this list. (THANK YOU!!) We do our best. :) Actually, thinking about this (and these observations are pre-coffee, mind you), my impressions are a bit different. Most guys (and a few women) I know have a tendency to do this, but not because they expect the rest of the conversants to defer. These kinds of people seem to view discussion as sort of a King-Of-The-Hill situation, where they make a grab for power (or whatever) by moving the focal point of the discussion to them, and the longer they keep it there, the more points they get. Aaargh. It sounded better in my head, I can't elaborate on ideas this early. :) -- Aaron Malone ([EMAIL PROTECTED]) System Administrator Poplar Bluff Internet, Inc. http://www.semo.net [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://www.linuxchix.org
Re: [issues] Something I've observed
Hi, Deb, > I'm certainly not going to stop you from excluding men from your chapter > meetings. I will not exclude them from the online forums, but I can see > situations in which face-to-face meetings may be improved by enforcing > an all-women rolecall. > > So, if you wish to exclude men from your chapter meetings, I think > that's fair. For better or for worse, I don't think it's legal to do so. This was discussed heavily by Webgrrls a couple of years ago, and the conclusion that was reached was that we, ourselves, could be sued for discrimination. This applies only to the U.S., of course. (Disclaimer: I am not a lawyer, and I am merely passing on other people's opinions/conclusions). FWIW, we had three men at the first "official" Triangle (Raleigh/Durham, NC) meeting. Two were the sensitive, constructive type that, IMHO, are part of the solution. One was the CMOTW. Our speaker asked if "anyone else has a question" before I had to, thankfully. He came with his SO, and she was silent for the entire meeting. I don't know what the solution is, but I sure don't want to exclude the first two guys, or one other who was at our organizational meeting and helped with publicity. Regards, Caity (in one of her brief lucid moments between being really ill this morning :( ) [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://www.linuxchix.org
Re: [issues] Something I've observed
On Mon, 01 Nov 1999 09:46:20 -0500, "Caitlyn M. Martin" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> said: >For better or for worse, I don't think it's legal to do so. Probably not. U.S. federal sex discrimination laws do not apply to private clubs[1], and LinuxChix chapters are private clubs as far as I can tell. Exceptions might apply if your organization is affiliated in some way with a government entity. Kelly [1] Unless they operate a "public accomodation". [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://www.linuxchix.org
Re: [issues] Something I've observed
On Mon, 1 Nov 1999, Caitlyn M. Martin wrote: > > > So, if you wish to exclude men from your chapter meetings, I think > > that's fair. > > For better or for worse, I don't think it's legal to do so. This was > discussed heavily by Webgrrls a couple of years ago, and the conclusion that > was reached was that we, ourselves, could be sued for discrimination. This > applies only to the U.S., of course. (Disclaimer: I am not a lawyer, and > I am merely passing on other people's opinions/conclusions). Though I'm not a lawyer yet, I'm in my second year of law school, and I just want to clarify this point, because people often have misunderstand about who can discriminate: You can have a private group/club that discriminates all it wants in the US. Plenty of golf clubs, societies, etc. discriminate by gender, race, ethnicity and other criteria. The Constitution, in fact gives them the right to do so through the right to assemble. You CANNOT discriminate based on gender and race IF you are a PUBLIC organization. "Public" meaning pretty much anyone that gets money from the government. This is why universities can't discriminate - they get tons of money from the government through grants and student loans. The distinction between public and private groups is obviously not so clear cut. The Boy Scouts of America, for example, adamantly insist that they're private, and therefore they can exclude whoever they want to exclude (girls, gays and atheists). However, this topic strays pretty far afield from the current discussions, so anyone wishing to discuss this further can meet me in Grrl-talk. :) Ingrid [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://www.linuxchix.org
Re: [issues] Something I've observed
Greetings... I'm going to go into lurk mode for awhile(I was planning to lurk earlyer and let the thread I started die)... but before I do I want to address this thread... since I some how find myself being mentioned at the conclusion of each response.. "Unconscious assumption that women help and defer to men, perhaps?" Jen M. I don't belive it is anyone's obligation to help another. Interms of "deferment" I personaly find it easyer to take direction and fullfil the wishes of women more then men.. especialy at work. I'm sure you guys will have fun twisting this around in your own head to read it how you will... anyways... Hmmms... I feel so loved all of a sudden... (note I'm using digests so quoting is not so easy :) There seems to be alot of misunderstandings about my intentions of joining and speaking on this list: Why I joined: 1. to find out what issues exists for women in the male dominated technocracy, find out what I might be able to do about them, and offer viewpoints that may not have been thought of before. 2. in some small way to keep tabs in an usual way with two of my niftiest friends :) 3. and yes to test out issues with my bizzar project... btw it has never been my intention to promote this project.. I have not at any point in time give any form of refrence to it. Yes the project is (and has been) rather stagnent.. however it's my fault and I do have plenty of intrested people. I appoligize for bringing it up since it seems to be quite off topic, I should have followed threads better before I posted... 4. to talk about prejiduce(sic)... ie. how it is that I know many talented geek chicks but still subconciously assume with I meet a female that they don't know... or why when I guy tells me they know things I assume they don't (though I already know why on that one :) ) peace be with you, btw if you have a response to this please do so in personal email unless it directly pertains to the list... I don't belive that *I* am a linuxgrrl issue... if you feel I should never post here again... again let me know in email. :), Chris aka curious /"\ . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . \ / ASCII Ribbon Campaign [EMAIL PROTECTED] X - NO HTML/RTF in e-mail http://www.curious.org/ / \ - NO Word docs in e-mail"This quote is false." -anon [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://www.linuxchix.org
Re: [issues] Something I've observed
> For better or for worse, I don't think it's legal to do so. Oo. You might have a point (that reminds me to never respond to mail pre-coffee). This in mind, I withdraw my earlier statement. The last thing I need is lawyers at my door. - deb -- [EMAIL PROTECTED] [EMAIL PROTECTED] [EMAIL PROTECTED] [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://www.linuxchix.org
Re: [issues] Something I've observed
Aaron Malone wrote: > We do our best. :) And it's appreciated, believe me! > Actually, thinking about this (and these observations are pre-coffee, mind you), > my impressions are a bit different. Most guys (and a few women) I know have a > tendency to do this, but not because they expect the rest of the conversants to > defer. These kinds of people seem to view discussion as sort of a > King-Of-The-Hill situation, where they make a grab for power (or whatever) by > moving the focal point of the discussion to them, and the longer they keep it > there, the more points they get. And do people who value the King-of-the-Hill points less, wind up not having their issues and thoughts discussed? I'm afraid I don't see quite how this differs from my 'women appear to be accultured to defer' situation - unless you're saying it's that it's not a passive thing (deference) but an active thing (grabbing for the conversation)? Are you able to clarify at all? And I'd be inclined to say it's probably a bit of both - but then, I tend to aim for the middle-ground in social contexts. :) > Aaargh. It sounded better in my head, I can't elaborate on ideas this early. :) Ideas always sound better in your head. :) 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
Re: [issues] Something I've observed
> And do people who value the King-of-the-Hill points less, wind up not having > their issues and thoughts discussed? Right. Or if they do manage to inject something into the conversation, one of the Obnoxious will then attempt to twist it back to his (or her) thread. > I'm afraid I don't see quite how this differs from my 'women appear to be > accultured to defer' situation - unless you're saying it's that it's not > a passive thing (deference) but an active thing (grabbing for the > conversation)? > > Are you able to clarify at all? > > And I'd be inclined to say it's probably a bit of both - but then, I tend to > aim for the middle-ground in social contexts. :) You're right, it's a combination of both. Those who engage in this sort of behavior are grabbing the conversation, and from experience they know that many people *will* defer, if for no other reason than they're used to more polite conversational environments. So in retrospect, my comment was not contrary to yours, but simply another aspect of the situation. Neat. Back to Unreal Tournament now. :) -- Aaron Malone ([EMAIL PROTECTED]) System Administrator Poplar Bluff Internet, Inc. http://www.semo.net [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://www.linuxchix.org
Re: [issues] Something I've observed
On Mon, 1 Nov 1999, Caitlyn M. Martin wrote: > For better or for worse, I don't think it's legal to do so. This was > discussed heavily by Webgrrls a couple of years ago, and the conclusion that > was reached was that we, ourselves, could be sued for discrimination. This > applies only to the U.S., of course. (Disclaimer: I am not a lawyer, and > I am merely passing on other people's opinions/conclusions). eh? um..I think that's only if you take public funds or are incorporated or otherwise have some sort of legal standing...Otherwise, what about girl scouts or womens-clubs-at-church, not to mention a billion different mailing lists, etc... I'm not a lawyer, though, and I don't have the time to go play one right now..anyone with real legal experience have a comment? :) 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] alienation (was: Places, issues, etc)
Kelly Lynn Martin wrote: > > On Sun, 31 Oct 1999 23:12:31 -0800 (PST), Deirdre Saoirse <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> said: > > >>An interesting experience was brought up at the end: a male to > >>female post-op was working as a computer programmer. After the > >>operation, her salary decreased by $2000. My mouth definitely > >>dropped open! > > >That is EXTREMELY disturbing. > > It would interesting to argue that that was illegal sex > discrimination. Of course, the employer could come back that, no, it > was legal transsexual discrimination, but if so why did the employer > wait until after surgery (which is _long_ after the employer would > know that the employee was TS)? > > I'd also want to know whether the employer was subject to FMLA. > > Kelly (no, really, I'm not a lawyer!) Well, the TS would *definitely* have a cast-iron case in British law, and we (or rather our legal system) tend to be behind the times somewhat on this subject, but the precedent is clearly there now that TS discrimination counts under the sex discrimination act. -- Rachel [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://www.linuxchix.org
[issues] Automatic associations
A friend of mine sent this to our mailing list and I thought some of you would find it interesting: http://depts.washington.edu/iat/index.html The tests are designed to test your implicit attitudes -- whether you make an automatic association between certain things. The one that would be of particular interest is the gender/science one. "The gender-science IAT often reveals automatic association of female with liberal arts and male with science. This result fits with the notion of traditional gender stereotypes that females can not or just do not participate in scientific fields. " I found out that I, with 3% of the people who took the test, had a moderate tendancy to associate females with science. Not *too* big a surprise since I've been good and brainwashed with female-friendly science programs, although it'd be nice if I could say I had no associations. I noticed that I tended to put music on the wrong side, which is sort of interesting. I also put philosophy on the wrong side a few times. The rest of the stats: Interpretation Percent of Total (Inconclusive scores not included) (4500 respondents) Strong automatic association between male and science 51% Moderate automatic association between male and science 13% Slight automatic association between male and science 13% Little or no automatic gender association with science or liberal arts 12% Slight automatic association between female and science 5% Moderate automatic association between female and science 3% Strong automatic association between female and science 3% [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://www.linuxchix.org
Re: [issues] Something I've observed
> Date: Mon, 1 Nov 1999 09:38:21 -0500 (EST)
> From: Ingrid Schupbach <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> Subject: Re: [issues] Something I've observed
> {snippage}
>
> Sure, sometimes
> boys say stupid things; but at least here someone will let them know when
> it happens.
Amen. God knows there are plenty of men who don't hesitate to blast women in like
manner.
Meredith
--
Sometimes big things
do come in small packages...
PintSize Graphics & Web Hosting Inc.
http://www.pintsize.com
[EMAIL PROTECTED] http://www.linuxchix.org
Re: [issues] Automatic associations
> I found out that I, with 3% of the people who took the test, had a moderate tendancy >to > associate females with science. Not *too* big a surprise since I've been > good and brainwashed with female-friendly science programs, although it'd be > nice if I could say I had no associations. I had a strong automatic preference for female-science association. I took the test twice (one in the reverse order of the other), and both came out the same way. > I noticed that I tended to put music on the wrong side, which is sort of > interesting. I also put philosophy on the wrong side a few times. I did the same, with music especially. I kept putting engineering on the female side, it was the one I had the most trouble with. I got the big red "X" a lot with the science words. I found the word-association was more difficult than the face orientation. For my other IAT's, I had a slight preference for old over young (4% of 4000 were in my boat) and no preference for black over white (13% of 6000). I took each one twice (the reverse order thing) and they all came out the same both times. Well, my parents will be glad to know I have no stereotypical associations ;o) -nicole -- http://colby.dhs.org @ Colby - me! http://ghettobox.dhs.org \|/ ghettoBOX - home! http://nightspell.dhs.org | NightSpell - irc.dal.net! http://technopagan.dhs.org / \ TechnoPagan - spirituality! [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://www.linuxchix.org
Re: [issues] Something I've observed
On Mon, 1 Nov 1999, Aaron Malone wrote: > Actually, thinking about this (and these observations are pre-coffee, mind you), > my impressions are a bit different. Most guys (and a few women) I know have a > tendency to do this, but not because they expect the rest of the conversants to > defer. These kinds of people seem to view discussion as sort of a > King-Of-The-Hill situation, where they make a grab for power (or whatever) by > moving the focal point of the discussion to them, and the longer they keep it > there, the more points they get. Right. Thus the existence of trolls and trolling as rhetorical sport. Anyhow, I think you're right -- I don't think men expect women to defer; women are simply conditioned to. For this reason, in face-to-face meetings, it makes it somewhat difficult when we're trying to stick to a topic. -- _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] Automatic associations
Terri Oda wrote: > A friend of mine sent this to our mailing list and I thought some of you > would find it interesting: > > http://depts.washington.edu/iat/index.html Very cool tests! I did all three, and found out some very interesting results (that I'm not very proud of *laugh*) For the race test, I had a strong automatic association with blacks and 'bad' things (and I've never thought of myself as a racist person, either) In the young/old test, I had a strong auomatic associate between old and 'bad' things (again, I never thought of myself as ageist) Lastly, I showed a slight automatic association between male and science, along with 13% of the test takers. [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://www.linuxchix.org
Re: [issues] Something I've observed
On Mon, 1 Nov 1999, Deb Richardson wrote: > I'm certainly not going to stop you from excluding men from your chapter > meetings. I will not exclude them from the online forums, but I can see > situations in which face-to-face meetings may be improved by enforcing > an all-women rolecall. I wouldn't ask you to exclude them online; we haven't at baylinuxchix either. However, I was bringing up a face-to-face analogy for what I saw happening on the forum. > So, if you wish to exclude men from your chapter meetings, I think > that's fair. It's unfortunate, but it would be > unrealistic/idealistic/foolish of me to insist otherwise. I agree that it's unfortunate. I think that IF we had a strong group identity as a women's group, the presence of the occasional CMOTW wouldn't derail us. But we're new, so it has a more profound effect. -- _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] Automatic associations
On Mon, 01 Nov 1999 17:06:34 -0500, Amanda Knox <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> said: >Very cool tests! I did all three, and found out some very interesting >results (that I'm not very proud of *laugh*) >For the race test, I had a strong automatic association with blacks >and 'bad' things (and I've never thought of myself as a racist >person, either) >In the young/old test, I had a strong auomatic associate between old >and 'bad' things (again, I never thought of myself as ageist) >Lastly, I showed a slight automatic association between male and >science, along with 13% of the test takers. I did the gender and race ones, and scored a moderate preference for black, which surprises the hell out of me because I am personally conscious of a moderate dislike/distrust of black people, or at least black men (black women don't bother me as much generally), and a strong association of women and science, which is probably the result of my mother being a doctor. Kelly [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://www.linuxchix.org
Re: [issues] Automatic associations
Hm.. i took it twice and got inconclusive on both of them. I noticed that I kept on putting "her" and "history" on the male side, so maybe it was getting mad at me for hitting buttons before I read the whole thing :) It might be interesting to see if there are any associations with the individual words. As it is, it doesn't look like you can tell if someone doesnt have any associations, or just associates half of the science words with male and half with female. Also, some words probably have weaker associations than others, for example, I'd guess that male-biology is weaker than male-mathematics. [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://www.linuxchix.org
Re: [issues] Automatic associations
> I did the gender and race ones, and scored a moderate preference for > black, which surprises the hell out of me because I am personally > conscious of a moderate dislike/distrust of black people, or at least > black men (black women don't bother me as much generally), and a > strong association of women and science, which is probably the result > of my mother being a doctor. I think most of the images in the test for black-white preference were women, at least on the black-people side of things. I remember a few white males, but no black ones. That might explain a little bit... I think my strong association with women and science is independent. My mother had a fairly traditional role (did work with computers a bit) and my dad sides houses in a fairly traditional hard-labor male type role. I didn't have many female role models outside my home that I remember, either. I'm assuming it is personally instilled though highly due to my parents' belief that you can do whatever you want to regardless of sex. :o) -nicole -- http://colby.dhs.org @ Colby - me! http://ghettobox.dhs.org \|/ ghettoBOX - home! http://nightspell.dhs.org | NightSpell - irc.dal.net! http://technopagan.dhs.org / \ TechnoPagan - spirituality! [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://www.linuxchix.org
Re: [issues] alienation (was: Places, issues, etc)
Nicole Zimmerman wrote: > > > There was a great documentary on the TV/TS lifestyle on the Discovery > > > channel (it just ended and I am sure it will be repeated). > > > > I'm going to have to make a point of watching it. > > According to my http://www.tvguide.com/listings it will be repeated > tonight at 2:00 AM PST. It is called "What sex am I?". > > The listings specific for the discovery channel say "the discovery > channel west", so I'm assuming it would be the same for anywhere on the > west coast. > > I was trying to find more information on the discovery channel, but then > I saw their link for a show on house cats, which lead to the kitten > cam... and I was lost in "aww look at the cute kitty!!" land. :o) > > And also in other discovery.com news, "The difference between man and > woman is ancient" > http://www.discovery.com/news/briefs/brief1.html > > Couldn't find anything on the show, though. > > -nicole > > > [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://www.linuxchix.org Zines and the TV have suffered much mich since I have got on ther Internet again. Discovery has always in my not so humble opinion been the the viva-la-differenmce network.. If I remember tright they were ALWAYS emphazizing the diffference beteeen mena and womem or is that vice vera. Being in aancient days" that as a biologists(bio or bo for short) some of it sounded pretrty shakey. Awful had to project bird behavior to humasnas and with pick your specoees. Chimps and Bobonanos are top faves d3epending on your views. Discovery channel stuff is ovtern biologically skewed, so sawyeth in in my npt so humn;e pomopm/ Have Fun, Sends STeve [EMAIL PROTECTED] [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://www.linuxchix.org
Re: [issues] alienation (was: Places, issues, etc)
> Being in aancient days" that as a biologists(bio or bo for short) some of it
> sounded pretrty shakey. Awful had to project bird behavior to humasnas and
> with pick your specoees. Chimps and Bobonanos are top faves d3epending on
> your views. Discovery channel stuff is ovtern biologically skewed, so sawyeth
> in in my npt so humn;e pomopm/
It seemed pretty legit, discussing the genetics of the X and Y
chromosomes that make us the physical gender we are ("mental" or
psychological gender determined differently) having been around for much
longer than was first assumed.
I really like the discovery channel (and the learning channel), but it's
mostly due to my "must feed on science and other cool interesting stuff"
attitude. Appetite for knowledge, I guess :o)
I am, of course, not a biologist so I cannot take the same position as
you can. I also don't tend to watch the shows on animals unless it's
cats (of any size) or humans :o)
Additionally, the history channel is showing something on the "history
of sex" all week long. It should be interesting to see how they deal
with issues of non-physical gender (i.e. I may physically be male, but I
know I am female type gender issues).
-nicole
--
http://colby.dhs.org @ Colby - me!
http://ghettobox.dhs.org \|/ ghettoBOX - home!
http://nightspell.dhs.org | NightSpell - irc.dal.net!
http://technopagan.dhs.org / \ TechnoPagan - spirituality!
[EMAIL PROTECTED] http://www.linuxchix.org
Re: [issues] alienation (was: Places, issues, etc)
On Sun, Oct 31, 1999 at 11:10:09PM -0800, Nicole Zimmerman wrote: > An interesting experience was brought up at the end: a male to female > post-op was working as a computer programmer. After the operation, her > salary decreased by $2000. My mouth definitely dropped open! ah yes, the estrogen tax. :/ It makes sence when you hear that women earn what (I am not on this years stat), 70-80% of what men earn, so if someone does make a gender transition, then their earning should reflect that. I found, that when I started CD'ing full time, passing only about 30% - 50% of the time (not on testosterone) I started making 20% more than I made with a traditional female/woman presentation. Now, I'm back to passing less than 10% of the time, and at my new job, I am making less. course, my new job is at a .edu so that prolly doesn't count ;) also more on topic, I was yakking with a bunch of my (male/man) geek friends, and one of them made a comment about how every geek needs a Vemla(sp, nerdy girl char from scobby doo) because she's smart and wears short skirts. (I hate it when /. invades my house.) I brought up any number of assumptions my dear friend was making and I got the classic dear-caught-in-head-lights look. So I have been caught, yet again, assigning sexism/genderism to where mere cluelessness would suffice. So my question is more or less, Does the origin (ie, actually *ism, cluelessness, trolling, etc) of the *ist things which are said matter? I mean the effect on ppl seems the same (discomfort, getting defensive, going into "educating" mode). My SO is frequently telling me "he didn't really /mean/ X, don't be so agro"... But if he didn't really mean X, then he either said X to troll, or because he is clueless. Neither of which deserves a "well, that's nice, dear". nico -- ND Hailey www.demona.com "You don't hardly know yourself, girl, till you find yourself doing things you never imagined." --Dorothy Allison [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://www.linuxchix.org
Re: [issues] alienation (was: Places, issues, etc)
On Mon, 1 Nov 1999, Nicole Zimmerman wrote:
> It seemed pretty legit, discussing the genetics of the X and Y
> chromosomes that make us the physical gender we are ("mental" or
> psychological gender determined differently) having been around for much
> longer than was first assumed.
A terminology suggestion: "gender" is usually acknowledged to be a social
construction, whereas "sex" is usually the word for anatomy. So, for
example, someone may have a "male" sex, but have the gender "man".
Note that this isn't a one-to-one mapping; for the sex "male", you could
have innumerable genders ("fratboy", "leatherfag", "boygeek", "drag
queen", "neuter", to name a few).
Talking about gender and sex as non-binary conditions seems useful to
me--- that's why i suggest this. I think that a lot of the problems geeks
face could be talked about in terms of gender.
For example: Male geeks often face pressure because they aren't [usually]
the "jock-guy" gender, and female geeks get pressure because they aren't
[usually] the "cheerleader" gender.
Does that make sense to anyone else?
> Additionally, the history channel is showing something on the "history
> of sex" all week long. It should be interesting to see how they deal
> with issues of non-physical gender (i.e. I may physically be male, but I
> know I am female type gender issues).
hmm. what times do those air?
srl
[EMAIL PROTECTED] http://www.linuxchix.org
Re: [issues] alienation (was: Places, issues, etc)
> A terminology suggestion: "gender" is usually acknowledged to be a social
> construction, whereas "sex" is usually the word for anatomy. So, for
> example, someone may have a "male" sex, but have the gender "man".
Ahh better terms, thank you. :o)
> Note that this isn't a one-to-one mapping; for the sex "male", you could
> have innumerable genders ("fratboy", "leatherfag", "boygeek", "drag
> queen", "neuter", to name a few).
Of course not.
> Talking about gender and sex as non-binary conditions seems useful to
> me--- that's why i suggest this. I think that a lot of the problems geeks
> face could be talked about in terms of gender.
Like I said before, I don't think gender is as black-white as the
stereotypes want it to be. People for the most part are afraid to admit
they are less "male" or "female" than they really are because of the
pressure you mentioned among who knows what else. It is a rough road to
travel, but I wish people would be honest with themselves before they
get caught up in peer pressure (not that it's easy!).
> > Additionally, the history channel is showing something on the "history
> > of sex" all week long. It should be interesting to see how they deal
> > with issues of non-physical gender (i.e. I may physically be male, but I
> > know I am female type gender issues).
>
> hmm. what times do those air?
I will check. Looks like 10:00 PM EST/PST. You might check
http://www.historychannel.com/ontv/index.html or
http://www.tvguide.com/listings
-nicole
--
http://colby.dhs.org @ Colby - me!
http://ghettobox.dhs.org \|/ ghettoBOX - home!
http://nightspell.dhs.org | NightSpell - irc.dal.net!
http://technopagan.dhs.org / \ TechnoPagan - spirituality!
[EMAIL PROTECTED] http://www.linuxchix.org
Re: [issues] Automatic associations
> >For the race test, I had a strong automatic association with blacks > >and 'bad' things (and I've never thought of myself as a racist > >person, either) Haven't done it yet, but I suspect I'll show some sort of skew on the blacks one - I'm accustomed to seeing Euro-caucasians, orientals and Australian-Aboriginal face types, but there're VERY few African-dark- skinned people in Australia. To me, dark-coloured skin "should" be over Koori (Australian aboriginal) bone structure. It's just what my eyes and brain see as 'beauty' under dark skin. (Same way I expect the skin that's falsely called 'yellow' to be over Oriental-type features, and 'white' to be over Caucasian shapes.) When I went to the States, I kept having to readjust for 'yes, that is an appropriate face shape for that skin shade'. After the first week or so, I got used to it - but it was one of the culture-shock things I had to settle down on. And it wasnt something I felt I could talk about. I could bitch about the plumbing system being 'wrong', or noone having vegemite, but not that. You know? 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
Re: [issues] Automatic associations
strong automatic preference for young strong automatic preference for White slight automatic association between female and science one time taking each. :-) Walt -~ In formal logic, a contradiction is the signal of defeat; but in the evolution of real knowledge it marks the first step in progress towards a victory. Alfred North Whitehead [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://www.linuxchix.org
Re: [issues] Automatic associations
On Tue, 2 Nov 1999 [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: > (Same way I expect the skin that's falsely called 'yellow' to be over > Oriental-type features, and 'white' to be over Caucasian shapes.) > the plumbing system being 'wrong', or noone having vegemite, but not > that. You know? Yeahyou're not the only one -- it's surprising (or maybe not) how many people, when confronted with white skin over asian bone structure, think (and say, aregh) 'down's syndrome' -- i still get the comment from time to time, but never *after* I open my mouth and my friends all think people who say such are nuts, which just makes me suspect it's in the category of 'things people don't consciously want to admit' (for the record I'm a quarter japanese, and if you stick me next to my mother it's *very* clear we're related -- we have the same basic facial and body types, but I have my father's colouring) 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] Automatic associations
btw, several definitions of the good/bad things are rather subjective... i.e., war, the languages, et al. . . Walt -~ Wonder is the foundation of all philosophy, inquiry its progress, ignorance its end. Montaigne [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://www.linuxchix.org
Re: [issues] Something I've observed
On Mon, 1 Nov 1999, curious wrote: > "Unconscious assumption that women help and defer to men, perhaps?" Jen M. > > I don't belive it is anyone's obligation to help another. This is a difference between men and women's perspective. Women ARE raised to help. If you don't understand the deference/help thing, you'll never understand why a) women get so frustrated when they try to do their OWN thing; b) why women so often defer their own lives until middle age; c) why they resent themselves and others because of frustrations with a) and b). Please note that YOU are in OUR reality here and, for a change, we are not in yours. Try living for a week, just ONE WEEK, with an overriding command to "defer to men" and to "help others, especially men." Just see how frustrated you feel and multiply it times years and years. Honestly, this list has done more to make me *understand* lesbians as a cultural group than any of my 40 years of experience on earth. :) > 1. to find out what issues exists for women in the male dominated > technocracy, find out what I might be able to do about them, and offer > viewpoints that may not have been thought of before. Um, why do you think you have such a unique perspective? I guarantee you we've pretty much "heard it all." And, as my SO pointed out, if we need men to tell us about how not to be disempowered, that's pretty telling, isn't it? :) If you're here to *learn* and in a constructive manner, that's cool. I think if we started with a ground zero assumption here that men (and not just you specifically) really do not understand the motivations and issues of women, we'd be starting someplace useful. And, instead of coming in and, in your first post suggesting people change the way they do things and the second post bringing up your pet porn project, if you showed HUMILITY, you would be much better received. So, show some. :) > 2. in some small way to keep tabs in an usual way with two of my niftiest > friends :) :) > 3. and yes to test out issues with my bizzar project... btw it has never > been my intention to promote this project.. I have not at any point in > time give any form of refrence to it. Yes the project is (and has been) > rather stagnent.. however it's my fault and I do have plenty of intrested > people. I appoligize for bringing it up since it seems to be quite off > topic, I should have followed threads better before I posted... It's not just off-topic it's a sore subject. Most women don't like porn and it offends them. That said, different people draw the line in different places. But it is just really out of line here. -- _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] Places, issues and all the rest...Maybe the Wst CoastISTHE Best Coast.
Deirdre Saoirse wrote: > On Mon, 1 Nov 1999, Steve Kudlak wrote: > > > Well let's see, my emotional,. really got the best of me, > > Steve, this list isn't about YOUR alienation, no matter how real it may > be. > > It's about OUR alienation. > > -- > _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 20.6 That " D code issue has been beaten to nrathern to death. SOI'm in osmoneone's kill file. SOeone else sent me a nice comdoderte mesaahe... message in the midst og woes that helped a lot more. But it ie is best to lead=ve it over and done with. ANwyawritenow I am okkinf into (3) things: (1) U=Insall RED HAT (2) Insta.,l Debaian instead (3) How seriois is istalling a CD burner (4) I assumne and iomeaga drivce is easto isntall. If lautren Fan in Pittsbught hsd trirf thing thetr love ot lhere them.. Wlways glad to get int someonefile's kill fiel for an meninful messaged. Musy of have meant somethimnhg.BNut most lileru stick to trefh deemd modt gun sanf least apr to waste time with mean argiumrmnts pno one asgrees om. AMu ideas how to hget htur type fonts into limux. JHave Fun, Sends STeve Deirdre Saoirse wrote: > On Mon, 1 Nov 1999, Steve Kudlak wrote: > > > Well let's see, my emotional,. really got the best of me, > > Steve, this list isn't about YOUR alienation, no matter how real it may > be. > > It's about OUR alienation. > > -- > _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 Deirdre Saoirse wrote: > On Mon, 1 Nov 1999, Steve Kudlak wrote: > > > Well let's see, my emotional,. really got the best of me, > > Steve, this list isn't about YOUR alienation, no matter how real it may > be. > > It's about OUR alienation. > > -- > _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 It is about ou alinemation from pit [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://www.linuxchix.org
Re: [issues] Something I've observed
On Mon, 1 Nov 1999, Aaron Malone wrote: > Right. Or if they do manage to inject something into the conversation, one of > the Obnoxious will then attempt to twist it back to his (or her) thread. [snip] > You're right, it's a combination of both. Those who engage in this sort of > behavior are grabbing the conversation, and from experience they know that many > people *will* defer, if for no other reason than they're used to more polite > conversational environments. Right. So what we need to do is recognize that a) this happens all the time and b) that this has been happening on this list and c) resolve to cope better with it in the future. -- _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] Something I've observed
BTW, I want to say that I'm not singling out Chris so much with my last post as it is an expression of frustration with several of the guys here that I put into one post. You might say that my tolerance snapped with Steve. -- _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] Something I've observed
Deirdre Saoirse wrote: > BTW, I want to say that I'm not singling out Chris so much with my last > post as it is an expression of frustration with several of the guys here > that I put into one post. You might say that my tolerance snapped with > Steve. > > -- > _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 Well maybe you have a kill file, you npy yjrer hear me again. I I hebe doen my nedst tostart a flame war and feel sorry you can't imdermine my points. .. Maybe they didn't know why points exactly, were go good advice I might follow.. O have been told off since I was q0 and I am tired of it.. I don't have to listen to it. I don't want a flame world. I don't want to live in the old alt. sex. or worse.. Allows we could be devel[omg line and better partings systems. The linuxchis people that din flat. Berry food from boxes to networks seem to see it all go down the tube over voice that 60 % of woe ;ogjyt St. oy eon;; 90% of the lijuxhix are without peer/ There are all my opinions Steve K=Kudlaks chromexa@mry )@) sistrinution without Comoros; use emvpitrsaged... Hey prep feral witty Mr. do rot. Jab FUn, Of possible sends STeve [EMAIL PROTECTED] [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://www.linuxchix.org
[issues] sulfuric acid, liability, and object programming
All righty that was a short lurk :) enough people indicated in emails that I realy wasn't that bad... well that and I had one of those just about to fallasleep mental statements that I had to write down :) Note this was copy/pasted from pine :) sorry for the weird indention :) I was watching 20/20 the other day and they had this segment on women in some country (don't recall which off hand)... where increasingly men in that country were spraying sulfuric acid on thier faces if they didn't do what they wanted them to do... it was a country where a woman has almost no identity until she marries... the sulfuric acid would harm them in ways such as burning away eyes and ears though more often just leaving thier faces increadably mangled... at the end of this segment they mentioned that sulfuric acid was cheap and easy to come by there (used in car batteries)... and that there is a movement to get a law passed to hold the peope who sell sulfuric acid liable if it's used to attack women (the segment also implyied that this law was needed and would help)... I realy don't understand this logic... there is also a law that is being pushed all over the country (dworkin/mackinnon)... one of the clauses in this law says that if a person commits an act of assult on a person because of pornography... the pornographer can be held liable... This logic makes as much sense to me as holding radioshack resposible if someone stabs someone else with a screwdriver they baught from them or even better... if a woman decides to kill men with an ice pick because she saw it done in "Basic Instict" to hold the publishers of that movie liable... Now haveing said that we have social side effects of porn or more precicely women in media... fasion mags that claim that women are too fat and the one's that aren't too fat are too stupid... in an email I got someone talked about things as simple as titles... ie: "Big Boobie Babes" or "Super Suck Sluts" instead of "Joyus Jordan and Julie" (hopefuly I paraphrased that enough to avoid plaguizm... don't recall that much aliteration in the original email :) ) Yes this happens to men as well but it's easyer to find "your ok" messages and in porn there is usualy a guys name as apposed to an object (even if it's an alias) (ie. long dong silver, fabio, etc)... Almost all media has some form of impact no matter how large or small so one might say fictional "Jill" shouln't be alowed to sell movies of herself being objectified since it will have the impact of objectifying women in general... however (pull out a random article from a news paper) ahh... my county might not be ready for y2k... which instills fear and may lead to panic which can cause many a bad things to happen... media (be it books, movies, newspapers, etc) has impact, has influence not always those that a person wants or intends but the ability of other people to create material that may influence us in ways we don't like, alows us to create material that may influence others in ways they might not like Also objectification didn't come from porn or the media... the people who created the media had to feel it was right else wise before they made it... people who consume it has to feel it's ok to purchase the material as well... so I don't belive it originated from media... it's historical and cultural... and as time goes on women are being treated less and less like ojbects (at least from what I've seen in my little (rose colored?) glasses... and if media is a reflection of societys views compare "Sound of Music" with any recent movie of similar caliber (esp. "I am sixteen going seventeen") so to round this out my non-sequidor question :) : What can I (or other males on this list) do to bring more identity and understanding from men to women if anything? Peace, Chris aka curious PS Thanks go to JD Catron for enlightening me more about womens issues in this world :) PPS: hmmms there are proly better lists for me to address these issues on feel free to email me the location of a better place, and thanks for your patience :) /"\ . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . \ / ASCII Ribbon Campaign [EMAIL PROTECTED] X - NO HTML/RTF in e-mail http://www.curious.org/ / \ - NO Word docs in e-mail"This quote is false." -anon [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://www.linuxchix.org
Re: [issues] Automatic associations
On Mon, 1 Nov 1999, Terri Oda wrote: > A friend of mine sent this to our mailing list and I thought some of you > would find it interesting: > > http://depts.washington.edu/iat/index.html Very interesting! I had slight preference for young over old, and I only took that one once. For the other two: original order -- slight pref for whites over blacks reverse order -- no preference original order -- slight pref for women in science reverse order -- strong pref for women in science For whomever said they had the women & science thing because of the doctor mom, I'm the same way -- my mom's a radiologist. When I think of scientists in white lab coats they are invariably female in my head. I was actually surprised I didn't have a stronger association the first time through. _Cat /././././././././././././././././././ The plural of anecdote is not data. \.\.\.\.\.\.\.\.\.\.\.\.\.\.\.\.\.\.\ [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://www.linuxchix.org
Re: [issues] Places, issues and all the rest...Maybe the Wst CoastIS THE Best Coast.
Maybe this should move to grrltalk? It seems kind of far afield from 'issues of women in Linux' to me. _Cat On Mon, 1 Nov 1999 [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: > Steve Kudlak wrote: > > > This is a touchy issue, because if one woman said: "Don't do that", it might > > actually stop things. Or something like" Or it's not worth fight over" > > Instead they back out of the way and let the guys duke it out. > > Or /she/ might get hit. Have you thought about /why/ they (we) back out of the > way? Because we're at least as scared as the guys. > > > Only difference I think is that it IS FAIR FOR ME TO ASK THEM TO ACCEPT MY > > CLOTHING. I may joke about "suits" but they are no less a human being. I only > > ask the same. To me it seems they are glorifying stupidity. But the convenient > > way is to remove myself from it and do to some place better. It is the never > > teach a pig to sing thing... > > It is the never-teach-a-pig-to-sing thing. > > Have you considered the possibility that they might be /afraid/ of you? > Afraid of the symbolism of your appearance, perhaps. > Afraid of your intellect, perhqps? > Afraid of the freedom-to-wear-what-you-wish? > > These are all possible. You have mentioned that you dress as a biker - well, > I tend to be afraid of people who dress as bikers, because my experience is > that I am more likely to be (physically) hurt by a biker than I am to be hurt > by a suit. > > I have been told by a friend that she was intimidated by my reputation as > an intellectual - she thought I'd be patronising, that we'd have nothing to > talk about, that the kind of thing that interests her would bore me silly. > Now, I don't /agree/ with that, but I have to accept that that viewpoint > exists. > > And there's a LOT of people who really hate wearing ties and smart clothes. > Some of them envy people who can get away without it. So some of what you're > experiencing may be envy - not just prejudice. > > > > 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 > > /././././././././././././././././././ The plural of anecdote is not data. \.\.\.\.\.\.\.\.\.\.\.\.\.\.\.\.\.\.\ [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://www.linuxchix.org
Re: [grrltalk] Re: [issues] Places, issues and all the rest...Maybe the Wst CoastIS THE Best Coast.
Cat wrote: > Maybe this should move to grrltalk? It seems kind of far afield from > 'issues of women in Linux' to me. > > _Cat z(Syuff userul clippedd) > > I feel pretty much like it is as dead issue. I pretty much give up.It is just too depressing and nothing much has been solved.. It seems it is just arguments back and forth. Some have seem just as bad as slash dot Blaming the victim who doesn't want to do toe the line.Be it dress codes or the in body image thing. WHereas as tech talk I get useful nd informed info from, an=and can make clear hopeful can make a clear discussion from. I understand the Information as the options I may have, and if I can use True Type fonts have I will be very happy. Issues, ststrted out as interesting but became like old usenet arrgumrnts., where nothing got decided likrthe rsdical Afghan Islam thing. And otd of other things. In some cases one f=deosn;t get the point but com away feeling out done and yelled at a and hurt badly Some comments ere helpful, nut othres jjust seemed rsndom huthing;. Have Fun Sends Steve P.sS> Maybe I don't get it but dress codes seem stupid and prejudiced to me...THAT'S JUST MY THOUGHTS...IF NO ONE WANts W=ME AROUND THEY ARE FREE TO ASK ME TO LEAve. [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://www.linuxchix.org
Re: [grrltalk] Re: [issues] Places, issues and all the rest...Maybe the Wst CoastIS THE Best Coast.
Steve Kudlak wrote: > Cat wrote: > > > Maybe this should move to grrltalk? It seems kind of far afield from > > 'issues of women in Linux' to me. > > > > _Cat > > z(Syuff userul clippedd) > > > > > > > I I agree, part of it all was set off by a bad day. My bad relationships witrh my local area. Etc. LIttle related to LINIX except easier to find linux people on West Coast. It is all such a downer I may give up and go to techtalk and give up on the other things. Doesn't seem worth it. Seems like those round and round arguments that went around aruments on Unix, where the "Health Nazi's")" stateed that fat people didn't get it wa unhelathful, and the the "Fat Freedom FIghters" said it was a matter of choice. Bothsides inssisted the other side "don't get it" and it went on and on for weeks. The stupid me got into the dress code thing. Another impossible to decide thing. Plus not mentioning the ful detsild of sn outhere ex-housemsate who thjought every guy was staling her. The only linux couldbe invoplvrd os when she asked to email lots of people o mention each new "stalker" and I refused. There weer like 5 a week. I cpould seee nor fnd any of them and other thngs pointed to derangement. So I agree with your view this should all go to girrltalk. It is my own fault to get stuckin political arguments thast convinceor provoe nothing.. In fact it has become so aggravating that that, though I won't do it. I am tempted to go down to the local X-RAted store and get picks of the bigges bosedemd girls I can find a make a web page for them just to set pepple off. But that's poort sport and what I wanted top really learn was the easiest to install by oones'eslef with little help dual boot linux. Have Fun, Sends Steve [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://www.linuxchix.org
